Alan Ngo
04-26-04
English 101b

What is a Family?
or, My attempt to get back into routine in this class. @_@

a) 

Outline: 

•	In today's modern society, our definition of family has become more and more indistinct, less defined, and altogether a large grey area,
•	Popular definition of family is that of the traditional nuclear family: a married couple living with their biological children and no-one else.
•	Is parochial view. Other family structures have been judged against this definition, and judged varyingly, as deviating from the norm.
•	some argue that family should not be based on blood ties, but rather on the level of attatchment and/or intimacy present
•	The rise of the traditional family probably was in the 50's, where the image of the breadwinner father, homemaker mother, and children were immortalized by such shows as Leave it to Beaver.
•	60's and women's rights, as well as rights for other groups led to deterioration of the "traditional family," esp women's rights.
•	More readily available divorce also contributes, as a result, single parent familites abound.
•	80's and 90's face the "family breakdown," where one side argues that familites are reactionary hot-air, while the others argue that family values should be upheld, to the point of exclusion of all other forms of family.
•	Backlash against single women for "creating the underclass," citing failures of single-mother families
•	Very frequently, modern familites are judged by a "standard" of Ozzie and Harriet, that very few wish to return to.

b)

Defnitions:

Parochial: of, or relating to a parish.
Nuclear: pertaining to a nucleus, presumable in the vein of being a self-contained unit.
disingenuous : uninformed, unaware.

c)

1) Ereate measn that when government started to make changes to the policies that they had put in place as part of their Depression recovery plans, a piece of the triangle between the three, workers, corporations, and government, was broken, and stability of society that supported the "traditional family" began to fragment.
3) Erera's arguement is summed up as, the "traditional family" of the 50's is a standard that very few people wish to return to. This traditional family is an outdated benchmark, and cannot be counted upon to provide an accurate measurement of "What is Family?"
4) Erera's citations lead the reader to the conclusion that fathers are expendable, a dime a dozen. While the citations also lead to the conclusion that this situation may be hazardous to society and to the family structure, at the same time, she neither explicitly condones, nor supports this lack of a male presence in the family.

2) Many, many citations fill the pages, making Erera's article a very well documented and well supported article, but, at the same time, this makes it extrememly difficult to divine just what Erera believes, and what her sources believe. She also breaks the article, seemingly, into blocks, divided by the generaly line of thought.
3) Erera continutally calls upon the sources of psychologists, anthropologists, social researchers, and the like. Almost two full pages of references, even!

1) Perhaps these statistics are meant to show that the concept of "family" in the mind of society requires a great retooling, and to call to attention that the "traditional family" structure of Ozzie and Harriet no longer can be used as the benchmark for all other families.
2) These questions serve the purpose of challenging the reader to consider their notions and beliefs of family. An effective tactic, considering the length of the article. Merely by reading up to this chapter, Erera will have already effectively challenged the reader's beliefs and opinions on the topic of family.

d)

A family, in my mind, does still consist of the mother, the father, and the children. However, I am not quite so antiquated as to hail back to the times of Lord Ozzie and Lady Harriet. I do believe that the mother does have the right to pursue whatever course in life that she desires, whether it is home-making, or to pursue a 9-5 career, or even to pursue a career where the income may not contribute a significant amount to the family finances. On the other hand, I expect the father's role to be slightly more income-oriented, to support the family, while still remainging very much a part of it, and not just a paycheck. 

HOWEVER, this is only my ideal. I, personally, am not averse to, interracial marriages, or gay/lesbian marriages. I am, however, against polygamy, because I believe that a person with so many wives or husbands effectively turns their relationships into "wham bam, thank you ma'am, please come again!", without the consequences of such. I also am agaist parent families, if only because I, myself am a part of one. I do not believe that families do well with only one parent. It takes a certain kind of parent, and a certain kind of child to be able to pull this off successfully, and these parents and children are far and few between. I know for one, that I am neither.