LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Who cares if people have tattoos and clown-coloured hair? Live and let live.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Let's go to Disney World in 1973
- Thread starter mergatroid
- Start date
Chi84
Premium Member
It was. I live in Chicago.
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
We're letting people live.
The topic was did people generally give more importance to their appearance in say the 70's and 80's than they do now?
Any crowd scene footage bears out that yes indeed people used to care more.
It's also readily apparent if you look at the audiences on many tv shows.
Ever compare the audience/contestants on the Price is Right game show from the 70's compared to what the audience looks like now?
It's a staggering difference.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Yes, the difference is stark. What I’m questioning is the claim that people no longer care. Standards change continually. In the mid-eighteenth century, well-to-do women in Europe wore corsets and elaborate hairpieces; by 1800, they had switched to looser dresses and far more natural hairstyles. Did they care less than women of earlier decades, or were they just following the (very different) trends of their own time?
Our own age is one in which the casual look reigns supreme and people feel increasingly comfortable expressing their individuality. Perhaps you and your family have resisted this development and are still boarding aeroplanes in your Sunday best, but I daresay you’ve given in to at least some of the prevailing trends along with the rest of us slobs. I certainly care about my appearance and pay attention to what I wear, even if I don’t look particularly fancy at the end of my toilette.
Perhaps in a few decades’ time bowler hats and bustles will be back in fashion and all will be right with the world again.
Last edited:
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Is it right to claim people have tattoos because they don't care about their appearance? It's not like people can't be bothered thinking about what they're going to wear in the morning so decide to get a tattoo.
I like the clean-cut 1950s/60s look in all the old Disneyland photos and don't have any tattoos myself, but, at the risk of re-stating the obvious, aren't we discussing changing styles more than people caring about their appearance?
I like the clean-cut 1950s/60s look in all the old Disneyland photos and don't have any tattoos myself, but, at the risk of re-stating the obvious, aren't we discussing changing styles more than people caring about their appearance?
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
We did.
Reposting a story I’ve posted here a few times, the last time in 2021.
I was at the central hub at the Magic Kingdom in May 1982 with friends and noticed a bench with chipped paint on one arm. We joked about it for the rest of the day. We even took a photo. Wouldn't you know it, we came back the next day and the chip was fixed to the point where we couldn't see where the chip had been! That was the level of maintenance and service WDW provided to its Guests every day.
In hindsight, I now wonder if the joking we did brought it to the attention of a Cast Member who was walking by. He stopped to see what we were laughing about.
About a year later, I saw two lightbulbs next to each other that were out and reported it to a Cast Member who was nearby. The bulbs were fixed when we walked past the next night.
Maybe it’s simply that Cast Members (including the maintenance crews) were more responsive to Guests’ concerns back in the day?
Chi84
Premium Member
Or maybe you should go to WDW more often.
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
Indeed, but bell bottoms are a lot easier to take off than tattoos.
1. Clothing is due not so much to dress code, but season. Footage was not taken in the heat of July or August. People are dressed for relatively cooler weather for Florida.
2. adults look plenty chunky to me.
3. there was one shot of a grandma in a wheelchair, but yes, just the one.
2. adults look plenty chunky to me.
3. there was one shot of a grandma in a wheelchair, but yes, just the one.
I'm not trying to offend anybody here but I think there's a few things in these pictures that stand out. One is that yes, back then dying your hair in felt tip colours wasn't a thing, neither were piercings and tattoos. Some people think those things 'scruffy' and whilst they're not my cup of tea, the people into that are putting thought and effort into their appearance it's more back then that wasn't an option as readily. So they are putting an effort into their appearance, it's just not as appreciated by some others as a worthwhile effort?The idea that everyone was smartly dressed in the past is very easily disproved:
The other noticeable thing is that there don't seem to be as many obese people about either. Yes I've said that and that's not a criticism but rather a fact like it or not. Here's not the place for reasons why people are obese, but it's certainly a different landscape in that regard. I'm also not saying large people don't or can't look smart, anyone can. It's just a difference that in this day and age there are more people out and about that fit the larger category. Now I've not researched it and perhaps those who have will be able to tell me that back then scooters weren't a thing as so we just didn't see as many people of size as there were just as many but they stayed at home?
On a less controversial topic, I think fashion back then made people look more 'uniform' (best word I can come up with, I'm sure there's better out there?). There wasn't perhaps as much variety back then, so if you wanted to 'rebel' by looking 'edgy' or 'different', that you'd have to go out of your way to find a store selling clothes to satisfy that desire. Nowadays stores tend to supply a wider variety of looks and failing that, the online options to allow you to easily look anyway you want are there for all. As an example when we go to HHN at Universal, I'm amazed at the number of young ladies wearing ripped fishnets. My wife was explaining to me that you can even buy them that way already if you want and they're described as 'distressed' just the same as the ripped jeans folk pay extra for. Back in the 70's, ripped stockings or jeans were almost certainly thrown away rather than worn as a 'look' and anyone wearing them back then was probably doing so because they couldn't sadly afford anything new to replace them with rather than wanting to look that way.
Now I've done potentially upsetting people (certainly not my intention), I'll be on my way.
Last edited:
johnparkhopper
Member
Obesity is a national problem from a health perspective and yes there were less obese people in 1970 as reflected in the 1970 picture.
"To be specific, around 15% of adults had obesity in 1970. By 2016, that percentage had increased to almost 40% ".
obesity rate for 2023 rose to 41.7%
"To be specific, around 15% of adults had obesity in 1970. By 2016, that percentage had increased to almost 40% ".
obesity rate for 2023 rose to 41.7%
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
The reason there is so much parking footage is that that entire channel consists of footage that was obtained as B-roll for news segments. It's a fascinating channel as the videos just place you as if you're in those settings and just observing life.
JIMINYCR
Well-Known Member
Tattoos back then were generally a feature you would only see on bikers and military personnel. You wouldnt find tattoo parlors in "respectable" parts of town. The number of parlors were few and far in between. Someone sporting a tattoo outside of the military was looked at as being nefarious.
As far as obesity, that started to increase when kids started losing interest in being active outside because of the access of video games and such which got them planted on the couches for hours on end. As well as the promotion of fast food spots where parents found could feed their families cheaper and without effort on their part.
Fashion has always pushed the envelope as a means of being a push back on authority. The generations that did so in the 60s in time started to allow their kids to dress as they wished and it was less controversial to allow their kids to dress as they wished than to hold a standard. The influence of celebrities, movies and commercials that promoted a new relaxed look advanced quickly to what we have accepted now as acceptable wear. Businesses started relaxing their standards in order to attract and keep workers. And we got less and less standards of attire as a look.
As far as obesity, that started to increase when kids started losing interest in being active outside because of the access of video games and such which got them planted on the couches for hours on end. As well as the promotion of fast food spots where parents found could feed their families cheaper and without effort on their part.
Fashion has always pushed the envelope as a means of being a push back on authority. The generations that did so in the 60s in time started to allow their kids to dress as they wished and it was less controversial to allow their kids to dress as they wished than to hold a standard. The influence of celebrities, movies and commercials that promoted a new relaxed look advanced quickly to what we have accepted now as acceptable wear. Businesses started relaxing their standards in order to attract and keep workers. And we got less and less standards of attire as a look.
S.I.R. the Robot
Active Member
- In the Parks
- No
Snow White's Adventures lasted until July 1994; so here are the Sonic characters who rode it in my fanon...
Sorry if this seems off-topic, but Snow White was '70s, and my other posts here discuss the starburst scene.
- Sonic
- Tails
- Amy
- Sally
- Knuckles
- Sonic thinks the witch killed him
- Tails cries
- Amy goes "WHOAAAAAA"
- Sally understands it may be waking up from a dream
- Knuckles laughs because it reminds him of how he gets rid of intruders
Sorry if this seems off-topic, but Snow White was '70s, and my other posts here discuss the starburst scene.
DW Aficionado
Well-Known Member
you know what i noticed....NO BACKPACKS
spock8113
Well-Known Member
No cell phones with shots of people rudely putting their phones in your field of view to get "their shot" of the same thing that millions of people have taken before. The more "unique" your photo, the more it is the same.
How many videos are they're of any rides at Disney? Thousands. I don't see YouTube, not part of Disney but it influences "vloggers" and their amount of filming and following, or not, understood etiquette.
No drunk people at Food and Wine.
No shots of businesspeople talking loudly on line at the PeopleMover about whether they should discipline the son-in-law's long lunches.
You drove there, you paid parking, you bought a ticket/s, you waited online, you had no phone contact with anyone unless you went to a "phone booth".
Now it is digital manipulation through "Smart Phones" and added fees.
Still have an E-Ticket from Disneyland.
How many videos are they're of any rides at Disney? Thousands. I don't see YouTube, not part of Disney but it influences "vloggers" and their amount of filming and following, or not, understood etiquette.
No drunk people at Food and Wine.
No shots of businesspeople talking loudly on line at the PeopleMover about whether they should discipline the son-in-law's long lunches.
You drove there, you paid parking, you bought a ticket/s, you waited online, you had no phone contact with anyone unless you went to a "phone booth".
Now it is digital manipulation through "Smart Phones" and added fees.
Still have an E-Ticket from Disneyland.
DW Aficionado
Well-Known Member
Disney hadn't yet brainwashed every guest to dress head to toe in Disney merchandise.
John park hopper
Well-Known Member
Is society better off now--- IMO no
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
For some of us, it most certainly is.
DW Aficionado
Well-Known Member
No serving alcohol at MK then taking video of the fights that break out