User:Fennec.cs/sandbox
Bundling, or tarrying, is the traditional practice of wrapping a couple together in a bed sometimes with a board between the two of them, usually as a part of courting behavior. The tradition is thought to have originated either in the Netherlands or in the British Isles and later became common in colonial United States, especially in Pennsylvania Dutch Country. Bundling is associated with the Amish as a form of courtship. Some Nebraska Amish may still practice it.
Origin[edit]
[edit]It is possible the precedent for bundling came from the biblical story of Ruth and Boaz, in which Ruth, a widow, and Boaz, a wealthy landowner, spend a night together in a grain storage room. Tradition says they did not touch, and the pair later got married.
Courtship practice[edit]
[edit]Bundling, or "bed courting" is believed to have originated in the pre-Celtic populations of the British Isles and was introduced to the American colonies by Dutch and Welsh immigrants where it attained unprecedented popularity.[1] Traditionally, the practice of courtship involved two young adults, often betrothed, who spent the night in bed together under the parental roof to ensure compatibility and accountability. A bundling board or bundling sack may make an appearance, as it takes the form of contraceptive for a bundling couple. A bundling board was a large plank that was placed in between the couple and the bundling sack was a sleeping bag that was sewn up the middle. Periods of popularity for the practice of Bundling often align with eras of enhanced social position for women, as this custom afforded a high level of protection for premarital sex.[1]
The custom of bundling, which became common in New England in the eighteenth century, was used to certify that an unwed father was held accountable for an illegitimate pregnancy. The courtship practice would ensure that there would be witnesses to certify any intimacy that took place. Within the seventeenth century, courts were more willing to accept a woman's testimony that a specific man had fathered her child. Stricter standards came about in the eighteenth century when the court officials wanted evidence in support of the woman's allegation, which could be difficult to obtain. If a couple had sex in secret and the woman became pregnant, no witness of the relation would have taken place. Marriage by a spousal contract or in a church would often follow bundling.
In United States[edit]
[edit]Two forms of bundling in Colonial America are generally discussed: a sleeping arrangement between strangers, or the bed-sharing of lovers under parental supervision.[2][3] The former definition refers to the practice used to accomodate the heavy traffic of travelers in the underdeveloped colonies, often with no implication of sexual activity. The latter, however, refers to the courtship practice which ensured legal accountability for an unwed father in the case of pre-marital pregnancy.[4] The courtship ritual of bundling was primarily observed in rural communities. The measure of familial and community protection which bundling provided against the scandal of abandonment was not offered in urban settings where populations has a much higher degree of mobility and anonymity.[4]
Despite some religious criticism, bundling rose in popularity amongst rural populations throughout the eighteenth century. The prevalence of premarital sex in colonial America is shown by the rate of legitimate births within the first 9 months of marriage; the late eighteenth century observed a remarkable increase in pre-marital pregnancies, with 30-40% of infants born within the first nine months of marriage.[5] This is due in part to a sexually permissive subculture cultivated by parents of the less-wealthy classes. A high correlation is observed between the pre-marital pregnancy status of Mothers and Daughters in the 18th century.[5]
In Colonial United States, Jonathan Edwards and other preachers condemned bundling. American Puritanism condemned the practice of bundling as immoral, or un-christian.[2][1] The heydey of Bundling in the late 18th century corresponds to a period of low engagement with puritanical ideals, when religious participation for adolescents was not strictly enforced by societal standards. With the Second Great Awakening at the turn of the 19th century, religion became a much larger part of adolescent life and puritanical morals were more heavily enforced by a larger societal group.[5] As social opinion moved away from the practical solution of bundling to the ideological solution of abstinence and moral responsibility, the popularity of bundling waned.[4]
It is possible that, as late as the mid-19th century, bundling was still practiced in New York state and perhaps in New England, though its popularity was waning. The court case of Graham v. Smith, 1 Edm.Sel.Cas. 267 (N.Y. 1846), for example, initially argued before Judge Edmunds in the Orange Circuit Court of New York, concerned the seduction of a 19-year-old woman; testimony in the case established that bundling was a common practice in certain rural social circles at the time. By the 20th century, bundling seems to have disappeared almost everywhere, except for the more conservative Old Order Amish affiliations, where it was still in use as of 2006, regardless of location. In the modern United States, practices of "dating" and "necking" might be tied to the previous practice of bundling.Public widespread anxiety about the vulnerability of young women led to new writing which was published in newspapers and magazines during the eighteenth century.
Article Evaluation
[edit]Relevance of Information
[edit]Some topics do not have the connecting information even if they are relevant (counter culture, etymology)
Organization of locations is confusing
Needs a stated connection between the locations discussed and Gay Liberation
A general lack of context
Neutrality
[edit]Lack of nuance, but generally neutral
Viewpoint Representation
[edit]U.S. Centric
Strong coverage of the gay liberation movement in New York
Descriptions of violence and more nuanced topics are missing
Citation Functionality
[edit]Missing SO MANY SOURCES
Citation Relevance
[edit]Some sources are a little crazy ... either online, not respectable, etc
Up to date? Missing Info?
[edit]NOT up to date, missing SO much information (e.g. Magnus Hirschfeld)
Stonewall coverage in 1969??
Connection between Stonewall and GLF
Talk page discussion topics
[edit]Volatile
Rating, Membership in a WikiProject?
[edit]3 wikiprojsects, all start class
Comparison to topic coverage in class
[edit]Missing information covered in readings and lecture
Time period is off, article covers 60's-70's, class started in the 1950's
Article claims an end to the movement even though it is ongoing
 | This is a user sandbox of Fennec.cs. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the place where you work on your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. Visit your Dashboard course page and follow the links for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
- ^ a b c Moller, Herbert (1945). "Sex Composition and Correlated Culture Patterns of Colonial America". The William and Mary Quarterly. 2 (2): 114–153. doi:10.2307/1923515. ISSN 0043-5597.
- ^ a b Verfasser, Stiles, Henry Reed. Bundling; its Origin, Progress, and Decline in America. ISBN 978-3-337-08809-5. OCLC 1189849207.
{{cite book}}:|last=has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ 1731?-1791., Grose, Francis, (2004). A classical dictionary of the vulgar tongue. Beard Books. ISBN 1-58798-247-1. OCLC 65471926.
{{cite book}}:|last=has numeric name (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b c Godbeer, Richard (2004). "Courtship and Sexual Freedom in Eighteenth-Century America". OAH Magazine of History. 18 (4): 9–13. ISSN 0882-228X.
- ^ a b c Smith, Daniel Scott; Hindus, Michael S. (1975). "Premarital Pregnancy in America 1640-1971: An Overview and Interpretation". The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 5 (4): 537–570. doi:10.2307/202859. ISSN 0022-1953.