Spanking kids is not child abuse. And nothing they did harmed the environment. Not one bit.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
American Families and the Waltons
- Thread starter Myles
- Start date
Spanking kids is not child abuse. And nothing they did harmed the environment. Not one bit.
And your evidence ?
Actually, I am. Neither you nor anyone here is a member of my family, if that's what you're talking about. :shrug:
But if you mean I should present evidence, how do you expect me to do that from 100 years ago?
Yeah, all that wholesome goodness, innocence, kindness, love, compassion, concern, consideration, caring, and other good things would just be too much, huh?
Please enlightnen me. What is the difference between goodness and wholesome goodness ? What would unwholesome goodness be like ?
Actually, I am. Neither you nor anyone here is a member of my family, if that's what you're talking about. :shrug:
But if you mean I should present evidence, how do you expect me to do that from 100 years ago?
There's an old saying: Don't talk about what you don't know lest you be suspected when you talk of what you do know.
My point is that if you have no evidence to support your statement why make it ? It just shows you believe in some sort of Utopia.
I agree, but there are lots of guillible people who believe things were like that once.Myles???
The Waltons is a TV show, not reality. is it so bad to wish it was LIKE the Waltons? Is it so bad to want it to be LIKE the Waltons?
I don't understand your...frustration? anger?
Kinda like how CSI is how police work really is?
I think the issue is people talking about 'the good ole days' and forgetting to mention women died in childbirth and polio was an epidemic.
I thought the Waltons touched on issues such as racism, sexism, etc.
I think the issue is people talking about 'the good ole days' and forgetting to mention women died in childbirth and polio was an epidemic.
I thought the Waltons touched on issues such as racism, sexism, etc.
There's an old saying: Don't talk about what you don't know lest you be suspected when you talk of what you do know.
My point is that if you have no evidence to support your statement why make it ? It just shows you believe in some sort of Utopia.
No false beliefs on my side of this discussion. I once knew a GREAT many people who lived through that period of time and they all tell the same basic story of cooperation between members of a large family. It is you believing some fable of "one size fits all" that family members were always as independent as they are today.
And in my own case, my father was one of twelve children.All of them lived close by (on pieces of land that they were given by their parents from the family farm) until WW-II when just a few moved away. But the rest stayed, assisted each other and collectively cared for their parents when they became too old to completely care for themselves.
No false beliefs on my side of this discussion. I once knew a GREAT many people who lived through that period of time and they all tell the same basic story of cooperation between members of a large family. It is you believing some fable of "one size fits all" that family members were always as independent as they are today.
And in my own case, my father was one of twelve children.All of them lived close by (on pieces of land that they were given by their parents from the family farm) until WW-II when just a few moved away. But the rest stayed, assisted each other and collectively cared for their parents when they became too old to completely care for themselves.
Sorry, but you are missing my point. I am not knocking extended families. You can still find them in some parts of the world. But it erroneous to think that thy all live happily ever after. The Waltons are too pious to be true. That's all I'm saying.
Kinda like how CSI is how police work really is?
I think the issue is people talking about 'the good ole days' and forgetting to mention women died in childbirth and polio was an epidemic.
I thought the Waltons touched on issues such as racism, sexism, etc.
Yes. And we could write a long list of other problems which are conveniently overlooked. By all means let family groups stick together but let's be realistic and accept that it won't all be plain sailing. I am speaking from first-hand experience,
Yes. And we could write a long list of other problems which are conveniently overlooked. By all means let family groups stick together but let's be realistic and accept that it won't all be plain sailing. I am speaking from first-hand experience,
And keep in mind that I never once said that it was always clear sailing - I've simply been pointing out that (long before YOUR time) people were once better about accepting individual differences and worked together for the better good of everyone involved. In part, that cooperation was necessary for survival. Parents once needed a large number of kids to work the family farm. And grandparents served as built-in babysitters for those too young to work and freed up others - including the mother - to work and not be tied down with little ones.
Certainly there were disagreements internal to the clan!! And some of them very serious and occasionally even deadly - but they still made more effort to get along than they do today. Now days, when they disagree, they can just move far away - back then it was NOT so easy.
Someone ( George Bush ? ) recently said that American families should be more like the Waltons. The thought of it made me puke. Anyone disagree. Feel free to bring your cracker barrel
Whoever said it is quite right. I would hate to think it was George... he's not the kind of guy I would want to give credit to.
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
Title: We should be more discerning to watch the "good" on TV, and not so much the "bad." And naturally large families ought to be much more encouraged publically.
I'm not so sure that the Waltons are "too good to be true." I think when people for religious belief, or niceness, or faith, or whatever, allow for the natural flow of life, and purposely refrain from the use of any form of "birth control," that relates to them being kind and respectful to one another. Such people are more likely to see each and every human life, as sacred, special or something. Even in the "large family" movies, you can see children stick up for their siblings.
But if the Waltons be "too good to be true," did the Waltons even claim to be real? You did know that TV isn't exactly real, didn't you? I don't understand people's silly objections to "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" or whatever, as supposedly being "too perfect" of families. Even "Andy Griffith" seems to be a strangely popular TV show. When I watch TV, do you think I want to see "real life?" Of course not. I call look out any window or my car window, any time I like, and see "real life." Boring. I want to see something of "idealized life" or something like that. That's one reason I like sci-fi. I like to get some imagined glimpse, of how great life might be in the future. I like some of that optimism. Now some people seem to go the other way. They want to see action and violence or immoral sex on TV. And I don't always like every "sweet and syrupy" TV show. But I do have some respect for certain family-friendly shows, such as "The Waltons," or maybe "Eight is Enough." There's also the curiosity factor in, how can a family be so large?, or what were large families like?
What makes me puke is not the aspect of family life portrayed but the fact that the Waltons are too good to be true. I do not believe there was ever a time when such people existed.
I'm not so sure that the Waltons are "too good to be true." I think when people for religious belief, or niceness, or faith, or whatever, allow for the natural flow of life, and purposely refrain from the use of any form of "birth control," that relates to them being kind and respectful to one another. Such people are more likely to see each and every human life, as sacred, special or something. Even in the "large family" movies, you can see children stick up for their siblings.
But if the Waltons be "too good to be true," did the Waltons even claim to be real? You did know that TV isn't exactly real, didn't you? I don't understand people's silly objections to "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" or whatever, as supposedly being "too perfect" of families. Even "Andy Griffith" seems to be a strangely popular TV show. When I watch TV, do you think I want to see "real life?" Of course not. I call look out any window or my car window, any time I like, and see "real life." Boring. I want to see something of "idealized life" or something like that. That's one reason I like sci-fi. I like to get some imagined glimpse, of how great life might be in the future. I like some of that optimism. Now some people seem to go the other way. They want to see action and violence or immoral sex on TV. And I don't always like every "sweet and syrupy" TV show. But I do have some respect for certain family-friendly shows, such as "The Waltons," or maybe "Eight is Enough." There's also the curiosity factor in, how can a family be so large?, or what were large families like?
And keep in mind that I never once said that it was always clear sailing - I've simply been pointing out that (long before YOUR time) people were once better about accepting individual differences and worked together for the better good of everyone involved. In part, that cooperation was necessary for survival. Parents once needed a large number of kids to work the family farm. And grandparents served as built-in babysitters for those too young to work and freed up others - including the mother - to work and not be tied down with little ones.
Certainly there were disagreements internal to the clan!! And some of them very serious and occasionally even deadly - but they still made more effort to get along than they do today. Now days, when they disagree, they can just move far away - back then it was NOT so easy.
Exactly. Had they had the chance to move away in the " good old days" many would have done so. They were bound together by necessity as well as familial love. What reason is there to suppose that they were better at accepting individual differences ? Even the kindly old Amish, who live in the manner we have been talkng about, will "shun" anyone who steps out of line
Title: We should be more discerning to watch the "good" on TV, and not so much the "bad." And naturally large families ought to be much more encouraged publically.
I'm not so sure that the Waltons are "too good to be true." I think when people for religious belief, or niceness, or faith, or whatever, allow for the natural flow of life, and purposely refrain from the use of any form of "birth control," that relates to them being kind and respectful to one another. Such people are more likely to see each and every human life, as sacred, special or something. Even in the "large family" movies, you can see children stick up for their siblings.
But if the Waltons be "too good to be true," did the Waltons even claim to be real? You did know that TV isn't exactly real, didn't you? I don't understand people's silly objections to "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" or whatever, as supposedly being "too perfect" of families. Even "Andy Griffith" seems to be a strangely popular TV show. When I watch TV, do you think I want to see "real life?" Of course not. I call look out any window or my car window, any time I like, and see "real life." Boring. I want to see something of "idealized life" or something like that. That's one reason I like sci-fi. I like to get some imagined glimpse, of how great life might be in the future. I like some of that optimism. Now some people seem to go the other way. They want to see action and violence or immoral sex on TV. And I don't always like every "sweet and syrupy" TV show. But I do have some respect for certain family-friendly shows, such as "The Waltons," or maybe "Eight is Enough." There's also the curiosity factor in, how can a family be so large?, or what were large families like?
See my comments on the Amish.
sowhatifit'sdark
Valued Senior Member
If most families were like the Waltons and this meant that this kind of family life led to good little citizens/parents
how did things get bad?
since most people who think that most families were like the Waltons somewhere in the US do think that things got bad.
Often these people blame the hippies and the 60s.
But this would be silly since 'the 60s'
would be a product of the 40s and 50s when people
knew how to have good families.
If we blame current problems on 60s hippies, well then we can damn well blame
the existence of radicals and hippies on families in the 40s and 50s.
Let's remember that a lot of families that might have looked like the Waltons on the outside
were not so nice to the Johnsons and Washintons across the street or
on the other side of town, even while being nice to themselves -when they were.
let's also remember that a woman who claimed to be raped, in those days, had better be dressed right, have done the right things, not been in the 'wrong' place and sure as shit better not be saying it was someone in her family.
Let's remember how, in general, the police treated people who did not look like the Walton's, not to mention banks, government officials, etc. and this treatment had the tacit approval of 'the Waltons' of the world.
Let alone how sexual abuse was considered a non-issue in-family.
This is not to say loving multi-generational white families did not exist. Of course they did.
But in that nice little snowflake ball memory we can make about 'then' we are probably leaving out details
and creating an archtype rarely achieved and certainly not as widespread as we wish it was.
how did things get bad?
since most people who think that most families were like the Waltons somewhere in the US do think that things got bad.
Often these people blame the hippies and the 60s.
But this would be silly since 'the 60s'
would be a product of the 40s and 50s when people
knew how to have good families.
If we blame current problems on 60s hippies, well then we can damn well blame
the existence of radicals and hippies on families in the 40s and 50s.
Let's remember that a lot of families that might have looked like the Waltons on the outside
were not so nice to the Johnsons and Washintons across the street or
on the other side of town, even while being nice to themselves -when they were.
let's also remember that a woman who claimed to be raped, in those days, had better be dressed right, have done the right things, not been in the 'wrong' place and sure as shit better not be saying it was someone in her family.
Let's remember how, in general, the police treated people who did not look like the Walton's, not to mention banks, government officials, etc. and this treatment had the tacit approval of 'the Waltons' of the world.
Let alone how sexual abuse was considered a non-issue in-family.
This is not to say loving multi-generational white families did not exist. Of course they did.
But in that nice little snowflake ball memory we can make about 'then' we are probably leaving out details
and creating an archtype rarely achieved and certainly not as widespread as we wish it was.