Log in

View Full Version : Am I Old-Fashioned?



Pages : 1 [2]

Elvia
07-20-2008, 05:05 PM
I was just thinking about this the other day. It's like people don't even care to TRY to build a family. They just date this person, date that person -whoops! pregnant!- have the baby, break up with that person, marry this person for awhile, get divorced, date this person, get pregnant again....

I really can't understand it at all. I'm not bashing on single parents, but deciding to raise a child all on your own should be a BIG DECISION, as it is a major undertaking, and it seems like our society doesn't even see it that way anymore. How many celebrities do you see knocking eachother up out of wedlock and losing interest in eachother in a matter of months?

It reminds me of my ex, who's the sweetest guy in the world, but wanted a baby so much he had one with the first woman who was up for it- nevermind the fact that she's quite mentally ill and a drug addict who doesn't pick the kid up from school and disappears overnight when he's supposed to be in her care. And it's not like he's the only one who's had a baby with someone in the wrong situation. What's wrong with people? It's like they don't even try to find a decent situation and ensure some stability for the people they bring into this world.

I'd want to do it the old fashioned way. Get myself in order, find the right man, date for a good long period, get married, get our marriage in order, then have kids. It's one of the things that's attracted me to Judaism, a real emphasis on family, which you just don't see in society at large anymore.

Jenny
07-20-2008, 11:35 PM
It could just be that people have a different idea of what constitutes a "family" than you do. I mean, you can obviously make any plans you want but other people have different values and different priorities and might not really believe that the heteronormative ideal is their ideal. I mean people raise children with friends, with their parents, with their grandparents, with unmarried partners, and yes, sometimes on their own. These families are not necessarily just stunted, incomplete versions of what you would want for yourself.

Flick6
07-21-2008, 12:43 AM
It could just be that people have a different idea of what constitutes a "family" than you do. I mean, you can obviously make any plans you want but other people have different values and different priorities and might not really believe that the heteronormative ideal is their ideal. I mean people raise children with friends, with their parents, with their grandparents, with unmarried partners, and yes, sometimes on their own. These families are not necessarily just stunted, incomplete versions of what you would want for yourself.

indeedy!

pink_staR
07-21-2008, 01:37 AM
It's a little sad that you feel that you have to ask that question, although in my social circles, it would be scandalous to have a child out of wedlock.

No, you're not old-fashioned.

Same. I would much prefer to be married before I have any children.

Elvia
07-21-2008, 12:10 PM
I was just thinking about this the other day. It's like people don't even care to TRY to build a family. They just date this person, date that person -whoops! pregnant!- have the baby, break up with that person, marry this person for awhile, get divorced, date this person, get pregnant again....

I really can't understand it at all. I'm not bashing on single parents, but deciding to raise a child all on your own should be a BIG DECISION, as it is a major undertaking, and it seems like our society doesn't even see it that way anymore. How many celebrities do you see knocking eachother up out of wedlock and losing interest in eachother in a matter of months?



Yes Jenny...because when I say this, I'm so clearly talking about well planned and thought out alternative families with carefully chosen members. ::)

Jenny
07-21-2008, 05:54 PM
I'm sorry if I misunderstood your post - but when you talk about the nobility of "building families" in the context of a thread about the building of a heteronormative family, that may not be a wildly out-there misunderstanding. I mean, I'm hardly the only person who thought that was what you meant.

Although - I would also suggest that "unplanned" is not synonymous with "unwanted" for everyone. The fact that it might not have been planned and thought-out doesn't make it a non-family either.

threlayer
07-22-2008, 11:34 AM
Yes, but....

Statistically a lot more single-parent 'families' are low income (read public assistance) than two-parent families. This is even more so if the single parent is black. Yeah, I know: individual rights, new age, and so forth. Except that the statistcs of realism rule over idealism.

Hey, if you have the resources (including income), go for it if you can't find a good enough man in the 3 trillion on this earth.

Jenny
07-22-2008, 02:12 PM
Well
1) The scope of the question was already limited to people who made a decision to be a non-traditional family, which would indicate that there was probably a plan and means involved.
2) What does this mean?

Yeah, I know: individual rights, new age, and so forth. Except that the statistcs of realism rule over idealism
Like, what are you getting at? That we should make getting pregnant outside of marriage illegal because you are more likely to be on social assistance?

Mr Hyde
07-22-2008, 06:11 PM
So long as both parents are loving and involved I dont believe it makes a difference if they share a household or not. The benefits of that are far more important than the financial ones...

I has a dead beat ex and I would wish on a falling star that he was a quality loving BROKE father more than I would wish that he supported us financially.

All else being equal, a two parent household is the ideal.