RE: The Nuclear Family (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

sunshinemiss -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 5:29:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FF, the nuclear family is the best way to educate the kids. One works, the other takes care. The one who works also takes part.



I would disagree with you Term.  I think the best way to educate kids is in extended families where many people are able to support the children and the parents. 

It truly does take a village.

best,
sunshine



barelynangel -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 5:42:31 AM)

The definition is of nuclear family -- NOT family.  Nuclear is simply an adjective for family.   Family has more definitions one of which is the concept of nuclear family.

Yes, i grew up with my mom and dad and my brother in a nuclear family. Pros and cons are pretty much the same as most families i belong too. I also had family outside of that.  My other dad was another family.  My dad's family was another.  My mom's family was another.  And our neighborhood was another type of family.  Close friends became another family.  To me, you create your own family.  The concept of nuclear family is simply a definition.  But to me, nuclear is simply one adjective to the word family. 

I have had families created and families disbanded by time and miles.  Even my nuclear family isn't as close as it once was - my brother has his own nuclear family now.  Needs change, times change, and sometimes, families are created when needed and while connection will always remain on some level it doesn't mean the strength or closeness remains.

If you look at the definitions of family, you will find almost every type family defined for some it may not have anything to do with love or respect, for others that may be all that is required etc.

I've never given more or less value to each of my families as each family is different.  I do give more or less value to the people because my mom is the most important person in my life and always will be. 

I think most people have different families in their lives - whether they define the groups of people in their lives as families is up to the individuals.

To me, it tends to take a village to raise children.  Therefore, the village for that child tends to be a family concept in my eyes.

angel



Lucylastic -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 8:02:01 AM)

When I moved to canada with hubby and daughter 20 odd yrs ago, that was me, nuclear
even now, its me hubby and kids, we have a HUGE extended family but they are all 4000 miles away.
I have stepkids who lived with us too but they moved out and had their own kids,more than ten years ago



SternSkipper -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 10:19:01 AM)

quote:

You don't get it do you?
anyhow... the "gene" is 'kind of how' humans have been coming together etc etc.
That is our driving influence.
How we organise ourselves and how defend that gene is out of our hands.
You have no choice.
You have no control.
You are lost.
("You", refering to species, not individual)
pD


    Listen, I am NOT operating in a nuclear family no yet I am raising two kids. I raise them in a similar model except the mommy part is snipped off. They're nice, immensely intelligent (not my estimation, their educators), oh and they can spell. I'm pretty happy with the arrangement. Good luck with yours.




SternSkipper -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 10:41:03 AM)

quote:

Given that, it is a logical conclusion that if either or both of those particular people are replaced by others, those others will, despite their best intentions, never have the same loyalty to the cause. Be honest, if your kid is not yours, do you care as much ? To say yes is to lie. That is a fact, no matter how much anyone will avoid admitting it.


Term ... that's why I choose not top seek Ms. Replacement. I raise them alone, and they know the primary adult in their lives is signed on no matter what. When I got divorced, I  was VERY worried how that would impact the kids. I've gained some comfort in knowing that the counselors I got them at times when it looked either like there would be trouble between the parents and was told that they really weren't lacking for anything. And now I have my daughter seeing a counselor, but not for any issues. It's because she is approaching young womanhood and the counselor who interacted with her years ago is friends with us now and offered it as mentoring from a grown up woman. And THAT works out rather  well.
     And while I see room for other styles of family. They sure as hell need to do something besides sound 'edgy'. Little kids neither understand, nor care about 'defending the gene'. They want to know "Do you love me mommy/daddy?", "Am I safe?" and "How do I do <everything>" [:)] And Mr Spock can say whatever he wants in round words as long as he can come out of it saying his kids aren't assholes or a threat to everyone else.




sunshinemiss -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 3:11:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

You don't get it do you?
anyhow... the "gene" is 'kind of how' humans have been coming together etc etc.
That is our driving influence.
How we organise ourselves and how defend that gene is out of our hands.
You have no choice.
You have no control.
You are lost.
("You", refering to species, not individual)
pD


   Listen, I am NOT operating in a nuclear family no yet I am raising two kids. I raise them in a similar model except the mommy part is snipped off. They're nice, immensely intelligent (not my estimation, their educators), oh and they can spell. I'm pretty happy with the arrangement. Good luck with yours.




"Organise" is a perfectly acceptable way to spell the word.  You are really giving someone a hard time over a typo/commonly misspelled word in "referring"?  Well, it's a choice.



SternSkipper -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/9/2011 4:57:16 PM)

quote:

"Organise" is a perfectly acceptable way to spell the word. You are really giving someone a hard time over a typo/commonly misspelled word in "referring"? Well, it's a choice.


And of course, that's what's important in my post[:D]




LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 1:00:50 AM)

Having seen too many examples that proved otherwise, biological parents are not always the best for children; they don't always care the most nor are they the most loyal to their offspring. And it doesn't always have anything to do with drugs ingested by the parents.

While I grew up in a somewhat nuclear family, in that the family who lived in our homes consisted of 2 biological parents & 2 offspring of these parents, I tell people now that I was raised by blonde Norwegians. Those people were my mother's family, the grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, cousins, Great-aunts & Great-uncles who we hung out with. We didn't live with any of these other people, & we didn't even live very close to them. But they were such a huge influence on my sister's & my upbringing & on who we ended up becoming, that we say those people raised us. And we also say that without them, we may not have survived our parents.

I am all over the idea of the extended family of the heart. Some of that family is related to me by DNA, some are related to me by love. None of that matters to me. They are the ones who care about me & nurtured me & helped me to grow & become. And that includes family that I've added as an adult.

Count me in the nuclear family isn't always the best way to raise kids crowd/



HeatherMcLeather -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 1:18:14 AM)

quote:

the nuclear family is the best way to educate the kids.
I disagree. I grew up in a nuclear family. But I was raised by my extended family. My aunts, uncles, grandparents and so on. I am who I am in spite of my parents, not because of them. Everything good and decent about me I owe to my great-aunt. She taught me more about life and being a decent person than everybody else combined.



sunshinemiss -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 2:53:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

"Organise" is a perfectly acceptable way to spell the word. You are really giving someone a hard time over a typo/commonly misspelled word in "referring"? Well, it's a choice.


And of course, that's what's important in my post[:D]




It seems to be an important part of what you were replying to.  I was merely respecting your decision!  [:D]



popularDemand -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 6:45:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

You don't get it do you?
anyhow... the "gene" is 'kind of how' humans have been coming together etc etc.
That is our driving influence.
How we organise ourselves and how defend that gene is out of our hands.
You have no choice.
You have no control.
You are lost.
("You", refering to species, not individual)
pD


   Listen, I am NOT operating in a nuclear family no yet I am raising two kids. I raise them in a similar model except the mommy part is snipped off. They're nice, immensely intelligent (not my estimation, their educators), oh and they can spell. I'm pretty happy with the arrangement. Good luck with yours.




"Organise" is a perfectly acceptable way to spell the word.  You are really giving someone a hard time over a typo/commonly misspelled word in "referring"?  Well, it's a choice.


Don't worry, the poster missed the inference to (in humour) the 'reason' for rasing children being lost e.g: the ability to employ them a very young age, due to liberal human-rights campaigners and thier misguided slant on child welfare.
Chimneys have never been the same since.

I don't believe I actually said anything about his family practice, nor indeed anyone elses.

I hope his progeny have no reason to debate with him... the subject may be lost before it is explored.... however, being as gifted as they are I would they will fly the nest at the first opportunity. I wish them well. And a safe flight.

pD



xssve -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 8:32:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

There is no reason for this 'mode of cohabitation' in the modern world.
Not since laws were braught in to restrict the age and manner at which children can be put to work.


If you say so. I think though it's kind of how humans have been coming together since at least primordial man to procreate and as the central organizing unit of societies. Sure, there are things that make it 'not necessary'. Hell procreation is not necessary when you take it at that level.
  With that said, plenty of people survive not being from a traditional nuclear family these days.

No, not really - the extended family, or clan is the more common mode of basic social organization historically - the nuclear family as a concept, though it has always existed, wasn't promoted as the "ideal" until the Sixties, when mobility became the norm, and families could become scattered from one coast to the other - previously, geographic isolation usually kept extended families in closer proximity.

My extended family for instance ranges from both coasts, and along the Canadian border and Alaska, about as geographically distant as possible and still remain in the same country, but we are in semi-regular contact.

Anyway, the nuclear family is on the way out, as we shift to a corporate economy - corporations, not liberals are hostile to family, the corporate demands are incompatable with family life, which entails taking time off for pregnancy and family emergencies, extra relocation costs, etc., i.e., divided loyalties, so, taken to it's logical conclusion, I suspect future workers/consumers will be cloned and families will be poly co-ops like in SiaSL.



xssve -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 8:42:26 AM)

Even now it's weird world: my Nephew just had a baby with hid girlfriend, and the closest family at least has been coming and going, often driving thousands of miles just to ogle the creature - the funny part is, I see more of them than I do of him, and he lives a hundred feet away from me.



LafayetteLady -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 9:02:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popularDemand

There is no reason for this 'mode of cohabitation' in the modern world.

Not since laws were braught in to restrict the age and manner at which children can be put to work.

pD


While this may have been an attempt at humor and the concept that children many years ago went to work to help support the family or work on the farm, the attempt missed.

This "mode of cohabitation" will always have a place in the modern world. Nuclear family merely describes a certain type of family. I'm surprised though it left out the fact that there is usually also a pet in the mix.

Family as a whole is, like it or not, the driving force of the world. Now when I say "family," I include the "nuclear family" (which I grew up in), the single parent family, the families where extended family lives and helps raise the children, families with same sex parents, and any other combination you might be able to come up with, even those couples who have chosen to remain childless, because those couples constitute family to each other.

Humans are social animals. We don't do well in isolation or without love (regardless of those here who claim that "love" is nothing but a word, and actions speak louder). It isn't just children who need loving people around them, we all do. However, you define or describe "family" doesn't matter. Having that love and care and giving it in return is what's important.



BubblegumPiglet -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 11:23:00 AM)

I was raised in this setting, and i believe it is best. The pros far outweigh whatever cons there may be.
I also believe in one parent staying home with the children (doesn't always have to be mom).
I plan on being a housewife, especially if i have babies.

Of course having a fondness for the 50's retrofetish may be partially to blame...lol.



juliaoceania -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 11:42:46 AM)

fast reply...


From an anthropological perspective the "nuclear family" is a rather new adaptation...

Hunters and Gatherers, bands, tribes, and seasonal villages, were the common form of habitation for most of humanity's past. Sure, mom and dad were important, but an entire band might live in the same household. Grandparents and extended families helped with the children, etc etc etc.


The nuclear family was a unit of family that developed after we became agriculturalists... it became even more entrenched after industrialism because we no longer needed extended family to help with childcare, etc, because we were these little self contained units... think the cottage industry in England, for example.

The way we structure our families is highly reliant on our mode of economics. We tend to structure ourselves in ways that will maximize our survival



LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 2:06:11 PM)

^^^ Good post!! Very accurate factually.



juliaoceania -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 2:12:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LinnaeaBorealis

^^^ Good post!! Very accurate factually.



I hope so, it is my field....lol



Darktra151 -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/10/2011 7:02:46 PM)

Technically I come from a family like that. My parents were married when I was born. I have 2 sisters and a brother whom I lived with . . Both of my parents had children from their first marriage and I was the golden child of the second. For the most part I had a loving childhood. Mom and dad loved me, my big brother protected me as a brother should and both of my older sisters fussed over me. Sure we had our issues but all families do. I plan to bring my child into the world like this. A loving kinky husband, possibly one child , stable marriage and a kinky sex room that only mommy and daddy  have the keys to. I have no interest in being a single mother. Its a hard job and I don't know how you ladies do it. 



needlesandpins -> RE: The Nuclear Family (6/11/2011 11:16:04 AM)

fr

I ask her of her next of kin and loved ones in her care
She gestures all around her then she whispers "everywhere
"There is no nuclear family required any more
"My parents are the village and the village is the law"

the idea of the nuclear family is wonderful but outdated unless you count in nannies and childcare workers. unless you have the luxury or enough money so that at least one parent can stop at home then usually both parents will work and the child will spend a considerable amount of time in the care of someone else. even with two parents at home it won't mean the child will be brought up in any better mannor.

nothing is straight forward or perfect if it involves people let alone putting the together and expecting them to function in a certain mannor.

needles



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.171875