> I really feel like they’re missing out on a developmental milestone.
Are they though? Those milestones can take many different forms, as evidenced by the fact that "giant parties" are a relatively recent phenomenon, historically speaking.
Are they though? Those milestones can take many different forms, as evidenced by the fact that "giant parties" are a relatively recent phenomenon, historically speaking.
That is nowhere near true.
It did happened occasionally, but it was seen as something bad and stigma (especially toward such girls) could be quite high.
I was assuming you were suggesting large parties regardless of age is a new historical phenomenon.
Although, fraternities and sororities have been around for hundreds of years and they're 17-21 or so. I'm sure they've had parties most of that time. It's probably how they started. Not sure if that counts with teen-only criteria. The concept of adult age has changed over time as well.
Humans party. Always have, always will. They of course were called "feasts" in historical times. Lack of partying is probably more of an anomaly (assuming the article is true). Of course, I would venture that even having a large online gaming or chat session would constitute a party. I mean its a group of people socializing, and I'm sure some of them are having beverages or botany of their choice, plus some hot pockets.
When I read old times, I tend to imagine either rural living or middle classes in cities or something else more common. Of course they had fun and socialized, but it was not the same as 80ties or something.
I agree with you on the sheltered thing.