The reason is quite simple.
Posted on 04/12/2011 4:50:54 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
Scientists say Fifties housewives consumed far fewer calories and were much fitter and healthier than modern women.
We asked writer Amanda Cable to spend five days as a housewife in still-rationed 1953 and keep a diary.
Amanda, 41, lives in Blackheath, South-East London with photographer husband Ray, 45, and children Ruby, 12 and twins Charlie and Archie, nine.
MONDAY: My day begins at 7am with a bloodcurdling scream. My children have discovered I have confiscated their phones and gadgets. They storm into my room but stop dead at the sight of me in a tight-waisted cotton dress, and applying full make-up and red lipstick.
Back in the Fifties, few households had a car. So it will mean a bus ride and a 15-minute each-way walk to Charlie and Archie’s primary school, two miles from our house.
Women in 1953 consumed just 1,818 calories a day, but their busy lives helped them burn off 1,000 calories. Today’s women consume 2,178 calories and burn off just 556.
As a result, obesity 60 years ago was a rare thing — something I remind myself as I carry two swimming bags and a bassoon to the bus.
Normally, my drive to school takes just five minutes. Today the return journey takes more than an hour. I usually like to relax when back from the school run by reading a bit of online news. But computers are banned, and I’ve no time to waste.
In my hand is a 1950s Good Housekeeping plan of work for ‘a small servantless house’, and what an unforgiving tome it is.
Each task is illustrated by a cartoon Fifties housewife effortlessly completing her duties. Within minutes I am red-faced, perspiring and wheezing.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Ya think?
bmfl
We have an old reel mower and I let my lid try to mow the yard with it last week. I told her that was the norm when I was little, hardly anyone had a mower with a motor on it. After 15 minutes she was spent.
I told her this was one reason way back when we could eat meals laden with butter and no one worried about kids’ sugar uptake.
lid=kid...Oy! I need new glasses! : (
I still use one of those.....:o)
Walked two miles to school in 15 minutes? This article is an “exercise” in creative writing that was poorly researched and written by someone with limited life experience.
I agree. 2 miles in 15 minutes works out to a pace of 6 miles an hour.
That is a relatively decent jog speed.
Typical fast walk (for which Londoners are famous for) can approach speeds of 4 miles an hour
I have lived in Central London for great stretches of time and boy do those people walk. Not coincidentally, people who live in Central London and walk are among the slimmest people you see in all of London.
That's not what the article said...
So it will mean a bus ride and a 15-minute each-way walk to Charlie and Archie’s primary school, two miles from our house.
That's not what the article said...
So it will mean a bus ride and a 15-minute each-way walk to Charlie and Archie’s primary school, two miles from our house.
Having lived in Britain, I can say that few things are more revolting than being served kidneys, with or without mustard sauce.
“I agree. 2 miles in 15 minutes works out to a pace of 6 miles an hour.
That is a relatively decent jog speed.”
Try 8 mph.
You’re right. Thanks.
8 mph is what I call a “run”. When I go for a run in the morning, that is my peak sustained speed. I can’t do it for very long
However at 6 mph, I can run clean for an hour without exhausting myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.