Arnold, I’m sure birth control contributed to the difference a bit, but a greater factor was probably that a lot more women got married and started having babies right out of high school back then.
It occured to me after I posted that my mother gave birth to her first child in 1957 at age 19. She had been married for over a year at that point.
I found this article
Falling Teen Pregnancy, Birthrates: What’s Behind the Declines?
that says that teenage pregnancy in the USA hit a 20-year low in 1996. The article suggests that some of the reasons would be:
[ul]
[li]less teenagers approving of premarital sex;[/li][li]more teenages using condoms due to the large publicity around AIDs;[/li][li]involvement of conservative religious groups in the public debate over sexual behaviour;[/li][li]more teenagers using long-lasting hormonal methods to prevent pregnancies and less using oral contraceptives;[/li][li]a strong economy that produces jobs at the lower end of the pay scale.[/li][/ul]
So perhaps society in 1950s USA was not as prudish as some imagine, but the decline of teenage pregnancies has other causes as well.
Well Lance I hadn’t seen your post before my last one. But people getting married as teenagers would probably not be an indication of free-wheeling sexuality. In any case I don’t have any statistics on the 1950s concerning the percentage of teenagers having sex in the USA so I guess I can’t really state an informed opinion.
There’s also the factoid (yeah, yeah, I know… Cites would be appreciated either way) that among the Puritans, 80% of first children were born within the first eight months of marriage. But of course, that’s not licentiousness, they just had a shorter gestation time than the rest of us :rolleyes:.
If it means anything, Chron-dude, I’ve heard the exact same factoid. Can anyone say ‘shotgun wedding’?
Great cite, Spanky. Keep up the good work!
(May the Random Number Gods help me if someone actually signs up with the name Spanky. I’ll have to give Ahh-nold a new nickname. :))
I with Guinastasia on this. The Regency era was a time of remarkable liberalism in sexual matters…. The Hellfire Club, Masquerade Balls, one in eight women in London being prostitutes and enjoying remarkable social mobility……. In fact, huge tracts of central London were built on the ‘backs’ of affluent prostitutes who earnt in a day what men made in two weeks. Also, many Brothel owners were women although that didn’t appear to alter the exploitative nature of the business, especially in relation to children.
Sex and art were seen to be inextricably entwined to the high minded, society as a whole was very open and sex was perceived as a somewhat a spiritual activity.
Entirely possible that the Victorian attitude was a backlash.
One factor in the US which has not been mentioned is the explosion of religious revivalism in the first half od the 19th century. Nothing like a bevy of circuit-riding helfire-and-brimstone-preaching Baptist and Methodist evangelists to spoil a party.
Have a little respect for your superiors, Chuckles. 
The evangelical revival was also an important factor in Britain in the nineteenth century. It shaped Victoria’s own religious views. The other obvious factor which no one has yet mentioned was the growing middle class anxious to be seen as ‘respectable’. These were, for the most part, real factors rather than expressions of hypocrisy.