when our first was born we moved to live a few km from the grandparents, and there was always someone nearby to help and to show us how things are done.
oh, and going with the theme of the article, great-grandpa from my wifes side was still around, but my son does not remember him now.
and as my dad was the youngest of 7 kids, i just barely remember his parents.
Same for Indians. And 90% of Indian dramas are about mother in laws butting heads with daughter in laws.
Obviously, a daughter in law that earns sufficient money herself is not going to give up her agency, and many in laws who are expecting the deference they had to give their in laws when they were young are going to have trouble meshing with the new power dynamic.
But that is rapidly changing amongst the upper classes in India too, almost everyone will support their daughter to get as good of an education as they can and secure as good income earning opportunities as they can.
The upper classes in India are a rounding error, maybe the population of Spain at most.
Edit: you are right that it's a trade-off. In Bangladesh keeping women at home may mean starvation, so they are grudgingly allowed to work.
At least going by that, there doesn't appear to be a great deal of "lock your girls and women away" going on over in India.
1. https://opportunities-insight.britishcouncil.org/news/news/i...
2. https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/college-enrollment-sta...
That's a common mode. Another common mode in Chinese culture is that the young couple lives separately from their parents, and the child is raised by the grandparents, rarely seeing its parents.
That's great if the grandparents are good people. Not so much if they aren't.
Substitute "parents" "preschool teachers" "sports coach" &c. for "grandparents" in the sentence and it's still true for the domain for the children. It's true that with grandparents you have a maximum of 4 to choose from, but you might not have more than 4 preschools to choose from either.
My parents were in their 30s when I was born. Their skepticism not only decoupled them from depending on people they didn't trust, but their perspective rubbed off on me and set me up for success. Older parents have no problem showing their kids the reality of the world early on.
Individualism is not a bad thing at all if only you could convince all these people stuck in the past. This world will fall apart if we don't focus on higher quality parenting from the actual parents. Since long ago we've been saying we don't want "kids raising kids". My parents weren't the only ones thinking this way.
Whole swaths of the US don't have enough good jobs to maintain a middle class lifestyle for kids of middle class parents.
And parents are working longer as well, meaning that overlap is less likely to happen.
I went to my grandparents every Wednesday. My mom just retired, my kids are 12 and I didn't have kids until my 30s.
There's so much about life that has changed the fabric of families in the last few decades
for most people the problem is not that they don't want their parents around, but that the parents don't feel like helping as much as their kids would need it. and here the culture makes a difference.
my wife was not her mothers favorite. girls in china were always treated as secondary. and according to their tradition we should have been living with my parents. they favored their son and his wife in everything, and yet they did what they could to help their daughter, because that is simply what what grandparents in china do regardless of how well they relate to each other.
but in our culture it's not, and whether grandparents are willing to help varies a lot, and it depends on the relationship to their kids
This is specious. If they are particularly awful, their kid probably won't want anything to do with them raising his/her kids.
I was also a mess in my 20s and i had a lot of growing up to do to prepare for kids. Yet. Even after kids, I didnt really grow up quickly enough until kids forced the issue.
Having kids and being responsible for someone else who is solely deoendent on you to have a shot at decent life is a monumental duty. I did not have this imprinted on me and I can see why. Our values today are very different from those of my parents and grandparents, and I think that's the big difference.
Im not sure how we lost that as a culture. Maybe its bad leaders (bill Clinton affair etc), loss of religion, loss of community time due to diminished economic opportunity locally (flyover states, most former industrial towns and even cities), economic migration to large metros breaking family ties, all certainly played a role.
it seems correct to say that duty was the slowly boiled frog in the pan, and it looks increasingly hard for the frog to jump out
I would add to this the increasing speed and volume of news. I don't know whether today's leaders are truly worse so much as that were all just much more aware of their failings than we were in the past.
There are no secrets these days.
I also think there's an aspect of societal propaganda breaking down in the face of the internet. "Duty" is a clearly artificial term, people are only bound to it so far as they believe in it. Society has gotten less good at convincing people to believe they have a duty.
We also have a lot of infighting between political and cultural factions that ruins the sense of shared obligation underpinning duty. It's hard to feel a duty to someone Fox News or Reddit has been telling you to hate your whole life.
and there is also a sense of purpose. with the same conviction that young people work to provide for their family, which is something they learn to do because everyone else is doing it, grandparents simply see their purpose as taking care of their grandkids. i think that's much more than just duty. its their reason to live.
this is in part demonstrated by the distraught reactions by the hopeful grandparents when there are no grandchildren coming. (based on one person sharing their experience with me)
This is my favorite of the lies parents tell, it's so obviously nonsensical
When we found out we were pregnant, I was working at a gas station, my off hours spent riding around in a truck with my friends yelling things at people walking by on the street for reactions. There's maturity and stability.
Now I'm "ahead" of many of those friends because I knew I needed to hurry up and get things done. Didn't have time to rage quit jobs. Didn't have time to sit around and make less because it was easier.
So I agree with you. It tells me a lot about being responsible and mature. Most won't until they have to, and a kid has that effect.
Things like remote work could’ve helped here, allowing couples to live near family instead of wherever the best employment prospects exist currently, but the RTO push prevented that.
Try saying "soccer mom" with an admiring tone instead of a sneer if you want to understand this.
Or are they incapable of desiring power over their own lives, perhaps unlike men?
A stay at home mother in the past with a part time job had much more financial independence together with her husband than most working young people have today, even though they get fancy titles now.
Basically the current elderly generation used indoctrination to turn their children into serfs in some kind of foolish attempt to end humanity.
Also to remember is that traditionally in most cultures, the wife in the family controlled the household's finances.
A greater proportion of women today have more financial independence than they have ever had in the past.
> A stay at home mother in the past with a part time job had much more financial independence together with her husband
This is financial dependence, not independence.
> Basically the current elderly generation used indoctrination to turn their children into serfs in some kind of foolish attempt to end humanity.
Nonsense. I imagine it is pretty insulting for a woman to read that they could only be capable of wanting control of their own lives if they were fooled into it.
> Also to remember is that traditionally in most cultures, the wife in the family controlled the household's finances.
Also nonsense. In almost every culture, for almost all of time, women did not have power over the family’s assets, much less the ability to earn enough to power a family. They were and are literally married off because they were liabilities. Inheritances passed down to sons instead of daughters. And umpteen other examples.
This is ignoring that even with legal/social mechanisms that provide women equal access to power as men, biology throws them a curveball every month with the effects of menstruation cycles and the effects and risks of pregnancy/childbirth.
Do you really think that somebody who owns their own house and has supplementary income is less independent than somebody who works full time and owns nothing? The first has the option to stop working, the second will be out on the streets if they do.
> Nonsense. I imagine it is pretty insulting for a woman to read that they could only be capable of wanting control of their own lives if they were fooled into it.
Both women and men, and yes, the indoctrination is massive to convince the young generations that they want to work full time at an extremely elevated productivity and still not afford to own their homes to have families.
> Also nonsense. In almost every culture, for almost all of time, women did not have power over the family’s assets, much less the ability to earn enough to power a family.
Then you are ignorant of history regarding this, which is your problem and not mine. I trust that you will deny this even if you read about it and find out. Just say "Nonsense!" and shut it out.
In the world I live in, many or most women are still contending with uneven workloads in the home:
https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/real-reason-south-koreans...
>and grueling workplace norms that are inhospitable to family life, especially for women, who are still expected to do the bulk of housework and child care.
>Do you really think that somebody who owns their own house and has supplementary income is less independent than somebody who works full time and owns nothing? The first has the option to stop working, the second will be out on the streets if they do.
False dichotomies, and also most women did not own their own house outright and have supplementary income. Either in laws own it, or they had mortgages and had to work outside the home, or they were expected to do all the housework. There was no option to stop working (housework is work).
But what we can do is try to look at things today in the most logical way possible. Why should young men and women work hard and be highly productive at their careers? For financial independence and freedom says you and others, and that makes it worth foregoing having families. But the fact is that young people are more broke than ever. They are working hard and are highly productive, but all their productivity is eaten by taxes, profits and land rent (either outright rent or a mortgage). They didn't get the financial independence they were promised. So they've sacrificed everything and become erased from history and from the genome in exchange for almost nothing. To the benefit of other people who are reaping all their productivity, not least the elderly generation.
Why would somebody do that voluntarily to themselves? What sane person would forego taking care of their own family, people who love them, to instead sacrifice their life to take care of shareholders, political rulers and unrelated beneficiaries of their labour. All of them who are at best completely indifferent to the welfare of young workers who are supporting them.
It takes some indoctrination for that, most importantly schooling, which indoctrinates children to stay locked in a place for 8 hours a day, five days a week, and put obedience to authority as the most important thing in life.
> Either in laws own it
Those in-laws didn't live forever, and I think this is something crucial to the whole issue that the article brings up.
> or they were expected to do all the housework.
If you limit the definition of "housework" to anything the woman is expected to do and nothing the man is expected to do, I guess.
Power over their own lives... well, I'd say both men and women give it up in marriage, at least in a functioning, idealistic one.
If you want absolute power over your own life, and your goal in life is financial independence, that's okay, but maybe marriage and family is not for you.
This is a useless measure of independence in the context of this discussion since it applies to men and women. When discussing differences in genders, obviously we are discussing one gender being able to achieve more financial independence than the other due to laws/customs/discrimination.
> You can simply ask whether women really are financially independent today: You have student debt, mortgage costs, credit cards etc on one hand and the necessity of keeping that job once you're "independent" of your family and significant other on the other hand.
Student debt is optional and highly variable, mortgage is irrelevant in this discussion since it applies to men and women, credit cards are also highly variable, and the job thing was also irrelevant as pointed out above.
Also, note that 99% of women (and men) in 99% of the world for 99% of history have never had or been in families with enough wealth such that they did not have to work. They simply worked for their own family, with no explicit pay, and hoped they would get a sufficient spot at the decision making table.
But all of that is irrelevant anyway. The question is does my daughter have the same opportunities available to her as my son? Or would she have to hope for having nice in laws while my son could aim for the stars and secure a high paying job?
Women have been indoctrinated (as have men) to see "a career" as preferable.
The reality is that it is extremely stressful and for most people with no guarantee of how it will work out overtime.
And the fact is that it is much better to have one person focused on getting the ressource while the other runs the household, "making" other humans in the process.
It could be the man at home, but most woman don't actually want that even if they may say so to win an argument; and there is the added problem that only woman can make other human being.
Then you have people complaining that our society doesn't make babies anymore, well maybe if we didn't push the bullshit of independence on woman we wouldn't have this problem...
Easier said (especially in retrospective) than done, though.