With the passing of time comes the inevitable arrival of change. We see this in nearly aspect in our lives including technology, education, and especially in our relationships. One relationship that has been examined over the years is our familial relationships. The “family” of today is nothing like the “family of the 1950’s. Some of these changes have been viewed as very positive; that they show the strength and resilience of the family despite the turmoil that may arise in the world we live in. Other changes have been viewed as catastrophic for the family, to the point where people have claimed that the concept of family is on a rapid decline. The family in which I was raised in could be used as one of the examples for one of the “declining” …show more content…
I do not believe anyone can accurately say that the family is “declining” because every single family has their own faults, and will continue to have their own faults. The people who claim that the family has taken a turn for the worst are making a comparison to the idealistic 50’s family that was not even a reality for a lot of families during the actual 1950’s. Stephanie Coontz, professor at The Evergreen College in Washington described the oddities behind this decade in The American Family, an article published in Life Magazine’s November 1999 issue. She states that divorce rates went down during the 1950’s, birth rates went up, and the rate of foreign-born people went down (Cootnz, 2005). Life seemed a lot better in comparison to The Great Depression and the years during the Second World War Of course this would seem like a great time in American history, but the problem is that people look back at this era with “selective amnesia” (Cootnz, 2005). People tend to only be nostalgic for the positive aspects of life. In the 1950’s, there was still heavy censorship, leaving people to either stick with a limited/fixed set of values, or be punished for thinking a little bit outside of the box. Some minorities were not allowed to vote and society still stuck women with the dense “housewife” role. (Coontz, 2005). Life was very good for some, but the vast majority of people were left behind. Today we celebrate creativity and differences, more people have the …show more content…
Barbara LeBey author of American Families Drifting Apart points out several “untraditional” families such as single mothers, gay couples who adopt children, and grandparents who take care of their grandchildren. LeBey argues that if “traditional” families cannot prevent the rise of conflict within their homes, then these “untraditional” families are in absolutely no position to do so (LeBey, 2005). The problem with this argument is that LeBey is making prejudgments on something that is unfamiliar to her. The basis for a lot of prejudice is simply the fear of the unknown. We cannot make a judgement of character or a judgment of how well someone can raise a child on these factors alone. There are “traditional” families who suffer tremendously in raising their children, and there are also “untraditional” families who succeed and support their children. This is really based on the individual(s) who are doing the raising and not on the circumstances of their marriage or lack thereof. LeBey also notes that the women’s rights movement of the 1960’s broke down many traditional aspects of marriage by encouraging sexual equality, and job opportunities, which allowed women to gain financial independence and no longer rely on a man for money (LeBey, 2005). The reality is that we are an individualistic nation. We inadvertently put ourselves before others when seeking happiness. This is not a
In The Changing American Family by Cris Beam he uses statistics to show how the changes have changed so drastically. These statistics I think we’re trying to show the amount of change helping you picture in your mind how the changes have increased over the years. I believe that Cris Beam was trying to show that it really has changed and that the Traditional American family is no more. With the article The American family is no more by Allie Bidwell she talks more about the di...
Several changes have occurred since the 1920s in traditional family values and the family life. Research revealed several different findings among family values, the way things were done and are now done, and the different kinds of old and new world struggles.
A family has always been expected to be a loving and caring environment with support and communication, but this sometimes does not come naturally to soon to be parents. Some get caught up specifically in bad things, perhaps their upbringings are to blame or maybe the individual could take all of the responsibility. When a society chooses what is to be socially acceptable, that limits relatives to only one kind of family and the object becomes destroying all other kinds. The 1950s was a time when technology wasn’t a big distraction from loved ones. Joyin Shih feels her true self being targeted by others, even her own family, in attempt to destroy her true self in her article, “Chyna and Me”. Alex Williams may also be missing the 1950s an article by Stephanie Coontz called “What We Really Miss About The 1950s” because he finds that families may not be as caring as they used to be in fact he argues that families are becoming more isolated than ever in his article “Quality Time, Redefined”. Good gives people a lot of frustration, more the division than the “good” because not all families coming from different cultures, different religions, and different ideas can fit into one mold that is called “acceptable”. The more connected individuals are to the Internet the fewer individuals are connected to each other. Technology should not be the biggest tool of communication in a family.
For example, with the Neumanns, the children started to come to the house alone without their mother caring for them like she used to. As the children reach their teenage years their moods started to change and so did their grades. In adulthood, the boys started to work odds jobs because they had children at young ages, which cause them to drop out of high school. The daughter decided to get a stable job with benefits because she wanted to avoid dealing with the same struggles her family had. The Stanleys children had a different outcome. When the children took notice of the mother and father financial problems the boys decided to get a job in landscaping to help out. The eldest son graduated from high school and proceeded to go to college, which took all the families income and left the other kids without support. Cherlin describes this effect as the limits of kin networks meaning that the induvial income must be shared with the other family members. The mother and father paying for the son’s education cannot give money to the other kids. So the other kids looked for odd jobs or joined the military. In adulthood, the daughters have kids and struggle to make money. The son goes overseas for a job to avoid financial instability that his parents had in the U.S. The college son works at a good job with benefits but is still afraid that he might end up like his mother father, so he decides to work odd jobs
“In the 1950’s, 86 percent of children lived in two-parent families, and 60 percent of children were born into homes with a male breadwinner and a female homemaker” (Conley 451). In contrast, “in 1986, fewer than 10 percent of U.S. families consisted of a male breadwinner, a female housewife, and their children, a figure that has since fallen to 6 percent” (Conley 455). Modern families come in all shapes and sizes. They no longer follow the strict nuclear family layout. There are many reasons why the nuclear family is no longer the most common family type. Some of these reasons include increased divorces, increased acceptance of different sexual orientations, increased amount of couples choosing not to get married/common-law marriages, increased amount of people choosing not to have children (rise of birth control methods), increased amount of families with both parents working/needing to work, etc. Personally, I do not believe the decrease in the nuclear family model is a bad thing. By definition a family is just a group of people who are related or married/in a relationship and it can still be a healthy and well-functioning unit no matter the size or combination of people it is made up
Families have changed greatly over the past 60 years, and they continue to become more diverse.
Traditional family in today’s society is rather a fantasy, a fairy tale without the happy ending. Everyone belongs to a family, but the ideology that the family is built around is the tell tale. Family structures have undeniably changed, moving away from the conventional family model. Nowadays more mothers work outside of the home, more fathers are asked to help with housework, and more women are choosing to have children solo. Today there are families that have a mom and a dad living in the same home, there are step-families, and families that have just a mother or just a father. Probably the most scrutinized could be families that consist of two moms or two dads. These are all examples of families and if all members are appropriately happy and healthy then these families are okay and should incontestably be accepted. So why is the fantasy of the traditional family model still so emphasized in our society? This expectation is degrading and misleading. Progressing with times one ought not be criticized or shunned for being true to their beliefs. It is those living falsely, living as society thinks they should that are the problem. Perhaps as a society, if there were more focus and concern for happiness and peace within ones family and fewer worries for the neighbor then there would be less dilemma.
Throughout history we have seen that family values have been one of the most important aspects of societies around the world. Although these values may be different from one another, we can see that it is a ma...
As World War Two came to a close, a new American culture was developing all across the United States. Families were moving away from crowded cities into spacious suburban towns to help create a better life for them during and after the baby boom of the post-war era. Teenagers were starting to become independent by listing to their own music and not wearing the same style of clothing as their parents. Aside from the progress of society that was made during this time period, many people still did not discuss controversial issues such as divorce and sexual relations between young people. While many historians regard the 1950s as a time of true conservatism at its finest, it could really be considered a time of true progression in the American way of life.
Imagine life as a woman in the 1950s: struggling with the idea that men are superior to women, and stuck in a life filled with empty opportunities. Esther Greenwood, protagonist from the novel The Bell Jar, contemplated this problem as she began learning the typical customs expected of women during the 1950s. Pressured by both her mother and society to accept a future devoid of genuine happiness and adventure, Esther lost control of her own life and spiraled downward into a continuous cycle of denial and depression. During the 1950s, a typical family consisted of a working father, a stay-at-home mother, and respectful children, all living together in a safe, suburban neighborhood. Author Sylvia
Since the 20th century, researchers have sought out solutions to help assist families and the individual components that make up family systems overcome the challenges and schisms that can inhibit individuation and stability. Two theoretical perspectives, the family-systems theory and the family-development theory, were conceived to gain as Balswick & Balswick (2014) noted, gain “a wide-angle view of family life” (p. 22). Though these two theories have merit, one I found to be more advantageous in gaining a better understanding of the family as an actively metastasizing organism, which needs to be approached more adaptively.
‘A date with your family’ video demonstrates the American family values in 1950’s. There were values and expectations, quiet distinct from today’s values. Everyone was expected to be punctual, neat, and tidy. Women in the house were expected to look dressed up and charming, not tired and in day-time clothes. Elder children taught good manners to younger ones. Girls in the family helped in kitchen. This era shows the value of little things in life by making this dinner time so important. Everyone in the family was allowed to talk only pleasant things that makes it look little unrealistic. What if someone didn’t have a pleasant day or someone is stressed out and this is the only family time to talk to everyone. What stood out to me the most in
Society seems to have many different opinions when it comes to relationships and families and what is ideal. The ideal family may not exist anymore. We now have in our society families that are complete that do not necessarily contain the traditional material. The traditional family, as society would see it; usually consist of a married, mother and father and usually children. Moms are supposed to stay at home while dads work the forty-hour a week job. However, in our 2003 world, families exist in a lot of non-traditional ways. A lot of families now consist of single parent families, or same sex parents and their children, or even couples that are unmarried but live together. And even now, if a family contains what society sees as traditional as far as having a mom, dad, and kids, other aspects are not traditional anymore. Women now have more opportunity in the workplace than they have ever had, therefore, many moms are career moms and dads are sometimes staying at home. Years ago, these types of families were given labels for being dysfunctional or abnormal, however, this label is not holding up as well as it did years ago. There are many non-traditional families that are raising children in a loving, nurturing home with a substantial amount of quality love. Quality is the key in any relationship between anyone. Society is finding out that it is not the traditional image that makes a loving family, but the quality of a relationship that people give to each other is what really makes a family. In the essay "The Myth of the "Normal" Family", written by Lousie B. Silverstein and Carl F. Auerbach, they make references to the cultural idea of what a "normal" family should be and what i...
How different are families compared to the past? Lately there has been some major changes in relationships, weather female dominance, or even just having no relationships at all. We also see that relationships are based only on a basis of reproduction and sometimes the child of the relationship is rather irrelevant. In a Temporary matter by Jhumpa Lahiri, the reader can see how relationships have developed with the rest of the world into failing, no relationship, and feminist relationships.
The definitions of a family today and a family in the past are far from similar. The definitions may have some similarities but they have changed dramatically in many more ways. 50 years ago, families had rules that were stricter and families were closer in the sense of a relationship. Although some families today are more distant from each other and have fewer rules to maintain order, there are still some that maintain the same styles of the families 50 years ago. Families have changed a lot but still have some similarities depending on their home-life.