Even if people had shorter hours for their "jobs", literally every aspect of life would have been more labor intensive than today. Meaning you still had to constantly work to maintain everything you had, against the elements no less.Is it just pastoral idealism?
>>18466736White booba
One article that went viral and continues to do the rounds every so often.
>>18466736It was easier to find a wife and the wife wouldn't say no. That's the appeal. Are you happy now?
>>18466736There were a few years after the Bubonic Plague hit England that peasant farmers were in demand and could actually negotiate for a better life. I think that's the only time this claim holds up. It's a shame the Lords didn't have access to H1B Indians and were forced to give Native Britons a better life.
>>18466757> think that's the only time this claim holds up. It's a shame the Lords didn't have access to H1B Indians and were forced to give Native Britons a better lifeBecause having to yolk a mule required that much tech savy?Also, you are a fiend.
It comes from the fact that in northern Europe the growing season effectively doesn't exist during winter.Meaning for a out a full quarter of the year your total work load was highly reduced. Of course you still had to work very hard the rest of the year to prepare for winter.
>>18466736I bet those peasants were really glad they had more time away from their jobs so they could spend it doing other forms of labor like churning butter or weaving fabric at home instead.
>>18466754She could if she chose to be a nun
>>18466736If I were in medieval times, I wouldn't be an incel
>>18467179He didn't say couldn't, he said wouldn't. No healthy woman wants to be a nun, so they wouldn't.
>>18466736Here you go, it's laced with your typical boomer subversiveness but it's fun I guess.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QquhNTBfpdw
>>18466736It comes from wagies working increasingly ludicrous amounts of overtime year round plus commute just to pay rent. Not counting the life maintenance chores they also have to do. People aren't idealizing medieval peasants. It's the opposite. They're using medieval peasants as a known standard for low quality of life and saying things are getting even worse. Which is not unprecedented. The industrial revolution was the worse time in recorded history to be working class.
>>18467100>weaving fabric at home insteadDedicated weavers existed.In fact, one man so tasked because he was skilled would often have several women feeding him thread so he wouldn't have to take a break.Separation of labor isn't something that popped into existence during industrialization. People had specializations through the entire feudal period.So you would trade in kind for your cloth with whatever goods you had instead of having to raise all your own sheep and process the wool and weave it yourself.The idea of an atomized medieval society where each family existed in isolation and had to provide absolutely everything they needed themselves is totally inaccurate and at best simple ignorance but for how many people repeat this nonsense I suspect it's actually malicious.
Actually everyone was both a shepherd and a weaver and a farmer and a woodsman, etc, at the same time.nobody had any free time because they had to do everything since they were too stupid and superstitious to understand how efficiency workslmao
>>18467210>50 % child mortality>Second sons sent as mercenaries to die in Italy
>>18466736It comes from retarded, often American or other Firsties, urbanites who read a "study" and didn't bother to think about it critically for more than 10 seconds + have zero knowledge or firsthand experience of rural labour.I work on a 21st century farm, with automation and all the wonders of modernity, and it's still a 12 hour long workday everyday because shit still breaks all the fucking time and because animals are often suicidal sick retards who don't know what "free time" is and therefore neither do you.Cow is having a difficult birth? Haha guess who gets to be a midwife and covered in uterus, blood, etc. today! Tractor's wheel needs replacing? Yeah that's right, you're the one who needs to do it.Roof needs fixing? No you don't call Miguel & Sons Co. to do it, you have to do it. Dog food ran out? Go hunt kangaroos, butcher them yourself, and feed it to the hounds. Dogs' cages need cleaning because the dogs got worms? Yeah buddy that's you again. I can only imagine how much worse this would all be when you had to boil water just to drink it, made all your own clothes instead of buying them, didn't have good work boots, had to drag shit with a cart instead of a motorized ute, etc...
>>18467088Should also note that winter wasn't exactly cozy season either since you'd be living off your own supplies and genuinely ran the risk of starving to death in spring when they were running low.Sweden still had famines when the Brooklyn Bridge was already being built
>>18467271>Not counting the life maintenance chores they also have to doThat's the part where the peasant workload outpaces the modern one by a massive longshot. Doing your laundry today is a 30 minute affair because you chuck it in a machine. Laundry in the 1300s is your ass on your knees next to a river beating and scrubbing clothes the whole morning
>>18467383Yeah, winter is cold.Stop the presses.People would put their living quarters above their animals just to take advantage of their body heat.>>18467385People back then didn't do laundry every day.And for what's it's worth, the term washer woman didn't come out of the blue. People would often load their dirty linens on a woman to do for them collectively.The Roman army had a similar system. Most armies still do.>>18467381>you had to boil water just to drink itYou really think such a resource intensive task as bringing water to a boil happened just for drinking water, every day? It takes a lot of wood to bring water to a boil, so when they did that it was to make a lot of soup for multiple families.They used wells and cisterns. Usually even today, well water is safe even when unfiltered and untreated. Trad types like the Amish still know how to construct old school stone cisterns, bless them. I think you're really underestimating medieval communities and their collective capabilities. They weren't all on their own, like a lot of modern farmers are.They used alcohol to kill what would be be known later are microbes, but they didn't know that. Who knows what they thought made it work.
Also for what it's worth I grew up in earshot of a cattle farm and I've seen the man put his whole arm up a cow's vag to help deliver her calf while out on a stroll, so I know what you mean even if I've never done it personally.
>>18467378Okay, so I just fuck my wife twice as much and beat my second sons extra hard to make them more vicious
>>18467417You're just listing ways they lived, but none of this made life easier than in the modern era nor did it provide leisure time. Like yeah no shit they survived, we're here after all, but that doesn't mean the "based trad peasant life" in 1300 was better than that of a modern first worlder today (and if you think it was, you're still quite capable of living like a homesteader, plenty of people actually walk the walk and do it)
>>18467419We also pregnancy-test them by shoving a tube up their anus to do the ultrasound. My boss pregnancy tested something like 120 cows (heifers? I mean they weren't born yet) in a single day's work, thank fucking God I was just at the back moving them inside the yards.
>>18466767Why are you throwing eggs at a mule?
>>18466736It comes from "The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure" written by the economist Juliet Shor. Shor came to the conclusion that certain, especially english, peasants worked less than modern day Americans because she analysed the corvee services those peasants had to conduct for their liege lords. What she didn't take into account were the work hours the peasants spent on their own subsistence and maintenance of their belongings. But the statement that medieval paeasants worked less than modern day Americans was very catchy and soon online articles gobbled it up >>18466746.
They had a lot of holidays, when everyone is farmer there is just less work to do especially in Europe where you can only farm for 3 to 4 months of the year.
Men say this shit because they would actually have pussy to fuck, which convinces the male brain that anything they do the rest of the day was worth it. Women say this shit because men say this shit.
>>18466754>>18467210>>18467995How do you know you wouldn't be a loser back in medieval times too?
>>18468021Because a "loser" in medieval times would be dead. So your options were>Be not a loser or dieInstead of>Be not a loser or live in hell
>>18468031So you'd probably be dead then.
>>18468021>>18468097because we arent losers now, we are the victims of women having impossibly high standards and late stage liberalism gutting everything sacred about life.strictly speaking, the average man is not a loser, he is oppressed.arent leftists supposed to punch up??
>>18468190>aren’t leftists supposed to punch up??As a right-wing man, it is my duty and for your own benefit to call you a retarded loser so that perhaps you can reflect and grow as a person.
>>18467210Lmao, sure, Ranjesh.
>>18468031Why dont you kill yourself then.
>>18468268Because then I wouldn't be able to make you seeth
>>18468269You dont make me seethe, genuinely asking. If life here is more hellish than starvation, why dont you kill yourself?
>>18468278>You dont make me seetheYour constant "kys" posting says otherwise
>>18468285Its just a question but you dont seem interested to answer, because you actually dont think life today is more hellish than the peasant lifestyle.
>>18468329I wouldn't know, I've never experienced the peasant lifestyle. I've no frame of reference.
I think you could argue that a medieval peasant had more leisure time than an industrial worker during the early and middle of the 19th century. But them having more leisure time than modern people is ridiculous.
>>18468190Low quality men expecting top quality women is the problem. You can get a wife any time you want. She might be older, fatter, have some kids and another man’s name tattooed on her cellulite cratered ass, but she is exactly the standard you deserve. Because you’re not special, important, impressive, beautiful, unique, or anything else to set you apart. Your landwhale will love you for who you are.
>>18468686>Your landwhale will love you for who you are.Not even this is true, lmao. Even the bottom of the barrel women are utterly convinced they're on par with Brad Pitt in his prime. The landwhale will hate you and resent you and cheat on you.
>>18468692Simply not true. It’s also a matter of just not wanting to have to babysit some loser. I have never seen a man who really wanted a relationship fail to achieve one unless he was either completely repugnant and/or has some kind of personality disorder or mental defect, or wouldn’t date women of his own quality. If you’re so repulsive and useless that not even free Willy wants you? Work on yourself. No one owes you their company.
>>18468700>It’s also a matter of just not wanting to have to babysit some loserBut I should be expected to babysit a loser woman?
>>18468718If you’re both losers? Yes. If you’re both ugly, poor, fat, crazy, uneducated, and dumb, you’re in the category you belong.
>>18468721>If you’re both ugly, poor, fat, crazy, uneducated, and dumb, you’re in the category you belong.So any feminist is part of my dating pool?
>>18468723You seem like you fall into that personality disorder category.
>>18468727>Ad hominemImpressive
>>18468734Hey, I stipulated personality disorders are a reason why a lot of low functioning men can’t get married. Blaming feminists for that is a pretty good indicator.
>>18468735Where's the blame? Is making fun of a group blaming them?
>>18468741In this case? Yes.
>>18468746So we're just lying now?
Yes, people don't realize how convenient their lives are because of things like indoor plumbing and gas/electric heating. You simply pay a monthly fee and you don't have to fetch water for your daily ablutions and consumption, you don't have to chop and haul firewood and tend a fire to keep your home warm or cook food. That's literally hours of manual labor saved every day per household, and they don't even realize it.People also take for granted their ability to have clean, soft clothing. Washing your own laundry by hand with only the harshest of simple soaps, and then having to hang dry and hand-roll out the wrinkles will teach anybody to appreciate a washing machine. Just the fact that you don't have to painstakingly haul water to a large tub, or trek to a nearby stream, to wash clothes would probably be enough.Then you have the every day maintenance that an agrarian laborer had to contend with, just for his own upkeep. Not even part of his "job", that is, his assigned labor, but something which he had to do so he wouldn't starve.
>>18466757Not even in that period would their life be better than a modern worker's. It was only comparatively better to earlier life as a peasant. Peasants could negotiate better terms for their work, but they still had to do backbreaking manual labor, including their own subsistence labor.
>>18468021As long as you're a free man, you can always look down on the serfs and the like. You might be an ignorant peasant, but as long as you work every day nobody will call you a shirker and will respect you as a man.
>>18468771>but they still had to do backbreaking manual laborYou can tell it's weak little faggots who always "um, ackchually" this topic because they're obsessed with telling you how BACKBREAKING and LABORIOUS things were
>>18468793Because they were. You are a soft cunt who has never had to seriously labor in his life. I have done real manual labor, and I am glad it is not my livelihood anymore. My body would be used up by the time I was 40, probably, even with the benefits of modern medicine and nutrition and taking care of myself as much as I could. The fact is, strenuous labor taxes parts of the body which do not rejuvenate, which only wear down over time, so the harder you work those parts of the body, the faster they wear out. Even simple motions which on their own are not overly taxing can accelerate wear and tear if repeated 8+ hours a day for decades. For example, something as simple as stepping off a truck onto concrete, settling your entire body weight on one leg, crushes just a little bit of the cartilage in your kneecap. 20 years of that will turn you into a wobbly kneed old man at the age of 40. And that's not even the same level of hard labor that medieval farming was.
>>18468807>Stepping on concrete fucking KILLS YOU!lol
>>18468809Ask any runner and yeah it really does, if you jog without good shoes on concrete pavement you'll fucking feel it. Cavemen were running on dirt, which is relatively soft, our concrete world is a weird new thing.>>18468793yeah okay tough guy let's see you do 10-12 hours of physical labour every single day of the week and come out of it without an ache in your spine. Every Ringer here in Australia is fucked in the joints and back by their 40s-50s, it doesn't matter how tough you are, your body is not special or unique, we're all subject to wear and tear.
>>18468849>here in AustraliaGo to bed, wallabyfucker
>>18468190>muh leftists?!?11?!Kek
>>18466736>Where does the idea of "medieval peasants had more free time" come fromThree things mostly:1. misinterpreting holy days as holidays in the current sense2. grossly underestimating the amount of year-round effort tending to a farm requires3. wilfully ignoring side jobs, community labour, corvees, etc.
>>18468809Landing heavily on a hard surface like concrete will destroy your knees. Ask any athlete, especially marathon runners, about it sometime. Delivery drivers actually have to train to step lightly out of the van or truck these days, because companies like UPS and Fedex are tired of paying for knee surgery for lifer union employees.
>>18468809It kills your KNEES, do you not read? You only have so much cartilage in your body to pad your joints, you aren't going to get any more of it without surgical implants. That stuff is supposed to last you your entire lifespan, assuming you don't do anything to wear it out faster. Like working a job that requires a set of repetitive movements, hundreds of reps, that is outside the ordinary range you'd do otherwise. And if the job actually does tax you physically, you run the risk of injuring yourself through over-exertion. That's pretty much the number one way I saw people injured on the job. It wasn't sloppy mistakes or taking unnecessary risks, it was doing a little too much, too often, til something gave out.
>>18466736A jew wrote it in a book, because he doesn't know anything about history or actual labor. He has since retracted the claim, but it already spread on social media because retards like to pretend they have the worst lives in history.
>>18467381Maybe the dingo ate your baby.
>>18467383>Sweden still had famines when the Brooklyn Bridge was already being builtWhy didn't they just eat rotten fish?
>>18468793You're sitting at a computer typing right now. You aren't doing backbreaking labor you idiot
>>18469096Done more than you, pansy faggot
>>18467381The whole reason cholera outbreaks were notable is because, under ordinary circumstances, well and spring water is safe to drink. That you seem not to know this shows that you possess the ignorance you are criticizing.Same with the animals. Not only are you massively overstating how troublesome/suicidal they are, you also don't understand that many of the problems with them are modern. The main thing I have to do to keep my goats from killing themselves is get their heads out of fences. Fences that protect them from wandering into roads that wouldn't be dangerous without cars and keep out predators that our medieval peasant ancestors hunted to local extinction in the absence of wildlife protection laws.
>>18468190You sound like a fucking loser.A little bitch.
From what I gather in the medieval period the harvest seasons were 12-14+ hour workdays where you literally did nothing but labour, eat and sleep. Even if you were some itinerant retard with no feudal contract, you could get casual labour because labour shortage was so intense during harvest as there was a rush to get it in. Wages earned during this period was like 2-3x what you'd usually get.Then into autumn after the harvest, there's tasty feasts, work would taper down as you went through the process of preparing the soil, tilling it, and sowing. Then in winter you mostly fucked off inside and tended to your tools, just did light maintenance, did your secondary trade like blacksmithing, and worked on the loom, etc. So it's like 12+ hour intense labour for 3 months of the year, probably around 8-10 hours of labour for 6 months of the year, then finally 4-6 hours or so in winter unless you had a trade trade. Women usually worked 12 hours through the winter full time on the loom though.>>18469107>The whole reason cholera outbreaks were notable is because, under ordinary circumstances, well and spring water is safe to drink. Water was regularly boiled for consumption and dysentery outbreaks and other diseases were often the result of a malthusian wood shortage. Typically when an area became over-forested, people take shortcuts with boiling water for washing clothes and drinking, and this gave a window for disease to wreck havoc.>Not only are you massively overstating how troublesome/suicidal they are, you also don't understand that many of the problems with them are modern.Weren't pigs back then much more feral and tricky? They weren't the docile pink oinkers that we have today, they were belligerent little fucks back then that roamed around the street and often caused damage.
>>18469189But a further point, riddle me this medieval peasant maxxers, if it was so good and wholesome chonker relaxing free time, why was there a constant churning up and demographic death of the cottar population on the farms? They failed to reproduce themselves.Being a peasant was alright if you were a villein with 50+ acres, enough to comfortably support a family and get hired help when needed, but on every feudal manor there were like 20-30% of the population that were poorfag peasants that had like 5-10 acres, who couldn't sustain a family. They had to rely on leasing their labour out to the villeins or feudal lords for wages, on top of their usual feudal dues, and on maintaining their own household obligations, in order to make ends meet. They were kept specifically on a plot that failed to sustain a family because it was useful to have a variable workforce that could be brought in for hired help by the wealthier villeins and manor lords. Then during bad years and famines they weren't given the option of hired work, and were expected to suffer. It was feeling of dependency at the bottom 20-30% of the manor that kept the system stable. It also relieved inheritance pressure for the second sons and daughters of the wealthier villeins, primogeniture meant only one could get their fathers plot, but the cottars failing to maintain their station meant that the second sons of villeins often became cottars. Downward mobility, but better than nothing. If you look at it demographically, the manor system was a brutal engine with constant downward mobility. Cottars regularly failed to meet their feudal dues, had their titles revoked, became itinerant labourers and then finally died off in rags.
>>18466736Peasants had more time off throughout the year as they worked seasonally but had longer hours depending on the season. Despite this, modern workers on average have better working conditions and higher quality of life that leads to more enjoyable times off. Of course some jobs are genuinely worse than what peasants had to deal with.
