Unfortunately, compatibility testing for long-term relationships requires a very different kind of skill, which perhaps many people have never learned. Under atomization we've lost the habit of relating to each other on the time scale of years.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @QiaochuYuan
Were we ever good at relating to each other over the timescale of years, or were we just overwhelmingly more likely to collocate around the same cluster of people over the timescale of years in the past?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @bucketofkets
Maybe both? I think mostly people didn't used to have a choice, and knew that. You relate to people differently if you're only ever gonna know the same 100 people or w/e, the stakes are different if you can't meaningfully exit.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @QiaochuYuan @bucketofkets
Yeah - I think right now it's an uphill battle (that we didn't used to have to fight) to *form* committed family-type units. But I have no clue if we're better or worse at sustaining them. Families in the past might've had plenty of dysfunction, even if they would bring you soup.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @uncatherio @bucketofkets
Pessimistic story is we used to sustain commitments by just taking tons of damage, getting super traumatized and never healing, etc. (e.g. a wife never divorces her husband but just keeps sustaining abuse). You get a kind of stability but at the expense of your soul :/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Slightly more optimistic story is extended families / tribes used to have more checks and balances, e.g. husband abusing wife gets caught by grandparents. This would imply the most abusive period was when people had nuclear families but divorce was still hard / stigmatized.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @QiaochuYuan @bucketofkets
RE damage - gosh yes, good to see this verbalized. This has been in the back of my mind a lot lately (e.g. recently I heard yet another friend talk about getting out of a marriage that they always knew didn't work for them) as I think about making commitments of my own:
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I really, really value the sort of fluid authenticity that I've found with increased freedom to change things that aren't working, quit hobbies that don't fit anymore, generally succumb way less than I used to to status quo bias. How does that mesh with commitments?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
RE nuclear family being the low point - hadn't thought of that as clearly, but it seems super right to me. There's something weird to me about that many folks I run into online who are all about "don't forget about kid-having" are advocating "return to patriarchal nuclear family"
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
and they make evolutionary arguments *sometimes*, e.g. about pair bonds and jealousy... but they don't seem to be actually going all the way back to the ancestral environment, tapped into the diversity of ancestral patterns other than the isolated wife-husband dyad, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yeah, I suspect the ancestral environment was a lot more like an extended family. Here's a related thing I wrote last year:https://thicketforte.com/2018/07/05/meant-for-your-tribe/ …
-
-
Replying to @QiaochuYuan @bucketofkets
:D I hadn't read this before, but I feel excitement & recognition: my house talks about having/maintaining a secure attachment to the 6-person-group as a whole - "group attachment" is a concept we all use :)
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.