They aren't saying that families are bad, you baboon. The only possible way you could interpret that statement as "families are bad" is if you are intentionally trying to read it wrong. They're saying that isolation of mom/dad/kids from the extended family is bad. They're saying that having more familiy members around is good and that having fewer parents around is bad. Having more extended family members around can help support single-parent households.
Now if you want to debate as to the cause of single-family homes, we can talk about that separately. But please stop saying this "the left hates families" crap. It makes you look like an idiot with no reading comprehension skills
Without the mom and dad there is no extended family you mindless clown.
Single parent households are a disaster in most cases.
Every metric in society proves this.
The left promotes broken homes intentionally through policy. Why would they do that if they didn't want more broken homes?
Keeping people poor and stupid is very beneficial to a political party that gains power by offering poor stupid people free stuff in every single election.
Can you explain this? The left being pro-choice seems like a direct contradiction to this statement.
you do start with the nuclear family - and then you add on the extended family so that the nuclear family is not isolated. That's the whole point of the article
The title is "The Nuclear Family Was a Mistake".
Even if this imbecile's article was on to something the traditional nuclear family will have an extended family that's twice the size of the single mother's extended family.
Real world data proves that single parent homes are an abject disaster. This isn't because of a lack of extended family support.
Lol @ the people trying to claim that extended families in western culture don't exist or take care of each other. Who honestly thinks of this sh!t.
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”
If you don't do well in math you call math racist.
If you have 70+% of you kids born into broken homes you declare non-broken homes to be racist.
They use the same playbook in every area.
holy crap you get more idiotic by the day. Nowhere are they discussing "broken homes". You may not realize it but many many other cultures live in and emphasize the extended family and the community.
Alsp It's rich that a loser white boy would complain about "broken homes" when you and your conservative friends in the 70's 80's and early 90's CAUSED THE F-ING PROBLEM with your moronic backwards policies
You don't need a PhD to figure out 2 parent homes are better for children than 1 parent and no parent homes.
You also don’t need a PHD to know that disrupting a reliance on something is not trying to destroy the thing itself. Yet you read that and can’t see the difference.
If you made it through 3rd grade you'd understand how dumb your comment is.
Would you say disrupting seatbelt use would have a positive or negative impact on car crash injuries?
Would you say disrupting condom use would have a positive or negative impact on unwanted pregnancies?
Without the mom and dad there is no extended family you mindless clown.
Single parent households are a disaster in most cases.
Every metric in society proves this.
The left promotes broken homes intentionally through policy. Why would they do that if they didn't want more broken homes?
Keeping people poor and stupid is very beneficial to a political party that gains power by offering poor stupid people free stuff in every single election.
Can you explain this? The left being pro-choice seems like a direct contradiction to this statement.
There is a financial incentive to be a single parent in the welfare system.
When you reward a behavior you will get more of it.
You also don’t need a PHD to know that disrupting a reliance on something is not trying to destroy the thing itself. Yet you read that and can’t see the difference.
If you made it through 3rd grade you'd understand how dumb your comment is.
Would you say disrupting seatbelt use would have a positive or negative impact on car crash injuries?
Would you say disrupting condom use would have a positive or negative impact on unwanted pregnancies?
Have someone smarter than you (a lot of options) explain it to you. I tried.
Only absolute morans would think advocating for extended families is anti-family.
What's wrong with a boy growing up with an uncle or a grandfather around? Isn't it good for him to have an adult male figure around him?
Here is a history lesson for the infant in the room.
Once upon a time, extended families were the norm in the society. Nuclear families were considered departure from tradition, and were frowned upon by conservative people of the time.
Can you explain this? The left being pro-choice seems like a direct contradiction to this statement.
There is a financial incentive to be a single parent in the welfare system.
When you reward a behavior you will get more of it.
Okay, got it. So are you saying that people would prefer to be single parents instead of married/in a relationship because it would be financially beneficial for them?
There is a financial incentive to be a single parent in the welfare system.
When you reward a behavior you will get more of it.
Okay, got it. So are you saying that people would prefer to be single parents instead of married/in a relationship because it would be financially beneficial for them?
I'm only saying it because the data shows it to be true.
Only absolute morans would think advocating for extended families is anti-family.
What's wrong with a boy growing up with an uncle or a grandfather around? Isn't it good for him to have an adult male figure around him?
Here is a history lesson for the infant in the room.
Once upon a time, extended families were the norm in the society. Nuclear families were considered departure from tradition, and were frowned upon by conservative people of the time.
When and where did people frown upon nuclear families?
People didn't live with their grandparents and aunts and uncles under one roof because they wanted to they did so because they had to.
Immigrants still do this today. They do it to save money so they can afford not to.
On the BLM website, they stated they wanted to "disrupt Western-prescribed nuclear family"
Nope. Disrupt the REQUIREMENT for a nuclear family. Reading hard.
This. And that people kept misrepresenting that statement, whether out of ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, is why they took it down from their website.
Nope. Disrupt the REQUIREMENT for a nuclear family. Reading hard.
This. And that people kept misrepresenting that statement, whether out of ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, is why they took it down from their website.
Where is this "REQUIREMENT" written? The opposite is currently rewarded by the government.
They took it down because there was backlash against the stupidity of the comment.
You'll notice BLM has largely disappeared from the public eye since the hypocrisy and corruption of it's founders was exposed.
When and where did people frown upon nuclear families?
People didn't live with their grandparents and aunts and uncles under one roof because they wanted to they did so because they had to.
Immigrants still do this today. They do it to save money so they can afford not to.
Many people in many countries - including America! - still choose to live with their extended families even when they are not economically required to do so. Most people enjoy being around their extended families. In some countries (especially in asia and the middle east) doing so is the social norm, and a parent/child nuclear unit that intentionally isolated itself from the extended family would be seen as bad and weird
When and where did people frown upon nuclear families?
People didn't live with their grandparents and aunts and uncles under one roof because they wanted to they did so because they had to.
Immigrants still do this today. They do it to save money so they can afford not to.
Many people in many countries - including America! - still choose to live with their extended families even when they are not economically required to do so. Most people enjoy being around their extended families. In some countries (especially in asia and the middle east) doing so is the social norm, and a parent/child nuclear unit that intentionally isolated itself from the extended family would be seen as bad and weird
In America, the norm is to live separately from the extended family.
I don't know many adults that want to live with their extended family if they don't have to. This doesn't mean they don't enjoy their company.
This. And that people kept misrepresenting that statement, whether out of ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, is why they took it down from their website.
Where is this "REQUIREMENT" written? The opposite is currently rewarded by the government.
They took it down because there was backlash against the stupidity of the comment.
You'll notice BLM has largely disappeared from the public eye since the hypocrisy and corruption of it's founders was exposed.
Dude, you already demonstrated that you didn’t understand what was written. Why would I think a good faith discussion is within your capabilities?
