Lame adaptations and sequels are always like, “how can Mina go back to her stifling Victorian marriage after her experience with the dark, seductive Dracula??”
Meanwhile, Mina marries her best friend, who she’s known since they were children, who she share common interests with, they build a home together, work as partners, make immense sacrifices for each other, support each other through their traumas.
Guys, a marriage isn’t stifling and restrictive just because two people… get along, I guess?
Feeling deeply traumatized after watching a documentary about the chimney sweep boys in Victorian England. Boys and girls (usually sold to the upper class by their parents) as young as 3 were made to crawl up the chimneys of their master’s mansions and clean the soot from there.
Their knees and elbows were usually bruised and bloodied after they were done. To toughen them up, the master would usually pour water and salt on their wounds and mercilessly send them up another chimney. Because of this, calluses formed. Sometimes, to make the boys climb faster, the master would light a fire beneath them.
With the “job” came many hazards. It was not unusual for some boys to get stuck in the tight corners of the chimney, sometimes, without the knowledge of the master. These poor souls were left to suffocate from the soot and toxic fumes. Worse, some were BURNT to death when the fire was lit and their screams could be heard for 2 miles away.
Many of these chimney boys didn’t live to adulthood due to the daily breathing in of soot and other toxic chemicals. They also suffered from deformed bones due to their young bodies having to bend out of shape to fit into the chimney.
Never again will I whine about any uncomfortable setbacks in life.
The Forest Republican, Tionesta, Pennsylvania, July 3, 1889
Dollar Weekly News,
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, November 15, 1890
Harrisburg Telegraph, Pennsylvania, November 17, 1890
The Times, Philadelphia, May 7, 1901
The Evening World, New York, July 19, 1905
Chicago Daily Tribune, June 2, 1914
The Baltimore Sun, Maryland, August 22, 1916
The Morning News, Wilmington, Delaware, June 23, 1919
The News-Review, Roseburg, Oregon, November 16, 1929
I don’t know if anyone else has come across this, but I’ve read a lot of articles (Mental Floss, Jezebel, Smithsonian, NPR) that seem to conclude that while the colours could be interchanged and it wasn’t quite settled (I agree), the colour pink was more commonly a boy’s colour, while blue was for girls, until WWII. Almost all articles quote one single trade journal from 1918:
The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.
But from what I can find, while there’s some wiggle room - a couple articles I found said pink could certainly be used for boys - for the most part it’s generally been “pink for girls” and “blue for boys” since at least the 1890s. “Pink was a boys colour” seems like a bit of a modern myth perpetuated by that one source.