Monday, April 15, 2013

Family Traditions Project - New York Times Comment

Below are three screen shots of my comment on the New York Times blog post entitled: How Do You Define Family? This is just a smaller part of the family traditions project we have been working on in ROGATE lately. Enjoy! 
Here is the rest of my project:

In technical terms, a family is any group of people consisting of parents and children living together (We will call this Family A). However, we may also define family as being a matter of relationships, and modern society has grown to know a family as being any group of people that loves each other, regardless of their age, gender, et cetera. Although there may not always be two parents and a child, one may also define a group of unrelated people as being “one big, happy family” as they say. (We will call this Family B)
In my opinion, a family could be either of the two, however, a Family A may not always qualify as a Family B as well. When I travel from my small farm-town to the city on occasion, I often see families including parents that seem to care not a bit for their children, and only love (or not even love) their husband or wife. This is the kind of family that qualifies as Family A, but is it really and truly a family? There is much more meaning behind Group B, while Group A is simply a group of people who just so happen to be related.
This is where things get a little more complicated. Family A may have parents that care nothing for their kids, but the children may still love each other as Family B would, and vice versa. The parents may raise their children loving them, but the kids don’t seem to appreciate the love that is coming their way. This is merely saying that, although a Family B may not have as strong of a bond as a whole, there may indeed be relationships within such a family that can withstand the parenting that they receive.
I just recently saw a family outside of a department store that seemed to be the typical Family B, but they displayed what is mentioned above, by which I mean that the two little girls which were the parent’s children were laughing together and having a good time while their parents couldn’t have cared less if they were burning down the store. This proves my point that the relationships of a family do not necessarily have to be completely uniform. There may be some families that would qualify as being AB or BA.
In modern society, we seem to see the people that are born to wealthier or nicer, or both, Family As in a more positive light than those who may not be as privileged. Is a king always going to be more intelligent or more kind than the peasant begging on the street? We can relate this question to the situation of families. The “combination” families may have parents that are not as skilled at parenting, but their children can still do great things in this world. It seems that we refrain from giving such children a chance because they may have been born in the inner-city, where the economy is struggling and there tends to be a bit of a “rough crowd.” There is no reason to judge such people.
In conclusion, there are indeed different types of families, but the type of family that you are a part of should not reflect how you act as a person. It may influence you, but those who are truly good people will not allow this type of negativity in their lives. A family can be anyone from your mother to a friend from a foreign country, as long as they love you. That is all that truly matters.
— Charles

No comments:

Post a Comment