Rant...
We all know it. Way too many people who shouldn't be parents, are parents. The list of selfish reasons goes on and on. The effect is the same though, bad parents; and way too many of them. I was just thinking, back in the days before reliable, methods of birth control; back when everyone had kids. How many of those people would have liked to have been childfree if they could? Were children seen as blessing of marriage by everyone? Or were they just something they everyone had to do and get through? I mean, with so many different people back in the old days, becoming parents, do you think maybe all that diversity of parenting lowered the standards? Do you think since everyone became a parent, that a bad parent wasn't so much a phenomenon? I mean, with so many bad parents in the world where every couple became parents, do you think maybe bad parenting became a form of normality?
I mean, think about it. Why did farmers want kids? Because they're so cute? Try free labor. Taking care of the baby is mom's job, then when it's old enough the kid's only job is to help dad on the farm, but then the kid gets all these twisted ideas about school and college and going off to the city and leaving his pa (no doubt put into his head by his mother, silly mother, what good is sending their kid off to college going to do her husband?). What about wealthy aristocrats? Without any children who are they to pass their wealth, their mini-empire, too? Without a child to carry on the family name, all that money would be given, after the couples' death, to the poor in a flee market and that would be unthinkable. Just think of all those grubby starving hands reaching for your china, if nothing else insults you surely that would. Without a son to marry off to that Darby girl how are you going to get a hold of her father's land? But of course, if your son should fall in love with a pauper (God forbid) it'd be as insulting as if he'd fallen into inappropriate behavior with animals (and with the way the poor dress, maybe he has).
What good are parties with out and innocent naive daughter to show off. Such a fine daughter could build up a strong alliance between you and the Wellington family, which would further your mini-empire considerably. Of course, raising the kids is none of your responsibility, that's mom's job, your job is to deal with the real world; to face the manly elements. Your job is to provided shelter to your innocent daughter, so naive she doesn't even know how to parallel park or read past a fourth grade level.
...end rant.
Sorry, just a rant. But it's an interesting thought. Bad parenting is good parenting. It's a "respectable" excuse to be a bad parent. Interesting idea, that there may have been so many bad parents that society catered toward them to help them cope with their situation by looking at it...more objectively? If you can't love your kids, you can at least get some good use out of them. Wonder how much of that is still around today? Just a thought. If you need more food for thought, read David Copperfield. Now wasn't he a good firm "respectable" father?
We all know it. Way too many people who shouldn't be parents, are parents. The list of selfish reasons goes on and on. The effect is the same though, bad parents; and way too many of them. I was just thinking, back in the days before reliable, methods of birth control; back when everyone had kids. How many of those people would have liked to have been childfree if they could? Were children seen as blessing of marriage by everyone? Or were they just something they everyone had to do and get through? I mean, with so many different people back in the old days, becoming parents, do you think maybe all that diversity of parenting lowered the standards? Do you think since everyone became a parent, that a bad parent wasn't so much a phenomenon? I mean, with so many bad parents in the world where every couple became parents, do you think maybe bad parenting became a form of normality?
I mean, think about it. Why did farmers want kids? Because they're so cute? Try free labor. Taking care of the baby is mom's job, then when it's old enough the kid's only job is to help dad on the farm, but then the kid gets all these twisted ideas about school and college and going off to the city and leaving his pa (no doubt put into his head by his mother, silly mother, what good is sending their kid off to college going to do her husband?). What about wealthy aristocrats? Without any children who are they to pass their wealth, their mini-empire, too? Without a child to carry on the family name, all that money would be given, after the couples' death, to the poor in a flee market and that would be unthinkable. Just think of all those grubby starving hands reaching for your china, if nothing else insults you surely that would. Without a son to marry off to that Darby girl how are you going to get a hold of her father's land? But of course, if your son should fall in love with a pauper (God forbid) it'd be as insulting as if he'd fallen into inappropriate behavior with animals (and with the way the poor dress, maybe he has).
What good are parties with out and innocent naive daughter to show off. Such a fine daughter could build up a strong alliance between you and the Wellington family, which would further your mini-empire considerably. Of course, raising the kids is none of your responsibility, that's mom's job, your job is to deal with the real world; to face the manly elements. Your job is to provided shelter to your innocent daughter, so naive she doesn't even know how to parallel park or read past a fourth grade level.
...end rant.
Sorry, just a rant. But it's an interesting thought. Bad parenting is good parenting. It's a "respectable" excuse to be a bad parent. Interesting idea, that there may have been so many bad parents that society catered toward them to help them cope with their situation by looking at it...more objectively? If you can't love your kids, you can at least get some good use out of them. Wonder how much of that is still around today? Just a thought. If you need more food for thought, read David Copperfield. Now wasn't he a good firm "respectable" father?
