261–270 of 291 posts
The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back! Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car. Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one. The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.
So, let's prioritize helping folks have happy/healthy relationships?
How?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Equating a marriage with "submission" is the first thing that needs to die if we're going to create more two-parent households. It is simply no longer the case.
Go read and listen to the ideology from many conservative evangelical groups in the US. They are pretty direct on this point. Wives must submit to husbands. It’s not a secret.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was able to infer that from your original comment, but the point is that neither my sister nor I can reach my parents in a single day of driving[1], and my wife can't reach her in-laws in a single day of driving. My in-laws are very close now, but at this point we are caring for them more than they are caring for our kids. 1: I'm considering a full day of driving as 12 hours here. Different people tend to disagree…
Why don't your parents or your in laws move? Don't they want to be with their grandchildren?
My parents have so many reasons for not moving (Of course they want to see their grandchildren; they fly out 2-3 times a year and we visit every summer):
1. My dad only retired a year ago, and he still occasionally works on a contract basis
2. Which kid do they move to be close to; me or my sister? I'm on the west coast, she is in flyover country.
3. Having lived in the area for over 30 years they have many close friends and are actively involved in the local community.
4. Moving to either me or my sister would put them much further away from my maternal grandmother, who is in her 90s (right now only ~400 miles away from them).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Encourage how? By creating evidence-based policies that support and encourage nucleic families through education and counseling at accessible institutions for potential and actual family members.
Gobbledygook.
Get evidence around how to support and encourage these structures.
Figure out how to provide access to those mechanisms.
Put it into policy.
With all due respect, none of that is gobbledygook and it's just rephrased.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A multi generational household occurs naturally when grandma and grandpa had a stable two parent households and now mom and dad do too. More importantly, young people need a reason not to move hundreds or thousands of miles away from their stable household. Investing in community resources, local economies, and infrastructure that promotes health and opportunity are all necessary.
I honestly blame exurbia. I “left home” to just be able to walk to buy groceries. I doubt I would have left if my lifestyle choices were available at home. Monoculture is efficient only for the group building the infrastructure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. It took most of human history to build the old culture with immense social pressure to marry and have children, immense social pressure for men to provide and women to care for children, and intense taboos around divorce, births out of wedlock, even around non-marriage into old age That world is gone, and probably for the better in many ways. The world needs to find different cultural norms around children su…
You're saying goodbye to the old way too soon, and I'm not talking about the bad parts. I'm talking about the roles. Even in the most advanced progressive societies women continue to select for male providers (marry up) whilst they continue to do more care-related tasks. In other words, gendered roles continue to exist. None of which should be shocking because the idea that it's 100% a construct and men and women are…
I’m saying that a number of societal taboos that generally prevented women from accessing economic freedom, no longer exist
You will not be shunned for being a spinster
You will not be shunned for divorce
You will not be shamed for failing to have a baby for your husband.
And so on
Short of making these things illegal, we can’t just magically revive long-gone taboos, even if one thinks we should. Consequently, their absence should be assumed. Hence my statement “we need new cultural norms” - a way to encourage the formation of healthy and successful family units without relying on the shame of spinsterism/divorce
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps as women have gained more financial independence they no longer need to adopt a submissive attitude towards men to survive?
Equating a marriage with "submission" is the first thing that needs to die if we're going to create more two-parent households. It is simply no longer the case.
why is that better than everyone just realizing their own wishes and goals? because this way a space for cooperation is created because we'll both end up working on and supporting each others goals or wishes, and also each of us are able to notice if there is a conflict between each of our goals and wishes, and then we can work them out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A marriage does not equate to submission, but patriarchal issues in current marriages are still very much present.
Yes many, probably most marriages are based on an equal relationship. But many are not. And in the past most were not.
for me an equal relation ship means that each of our wishes, goals and needs are of equal importance. it can mean that both partners work and split housework equally, but it also can mean something different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am well aware that it is uncommon, coming as I do from a family of eleven children; but the world is much more than America, and birth control is a recent invention. I don't see how you can reasonably claim that one person cannot care for such a number of children when mothers of large families have been doing it for millenia.
It’s never at the same time and older siblings help with the younger ones which is still an infinitely better situation than some low paid employee watching 15 kids at the same time. Also that time has passed. All of Asia including south and south east are basically at replacement rate. Africa averages higher but not by a whole lot more and that number is dropping quickly. There’s a reason women from wealthy families…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> UBI still incentivizes divorce. It offers unconditional financial support to single mothers. No, it is neutral on divorce, because the support is unconditional. > More than half of all children will be raised in divorced households. Will be... when? And where's the evidence? The entire increase in single-mother families from the 1970s to 2019 was driven by the increase in parents who never married, not an increase…
> No, it is neutral on divorce, because the support is unconditional. Any government support subsidizes divorce. You are ignoring the fact that in the default state, without UBI (or government assistance), divorce would be naturally disincentivized because of the added financial burden on the caretaker. It substitutes the government as the provider instead of the father. It's precisely what the entire article is abou…
uhm, what?
either there is a valid case for divorce or there isn't. you can't have it both ways. if there is a valid case for divorce then absolutely nothing should stand in the way.
preventing divorce on its own does not help fix broken households.
i do agree that as a socety we should do everything in our power to fix broken households. and by doing that, divorces will be reduced. but this is not done by disincentivizing divorce. it is done by removing the things that are the cause for the household to break.
"Money arguments are the second leading cause of divorce, behind infidelity"
the infidelity issue is addressed by better education (teach children that when they get married, their responsibility is to take care of each other (and teach them how to do that))
and the money issue is addressed by financial support for parents. it doesn't have to be UBI, but it should be to make sure that couples have enough money to live and raise children. in germany this is achieved by guaranteeing an existence minimum, and by unconditional extra money of around 200euro per child.
disincentivizing divorce by not financially supporting the single parent is a very bad idea because it forces them to remain in an abusive relationship.