I think it was because two little kids were in the room. Besides, girls back then were told about the basics regarding biology and the birds and the bees when they reached adolescents. But explicit details were withheld until the girl got engaged. Once that happened, her mother (or maternal figure) would tell her all she needed to know so she wouldn't get scared on her wedding night.

Trust me, they did have a certain degree of knowledge regarding the birds and the bees. But explicit details, like pleasure areas, were withheld until the girl got officially engaged. I think the only reason the mom refused to answer was because two little kids were in the room

True, but the tradition continues in the United States- just ask a teenage Christian evangelist who promised her virginity to her father for safe keeping as if she doesn't have a body nor mind of her own.

​@@outinsiderthe heck are you talking about?

First off, two little kids were in the room so it wasn't the time or place for a conversation. Second off, girls back then did have a certain degree of knowledge regarding the birds and the bees. But explicit details were withheld until they were engaged. It was supposed to stop them from becoming who*es and be 'in tact' on her wedding night.

@@TimberlakeTigerGirl I'm talking about the creepy, grooming, perverted sexual tyranny of Christian evangelism that withholds sexual knowledge from teenagers and shames them for any kind of sexual expression. Not to mention, reinforce the double standard that men are allowed to be sexually adventurous as long as women maintain their virginal virtue. The tradition may have morphed, but as long as you have sexually bereft Christian evangelicals pushing absintence and creating rapists among men in the name of "traditional values" who get a free pass and the women's agency, but it is still a sinful, toxic, perverted tyranny that is way too similar to Regency standards of virtuous womanhood.

@@TimberlakeTigerGirl people on the internet are exhausting.

Well if you think about it’s not really Violet’s fault either. She was probably raised like that too since back then women knew nothing about marriage consummation. The only way you learn is if you are lucky enough to have a very loving governess or a mother who isn’t too afraid and awkward to tell you.

@@garlantyrell6368 Yep. My mother didn't know and neither did my grandmother until after the fact. Imagine being raised so strictly that you don't know the basics.

You can calm down darling. It’s not real.

@@Alskdoenfkemfnek So what? Fiction mirrors the real world. People are too chill with female rapists, that's a fact.

@@Mahi-nw5vh She didn't rape him. She didn't force him to have sex nor did he want to stop the sex. It's not like he wanted her to stop because he changed his mind about having sex, didn't like the sex, or felt coerced into having sex. She forced him to finish inside of her, which is not the same thing as rape. Both of them manipulated each other. He lied to her about not being to able to get her pregnant and deliberately had sex in a way to make sure she never got pregnant. He took advantage of her innocence. That is why he was initially angry, but forgave her.

And you wasted your time making a comment about a show you don't like, which makes you just as dumb.

Well yes there is no harm in not knowing, but there is harm in hooking up after two seconds like in today's world. And no, people were not clueless about intimacy in that time, just read Queen Victoria's diary and what she wrote about Prince Albert

@@НиколайРоманов-л6ю "No harm in not knowing"?? That may be one of the most ignorant things quoted on the Internet. How the 🤬 do you think there isn't harm in not knowing?? I live in the US. There is a vast difference in the areas that have comprehensive sex education and the areas that "teach" abstinence only. Guess which area has MORE pregnancies and STI's?? Hint: It isn't the areas that teach comprehensive sex education. How the 🤬 are you supposed to protect yourself from a thing if you have no understanding of it?? The ONLY reason to keep anyone, but especially women, in the dark about sex is control. That's it. We are going through this foolishness right now in my country. And I sincerely doubt you'd be okay with this crap if you were the one getting your rights stripped away and knowledge being forbidden to you. In this day and age of information, I find you to be disgustingly offensive in such backwards thinking. If you want to wallow in ignorance and stupidity, that's your mistake. But do not get it through your empty skull that such 🤬 isn't harmful to people. It is.

​@@НиколайРоманов-л6ю There's so much harm in not knowing

Not very smart are you

@@Yupyupyup32 Yeah I'm dumb.

10 điểm 💥✨

Und dass es eindeutog keine Leine sei sondern was toxisches Bär leider war ich wie Hessen von dem Thema er war mein einzöget he’d Air dieser wit Hass und die verletzen Gefühle

DAs war keine Liebe das war etwas krankhaftes manisches

Und sie ist in meine Gedankenwelt ei ge ochre und hat lügen er halt

First off, the two hardly compare. Teaching kids not to cross the street without looking is called common sense. And second off, contrary to popular belief, girls were never that ignorant about sex at age 17 back then. Girls were never given the talk about their own bodies until after they had their first period. To which after that their mothers or older woman figure would explain how their bodies worked. As for actual sex: they were informed about the birds and the bees but it was kept to a minimum because yes they wanted the girls to remain pure. Overall giving them the basic description of sex but never got explicit. But after they get engaged is when their female adult figures would go in detail in what to expect so the woman wouldn't be completely ignorant on the wedding night. If Eloise has no knowledge about this stuff at 17, not even a hint of it, then the mother failed in her duties.

​@TimberlakeTigerGirl thank you for commenting this I'm so sick of people thinking this was the norm back then.

Well certainly with two little kids in the room.