# What was not legal (or illegal as the whippersnappers call it) 'back in the day? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 4, 2005, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917 "2005-06-04T19:32:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/41 "2005-06-06T01:56:08Z")
> [@Julius Henry](#): > > certain methods of sexual congress were illegal, even between married couples. But what about Congressional sex? Seriously, though, several jurisdictions (particularly of a southeastern geography) still have laws against sodomy, which can be defined as anal sex, oral sex, or manual sex (handjobs). Someone in a thread I read here recently about watersports told of how he and some of his buddies and their wives would travel around and break as many local sex laws as they could. Apparently, one of them was a lawyer and did all the research for it. They would earn points for the laws they broke with their wives. One Southern county prohibited watersports, so they did it. > [@LouisB](#): > > It was designed entirely to prevent Blacks voting. Actually, it’s thought that poll taxes were intended to prevent voting by minorities in general, who tended to be poorer. At least, if that wasn’t its intention, it was certainly its result. The nation’s always-flourishing Mexican-American community, for example, was for a long time pretty well locked out by poll taxes. Same for literacy tests–who do you think that sort of blockade would target? > [@mamboman](#): > > The laws against male homosexuality were only repealed at that time, too. Female homosexuality had never been made legal because, oddly, it was never illegal. I wonder who wrote those laws. > [@Ranchoth](#): > > (which, if the story I’ve heard is true, banned Homosexuality, but Queen Victoria had all references to Lesbianism removed before she assented to it)? Reminded me of a sex quiz on Channel 4 (UK)'s website where one of the questions concerned Chinese Empress Wu Shu (I hope I’m getting the name right), who required all of her workers to perform cunnilingus on her as tribute. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/42 "2005-06-06T02:29:00Z")
> [@fetus](#): > > I wonder who wrote those laws. At one point two women in Scotland were arrested under the sodomy laws. The case at trial hinged on the question of whether or not two women could actually have sex. After grave deliberation, the judge decided that they could not. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/43 "2005-06-06T02:32:20Z")
> [@Laughing Lagomorph](#): > > That sounds like a terrible idea. I think most people could use a quick snort before they go in to pull that lever. And another, afterwards, as the consequences of their actions begins to dawn. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/44 "2005-06-06T04:16:03Z")
> [@E = mc](#): > > Bars were closed on (presidential) election days, but no more, I think. > [@WhyNot](#): > > They were last year in French Lick, IN. > > Dammit. > > We Illinoisians didn’t know, and made a special trip into town for beer, only to find out it was (local) election day. Not only no bars, but alcohol in the grocery stores and liquor stores - no sales at all. We were told it was to prevent a candidate buying a round for the whole bar and then sending them to the polling place. Actually, the liquor–namely, rum–was given out _at_ the polling place. This was in the early years of the nation (US). Today, all sale of liquor is illegal on election days in Colombia, but for a different reason. It’s to prevent people from getting into violent drunken political arguments. Imagine that happening here. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/45 "2005-06-06T05:05:15Z")
I don’t know if this was a state law or just a school board policy, but when I began teaching in 1969, teachers were not allowed to teach beyond their fifth month of pregnancy. (Some of the church folks didn’t want us “flaunting our sins” in front of our students.) Female teachers were not allowed to wear slacks to school – only skirts and dresses. Women’s basketball teams played only half-court. (Women didn’t have the strength to endure full court games even in Tennessee back then.) Females could not sign up for woodshop classes and males could not sign up for cooking and sewing classes. I can remember “Whites Only” and “Colored Only” waiting rooms at the bus station. I accidently walked into the wrong one one time to make a phone call from a booth. (This was during the time of some of the civil rights marches.) There were about ten people in that room and not a single eye left my face the entire time I was on the phone. ---
**Author:** ![elfbabe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b782af/32.png) [@elfbabe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfbabe)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/46 "2005-06-06T08:41:14Z")
> [@fetus](#): > > Seriously, though, several jurisdictions (particularly of a southeastern geography) still have laws against sodomy, which can be defined as anal sex, oral sex, or manual sex (handjobs). As **matt\_mcl** also mentioned, those’ve all been invalidated thanks to good old _Lawrence v. Texas_, so I’m afraid you’ve lost your chance to break US sodomy laws if you haven’t yet done so. Should’ve done it while you had the chance! I know a (lesbian) couple who went on a road trip and decided to try to break various local sex laws along the way. Unfortunately for their civil disobedience, _Lawrence_ was decided in the middle of the trip. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![pullin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c57346/32.png) [@pullin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pullin)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/47 "2005-06-06T11:10:18Z")
I live in Texas. Many’s the time I’ve driven home from work, convertible top down, with a nice frosty Budweiser in the drink holder of my car. Drinking and driving wan’t illegal “back in the day”, but driving drunk was. imo, just another step in our nation’s march toward criminalizing the _ability_ to commit crime, rather than crime itself. ---
**Author:** ![vetbridge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b5e925/32.png) [@vetbridge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vetbridge)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/48 "2005-06-06T13:11:27Z")
> [@pullin](#): > > I live in Texas. Many’s the time I’ve driven home from work, convertible top down, with a nice frosty Budweiser in the drink holder of my car. Drinking and driving wan’t illegal “back in the day”, but driving drunk was. > imo, just another step in our nation’s march toward criminalizing the _ability_ to commit crime, rather than crime itself. Yep, I remember back around 1980 buying a case of beer on the way home; and since they were not twist-offs the proprieter would open two bottles for my drive home. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/49 "2005-06-06T14:48:07Z")
M-80s were legal until 1966. Pot, cocaine, opium, and Heroin were all legal until the early 1900s. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/50 "2005-06-06T15:04:41Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > Some of these are still enforced today. For example, I won’t be able to buy beer or wine tomorrow before 2:00pm. The Supreme Court upheld blue laws against an establishment clause challenge in [McGowan v. Maryland](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=366&invol=420) , 366 U.S. 420 (1961). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/51 "2005-06-06T15:29:44Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > coed cohabitation used to be illegal. It’s still illegal in Virginia. ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/52 "2005-06-06T15:51:44Z")
Funny how most of the things mentioned here are the so called ‘Morality Laws’. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/53 "2005-06-06T17:23:22Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > > [@Wesley Clark](#): > > > > coed cohabitation used to be illegal. > > It’s still illegal in Virginia. Damn, I’m in trouble. You have the listing of that law? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/54 "2005-06-06T17:35:49Z")
> [@flight](#): > > Damn, I’m in trouble. You have the listing of that law? Thes laws are almost certainly invalid after Lawrence v. Texas. _But see_, [Anti-cohabitation laws still being enforced](http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/News-About-Us/Anti-cohabitation.htm) (still being enforced in some states). [MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7794211/) (map of states with cohabitation statutes remaining on the books). [http://www.washingtonblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog\_id=639](http://www.washingtonblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=639) ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/55 "2005-06-06T17:46:42Z")
The [Virginia anti-cohabitation statute](http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-345). In the [Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/09/AR2005050901091.html) – > [@](#): > > North Carolina is one of seven states that have laws prohibiting cohabitation of unmarried couples. The others are Virginia, West Virginia, Florida, Michigan, Mississippi and North Dakota. North Carolina appears to be the only state where the law is being challenged. > > The Virginia Supreme Court in January responded to the Lawrence v. Texas decision by striking down that state’s rarely enforced state law prohibiting sex between unmarried people. But a Virginia law against cohabitation remains on the books. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/56 "2005-06-06T18:00:42Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The [Virginia anti-cohabitation statute](http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-345). > > In the [Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/09/AR2005050901091.html) – The law is indeed on the books, because it has not yet been challenged, and as this [article](http://www.washingtonblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=639) makes clear, in North Carolina, a dispatcher was forced to resign because she was violating the state’s cohabitation ban. The article notes: > [@](#): > > If challenged in court, Mason said she is confident the Virginia cohabitation law would be struck down, as happened to the state’s anti-fornication law in January. > > Joanna Grossman, a visiting professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law, agreed that all state bans on fornication and cohabitation are in jeopardy due to the Lawrence decision. > > “I think each one is going to stand until its challenged individually, or if the states decide to be proactive and repeal it, which happened after Lawrence, with some states repealing adultery and fornication laws,” Grossman said. The law remains on the books (and enforceable, for now) because the Virginia Supreme Court only considered a challenge to the state’s fornication law–not the cohabitation statute. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/57 "2005-06-06T18:11:12Z")
The Virginia statute refers to “lewd cohabitation.” I wonder whether _Lawrence_ would apply where a statute only prohibited two unrelated, unmarried (etc.) people of the opposite sex from living together without reference to their sexual relationship. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/58 "2005-06-06T18:15:39Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The Virginia statute refers to “lewd cohabitation.” I wonder whether _Lawrence_ would apply where a statute only prohibited two unrelated, unmarried (etc.) people of the opposite sex from living together without reference to their sexual relationship. An interesting question, probably better suited for GD. I started a GD thread a while back on a related topic > **[Does Lawrence invalidate adultery statutes?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=318651)** > > In this thread some of us suggested that Lawrence v Texas invalidates state laws against adultery. \*E.g., \* I don’t find the matter so clear cut, and neither do most commentators (at least those whose writing is available on the Internet). E.g.,... but wound up talking to myself. I’d love to pick it apart in the right forum. For the record, I don’t think it would make a difference, and perhaps other law covers the issue, too. Feel free to revive the other thread or start your own, and we’ll hammer it out. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/59 "2005-06-06T19:09:27Z")
> [@elfbabe](#): > > I know a (lesbian) couple who went on a road trip and decided to try to break various local sex laws along the way. Unfortunately for their civil disobedience, _Lawrence_ was decided in the middle of the trip. 😃 “We’ve broken the law in a number of states. That’s right, we’re outlaws! When I’ve gone back to some of the towns where I had a particularly good time, I sometimes go and check to see if they’ve put my picture up at the post office with all the other criminals. ‘Wanted for sodomy.’ And of course they don’t do that, but I wish they would because it would be a great way to get dates.” - Romanovsky and Phillips ---
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2005, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917/60 "2005-06-06T22:16:47Z")
How about obscenity laws? They’re not all gone, but they certainly used to be a LOT stricter in a lot of places. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-was-not-legal-or-illegal-as-the-whippersnappers-call-it-back-in-the-day/306917.md?page=4)