upworthy

smoking

History (Education)

Gen Xers and Boomers share things that used to be 'normal' but are 'boundary crossing' today

Birthday spankings, school paddlings and more.

Photo by lil artsy/Pexels

People used to just light up wherever and whenever they pleased.

How many times have you looked back to things you thought were "normal" from your childhood and thought "Huh, that was actually kinda weird in hindsight"? Times change, and what's considered "normal and acceptable" change with them. That's not automatically good or bad, necessarily, but hopefully humanity is evolving such that we learn from our mistakes and recognize room for improvement.

In that vein, someone asked Gen Xers and Boomers on Reddit, "What are some things that would be considered rude or boundary crossing today but were perfectly normal and acceptable when you were growing up?" and the answers reveal how much has shifted in the past handful of decades.

If you're over 40, enjoy this slightly disturbing trip down memory lane. If you're under 40, yes, all of these things really happened on a regular basis.

Scolding other people's kids (even strangers)

Raising a child was seen as more of a community effort than it is today, which resulted in perfect strangers doling out discipline.

"Scolding someone else's child. I remember getting corrected by strangers."


via GIPHY

"Those were the lessons that stuck the most too for me. When a family friend or stranger corrected me I knew without doubt I done f'd up. I didn't like the trend during the late 80's into 90's of everyone telling each other to mind their own business and not correct a child that wasn't theirs ~ horrible logic that I feel totally contributed to where we are at today with nobody considering other peoples opinions on things."

"OMG yes! in my neighborhood, whoever's house you were at, if you acted up, their mom was expected to let you know, and even send you home! it's just how things were."

"Kids were basically community property."

Showing up or dropping by unannounced

Before cell phones, people didn't always call or text before going to someone's house. Company could just show up at any time. People had snacks on hand specifically for unexpected guests. It was a thing.

"Possibly stopping in at a friend’s house unannounced. That used to be fairly common when everyone didn’t have a phone in his or her pocket."

"You never knew who, or how many, would show up at our house on a Friday night for a game of penny ante poker or Yahtzee in the 60's and 70's."

"I do miss that. We always had extra snacks for guests available because we never knew when someone might just show up."


via GIPHY

"We always had a Pepperidge Farms Coconut cake in the freezer. My mother would take it out to thaw as soon as company showed up."

"A corollary of this was that you were also expected to have your clothes on and be somewhat presentable while you were at home, since you never know who would be dropping by."

"Hell, me and my friends would just walk into each other's house like we lived there. None of the parents seemed to mind either. I often ended up eating meals at their homes and them at mine."

Birthday spankings

Okay, yeah, this one is weird. It was a tradition to get a spanking for every year of your life on your birthday, and it wasn't even just parents who did this. Teachers, your parents' friends, etc.

"All my parents' friends used to give me a spanking for each year on my birthday. Does anyone else remember this? Birthday spankings? So weird."

"And a pinch to grow an inch."

"My 4th grade teacher did this to all of us in front of the whole class. She ended it with a "pinch to grow on" and literally pinched our butts. This was around 2001 in Indianapolis. I don't recall anyone ever having an issue with it at the time, but looking back it was definitely odd. She was a great teacher and I have nothing bad to say about her at all. It was just a different time."

via GIPHY

"Yessssss! I'm in MD and was in elementary school in the 80's. If it was our birthday we would pick another kid to spank us in front of the whole grade, so if turning 9 you would get 9 smacks on your butt and all the kids would shout "ONE! TWO!..." 😂😂😂😂 I can't imagine that happening now!"

"Oh god! In a school club we would all line up and the birthday girl to crawl between all our legs as we spanked her on birthdays. What a crazy tradition!"

"The spanking machine! Kids would line up in a row, legs open, and you would crawl through, while kids slapped your butt. Sometimes singing 'today is spankin’ day!'"

Actual spankings. With a paddle. At school.

School principals, vice principals and sometimes teachers kept a paddle at their desk, which would be used to whack kids who misbehaved. Corporal punishment was the gold standard for behavior modification. Hacking, whacking, paddling—so any names for this woefully outdated practice.

"The big paddle that one of the teachers would possess that would be used on your hind quarters at their whim. No parent permission needed."

"The (completely backward) school I attended in 7th grade in 1999-2000 still spanked kids. My math teacher spanked a kid in class at least once a week. This was the deep south and very different from other schools I went to, it was quite the culture shock."

via GIPHY

"I would get the paddle or else my desk kicked over while I was in it, my head would hit that floor HARD! I don’t know which was worse."

"In 1987 my mom walked me into the school office and told everyone including the principle that under NO circumstances is anyone to paddle or spank me for discipline and if I misbehaved they were to simply call her about it. Their jaws dropped. That would not have happened anyways because I was a very well behaved and respectful child."

"I definitely got the big paddle in the vice principal's office."

Smoking indoors everywhere

It's impossible to explain to young people today how ubiquitous smoking used to be. Like, it was considered rude not to have ashtrays in your home. High schools had smoking areas. Restaurants, airplanes, waiting rooms—people smoked everywhere.

"I can recall the nurses at the triage in the hospital in my home town, smoking away while working. The 80s man, crazy time."

"I was born in 82, there’s a picture of my mother holding me shortly after I was born, laying in a hospital bed, and on her bedside table is a pack of reds and an ashtray."

via GIPHY

"And on airplanes and trains. I remember riding the L in Chicago with people smoking on the cars."

"Smoking in class at college."

"Smoking in grocery stores and putting out butts on the floor.

Teachers with ash trays on their desks smoking during class."

"My parents didn't smoke, but they (1970s) kept a guest ashtray in the house in case a visitor wanted to light up. Complained endlessly about the smoke smell once the person was gone, but it would have been rude to tell them to take it outside or wait."

Sexual harassment

Not that this was ever normal or acceptable, but it was tolerated to a disturbing level.

"Until Anita Hill, I had never even heard the term Sexual Harassment. I literally had no idea it was a thing. You were female, you were employed, men could make insistent advances with zero repercussions. One of my co-workers finally slept with the boss just to try to get him to leave her alone. This was NORMAL. We expected it to happen and accepted that it would, we just had to deal with it."

via GIPHY

"I was told to lighten up because it was a compliment."

" I got my first job in 1973 when I was 15. I worked in the restaurant business and waited tables all through college. It was pervasive and customers (men) would say many unwanted things as well. My first adult job was selling pharmaceuticals in 1984 and the first thing my regional manager told me during orientation was if a doctor did or said anything inappropriate handle it anyway you saw fit and then call and tell me about. He made it clear we didn’t have to put up with any BS and were free to slap anyone if we needed to. By the nineties sexual harassment wasn’t gone but was getting called out in a big way. Until there was a name for sexual harassment we knew we were uncomfortable but didn’t really have a way to express it in a meaningful and united manner."

"My friends and I were grabbed constantly in middle school by boys in early 90s. It never occurred to us to tell anyone and I honestly don’t think they would have cared. We just shared our shame amongst ourselves."

"Men would randomly grab and touch women all the time when I was growing up. Boomers were the worst about it, but I’m GenX and even we had it somewhat normalized. We’d gotten a clue that it wasn’t great, but we hadn’t yet realized it was actually sexual assault when someone would fondle your butt or breasts unbidden. Or when someone would grab you and kiss you. If you complained you were told to lighten up."

The drastic policing of what women wore under their clothes

Imagine having all the girls line up in gym class while the teacher runs his finger down each girl's back to make sure she was wearing a bra. Imagine it being unheard of to not wear pantyhose and show bare skin on your legs while wearing a skirt. We still police what women and girls wear in some places, but it's not as bad as it used to be.

"I’ve been told that women were expected to wear 'foundation garments' at work, and if they didn’t, then they might get reprimanded. I’m talking about longline bras and girdles."

via GIPHY

"In the 80s, one of my friends got sent to the office for not wearing a bra to high school."

"Until 1999, I was required to wear pantyhose at work. Nuts! And they dictated 'suntan' color!"

"Not sure what I spent more $ on - pantyhose or clear nail polish to stop the runs."

"I remember being a kid in the 90s my mom going from store to store looking for slips to put under my dresses, she had a whole section of her closet devoted to them. I hated them and didn't understand their purpose. Still don't. I'm so glad those are in the past."

People shared other things as well, such as how common it was to touch total strangers or to cut through people's yards to get to where you were going, and it's a wild ride through shifting social norms. Some things are definitely best left in the past, but some lend themselves to a stronger sense of community and might be worth revisiting. It does make you wonder what things from today will show up on a list like this decades from now.

You can see more on the r/AskOldPeople thread here.

This article originally appeared in September.

From Your Site Articles
history
Health

New Zealand will be the first country to effectively ban smoking. Here's their plan to do it.

The government wants the country to be 'smoke-free' by 2025.

via Pixabay

A young woman smokes a cigarette.

The dangers of tobacco are well-known throughout the world but no country has been so bold as to try and stamp it out completely, until now. New Zealand passed a new law on Tuesday, December 13, that would phase out smoking throughout the country. The bill was passed by Parliament by a 76 to 43 margin.

The new law would make it illegal to sell tobacco to anyone born on or after January 1, 2009, for their entire lives. So, theoretically, by 2050, a 40-year-old will be too young to buy cigarettes. The goal is to effectively ban tobacco products by 2025.

Advocates for the law say that it will improve the country’s health and reduce the astronomical cost that smoking has on the country’s health system. New Zealand has universal healthcare and provides services to its citizens for free or at a reduced cost. So, the cost of smoking is shared among all its residents whether they smoke or not.

Currently, 8% of New Zealand residents smoke daily, which is half the number who smoked a decade ago. However, the percentage is considerably higher among the Indigenous Māori population, of which about 20% are smokers.

“Thousands of people will live longer, healthier lives and the health system will be $5 billion (US$3.25 billion) better off from not needing to treat the illnesses caused by smoking, such as numerous types of cancer, heart attacks, strokes, amputations,” Associate Health Minister Dr. Ayesha Verrall said in a statement.

“We want to make sure young people never start smoking so we will make it an offense to sell or supply smoked tobacco products to new cohorts of youth. People aged 14 when the law comes into effect will never be able to legally purchase tobacco. Smoking rates are plummeting,” she added. “Our goal of being smoke-free by 2025 is within reach.”

via Pixabay

The bill is a big win for public health, but it has rankled those who believe that tobacco should be a personal choice that isn’t made for people by the state. "No one wants to see people smoke, but the reality is, some will and Labour's nanny state prohibition is going to cause problems," the libertarian ACT party’s Deputy Leader Brooke van Velden said, according to the BBC. Van Velden believes that the ban will create a black market for tobacco and have unintended consequences.

Further, if someone is banned from buying cigarettes they can just ask someone older to purchase a pack for them.

The bill does not affect those who use vape products, which make up about 6% of New Zealand’s population.

The new law will reduce the number of stores authorized to sell tobacco products from about 6,000 down to 600. The legal amount of nicotine will also be dramatically reduced in products to make them less addictive.

Whether one sees the new bill as a massive piece of government overreach or a law that was a long time coming, it will no doubt have a positive effect on public health.

“There is no good reason to allow a product to be sold that kills half the people that use it,” Verrall told lawmakers in Parliament. “And I can tell you that we will end this in the future, as we pass this legislation.”

From Your Site Articles
smoking
Wellness

The 'Best Anti-Smoking Ad Ever' was made 8 years ago, but is just as relevant today

via Ogilvy

Quitting smoking is one of the hardest things to do because nicotine addiction keeps people in denial. Smokers either tell themselves they'll be the lucky one who avoids the health consequences of smoking or they procrastinate, halfheartedly believing they will quit next week, next month or next year.

One of the keys to helping people quit, is to put them in a position where they are forced to take an honest look at themselves and their habits.

A 2012 anti-smoking ad made by Ogilvy Thailand for the Thai Health Promotion Foundation is known as one of the greatest ever because it uses the smokers' love of children to help them confront their habit.

In the video, two small children, armed with cigarettes, ask adults if they can borrow a light. Out of concern for the little ones' health, the smokers tell the kids all about the dangers of smoking.

"If you smoke you die faster," one man tells a little boy. "Don't you want to live and play?" "When you smoke you suffer from lung cancer, emphysema and strokes," another says.

The smokers cannot help but feel hypocritical talking about the dangers of smoking to a child while holding a cigarette.

The ad ends with a touching twist.

Smoking Kid - Best of #OgilvyCannes 2012 / #CannesLionswww.youtube.com


From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
health
Family

These anti-smoking ads were —​ wait for it — ​paid for ​by tobacco companies.​

Justice has finally been served to Big Tobacco in the U.S.

"More people die every year from smoking than from murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes, and alcohol, combined."

After decades of growing evidence telling us smoking kills, you may not be all that shocked to see a message like that being advertised.

What if I told you a cigarette company paid for it?

[rebelmouse-image 19469889 dam="1" original_size="750x394" caption="Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids." expand=1]Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

Starting Nov. 26, anti-smoking ads — paid for by Big Tobacco companies — will start appearing in newspapers and on TVs across the U.S.

These companies aren't running the ads voluntarily, of course.

Back in 2006, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler found that tobacco giants Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA conspired to hide the health risks associated with smoking from the public, NPR reported. The suit was originally filed by a number of medical and advocacy groups in 1999.

In her scathing ruling — in which she called cigarettes "highly addictive" products that lead to "a staggering number of deaths per year [and] an immeasurable amount of human suffering" — Justice Kessler ordered the companies run "corrective statements" to counter their harmful and misleading messages from years past. After years (and years and years) of appeals and disputes over the exact wording of the statements, the companies' ads are finally being published and aired to an audience of millions.

So you may start seeing ads like this one — a full page spread in The Wall Street Journal — that spells out the facts about cigarettes and their effects.

Or a TV spot like this one, which will air on networks during prime time.

The ads are void of color and flashy imagery; they simply state the facts.

All in all, 50 major American newspapers will carry full-page, weekly anti-smoking ads, and NBC, ABC, and CBS will air five spots like the one above every week for the next year — all paid for by Big Tobacco, NBC News reported.

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, which has been part of the suit since the beginning, created graphics to be shared on social media to help boost news of the ad launch.

There's this graphic, in which the group notes why tobacco executives are a bunch of "frauds."

[rebelmouse-image 19469890 dam="1" original_size="750x393" caption="Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids." expand=1]Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

Or this one, in which the organization highlights the fact that Big Tobacco all but admitted to lying and racketeering.

[rebelmouse-image 19469891 dam="1" original_size="750x394" caption="Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids." expand=1]Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

"It’s both an important victory and a frustrating one," Matthew Myers, president of the organization, told The New York Times. These companies, he explained, have spent millions of dollars and over a decade avoiding having to simply tell the truth about their products.

Anti-smoking advocates see a few drawbacks to the ad launch though. For starters, the 11 years it took for these corrective statements to go public means the media landscape has evolved in favor of the tobacco companies. Newspaper ads, for instance, are significantly less influential than they were in 2006 since social media and internet advertising has grown. The wording on the ads has also been tampered down throughout the appeals process; the companies' lawyers argued earlier versions were crafted with the sole intent to "shame and humiliate them," according to The New York Times.

These ads will still make a difference, however, advocates argue.

The public may already know smoking cigarettes is harmful because the health effects are well-documented by now, Myers said. But this is still an opportunity to further inform Americans about just how deadly they can be and just how far their makers are willing to go to get customers to buy them.

"Very few people know that the court found that the tobacco industry intentionally manipulates cigarettes to make them more addictive," Myers told NPR.

[rebelmouse-image 19469892 dam="1" original_size="750x394" caption="Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids." expand=1]Graphic by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

Robin Koval, CEO and president of anti-smoking nonprofit Truth Initiative, agreed: The ads take on important new meanings in 2017.

"People have forgotten over time all of the practices of the tobacco industry," Koval told NBC News. "Not only the fact that they lied about the products but also the fact that the products they were selling to the American people were engineered to be addictive as possible."

It's about time Big Tobacco got its facts straight.

From Your Site Articles
Trending Stories