They Had Condoms Back Then? The Questions and Answers Thread

[MochaJay]

21 hours ago, quarks said:

Yeah, that did seem to be a bit odd?

I know there were cases where younger sons inherited cash or some portion of land that wasn't tied to the estate, and cases where younger siblings received some sort of allowance from the family estates, or inherited funds from another relative (this happened with one of Jane Austen's brothers, for instance) but the idea of Colin being able to dip into the family funds at will did seem odd.

It seemed atypical but didn't really shock me in the context of this family. Anthony takes all responsibility for the family finances, but he views their assets as being for the benefit of them all, so I could see him having authorised his adults brothers to draw from accounts that might otherwise be under his sole control.

 

If Colin had lost the investment then Anthony might have lost trust. But (not having read the books) I assume Anthony is planning to settle independent incomes on his brothers when they marry so has made sure they are capable of managing money.

 

 

[Atlanta]

Of course this is fiction so I don't know how it could have worked in real life, but even though the Bridgerton family is 'only' a viscountcy, they are very wealthy and old. The sons may have had trusts set up for them from the beginning and wisely invested and the daughters have dowries. They don't seem to gamble or spend senselessly. In a future book (won't say what book or which son) has a cottage though it's more like a large country house though not a manor by any means, and it's not tied to an estate. I can't imagine a family maintaining good relationships between siblings, but the siblings are left to be poor while the first sperm and egg gets it all. 

I'm reminds of the Spencer family (as in Lady Diana). They were originally a viscountcy and later upgraded to earldom in the 1700s, IIRC. 

Edited March 30, 2022 by Atlanta

[chaifan]

At some point I heard/read that women don't wear tiaras until they are married.  May have been The Crown, may have been Downton, or may have been an actual real article about real life.  Season 2, Ep 2 had a bunch of unmarried women, including Kate, wearing what I would call a tiara in the debut and ball scenes.  Is this not yet a rule in England, or is it just not a rule that is followed by this show? 

[bijoux]

According to The Court Jeweller that's a widely spread myth. There's more in the link, but here's an excerpt:

You do not have to be married to wear a tiara! Single women have been sporting tiaras since they regained popularity in the nineteenth century, and they continue to do so today.

It’s true that tiaras should be worn by adults, not by children. Marriage used to be seen as the marker of the transition from childhood to adulthood for women, but many women marry later in life, and many never marry at all. Any adult women who attends an appropriate function can wear a tiara, regardless of her marital status, and it’s been that way for a very long time.

[Atlanta]

If I remember correctly, the current Swedish princesses got 'starter' tiaras at 18. Madeleine's was a beautiful aquamarine.

[iwantcookies]

What is the queen snorting in the show? 

[Ohiopirate02]

5 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

What is the queen snorting in the show? 

Snuff, a form of tobacco.

[circumvent]

I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if that has been asked and answer but why do they insist in disappearing the "F" daughter (Francesca?). First season she was there, then gone. Second season, same. Are they setting up for a story centered on her for next season?

[Ohiopirate02]

2 minutes ago, circumvent said:

I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if that has been asked and answer but why do they insist in disappearing the "F" daughter (Francesca?). First season she was there, then gone. Second season, same. Are they setting up for a story centered on her for next season?

From what I have read, it's not that they are insisting on disappearing Francesca.  More like the actress hired for the role had other commitments last year while season 2 was filming, and with Covid restrictions she could not just show up for one or two days of filming.  

[shapeshifter]

25 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

From what I have read, it's not that they are insisting on disappearing Francesca.  More like the actress hired for the role had other commitments last year while season 2 was filming, and with Covid restrictions she could not just show up for one or two days of filming.  

Now I want to know how they would have incorporated Francesca into the season if not for Covid, and what bits were added because they could not do those scenes.🤔

[circumvent]

41 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

From what I have read, it's not that they are insisting on disappearing Francesca.  More like the actress hired for the role had other commitments last year while season 2 was filming, and with Covid restrictions she could not just show up for one or two days of filming.  

Thanks. Still kind of dismissive to viewers that they don't address the absence. It would be very easy to add a line or two to explain why she wasn't there, since the same thing happened in the first season and there was no explanation either, as far as I remember. 

Another show did this too, they fired two actors between seasons 1 and 2 and the characters, even though they were among the main cast, were not even mentioned anymore. They gave a silly excuse for the lack of mentions but it is still dismissive (show was Code Black)

[bijoux]

Francesca was visiting an aunt in Bath on the first season, they said so on the show, it was either episode 7 or 8 od the first season.

[circumvent]

51 minutes ago, bijoux said:

Francesca was visiting an aunt in Bath on the first season, they said so on the show, it was either episode 7 or 8 od the first season.

I see. Still, they waited until the final episodes to even mention her, and now not even that.

[shapeshifter]

56 minutes ago, bijoux said:

Francesca was visiting an aunt in Bath on the first season, they said so on the show, it was either episode 7 or 8 od the first season.

4 minutes ago, circumvent said:

I see. Still, they waited until the final episodes to even mention her, and now not even that.

Yes, I've seen this happen on other shows when a character is not going to be seen for an entire season but might come back the next. It makes sense to me to avoid confusing those who have just tuned in during the current season; no point in mentioning a character they have never seen before and may never see.

 

[circumvent]

1 minute ago, shapeshifter said:

It makes sense to me to avoid confusing those who have just tuned in during the current season; no point in mentioning a character they have never seen before and may never see.

But she did appear in this season, at least in the first episodes. I was actually surprised that she was there. 

[RachelKM]

1 hour ago, bijoux said:

Francesca was visiting an aunt in Bath on the first season, they said so on the show, it was either episode 7 or 8 od the first season.

I think it was first mentioned a bit earlier.  Because I recall not being surprised Francesca wasn't at Daphne's wedding with how quickly it was planned and executed.  So I was aware that she was out of town by whatever episode that happened in (Ep 4?).

[RachelKM]

17 hours ago, kittykat said:

I don't know much about regency London but I assumed the season was April-August with everyone retreating to country estates a  the weather chilled.

17 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

No, it was the other way around - the social season began in winter and ran through mid-June and then they retreated to their country estates in summer. 

The Regency era Season ran from late January or early February, timed roughly with the opening of Parliament, through the close of session in July or August.  

Before the 19th century, it had been October through May because traveling to or from London in during the winter was too hard. By the 1810s the roads were improved and it wasn't as necessary to get to London before winter.  Not that that should have mandated a change. But maybe people decided to spend Christmas at their estates.

I found this page while double checking myself and it seems super helpful. 

 

[Harvey]

15 hours ago, circumvent said:

I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if that has been asked and answer but why do they insist in disappearing the "F" daughter (Francesca?). First season she was there, then gone. Second season, same. Are they setting up for a story centered on her for next season?

I don't know if this belongs here or in the book thread (?) but  the show runners are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing. It is explained in great detail in her own book why Francesca barely spends any time with her family. 

For those who want to know:

Spoiler

She is an introvert and not as in your face and outright friendly as her other sisters. She loves her family but she is eager to explore her own identity apart from them and make her own way in life. Later on she leaves to live in Scotland and that explains why she doesn't show up at important family events like weddings and christenings. She is too far away and the Bridgertons are obsessed with getting married on a whim with these special licenses so there often simply isn't enough time to write her and tell her to come. 

 

[circumvent]

3 hours ago, Harvey said:

I don't know if this belongs here or in the book thread (?) but  the show runners are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing. It is explained in great detail in her own book why Francesca barely spends any time with her family. 

For those who want to know:

  Reveal spoiler

She is an introvert and not as in your face and outright friendly as her other sisters. She loves her family but she is eager to explore her own identity apart from them and make her own way in life. Later on she leaves to live in Scotland and that explains why she doesn't show up at important family events like weddings and christenings. She is too far away and the Bridgertons are obsessed with getting married on a whim with these special licenses so there often simply isn't enough time to write her and tell her to come. 

 

Thanks for that clarification but it is still strange that for people who didn't read the book, things are left up in the air unless, like I said, they are setting up for a more Francesca focused story to reflect what is in the book. 

Then there is the explanation given about the actress having other commitments, which muddles things. She is so unseen, that they could have just changed the actress and few people would have noticed (better yet, add a line about her absence in the second season, after she was seen in a few scenes) Or maybe the actress has a good contract and is still being paid until the schedules can be reconciled. If that's the case, good for her for having an upper hand 

[Ohiopirate02]

3 hours ago, circumvent said:

Thanks for that clarification but it is still strange that for people who didn't read the book, things are left up in the air unless, like I said, they are setting up for a more Francesca focused story to reflect what is in the book. 

Then there is the explanation given about the actress having other commitments, which muddles things. She is so unseen, that they could have just changed the actress and few people would have noticed (better yet, add a line about her absence in the second season, after she was seen in a few scenes) Or maybe the actress has a good contract and is still being paid until the schedules can be reconciled. If that's the case, good for her for having an upper hand 

Filming of season two happened in a covid bubble they were lucky to get the cast that they did when they wanted to film.  They are not going to punish an actor who had other commitments.  Nicola Coughlin, Penelope, had to miss the majority of Derry Girls season 3 filming due to this.  

[circumvent]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

They are not going to punish an actor who had other commitments

I am not talking about punishment. The actor is likely still under contract and is not being kicked out. But since they seem to be following the book, the story is very specific and it would not disrupt the story too much to have a scene added, with the actress or another actor - since she was present for some scenes, I can speculate that her schedule was badly used and left viewers not knowing what happened. Just to tie things up. I call this bad directing, bad production, the apparent lack of planning under circumstances that were not a surprise to anyone

[Haleth]

The cast is so large I haven’t missed one sister who is not important to the story. 

[eleanorofaquitaine]

I think that's it. Francesca wasn't important to the story so calling out her absence would make it more conspicuous. I think they figured that most people won't notice or care, and I think that they were largely correct. Which is not to say nobody has noticed, of course.

[Cetacean]

2 minutes ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I think they figured that most people won't notice or care, and I think that they were largely correct.

They were correct in my case, didn't notice and don't care.

[GaT]

This just occurred to me, were people not allowed to court & find spouses when it wasn't the season? What was so specific about the season that women had to find a husband then, or be considered a failure?

[bijoux]

There was nothing stopping people from doing it outside the social season, the numbers just worked for the benefit of those pursuing marriage during the season since there was a greater number of eligible people in the same place. Off season, a lot of them would be spread out on their estates outside of London.

My question is, is there a limit to the number of dowagers of the same title? Like if the dudes who inherited a title kept dying and their widows still alive and kicking, could there, theoretically speaking, be six dowager countess Soggybottom?

[Ohiopirate02]

16 minutes ago, GaT said:

This just occurred to me, were people not allowed to court & find spouses when it wasn't the season? What was so specific about the season that women had to find a husband then, or be considered a failure?

Engagements happened throughout the year.  Not every young lady went to London to be presented at court and have a Season.  The Season was the time when Parliament was in session and the men needed to be in London.  Their wives followed and entertained to pass the time.  There were balls, the theater,  garden parties, and dinner parties.  Because the men were in London, families with unmarried daughters started coming there.  

The whole "a young woman has only one season to find a husband" thing is a romance convention.  It was perfectly acceptable for a young lady to have more than one season under her belt before finding a husband.   Usually the first season was a girl figuring out how Society worked as she and her parents made connections with other members of the Ton who could steer them into a good match.  

[Bill1978]

I feel I should now the answer already considering I have watched a bajillion British shows and movies set around this time but do the working class hold the same views about a woman's 'innocence' as the noble class?

Theo didn't seem to hesitate to move in for a kiss with Eloise which if he was noble would have meant Eloise was 'ruined' and he would have to marry her. Did parents care whether the daughter was a virgin before being married? Were members of the opposite sex supervised and not left alone in a room?

I feel the answer is they don't care (to the same degree as nobility), but I'm not willing to bet my life on it.

[Haleth]

It's all about the property and making sure you are leaving your estates and titles to your biological children.  Daughters who are pure will be less likely to arouse suspicion or scandal.

[Scarlett45]

On 4/11/2022 at 12:47 AM, Bill1978 said:

I feel I should now the answer already considering I have watched a bajillion British shows and movies set around this time but do the working class hold the same views about a woman's 'innocence' as the noble class?

Theo didn't seem to hesitate to move in for a kiss with Eloise which if he was noble would have meant Eloise was 'ruined' and he would have to marry her. Did parents care whether the daughter was a virgin before being married? Were members of the opposite sex supervised and not left alone in a room?

I feel the answer is they don't care (to the same degree as nobility), but I'm not willing to bet my life on it.

The goal was to have your daughter be a virgin when she married, even for a working class girl. But if your daughter was courting a young man with a trade/job, and became pregnant, so long as he was game to marry her quickly, it wasn't THAT big of a deal.

Less than ideal, but if they were in a socially established courtship, and he had a way to support her and was willing to take responsibility for her/the child, people accepted that these things just happened. Working class women/girls had a bit more freedom to move about the world, and more interaction with unrelated male peers- girls/women still tended to do things in pairs, and going on "dates" wasn't a thing yet (it would be 100 more years before that started happening) but young people did get together in groups and socialize, and couples did have sex on the sly because humans are humans. No, being alone in a room with an unrelated male wasn't going to "ruin" her the way it would a noble young woman.

Working class young men/women chose partners more based on personal attributes (attraction and personal compatibility) as there weren't large amounts of money at stake. If a young man had a way to support a wife, he could court a woman seriously.

[Scarlett45]

16 hours ago, bijoux said:

My question is, is there a limit to the number of dowagers of the same title? Like if the dudes who inherited a title kept dying and their widows still alive and kicking, could there, theoretically speaking, be six dowager countess Soggybottom?

Yes. There could be several Dowager of a title, that happened somewhat frequently, especially because even then, women lived far longer than men, so lets say the current "Lord Soggybottom" is a young man in his twenties, his paternal grandmother is still alive, as is his Mom, they would both be "Dowager Soggybottom". The older of the two would often be referred to as "Elder Dowager Soggybottom".

[janie jones]

15 hours ago, Bill1978 said:

Theo didn't seem to hesitate to move in for a kiss with Eloise which if he was noble would have meant Eloise was 'ruined' and he would have to marry her.

When did that happen?

[peachmangosteen]

46 minutes ago, janie jones said:

When did that happen?

The final ep, about 45 minutes in.