What are women's thoughts on the nuclear family?

Jacknife

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Dołączono
9 Wrz 2021
If you surf the Kiwifarms and/or listen to Nulls podcast you have probably come accross discussions about the dismantling of the nuclear family, falling birthrates, women in the workplace and so on.

As a rightwing man I am naturally drawn to the nuclear family model.

However after reading a bit about female experiences in traditional marriage, the fucking Andrew Tate Incel movement and what is going in South Korea I can see why marriage seems like a shitty deal most young women.

What are your thoughts and maybe proposed solutions as a woman to this problem?

Is there a alternative non-globohomo model to the nuclear family?
 
I think a lot of people have visions of utopian families and societies where they finally do all the right things and fulfill the true and honest purpose that makes them feel better about the abyss that lays before them until the heat death of the universe reduces all of their efforts to nothing. but yeah in general not being a fucking psychopath would benefit women in relationships a lot
 
i'd like to get married and have a family but dating these days sucks ass and the economy is horrible so unless the husband and i are both working full time (terrible for children) i cant see how it would work out well
 
In this day and age? You can't afford to be a nuclear family without being rich. I wouldn't mind it but I feel like guys that want one just want to play videogames all day while the wife does all the house work and deals with the kids. Or maybe I've just been online to long.
 
Is there a alternative non-globohomo model to the nuclear family?
Yes, it's to have a functional family system. Humans are a troupe species. We aren't meant to be just two adults + the babies. We're "supposed" to live in family groups. A lot of the worst parts of being a stay at home mother are avoided if you're in a community with access to other supportive women. If you need a nap, you hand baby to another woman for a bit. Stuff like that.
Things aren't like that right now. Even the "multi-generational home" model you see in places like India isn't great, because if it's just "Husband + Wife + Mother-in-law + children" then it can actually be worse than just "parents + children" if the MIL is aggressive or dislikes the DIL.
 
You might be interested in Mary Harrington's work on this subject. I will edit this if I find a more specific piece to link to but here is one where she talks about the family. She addresses both social and economic factors but does also acknowledge the challenge but importance of finding a good man who actually gives a shit. I'm a bit iffy on some of her stances, but her ideas are definitely thought-provoking imo. What struck me was her critique of the 1950s family model being referred to as "traditional", which many right wing men and tradwife larpers look to as the epitome of the traditional family, even though it is actually very modern. And it was very short-lived because it turns out a woman staying at home alone all day cleaning and looking after kids isn't very fulfilling for most! But when we look further back to a time before the industrial revolution, where men and women had distinct yet cooperative roles, with more balance at home, it starts to make more sense for both sexes. I'm not personally looking to start a family but it frustrates me that modern feminism often neglects mothers and dismisses the family, even though it's what so many are looking for.

But I agree with other commenters that this is largely an economic issue. The couples I know in their 30s can barely afford a small house, and don't seem to feel very optimistic about the future.
 
The nuclear family is actually one of the better parts of western culture and people take it for granted. I know you guys love heehawing about big brown la famiglia families in between being racist, but those large extended families have their own share of issues and frankly, aren't applicable as westerners and modern people. I suppose a balance would be those families where the grandparents retire and watch their grandchildren while the parents work. I know so many people who have done just that, but you still have to have good/tolerable relationships between your immediate family, which many people don't have at all. Another suggestion was to be more communal, but I think that goes back to idealizing this vision of how family life should be. Plenty of mothers in history got by alone, and often they had no choice.

Can we fix it? Maybe with quality over quantity. But how do we encourage people who should be reproducing (high earning, high achieving, dual income people) and discourage people who shouldn't, short of something evil like eugenics?

In the short term, men can help by changing diapers once in a while. Who cares if some manosphere faggot or tradwhore online says you shouldn't?
 
I am going to be rich (going to law school) so I'm very excited to have a nuclear family. Hope to meet my future husband and the father of my kids while in law school, and to raise my kids in the US South. I hope to live close to family but my parents want to live on opposite sides of NC when my siblings go to university. I want my kids to be around my family
 
If the nuclear family wasn't a good thing they wouldn't try so hard to destroy it. Life is easier as a team and children need both a male and female influence in their lives. Having someone at home is practically a necessity. Our household falls back on so many things because we both work. We're working our asses off so I can stay home. It's doable, we aren't rich in the slightest.
 
The critique of the nuclear family always seemed misguided to me. It's not the structure of the family itself that's the issue, its their placement in modern urbanised society and the downplaying of the role which is served by a larger community and/or extended family. In America especially, family is seen as a very transient thing. As soon as you reach adulthood, you no longer have a family. You have to leave home, become wholly independent and work until you can afford to create a nuclear family of your own.

Do women get screwed over in this arrangement? Yes. Being a housewife can be entrapping. Being financially dependent on a man allows for and perpetuates abuse, that's why family courts favor women. And yet, our best solution to this problem is to throw women into the workforce too? Forgive me for being cynical, but I have my doubts that this particular change occurred naturally, for the benefit of women. Women don't need to be wageslaves, they need stable and healthy support networks.
 
I've known since I was a kid that I didn't want kids. Now that I'm older and have even more perspective, I would never want to subject a child to a likely life of the difficulties of the modern age. I would likely have to be a working parent and all that nonsense. Healthcare in Canada is rough right now, autism rates are high, theres all these shady little brown kids all of a sudden, teens see to really not give a fuck and they are doing all manner of crazy shit. I think if kids became a possibility I woulf want to move to be close to my cousins who will start having their own kids soon. But honestly, I'm in my mid 30s and my biological clock has never kicked on.

I love and appriciate children for the funny, intriguing, energetic little beings they are but I have never thought, wow I need to make one of my own. Additionally, I've never thought, wow mom and dad thanks for creating me And I would never want to put another person in that position.
 
I don't care if you don't want kids, but I have never ever understood this line of thinking.
This kind of thinking is heavily conditioned these days, sadly. A lot of urbanist/climate activist talking points, for example, promote this kind of nihilism and anti-natalism. Save the planet at the expense of your personal fulfilment. You don't need a family when you have a career and Disney films to look forward to.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole