I think it's easy to overestimate the difference between people in the past and ourselves. The lack of shame with which people pursue their pleasures now may be different, but it's silly to think people 100 years ago didn't enjoy getting smashed and having sex.
After the double take/uneasy giggle at the choice of word to describe women (in the 1920s), I looked at the article.
One main difference that stands out for me is that the type of behaviour patterns described by the OP above (booze, grind, etc.) would be classed as "typical" from today's point of view, the "flapper" behaviour pattern above wouldn't have been "typical" in that usual sense of the word in those times (would it probably be tame from today's stand point?). Anecdotally, it would have been, at best fringe, and dare I say, restricted to (perhaps) the wealthy.
Someone also mentioned roman orgies. That would have been restricted to the wealthy, upper class too and would not have been classed as "typical"?
Therefore, the OP's point, namely, " the way we enjoy or practice most of these would be alien to people of 100 years ago. It's not the concepts that change but their expression." is relevant IMO.
And usually that is where clash of the generations originate from?
I think the issue is that when doing a comparison we are comparing todays common culture and our own experiences with the prevailing generalisations of the past.
Who knows in 50 to 100 years time how people will generalise our current culture and compare it to however people are then.
I think it's easy to overestimate the difference between people in the past and ourselves. The lack of shame with which people pursue their pleasures now may be different, but it's silly to think people 100 years ago didn't enjoy getting smashed and having sex.