A fantastic look at the history of dating in the twentieth century, with a particular focus on the long decade of the 1950s. Bailey starts off with a joke: A man went to call on a city girl, and when he arrived at her house, she was wearing a hat. Knee-slapping, I know. Bailey explains that before dating became universal, calling was the custom. A woman would invite a man to visit her at home, and woman's family would host and supervise the youths. A man could never invite himself to a woman's home. Twenty years later, advice columnists were writing that since the days when cavemen were dragging cavewomen around by the hair, men had always been the romantic pursuers, while older people in the same newspaper office with the advice columnist could remember that women used to control the dating system.
The weird, pre-war, rating-dating system, where the goal was to go on as many dates as possible with the most popular people possible, sounds insane. One hopes that that was mostly confined to college campuses. I've heard echoes of this system in archaic slang, but how could this romance by quantity actually function? The important thing is, the war killed it. The war was defined by a scarcity of men, and after the war, the actual or perceived scarcity of men (actual among 25-year-olds, perceived among high school students) and the post-war mandate for middle class nuclear families led to that wave of early marriage, and its younger corollary, "going steady," which was fought by adults who had grown up a short while ago when dating was never exclusive until you were engaged. When kids weren't going steady, they were calculating the economic worth of their dates: who is pretty enough to rate a hamburger and a movie, given the cost of hamburgers relative to a young man's hamburger budget. And young men were expected to pay for everything, and hold doors, and perform politeness publicly at all times. The cost of date relative to what might be exchanged was entirely the woman's fault, if this ever came up. A girl who got groped against her will was subconsciously asking for it, and needed psychoanalysis. This was the opinion of experts. And a whole professional identity of marriage experts sprung up to analyze and advise middle class teens and parents about what relationships and marriage should be. This was also youth-driven somehow, so that marriage experts attempting to advise newlyweds on finances were shot down, because other aspects of the newlywed state are more interesting.
This book, like 1950s American popular culture, was entirely white and middle class. It would have been interesting if Bailey had checked the advice columns at a few HBCUs to include some diversity to the salient contemporary discourse on parking or what have you. This book was also a bit dry. But it was a fascinating look at how much dating is a social construct, how it became an economic metaphor, and the nightmare from whence we came. I enjoyed it very much.