Nuclear family

[Winner]

BECOZ UR OPPRESING TEH WOM3N!!!11!!1!!!

No, the nature is oppresssing them

Seriously, gender roles are as old as the humanity itself. Until recently, nobody thought there is something wrong with the fact that women should be the mothers and men should be the fathers. Then, a group of sexually frustrated people suggested that we've been wrong for the last 2 million years and in fact the gender roles are men's tool of oppression.

That's bulls***t if you ask me.

 

[azzaman333]

No, the nature is oppresssing them

Seriously, gender roles are as old as the humanity itself. Until recently, nobody thought there is something wrong with the fact that women should be the mothers and men should be the fathers. Then, a group of sexually frustrated people suggested that we've been wrong for the last 2 million years and in fact the gender roles are men's tool of oppression.

That's bulls***t if you ask me.

I agree. Especially since a growing number of parents believe that it's best for their children if the mother and father work 9 to 5 and leave the kids in child care until they get home, when they make half-hearted attempts to bond with the child. Raising a child is a full time job, and if you think that you can do full time work plus raise a child well, you're kidding yourself.

 

[amaterasu]

I am not sure of what I did to ofend you so badly, but I guess im'm sorry for it...

anyways, heres some second opinions http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/2001/06/07/family_values/index.html

if only 25% of america in nuclear families, it can't be such a great thing can it?

http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/CURRIC/soc/socessa2.htm

some socialologists mentioned who agree with me there.

http://www.allenandunwin.com/academic/double.pdf

a bit wordy, but agrees with my view in places. It is just my opinion though, sorry if I came over too strongly, now can we make up? I hate fights >_<

 

[pboily]

If only because taking care of a kid single-handedly is near impossible, there should at least be two care-takers in there.

I have no idea if it's truly important for there to be at least one male and at least one female, but I seem to recall a study suggesting that girls with a father figure develop better self-esteem than those without, and boys with a father-figure perform better than those without, on average. Sound like truisms to me, but that's my 0.02$.

 

[Maimonides]

Still, I don't get why are gender roles supposed to be a bad thing.

I agree.

Also the front put up by the nuclear family can alienate people more, your more likley to end up with either strict converts, or rebellious oppsites to the message given out by the family.

What is "the front put up by the nuclear family?"

Every family has it's rebel.

Whether the nuclear family creates values is questionable...It also ties people more closely to the family, which isn't always a good thing, and then splits from the family are more painful and damaging.

Why is it bad to be closely tied to your family? When you start life, all you have is family. When your possessions & friends are gone, all you have is family.

Basically, you are saying don't be close to your family because it will be more painful to turn your back on them. That's ridiculous.

more then the type of family is the parenting style that makes the difference I suppose.

I agree.

what do you want me to prove?

If you had said that ignorant people commit more crime, Downtown & I probably wouldn't have a problem with it. Blaming poverty for crime is absurd.

One shoplifter I caught told the police he stole because needed to feed his family & couldn't get a job because he was disabled. If he was so disabled, why did the police & I have to chase him a mile through the woods to catch him? If he needed to feed his family, why did he also steal a paperback novel & an entertainment magazine? Why didn't he just ask? I'd never let someone go hungry. If he was so poor, why did he have enough cash in his pocket to pay for everything he stole? Poverty is a lame excuse. Ignorance is the real cause. Nobody ever taught him any better.

if only 25&#37; of america in nuclear families, it can't be such a great thing can it?

So you think that 70% of African-American children now being born as bastards must be OK because most of them are doing it? Crowd mentality is disasterous.

I have no idea if it's truly important for there to be at least one male and at least one female, but I seem to recall a study suggesting that girls with a father figure develop better self-esteem than those without, and boys with a father-figure perform better than those without, on average. Sound like truisms to me, but that's my 0.02$.

I didn't understand this until I became a parent. When my 3 year old son gets hurt, he cries for mommy. When he wants to see how high he can jump, he calls for daddy. He says he is growing up to be a "big daddy" like me. He never says he wants to grow up to be a "big mommy." My wife can't be a role model for a good man & I can't for a good woman. He definitely needs different things from my wife & I.

I've seen homosexual couples raise wonderful children so I don't have an issue with it. It's also better that the kid have two same gender parents than grow up with no family being bounced around between foster homes.

 

[Narz]

I think families in which grandparents, cousins and such all live in the same household (obviously large enough for them) or at least the same neighborhood is preferable. I was a lonesome kid with just my parents (my much older brother was off at boarding school, military, college, on his own so I barely spent any time with him). I barely knew my cousins either. I remember being kind of jealous of Hispanic families where the kids were always getting to hang with their cousins.

 

[LucyDuke]

It takes a tribe to raise a child.

This is primary. It makes little difference who lives in the house with the child as long as there is a reliable village. This is one of the places that America has gone terribly, terribly wrong.

 

[Rossiya]

I would say that generallly (yes, "generallly" with three "l"s), a nuclear family is better.

 

[JollyRoger]

If only because taking care of a kid single-handedly is near impossible, there should at least be two care-takers in there.

I have no idea if it's truly important for there to be at least one male and at least one female, but I seem to recall a study suggesting that girls with a father figure develop better self-esteem than those without, and boys with a father-figure perform better than those without, on average. Sound like truisms to me, but that's my 0.02$.

So with two father figures, there would be twice the improved self-esteem and twice the improved performance.

 

[Princeps]

So... are they four or six megaton nuclear families?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Fairy]

In my point of view, a nuclear family is a good thing, call me a functionalist but in a way I guess I am.

I'm very traditional; i'm the kinda girl who believes men should be served the most and served first so take it from there

I believe it nurtures the children into seeing that there is a family structure and there is nothing to worry about.

 

[Leonel]

I'm a bit of a fan of the "Whatever has worked for the past million years" camp. Although I would think that the guy and girl can switch mother/father figures as long as one is getting the bread and the other is caring for the young.

 

[Yuri2356]

So... are they four or six megaton nuclear families?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Most moderns families are 6x0.5MT MIRVs.

 

[sonorakitch]

Still, I don't get why are gender roles supposed to be a bad thing.

Gender roles are only a bad thing to leftist loons.

~Chris

 

[Perfection]

Gender roles are fine provided they aren't cast in stone.

Really, I think the configuration of the family isn't the important thing, but the stable and loving relationships.

 

[Princeps]

Most moderns families are 6x0.5MT MIRVs.

Consumer or professional oriented versions?

 

[Elrohir]

Do you think the nuclear family is a good thing, and desirable over, say, a single parent family ( not from an economic view, just social)

I would say, hmm, no, as it encourages gender roles more and the kids usually get more marginalised, and they don't tend to express themselves as much.

There are two-parent families which such, and single-parents who rock. But generally speaking, with all other factors being the same, it's better to have two parents in the home rather than just one. I'm not sure how this is a controversial or hard to understand position.

if only 25% of america in nuclear families, it can't be such a great thing can it?

So because many Americans are doing it, it must be a good idea?

 

[mdwh]

Still, I don't get why are gender roles supposed to be a bad thing.

I don't think they're a bad thing as such, if people want to take those roles, but it's bad that society strongly expects that people must behave in all sorts of ways based on what they have better their legs.

Not that I agree with the OP; I wouldn't say the nuclear family encourages gender roles necessarily, plus it depends what you mean by "nuclear family" - I think two legal guardians of the same sex would still count, for example.

 

[mdwh]

Seriously, gender roles are as old as the humanity itself. Until recently, nobody thought there is something wrong with the fact that women should be the mothers and men should be the fathers. Then, a group of sexually frustrated people suggested that we've been wrong for the last 2 million years and in fact the gender roles are men's tool of oppression.

That's bulls***t if you ask me.

There's far far more to current day society's concept of "gender role" than biological things such as being a mother or father. Most things related to gender role have nothing to do with this (e.g., once it was a gender role that women couldn't wear trousers; do you think they gave a damn about that 2 million years ago?)

 

[mdwh]

I agree. Especially since a growing number of parents believe that it's best for their children if the mother and father work 9 to 5 and leave the kids in child care until they get home, when they make half-hearted attempts to bond with the child. Raising a child is a full time job, and if you think that you can do full time work plus raise a child well, you're kidding yourself.

Well that's an entirely separate issue. You could just as equally have the man staying at home and bringing up the kids, but that would be contrary to western society's gender roles.