littleangels        English Nanny
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Thoughts on the implications of divorce and the loss of stable, child-rearing families

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107

    Thoughts on the implications of divorce and the loss of stable, child-rearing families

    Everyone has an opinion, of course.
    I suppose it's a question of trying to see if anyone has thought better and deeper than you yourself.

    This from another thread:
    Quote Originally Posted by Salsero View Post
    The population is shrinking, so the more favorable laws are there to attract more foreigners to Russia, preferably good qualified ones of course.
    The reasons are blazingly obvious and heavily connected to the Western effort to completely separate sex from its natural purpose.

    Treating the reproductive system as primarily for pleasure, with babies as an optional side effect is like treating the digestive system as primarily for pleasure, with the nourishment of the body as optional. It's insane, but people brains tend to be below their belts in that. They wouldn't survive the gom jabbar (cf Frank Herbert's "Dune").

    If you teach young people to fear the responsibility of having and raising children in marriages that cannot be easily broken, then you get a well-deserved end of your civilization. Thus, divorce is something opposed to civilization, as sexual libertinism is opposed to civilization. It's expecting others to do the work of civilization that one does not want to do oneself.

    Not to make light of hard marriages. They remain tough, and I sympathize with people who struggle in them. But the alternative to saving and maintaining them, which we are getting, is chaos. My argument would be that most people see marriage and sex wrongly, and so, draw wrong conclusions and have faulty opinions, for understandable reasons, of course, but still mistaken.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to rusmeister For This Useful Post:

    nicklcool (30-09-2020)

  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Moscow Orange Line, oh Yeah, I'm movin' on up!
    Posts
    1,506
    Thanked: 998
    Quote Originally Posted by rusmeister View Post
    If you teach young people to fear the responsibility of having and raising children in marriages that cannot be easily broken, then you get a well-deserved end of your civilization. Thus, divorce is something opposed to civilization, as sexual libertinism is opposed to civilization. It's expecting others to do the work of civilization that one does not want to do oneself.

    Not to make light of hard marriages. They remain tough, and I sympathize with people who struggle in them. But the alternative to saving and maintaining them, which we are getting, is chaos. My argument would be that most people see marriage and sex wrongly, and so, draw wrong conclusions and have faulty opinions, for understandable reasons, of course, but still mistaken.

    It's so pleasant to see a thought-provoking thread on our ole jalopy forum, which has been lacking recently the abundance of creative, timely, and energizing thought that it once had.

    My marriage had been having a rough few months. I think this was at least partly (IMHO) since CoVid had moved us closer to a divorced in-law of mine (even when not done consciously or intentionally, I think that the people whom we surround ourselves with inevitably influence our actions and thoughts). And also, stress and change usually challenge relationships of all kinds, and this CoviD plandemic had of course been taking its toll on ours! But I digress...

    I am SO blessed that YouTube, despite its disgusting censorship and biased algorithms, managed to recommend this gem from Jordan Peterson to me:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc_NNjV0s1o&t=1s


    I HIGHLY recommend you watch his video!! My interpretation of his comments is that when the fights inevitably start getting bloody, it's not because your spouse has changed for the worse, and you aren't "wasting your life" "stuck" in a broken relationship. Rather, you are starting to see some of the effects of the ugly psychological damage your spouse suffered in childhood precisely BECAUSE you have been together so long, and you choose to work through them not because you are "stuck with him/her," but rather because you have CHOSEN to work it out and stick with your spouse through thick and thin.


    We really are blessed to have the principles, thoughts, and alayses of thought leaders such as Jordan Peterson available to us so readily, and FREE, even!

    What do you think of his perception of why married people are called to (and better off to!) stay together no matter what?
    I am fascinated by Russia, this country with frigid weather, hard souls, and hot girls!

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nicklcool For This Useful Post:

    bydand (02-10-2020), Hans.KK (30-09-2020)

  5. #3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    St. Petersburg, Russia
    Posts
    2,095
    Thanked: 998
    Yes, Jordan Peterson is food for thought, rusmeister can be that too, just two different playing fields.
    If you do not tell it to anyone, then I will say I like them both, I may not fully agree with them, but they are worth listen to.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Hans.KK For This Useful Post:

    rusmeister (01-10-2020)

  7. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    On the Yellow Brick Road, near El Dorado...
    Posts
    3,876
    Thanked: 1393
    Quote Originally Posted by rusmeister View Post
    ...If you teach young people to fear the responsibility of having and raising children in marriages that cannot be easily broken, then you get a well-deserved end of your civilization. Thus, divorce is something opposed to civilization, as sexual libertinism is opposed to civilization. It's expecting others to do the work of civilization that one does not want to do oneself.

    Not to make light of hard marriages. They remain tough, and I sympathize with people who struggle in them. But the alternative to saving and maintaining them, which we are getting, is chaos. My argument would be that most people see marriage and sex wrongly, and so, draw wrong conclusions and have faulty opinions, for understandable reasons, of course, but still mistaken.
    The Left has simply redefined what the word "marriage" means.

    A 2020 "marriage" can be anything from 3 lesbians with their 6 horse partners, to a street gang. The Crips, Bloods, MS-13, etc. are all described by sociologists as "families" which fulfill all the functions of a nuclear married family. The gang member is "married" to his "brothers" or "sisters" and like a traditional marriage, shares affinity for his "marriage partners". They communicate with each other to resolve differences, and they understand one another. They are bonded in the pursuit of marital "success" (more territory) and "prosperity" (money from selling drugs, prostitution, robbery, etc.).

    Chaos results when words are altered to mean what they do not mean.
    "Defund the Social Sciences." - Fantastika, 2020

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to TheInterocitor For This Useful Post:

    rusmeister (01-10-2020)

  9. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Moscow Orange Line, oh Yeah, I'm movin' on up!
    Posts
    1,506
    Thanked: 998
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInterocitor View Post
    The Left has simply redefined what the word "marriage" means
    .


    No Fanty, Divorce is more prevalent than ever because the definition of what are acceptable reasons to get divorced has been exponentially expanded, not because more people in more ways than ever are now allowed to get married.

    People always have been getting married for wacky reasons, but only until relatively recently have they been able to get "no fault" (take a bogey) divorces.

    That's exactly what my video was referencing -that people think they are freer since they can quit [marriage] instead of trying to fix things.

    Did you, Hans, or Rus even watch it?
    I am fascinated by Russia, this country with frigid weather, hard souls, and hot girls!

  10. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kashin, Tverskaya obl.
    Posts
    1,912
    Thanked: 685
    Quote Originally Posted by nicklcool View Post
    Did you, Hans, or Rus even watch it?
    I watched it. Would like to add that to truly help one (not only spouses) with a problem, you have to truly understand the problem. Even if you have been through the same exact thing, another person will have a different perspective than you. You have to empathize to the point of seeing the problem from their perspective. When you do, you will see something about yourself from a different perspective, and be better for it. Win/Win
    If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough...

  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to bydand For This Useful Post:

    Hans.KK (02-10-2020), nicklcool (03-10-2020), rusmeister (02-10-2020), Uncle Wally (03-10-2020)

  12. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    On the Yellow Brick Road, near El Dorado...
    Posts
    3,876
    Thanked: 1393
    Quote Originally Posted by nicklcool View Post
    No Fanty, Divorce is more prevalent than ever because the definition of what are acceptable reasons to get divorced has been exponentially expanded, not because more people in more ways than ever are now allowed to get married.

    People always have been getting married for wacky reasons, but only until relatively recently have they been able to get "no fault" (take a bogey) divorces.

    That's exactly what my video was referencing -that people think they are freer since they can quit [marriage] instead of trying to fix things.

    Did you, Hans, or Rus even watch it?
    I'm not disagreeing with you, the social engineers that made it easier to get a divorce are the same forces that have have legally and socially "enlarged" the definition of a "marriage".

    I wish the social scientists had had the grace to call a "non-traditional marriage" a "partnership" or something else, as it is labeled in some European countries, instead of redefining and altering the meaning of the word "marriage." But they are about altering or "burning down" and "defunding", our traditional structures, including our ethics, which in one basis consists of the concept of a Christian "family" based on the traditional definition of "marriage."
    "Defund the Social Sciences." - Fantastika, 2020

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TheInterocitor For This Useful Post:

    nicklcool (03-10-2020), rusmeister (03-10-2020)

  14. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107
    I finally watched the video. It's very good, very on-target, and right in line with everything I have said.If you ever read Chesterton's "The Superstition of Divorce" (a 100 or so page read), you'll see that he anticipated all of that and much more when George Bernard Shaw, HG Wells, Bertrand Russell, DH Lawrence and the rest of the intellectual elite were mealy-mouth mambling (bleating, if you like) about how no-fault divorce would make everyone happy.

    Here's a one-page look at "Superstition": https://www.chesterton.org/lecture-33/ ; compare it to what Peterson says.

  15. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107
    It's kind of a side note, but when you add all this up, it radically changes how you view marriage. I used to think it was a private affair between two people. It was only when the first divorce happened in my church, and my sister's divorce in 2012, that shocked me into seeing that their divorces affected ME, the realization that divorce affects everyone in concentric circles, obviously the wife and children at the epicenter, but like shockwaves, spreading out to damage or ruin relations with in-laws, friends and neighbors. Divorce is a public act, and it is essentially one of sabotage. That's why, as I came to realize, our ancestors were not stupid in making it really hard. And that's why, when someone comes to this site asking for help in getting divorce, it seems to me to be akin to asking us to help them commit suicide. (If you didn't watch Peterson or read my brief link, please don't comment on that!)

    So what can people do when it gets super-hard? (And it most often does!) I'll try to answer that later. It IS hard, no denying it.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rusmeister For This Useful Post:

    nicklcool (08-10-2020), TheInterocitor (05-10-2020)

  17. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107
    We want exceptions for ourselves that we don’t really want for others, especially those we love. That goes for every dark desire, everything we know to be wrong but want because it makes us feel good (for a while). As long as we are normal, and not insane, we want a “right” to pornography and prostitutes for ourselves, but would be horrified to see our parents or our children engaging in that. We want to get drunk at will, but again, not to see our parents or children do it. I think that’s a fairly good test, the test of our parents and children. We want a right to get divorced should we want, but want our parents and children to learn to get along with the people they have chosen as (ostensibly) life-mates. And we generally don’t know what to do with the relations known as “in-laws” created by the marriage. It is in these things that we see and sense that there is something not quite right about our permissive view of divorce, even if we leave the children of divorce - the greatest victims - out of it, though we shouldn’t. The answers given generally presuppose that it is impossible for people to control themselves and their own reactions, that the one unthinkable thing is to maintain the marriage.

    And that IS a very hard thing to do. Frankly, without the Christian concepts of loving one’s neighbor and one’s enemy, and of taking up one’s cross and loving anyway, I don’t see a way to make divorce not an option at all. It comes down to a refusal to do the hard, yet Christian thing - to love as an act of will, to refuse to resent, envy, hate one’s spouse, and to insist on committing acts of love with no return expected. All the time, every day.

    Or as Dumbledore said, “the time is coming when we must choose between doing what is right, and what is easy”.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to rusmeister For This Useful Post:

    nicklcool (11-10-2020)

  19. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    On the Yellow Brick Road, near El Dorado...
    Posts
    3,876
    Thanked: 1393
    Quote Originally Posted by rusmeister View Post
    We want exceptions for ourselves that we don’t really want for others, especially those we love. That goes for every dark desire, everything we know to be wrong but want because it makes us feel good (for a while). As long as we are normal, and not insane, we want a “right” to pornography and prostitutes for ourselves, but would be horrified to see our parents or our children engaging in that. We want to get drunk at will, but again, not to see our parents or children do it. I think that’s a fairly good test, the test of our parents and children. We want a right to get divorced should we want, but want our parents and children to learn to get along with the people they have chosen as (ostensibly) life-mates. And we generally don’t know what to do with the relations known as “in-laws” created by the marriage. It is in these things that we see and sense that there is something not quite right about our permissive view of divorce, even if we leave the children of divorce - the greatest victims - out of it, though we shouldn’t. The answers given generally presuppose that it is impossible for people to control themselves and their own reactions, that the one unthinkable thing is to maintain the marriage.

    And that IS a very hard thing to do. Frankly, without the Christian concepts of loving one’s neighbor and one’s enemy, and of taking up one’s cross and loving anyway, I don’t see a way to make divorce not an option at all. It comes down to a refusal to do the hard, yet Christian thing - to love as an act of will, to refuse to resent, envy, hate one’s spouse, and to insist on committing acts of love with no return expected. All the time, every day.

    Or as Dumbledore said, “the time is coming when we must choose between doing what is right, and what is easy”.
    Certainly the anarchist Left has been about destroying the pillars of Western Civilization. Via the government, they have gone after the moral pillars of our society, disenfranchising the church from its legitimate power and important voice in shaping society. The two latest and biggest moral bulwarks to fall are the Boy Scouts, and the Catholic Church. But Leftist government institutions such as public schools are likewise, not held accountable - only the individual can be charged.

    Every 5 minutes on TV is a commercial from an attorney soliciting business from "injured" parties, to file another lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America, a Christian-based youth organization which taught citizenship and virtue to young men, for "their injustice" and "immoral rectitude" and "child abuse". The suit is not against the individual, but against the whole organization.

    So to, goes the Catholic Church, attorneys yell from the TV about "abuse" by the Catholic Church, with its "sexual predators". With these two latest and significant pillars of morality crumpling, the Left, after corrupting everything else, including the Deep State federal government, and the public education system, now take aim at the last structural impediment before Western Civilization crumbles into rubble - the family.

    I was trying to make a connection between divorce and homelessness. Divorce would be a big factor in the breakup of the traditional "family" and sans the family structure, individuals would find themselves homeless. If the "family" is not responsible for its former "members" then where do they live? What happens to individuals after a divorce in Russia? Since they are not living together (unless they are truly both "good comrades"), where do they live?
    "Defund the Social Sciences." - Fantastika, 2020

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to TheInterocitor For This Useful Post:

    rusmeister (11-10-2020)

  21. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    On the Yellow Brick Road, near El Dorado...
    Posts
    3,876
    Thanked: 1393
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInterocitor View Post
    ...
    I was trying to make a connection between divorce and homelessness. Divorce would be a big factor in the breakup of the traditional "family" and sans the family structure, individuals would find themselves homeless. If the "family" is not responsible for its former "members" then where do they live? What happens to individuals after a divorce in Russia? Since they are not living together (unless they are truly both "good comrades"), where do they live?
    What I mean is why is homelessness in Russia not the huge problem it appears to be in USA, given comparable divorce rates?
    "Defund the Social Sciences." - Fantastika, 2020

  22. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInterocitor View Post
    What I mean is why is homelessness in Russia not the huge problem it appears to be in USA, given comparable divorce rates?
    Well, of course there is a connection:
    “A family is of course the best way to create, to protect and to raise children. Besides this obvious truth, Chesterton also argues that the family must be kept intact because the home is the greatest refuge of freedom in the world.

    Divorce is not an act of freedom. On the contrary, it is an act of slavery. A society where vows can be easily broken is not a free society. A free society cannot function without volunteers keeping their commitments to each other. When the most basic unit of society, the family, breaks apart, some other institution will try to replace it and restore order, and will then become more important than the family.

    Chesterton knew that the proponents of divorce would object to his characterization of divorce as being an act of slavery. But he reminds them that anyone who’s ever read Uncle Tom’s Cabin knows that one of the oldest and simplest charges against slavery was that it broke up families.”

    https://www.chesterton.org/lecture-33/

  23. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    8,203
    Thanked: 1107
    Anyone who wants to know how anyone could reasonably object to divorce as a general option should read this short article.

    https://www.chesterton.org/lecture-33/

    Itís always eye-opening when you find someone who has thought about aspects you never thought of, or just plain deeper than you.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •