"Mother" and "Father" Erased at British University

[Ahab]

8 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

This is true only in America. Every culture we have visited by sail boat has the enlarged nuclear family. It works really well in Polynesia. A lot of them have 4 generations in one house/compound as well as the graveyard on the same property.

How do they decide who gets the best chair or the chair with the best view of the big screen TV ?   Or do they not have a room big enough for everyone in a chair so they split up into different rooms with different TVs?  And what about sound insulation?

So many things I am curious about in that type of situation, depending on how many people are in the same room.

[smac97]

19 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I don't usually either except when wondering what my living accommodations will be like in heaven when I will supposedly be living with our father in heaven along with a WHOLE LOT of other people who supposedly will, too.

A room with my wife, just the 2 of us, would be very nice, I think, as long as it is a nice room, but maybe my wife and I will get a big wing of the mansion of our Father with all of our children and grandchildren close by.

Or will each married couple get their own house with as many rooms added on as they want to add, I wonder.

We're all going to need a comfortable chair to sit in, at least, unless we're supposed to be standing up all of the time.

So many things to wonder about, some times, that is hopefully already figured out by at least one person in our family.

"In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."  (John 14:2)

Thanks,

-Smac

[rodheadlee]

13 minutes ago, Ahab said:

How do they decide who gets the best chair or the chair with the best view of the big screen TV ?   Or do they not have a room big enough for everyone in a chair so they split up into different rooms with different TVs?  And what about sound insulation?

So many things I am curious about in that type of situation, depending on how many people are in the same room.

They respect their elders. The oldest gets first choice, the youngest gets last choice. As far as noise goes, you just deal with it.

[smac97]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

How many grandparents are living with at least on of their children from first child to death in the American culture of the Church?  

I don't know.  

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

Visit a lot, live in the same town or close by sure.  In the same house or next door, not that many from what I have seen though many move in with one of their children’s family when they can’t care for themselves...and often see that as a personal failure rather than a step forward.  And it is not just grandparents, but aunts and uncles, especially single ones that can benefit in terms of companionship, shared resources, etc.

Fair observations, these.

I think multi-generational family living is more common amongst the Hispanic and Polynesian members of the Church.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

"In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."  (John 14:2)

Thanks,

-Smac

Yeah, but saying many doesn't say how many and we are talking about a WHOLE LOT of people who will all be living somewhere in our Father's house. 

 would wonder a lot less if our Lord had simply stated how many mansions there will be and how they will be divvied up.

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

They respect their elders. The oldest gets first choice, the youngest gets last choice. As far as noise goes, you just deal with it.

Still having some trouble envisioning how 146 people sit down together to watch some TV.  

[rodheadlee]

13 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Still having some trouble envisioning how 146 people sit down together to watch some TV.  

No TV sets in grass huts.... What we observed is the family gets together and sings, plays games and makes meals together.  I don't think there are any TV stations on Bora Bora. In American Samoa the TV sets are tuned to football.

P.S. We went 9 years with no TV.

Edited March 12, 2021 by rodheadlee

[CV75]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

Here:

In 1995 the Brethren warned the world that "the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets."

There are many ways the family can disintegrate. 

We as a society can decouple sex and procreation from marriage.

We can radically re-define marriage.

We can demean and disparage the role of fathers and fatherhood.

We can create perverse incentives to discourage people from entering into marriage.

We can declare that children belong to the government or community, not to their family/parents (hat tip, Melissa Harris-Perry).

We can openly call for the destruction of marriage as an institution.

And now we are erasing from our vocabulary the very words we use to formulate ideas about marriage and family, like "father," "mother," "sister," "brother," "husband," "wife," "man," "woman."

Thanks,

-Smac

 

I wish I could get more excited about this, but the Family Proclamation has prepared us well, and for a long time, to expect it. I suppose one ting we an do is to keep using the vocabulary of the Proclamation while having the companionship of the Holy Ghost to influence others to tolerate us -- hopefully that will help stem the tide.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I disagree.  I think the optimum form is the family compound (individual family and personal living spaces along with shared social areas) where aging grandparents can both contribute and be cared for, additional adults are able to help care for children, single family members are not left on their own when sick, etc.

Nuclear families on their own are more susceptible to financial ups and downs and lack of support of a parent or parents on injured.

I think any construct involving the sealing keys and properly focused faith can work well -- and at the same time, a larger community that supports these spiritual foundations will certainly protect any such unit, temporally and spiritually.

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

No TV sets in grass huts.... What we observed is the family gets together and sings, plays games and makes meals together.  I don't think there are any TV stations on Bora Bora. In American Samoa the TV sets are tuned to football.

Hmm.  What we need is more rich people to show us how to live together in one big house with multiple generations of family.  Hearing about how poor people manage it doesn't make it sound very exciting. 

I don't like football or singing, at least not very much.

My family has a big media room that seats 8 people, but if we get much larger we're going to need to figure something else out or somehow come up with enough money to build another big room to hold all of our people.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Human desire and nature creates families, makes moms out of women, dads out of men and parents out of people. 

Yet, family also comes in many forms away from the (relatively new) nuclear model: Adoption. Multigenerational. Same-sex couples. Platonic partners. Single parents. Step-parents. Adult siblings raising minor siblings. Etc...

These non-nuclear forms broaden the adaptability of people and society. Where the nuclear family ideal might separate young adults from otherwise functioning households, leave older folks to live without support, leave single people to live alone without wanting to be alone, leave orphans without homes, and single parents without as much support, other forms can do the opposite. 

Non-nuclear families having dignity does not remove dignity from nuclear families. Families of loving people who care for each other enriching their lives have inherent value. For themselves and society.

All family forms create more options and more options provide avenues for people to meet needs of more people, oftentimes the needs of the least of these.

Add grandparents, aunts and uncles....

Good post Meadowchik! When I'm sub'g in the school district, I have to stop myself when discussing parents with children. Like when it comes to asking who is picking students up from school or many other different situations that arise when referring to family or guardians. I have to catch myself from saying "mom and dad", because it's not always a mom and dad. 

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

Here:

In 1995 the Brethren warned the world that "the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets."

There are many ways the family can disintegrate. 

We as a society can decouple sex and procreation from marriage.

We can radically re-define marriage.

We can demean and disparage the role of fathers and fatherhood.

We can create perverse incentives to discourage people from entering into marriage.

We can declare that children belong to the government or community, not to their family/parents (hat tip, Melissa Harris-Perry).

We can openly call for the destruction of marriage as an institution.

And now we are erasing from our vocabulary the very words we use to formulate ideas about marriage and family, like "father," "mother," "sister," "brother," "husband," "wife," "man," "woman."

Thanks,

-Smac

 

It is a western world assault on the family, and “God will not be mocked”. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

This is true only in America. Every culture we have visited by sail boat has the enlarged nuclear family. It works really well in Polynesia. A lot of them have 4 generations in one house/compound as well as the graveyard on the same property.

Yes, and that is exactly the type of extended family depicted in Mosiah 2:5 during King Benjamin's Speech (cf. Gen 36:6, I Sam 30:3, II Chron 31:18).   The nuclear family is often weak and ineffectual.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Still having some trouble envisioning how 146 people sit down together to watch some TV.  

Sounds like a village.  In fact, ancient villages were basically an extended family, with lots of aunts, uncles, and cousins, and grand uncles and great aunts, and second cousins, etc.  I still recall the first time I saw a movie projected onto a screen outdoors.  It was at Scott's Ranch in rural Northern California, and I was around 7 years old.  The movie was "When It's Springtime in the Rockies" (1937).  Everyone in our small community was there to see it.  A real treat in the remote high Sierras.

I recall many times aboard a U.S. Navy ship, hundreds of us Marines would gather at night on the main deck to watch a movie shown on a huge sail-cloth screen.  We were a family of men, comrades in arms.

[The Nehor]

Oh for crying out loud.

This is a style guide specifically for university communications. It is not erasing the term "mother" or "father". It is telling you to use generic terms when the situation is ambiguous. It tells you to use "parent or guardian" instead of "mother or father" because the generic terms are more likely to be accurate generally. This isn't erasure. It is a style guide and it wouldn't apply to all sorts of situations. If a staff member is writing a bio for themselves and talks about their father they are not going to correct it. The examples show it is about generic terms.

https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity/training/inclusive-language/

The article in the OP is hate clickbait designed to stir people to anger.

 

Sorry to interrupt. Anyways back to decrying a style guide as the end of days and talking in worried tones about how it will bring about the calamities the prophets have foretold.

[Duncan]

26 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Oh for crying out loud.

This is a style guide specifically for university communications. It is not erasing the term "mother" or "father". It is telling you to use generic terms when the situation is ambiguous. It tells you to use "parent or guardian" instead of "mother or father" because the generic terms are more likely to be accurate generally. This isn't erasure. It is a style guide and it wouldn't apply to all sorts of situations. If a staff member is writing a bio for themselves and talks about their father they are not going to correct it. The examples show it is about generic terms.

https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity/training/inclusive-language/

The article in the OP is hate clickbait designed to stir people to anger.

 

Sorry to interrupt. Anyways back to decrying a style guide as the end of days and talking in worried tones about how it will bring about the calamities the prophets have foretold.

Can I get a hallelujah☺️

Edited March 12, 2021 by Duncan

[Peacefully]

38 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Oh for crying out loud.

This is a style guide specifically for university communications. It is not erasing the term "mother" or "father". It is telling you to use generic terms when the situation is ambiguous. It tells you to use "parent or guardian" instead of "mother or father" because the generic terms are more likely to be accurate generally. This isn't erasure. It is a style guide and it wouldn't apply to all sorts of situations. If a staff member is writing a bio for themselves and talks about their father they are not going to correct it. The examples show it is about generic terms.

https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity/training/inclusive-language/

The article in the OP is hate clickbait designed to stir people to anger.

 

Sorry to interrupt. Anyways back to decrying a style guide as the end of days and talking in worried tones about how it will bring about the calamities the prophets have foretold.

Thank you for bringing some logic into the conversation. 

[carbon dioxide]

8 hours ago, Duncan said:

I think it's presumptuous for for the US, and I love you all, to tell others how to live when like 1000 Americans die everyday from covid, solve your problems before you start mucking around others, people dying and the government or shear arrogance is unwilling or unable to do anything about it. You know what else "disintegrates" the family, death

320 million Americans and 7000 on average die of something every day so 1 or 2 thousand deaths is not statistically significant.  In fact, 650,000 died of the Spanish flu with a much smaller population.  In today's numbers, the Spanish flu would have killed up to 2 million Americans. 

[Duncan]

12 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

320 million Americans and 7000 on average die of something every day so 1 or 2 thousand deaths is not statistically significant.  In fact, 650,000 died of the Spanish flu with a much smaller population.  In today's numbers, the Spanish flu would have killed up to 2 million Americans. 

more americans died because of covid than died in WW2, it's like they are their own worst enemy

[bsjkki]

There are three generations living in my house and from my perspective, it’s not ideal. Every woman likes to be the queen of their own castle and not many women enjoy living with their mother in law. 😝

Nehor is spot on in his comment. Use of generic terms when family status is unclear. Even in Primary, it’s important to know the home situations of all the kids in order to not make some feel less than.  
As long as they are not banning the terms ‘mom’ and ‘dad’ a little sensitivity goes a long way.

[The Nehor]

29 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

320 million Americans and 7000 on average die of something every day so 1 or 2 thousand deaths is not statistically significant.  In fact, 650,000 died of the Spanish flu with a much smaller population.  In today's numbers, the Spanish flu would have killed up to 2 million Americans. 

Over 3 million deaths in one year, a new record. The highest percentage rate increase in US history that beat that was in 1918 and that took the Spanish Flu and World War I to pull off.

14 minutes ago, Duncan said:

more americans died because of covid than died in WW2, it's like they are their own worst enemy

And in both cases a lot of the deaths can be tied to fascism.  

[Calm]

36 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

There are three generations living in my house and from my perspective, it’s not idea

That is why I like the idea of a compound...separate private spaces, shared social spaces.  I have seen it done with three or four homes surrounding a courtyard with a play and sitting area and outdoor kitchen, dining area.  Workshop and storage areas and cars could be shared.  No need to have four hammers for four families, one carpet cleaner, a laundry area.

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

That is why I like the idea of a compound...separate private spaces, shared social spaces.  I have seen it done with three or four homes surrounding a courtyard with a play and sitting area and outdoor kitchen, dining area.  Workshop and storage areas and cars could be shared.  No need to have four hammers for four families, one carpet cleaner, a laundry area.

A woman at our local bakery in France has this. Her parents bought a generous parcel and over time the adult children built their homes on it. There are standing regular activities and shared spaces. The cousins are great friends and the parents have lots of support. I found this super interesting because there seemed to be no dogmatic motivation, just the desire to extend family relationships in a mutually beneficial way for all.

[Meadowchik]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Oh for crying out loud.

This is a style guide specifically for university communications. It is not erasing the term "mother" or "father". It is telling you to use generic terms when the situation is ambiguous. It tells you to use "parent or guardian" instead of "mother or father" because the generic terms are more likely to be accurate generally. This isn't erasure. It is a style guide and it wouldn't apply to all sorts of situations. If a staff member is writing a bio for themselves and talks about their father they are not going to correct it. The examples show it is about generic terms.

https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/equality-and-diversity/training/inclusive-language/

The article in the OP is hate clickbait designed to stir people to anger.

 

Sorry to interrupt. Anyways back to decrying a style guide as the end of days and talking in worried tones about how it will bring about the calamities the prophets have foretold.

It is typical moral panic, the kind often seen in very politically-biased media. And imo it often comes with a cynical view of the world and people and families.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

A woman at our local bakery in France has this. Her parents bought a generous parcel and over time the adult children built their homes on it. There are standing regular activities and shared spaces. The cousins are great friends and the parents have lots of support. I found this super interesting because there seemed to be no dogmatic motivation, just the desire to extend family relationships in a mutually beneficial way for all.

I would think with the way we promote eternal families we would see more of this in the church, especially living as close as so many do, and our emphasis on prudent living, but we have been raised in our greater culture adults that living at home is a bad thing, nor do we have cultural standards that could aid in less friction between individuals, especially generations...mother in law jokes promote the idea they will never get along...the whole “my house, my rules” attitudes for another, we aren’t taught to share as much anymore.  In middle and higher incomes, I hardly ever see kids sharing bedrooms.  I have seen mothers and fathers come into their adult child’s home and start ordering everyone around as if their right as matriarch/patriarch rather than treating adult children as true, equal companions.  It makes sense people put off living with each other...and if one might consider it, media and everything are constantly showing us how hard it is to live together.