Typical American family. America, America... truth and fiction about American families. Features of families in African countries - bright colors and ancient customs

From the very beginning, the American family took advantage of the benefits that came as a result

the dramatic changes in family ethics that swept Europe and the colonies in the mid-18th century.

Although paternal authority was still the core of the "orderly family", the new ethic

"emotional individualism" led to the ideal of warmer and closer relationships between

husband and wife and between parents and children. Following the “influx of feelings,” the man and

women were encouraged to marry on the basis of mutual affection; marriage was regarded as

“union of individuals”, and not as “union of two genealogies”. The number of cases of cruelty has decreased

husbands’ treatment of their wives: the number of beatings of wives, as well as husbands, has decreased,

insisting on their marital “rights.” Parents have become less cruel to their children,

which can be judged from data on a decrease in the frequency of corporal punishment of children4.

American women had more freedom than European women. Without dowry

linking the wife economically with her family and with the right to retain ownership of her

property upon marriage, they could much more easily get married and enter into

remarriage. Thus, the American family of the 18th and early 19th centuries. looked less like

into a miniature monarchy and more like a "small commonwealth of nations" in which the husband,

wife and children "worked together as members of a common enterprise." It was much less

differentiation between

“his” and “her” spheres: women and men worked both at home and outside; women

produced much of what was needed for the family; the men worked, following the rhythm

family, not industrial time. Since both women and men worked, both

parents took part in raising children. Historian John Demos writes of the "active,

full paternity, permeating the entire fabric of home and work life.”

In fact, at the beginning of the 19th century. parenting manuals were written by fathers, not mothers, and

the child was primarily raised by a parent of the appropriate gender, following an informal but

generally accepted model of dividing upbringing by gender5.

However, for the first time in the decades of the 19th century. this world has changed. By mid-century the gap between

work and home became sharply defined, both in reality and in ideology

separation of spheres. Family life was “torn out of the world of work.” Workplace and home have become

clearly defined his and her spheres.

In 1849, Lord Alfred Tennyson expressed this division of spheres in his poem "The Princess":

A man is for the field, and a woman is for the hearth. The man is for the sword, and she is for the needle. A man with a head

woman with a heart. The man commands and the woman obeys; Otherwise there will be chaos.

Men felt this separation of spheres in two aspects. First, from home and from the farm place

making money moved to the mill and factory, to the store and office. Men

turned out to be subject to a different rhythm of activity, dictated by growing specialization

industry Secondly, the male share of work in the house was gradually industrialized

rova, and tasks such as collecting fuel, processing leather and grain were eliminated,

as they found themselves transported to the outside world. This "freed" men to

They left their homes and handed over to their wives the upbringing of not only their daughters, but also their sons.

With such emancipation of men, popular literature was engaged in glorifying

the situation of women who are actually locked at home. Starting from the department of pro-

guide and ending with examples of high art, women’s work was not rethought

as “work” in general, but rather as a mission assigned by God to a woman. Some

domestic work disappeared, such as spinning and weaving, but most

the female sphere remained unaffected. Women continued to cook food and bake bread,

even if their husbands no longer grew or milled grain or slaughtered livestock for meat.

Cleaning and child-rearing were increasingly labeled as “women's work.” Although men's

the female spheres were symmetrical and complementary, they were not equal.

Catherine Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote in their famous book "The Home of the American

women" (1869):

“The family begins with marriage, and it is the man who controls it, possessing physical power and

requirements of responsibility of the head of the family, as well as according to Christian law, according to

which, when disagreements arise, the husband has the right to the final decision, and the wife

must obey."7

Many historians argue that this new ideology actually represented

historical decline in the status of women. Historian Gerda Lerner, for example, points out that in

1830s there were fewer women shopkeepers and businesswomen than in the 1780s:

“Women were excluded from the new democracy,” she writes. Democracy meant geographical

physical mobility, as well as social and economic mobility. The woman was “imprisoned in

prison”, to “home”, to the new ideology of women’s domestic life. Statement "small

wonderful female sphere" needed videological support from the rhapsodic

poetry and religious sermons. But men’s “liberation” from home turned out to be partly

complained that men spent too little time at home. "Paternal neglect

is currently one of the most abundant sources of domestic discord,” wrote

Rev. John Abbott in the Parents' Magazine in 1842. Father, "all in a hurry for

his business interests, sooner or later discovers that he does not have enough time for

fulfilling... my parental duty.” In A Book for Fathers (1834), Theodore Dwight wrote about

the need to convince men to retake their household responsibilities8.

The family becomes a "shelter and refuge from the heartless world" which is great

French theorist Alexis de Tocqueville observed while traveling in the United States

States in the early 1830s. “Deprived of its productive functions, the family is now

specializes in education

children and emotional comfort, providing much needed holiness in the world,

based on the impersonal principles of the market,” writes historian Christopher Lash9.

Of course, the ideology and reality of the separation of spheres in the mid-19th century. in America were in

are largely characteristic of the white middle class, but it is precisely this ideology

was promoted as the norm for everyone else, as the “American” form of family.

Working class women and women of color continued to work outside the home while

how men willingly shared housework and child-rearing with them, if not because

ideological obligations, then out of economic need. "Rather regarded as

workers than as members of family groups, women from unprivileged classes

worked to provide, support, stabilize and reproduce their families both in

public (productive) and private (reproductive) spheres""0.

Since the family was now the responsibility of women, its

significance and the degree of integration into wider communities has weakened. As if as

To compensate for this change, the symbolic importance of the family increased. Events,

which were previously solemnly organized from time to time have now become routine

family holidays; community celebrations were to become home-based. "Family" like

the place of idealized romantic longing was a nineteenth-century invention because it

John Gillies writes:

“When men worked from home, meals were rarely private or even regular.

Weekends resulted in community celebrations and mutual visiting of guests, and not in

private family celebrations with home-cooked food. Leisurely

lunch hours, spending Sunday afternoon with family and nuclear family reunion

major holidays, such as Christmas, were invented only from

mid-19th century."11

Rapid industrialization of the American economy in the decades after the Civil War

only strengthened these trends. By 1890 only about 1% married women worked

outside the house. As motherhood was increasingly seen as the only "calling"

women, the importance of fatherhood was downplayed. “Husband and father in a middle-income family,

living in the suburbs - almost completely restored

title "Fathers, time to return to the family!" appeared with some regularity in

popular magazines. “They left the poor father outside the door,” she shared her observations

Progressive member Jane Adams in 1911 - He doesn't get

special recognition. It would be nice if father had a special day when he

received this recognition." (This noble idea has been waiting for its moment for sixty-one years

implementation"2.)

Commentators at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. They also worried a lot about the family crisis. Number

divorce rates have risen steadily since the return of soldiers after the Civil War

From seven thousand in 1860 to fifty-six thousand in 1900 to one hundred thousand in 1914. In 1916 in

In San Francisco, one out of every four marriages ended in divorce; In Los Angeles -

one in five, in more traditional and Catholic Chicago one in seven. In 1914

study of the marital status of female college graduates

Barnard, Bryn Mawr, Cornell, Mount Holyoke, Radcliffe, Smith, Vassar, Wellesley and Wells

showed that less than 40% of graduates got married. From Harvard graduates of the 1870s. almost

a third of women between forty and fifty years old were single. "In fifty

years, marriage will disappear,” the respected Harvard psychologist John Watson predicted early on.

The family crisis was such a pressing issue that President Theodore Roosevelt

1909 Convened the first White House Conference on Children. Roosevelt believed that

men should be encouraged to be more active fathers, and white-born

American women, in turn, need support to have more children in order to

white people did not commit, as he put it, “race suicide.” He also believed that

poverty, especially the poverty of widowed mothers, is a major problem in the lives of their children and

helping such families is the responsibility of the government. Roosevelt considered it necessary

financially support single mothers who, by all accounts, were capable of

provide decent care for your children if you add a little money14.

The separation of spheres provided the basis for a virtually endless crisis of the family in

throughout the 20th century. Attempts by women to leave the home to enroll in

institute,

enter the labor market, join trade unions, receive vocational education,

met significant resistance, and men’s desire to return home to their family declined

up to the 1940s. The Second World War interrupted this process, as women again

huge numbers found themselves on the labor market. But the post-war economic boom

fueled by huge government spending on roads, schools, and

also legislation aimed at supporting war veterans made nuclear

family living in their home in the suburbs, a living reality for everyone

growing number of American families. All this stabilized this form of family,

actually artificial and fraught with problems: the nuclear family of June and Ward

Cleavers with their children Wally and Beaver*15.

Huge public investment to support the ideal family model, consisting of

husband-breadwinner, mother-housewife and their children, were accompanied by a sharp increase in the number

marriages and an equally sharp decline in the age of first marriage. While

Today's indicators in this area correspond to those of the rest of the 20th century,

era 1945-1960 stands out sharply, since “young men and women... as

reactions to the difficulties and separations associated with depression and war... married unusually

but it’s early.” In 1867, there were 9.6 marriages per 1,000 people in the United States; a century later - 9.7

marriages. But in 1946 this number reached its absolute maximum - 14.2. With this

high marriage rate, high fertility and consistently low rates

divorce family 1950s has become a model that many continue to regard

as an ideal. In fact, this family model turned out to be “the result of interaction

unusual range of historical, demographic and economic circumstances to which

it’s unlikely to come back again,” is the conclusion of two leading history experts

But the new family model that had emerged was declared natural, i.e. and biologically

inevitable and morally consistent with social progress. Attempts to strengthen

This model has become a constant annoying buzz in the ears of the nation. "Requirement

it seemed almost frantic to reinforce traditional norms, writes historian William Chafe.

We are talking about the characters from the popular film “Leave it to Beaver!” (directed by Andy Cadiff, 1997). -

Note ed.

as if something completely different was actually happening.” In academic

sphere, scientists of the structural-functionalist school in the social sciences also provided

legitimacy of this model, arguing that the isolated nuclear family of the middle class,

with a separation of spheres, serves the needs of both children and society. This family system

requires the presence of both expressive (female) and instrumental (male)

components, wrote Talcott Parsons, and this can only be achieved in a family where the mother

the housewife retains the domestic sphere for her husband, the breadwinner, who works outside the home. IN

In 1955, another sociologist described this domestic paradise as follows:

“Father helps mother wash the dishes. He sets the table. He dilutes the milk formula

for a child. The mother can supplement the family income by working somewhere. However, it is

American man by definition must“provide” for his family. He

responsible for his wife and children. His main area of ​​self-realization is professional

the role on which his status directly depends; and him most important function in the family

is to provide an “income”, to be a “breadwinner”. Something's wrong with

American adult male who is unemployed."

American women, on the other hand, tend to work before marriage and

stop doing it when “their day” comes; or continue to do the work for more

lower status than their husbands. The mother plays a central role in emotional support

child in a middle-class American family and devotes himself much more to this than in

most other societies... The cult of “maternal warmth” is opposed to the cult

“capable”, “competent”, “enterprising” man. More expressive type

a man would, in fact, be judged as "effeminate" (too much fat on his body)

thighs)"17.

An entire generation of middle-class men tried to live up to the breadwinner type

family living in the suburbs. They became a collective character, an object of countless

linen satire, "men in gray flannel suits" who rush to the

their latest model cars to the suburban station to catch one train

together with another man, a neighbor down the street. And their generation of wives cooked and cleaned,

cleaned and soaped, washed and ironed, and all in order to constantly fit

rising standards of cleanliness.

For many baby boomer parents and children, this family form

turned out to be successful. Suburban life was safer and easier than in crowded

cities, of which in the 1950s. many families fled. Life in such a family created

men of the post-war generations a safe anchor in an increasingly dangerous

corporate world. Home life focused on spending time with children and

a variety of leisure hobbies, from hiking and camping, concerts and theater to sailing

sports and hobbies of photography. Middle class Americans preferred family

vacations, moving into family-friendly hotel rooms together, buying “family

packaging" of ready-made food - unless you were cooking, following the French

gourmets. They went to the local library or cinema together. Some husbands

adored their wives-companions and together with them built their own, more stable, comfortable,

children's centrist and comradely family than their parents could have imagined (divorce

was a last resort solution to problems). These are the tender lines the poet dedicated

Archibald Macleish to his wife, to whom he is grateful for his marital happiness:

Everything that becomes a woman, whether words or ways - everything is beautiful Sweet debt of love Pure

swept room

In conclusion:

My greatest and most abundant wealth is

All my life -

This is her gift to me

Everything she could give me.

Of course, the poet’s idea of ​​domestic happiness was based on what was indisputable for him

obligation to separate spheres and male primacy (she gives him his life, but he does not give

her her life). I'd like to hear from his wife. However, “these ideas and images, like

religious language and imagination still have a complex power over us, wrote

I recently had a friend send me MacLeish's poem as a reminder of that era. - When

we read about the transition of Romantic passion into the home world of love and tranquility, even

the most cynical and free-spirited among us take our breath away and wonder if

was it lost here

something irreplaceable." If modern defenders of family values ​​feel

excessive nostalgia for this romanticized form of family, then often their critics

equally exhibit a unilateral approach18.

The appearance of domestic happiness only partially hides the increasing anxiety and

on the part of husbands, and on the part of wives (not to mention children, who will give a lot of creative [and not

only creative] outlets for their discontent in the 1960s). Many women and men

felt frustrated and unhappy in this supposedly “natural”

family form. Some fathers felt that they were alienated from their families and especially from

children. Although they saw Ward Cleaver, Jim Anderson and other "devoted dads" in those

television comedies, most middle-class American men were the best

fathers in theory rather than in practice, they spoke more about the need to spend time with

children than actually did it. The position of a professional housewife and

mother was “something new and historically unprecedented,” and wives, following the requirements

"the senseless tyranny of spotless shirts and sparkling clean floors" restrained

growing resentment of the world passing them by. In his review of American culture

tours “America as a Civilization” (1957) historian Max Lerner wrote about the “severe test”

for the modern woman, arguing that “the unhappy wife has become a characteristic type

culture"19.

This unfortunate situation fueled women's increasingly politicized anger. IN

The 1963 challenge of feminist Betty Friedan in The Feminine Mystery sounded like an alarm bell

all the carefully licked suburban lawns and university courtyards

campuses. Calling the suburban home a “comfortable concentration camp,” she declared that

real life lies beyond frying pans and skin irritation from diapers. beatniks,

playboys and juvenile delinquents emerged as three alternatives to the image of the suburban breadwinner.

And of course, popular music of the era ridiculed "respectable" men and their

wives, swallowing tons of “mother's little helpers”*20.

* This refers to tranquilizers, after the name of one of the Rolling Stones' compositions,

dedicated to the same topic. - Note ed.

In fact, once this "traditional" family was fully established and recognized, it

began to crack under the enormous weight that was placed on it. Family like

was supposed to be the only source of comfort and pleasure in an increasingly

cold bureaucratic world; marriage was the only, most important

a bastion of intimacy and friendship that only man is capable of. Having lost more

“traditional” support from local community networks, civic participation and

ties of extended kinship, the family had to satisfy everything alone

psychological and emotional needs.

And it was too hard: the “traditional” family has been an anachronism since its inception.

occurrence. In the 1960s less than half (43%) of American families met

traditional family model with one breadwinner; one quarter (23%) were families with

two breadwinners. Yet nearly nine in ten (88%) white children are under eighteen

lived with both parents, 9% with one parent and 3% without parents. Among

of African American families, two-thirds (67%) lived with both parents, and one-fifth lived with only

with Mother.

Family of the 1970s and early 1980s. was actually more stable and at the same time more

flexible precisely because of the growing diversity of family forms. In the early 1970s. Theodore Caplow

and a team of sociologists returned to Middletown (Muncie, Indiana) after fifty years

after the famous historical study of provincial America conducted

Robert and Helen Lind. Sociologists have come to the conclusion that the family is in the best shape according to

compared to the 1920s. This was explained by economically and socially improved

conditions, as well as improved pay, leisure, and housing. Parents spent more

time with children than half a century ago. More flexible gender roles, expansion

opportunities for women and increased knowledge about birth control and

sexuality also significantly improved marital relationships21.

But since the beginning of the 1980s. the family really began to experience troubles, partly due to

a sharp reduction in social services. Reducing and freezing wages, especially

especially for men, reduction in leisure time and public housing financing, large

the need for both parents to be employed and the return of previous restrictions on control over

birth rate and abortion - all this led to a sharp decline in the quality of life of the family. Many

of the family's problems were actually caused by the economic downturn. In 1970, 15% of all

children under eighteen lived in families that fell under the definition of “poor”; Today

this number reaches one fourth22.

In middle-class families, decreased leisure time and increased professional

dad" of a 1950s family. has become an "endangered species". More than 10% of men with children up to

six years work more than sixty hours a week, and 25% work between 50 and 60 hours.

(Less than 8% of women with children this age have the same work schedule.) Always flexible and

Responsive to the ongoing erosion of its foundations, the American family responded

a number of changes and modifications, as well as the appearance of a bunch of prophets and learned men,

proclaiming false decisions23.

Since the 1960s. the age at first marriage has been steadily creeping up, increasing by

three years for both women (twenty-four years) and men (twenty-six years).

The number of children per family fell steadily as married couples delayed

the birth of a child due to the receipt by both spouses of higher education and the implementation of their

professional interests. Today, only half of American children live

in nuclear families with both parents. One fifth live with stepfathers or stepmothers and

one fourth are in single-parent families. Number of single parents

increases by approximately 6% per year. If in 1970 parents-od and nights were

only 13% of all families, then by 1991 they accounted for more than a quarter (29%) of all families and 23%

all families in which children are eighteen years of age or younger. Fathers nowadays

are headed by 14% of such families. These figures are the highest among

industrial nations24.

The number of people not marrying before the age of thirty increased from 11% for women and 19%

for men in 1970 to 31% women and 45% men. Proportion of women aged over twenty

five to forty-four year olds who had never been married accounted for 9% of those aged five to forty-four in 1950

women of color and 10% among whites; by 1979 these figures were already 23% for

women of color and 10% among white women. Cohabitation is becoming increasingly common, and

not just as a phenomenon among students

college and young people. (In fact, most of these couples never studied at

college and represent the least educated sector of society; cohabitation replaces

early marriage for the poor and working class.) 40% of all cohabiting

families have children25.

At the same time, divorce rates skyrocketed. In 1860 on

one thousand married women there were approximately two divorces, approximately four

divorce in 1900 and more than twenty to date. Almost half of all marriages

prisoners in 1980 and 1990 will end in divorce. These divorce rates in America are -

highest in the industrial world. Most divorces occur only through

several years of marriage. We can say that the family serves less and less as a “shelter in a heartless

world" of nostalgic sentimentalism and is more like a "shock absorber"

contradictory influences from the outside world. "Traditional" family - the father is the breadwinner and

stay-at-home mother remains the norm in approximately one in ten families, while

dual breadwinner model and other family forms (including single parent families and

also gay and lesbian families) account for approximately 40%26.

A recent article in Newsweek argues that “the American family as such is not

various styles and forms... There are families in which the father works and the mother runs the household;

there is where both work - the plaintiff's mother; have single parents; second marriages and childless

couples; as well as unmarried couples with and without children; gay and lesbian families with

children." This diversity of families is well illustrated by one famous

modern political figure: a middle-class white boy born in the South in

single-parent family, raised by a single mother, who then, when he grew up, divorced

his first wife, never paid alimony or child support, does not support

no contact with his children and has a lesbian sister who recently started her own

own family. Who could belong to such a diverse family? This is Newt

Gingrich, until recently the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who cared so much about

family values27.

As families change, so do our ideas about them. Scott family sociologist

Coltrane writes that "support for the separation of spheres of life and automatic

male dominance has declined sharply over the past few decades, although significant

a minority of Americans still cling to so-called traditional views."

Let's look at one or two examples. In the mid-1970s. one man said in an interview

sociologist Lilian Rubin that “[if] a man with a wife and children needs a job, no

a woman should not have the right to take this job away from him.” Few men today

would express such a sense of right to jobs as “their” property. In 1977 two

thirds of Americans agreed with the statement that “it is much better for everyone in the family,

if a man achieves success outside the home, and a woman takes care of home and family.” Twenty

years later, fewer than two in five people agreed with this statement (38%) and less than 30%

baby boomers. In 1977, more than half of Americans

argued that “it is more important for a wife to help her husband’s career than to make a career herself.” TO

By 1985, just over a third (36%) agreed, and by 1991 the number agreed was

only 29%. Today it is approaching one

quarters.

This attitude is felt all over the world. In a recent international survey by the Institute

Gallup, less than half of people agreed that the "traditional" family model

“breadwinner-housewife” would be desirable: in the United States - 48%, in Chile 49%,

in France 46% and in Japan 46%. Only in one country, Hungary, this family structure

supported by the majority - 66%, while in several countries the number

reached only a third, including Spain (27%), India (28%), Germany (28%) and Taiwan

The "traditional" family as a normative ideal was not a reality for everyone

American families even when this ideal was invented. And even more so today. This

the ideal represents the last stronghold of traditional gender relations -

gender differences created by gender inequalities that are being challenged in today's

all visible spheres of life. Families are gendered institutions; They

reproduce gender differences and gender inequalities among adults and children. Families

give gender education to children and remind parents that they should behave

according to your tender. It is not surprising, therefore, that each specific aspect

family life - marriage, raising children, housework, divorce - expresses difference and

gender inequality.

Valeria Protasova

Reading time: 8 minutes

A A

Each country has its own unique family characteristics and traditions. Of course, many customs are undergoing changes due to the influence of the modern world, but most peoples strive to preserve the heritage of their ancestors - out of respect for their past and to avoid mistakes in the future. The psychology of family relationships is also different in each country. How do families in different countries differ?

Family psychology in Asia - traditions and rigid hierarchy

In Asian countries, ancient traditions are treated with great respect. Each Asian family is a separate unit of society, practically cut off from the outside world, in which children are the main wealth, and men are invariably respected and revered.

Asians...

• They are hardworking, but do not consider money the goal of their life. That is, on their scales of happiness, everyday joys always outweigh, which eliminates many problems of family relationships that are characteristic, for example, of Europeans.
• They get divorced less often. To be more precise, divorces practically never happen in Asia. Because marriage is forever.
• They are not afraid to have many children. Asian families always have a lot of children, and a family with one child is rare.
• They start families early.
• They often live with older relatives, whose opinion is the most significant in the family. Family ties in Asia are very strong and strong. Helping their relatives is obligatory and natural for Asians, even when relations with them are strained or one of the relatives has committed an antisocial act.

Family values ​​of different Asian peoples

• Uzbeks

They are distinguished by love for their native land, cleanliness, patience with life's hardships, and respect for elders. Uzbeks are unsociable, but friendly and always ready to help, always maintain close contact with relatives, have a hard time being separated from home and loved ones, and live according to the laws and traditions of their ancestors.

• Turkmens

Hardworking people, modest in everyday life. They are known for their special and tender love for their children, the strength of marriage bonds, and respect for elders. The elder's request is necessarily fulfilled, and restraint is shown in conversations with him. Respect for parents is absolute. A significant part of Turkmens marry according to religious customs, even if they are not believers.

• Tajiks

This people is characterized by generosity, selflessness and loyalty. And moral/physical insults are unacceptable - Tajiks do not forgive such moments. The most important thing for a Tajik is family. Usually large - from 5-6 people. Moreover, unquestioning respect for elders is brought up from the cradle.

• Georgians

Militant, hospitable and witty. Women are treated with special respect, like a knight. Georgians are characterized by a psychology of tolerance, optimism and a sense of tact.

• Armenians

A people devoted to their traditions. The Armenian family means great love and affection for children, respect for elders and all relatives without exception, and strong marriage ties. The greatest authority in the family is with the father and grandmother. Young people will not smoke or even talk loudly in the presence of their elders.

• Japanese

Patriarchy reigns in Japanese families. The man is invariably the head of the family, and his wife is the shadow of the head of the family. Her task is to take care of her husband’s mental/emotional state and run the household, as well as manage the family budget. A Japanese wife is virtuous, humble and submissive. Her husband never offends her or humiliates her. Cheating on your husband is not considered an immoral act (the wife turns a blind eye to cheating), but the wife’s jealousy is. Today, the traditions of arranged marriage are still preserved (albeit not to the same extent), when parents choose a match for an adult child. Emotions and romance are not considered decisive when entering into marriage.

• Chinese

These people are very careful about the traditions of the country and family. The influence of modern society has not yet been accepted by the Chinese, thanks to which all the customs of the country have been carefully preserved. One of them is the need for a man to live to see his great-grandchildren. That is, a man must do everything so that his family line is not interrupted - give birth to a son, wait for a grandson, etc. The wife necessarily takes her husband's surname and after the wedding her concern becomes her husband's family, and not her own. A childless woman is condemned both by society and by relatives. A woman who gives birth to a son is respected by both. An infertile woman is not left in her husband’s family, and many women who have given birth to daughters even abandon them right in the maternity hospital. The harshness of attitudes towards women is most pronounced in rural areas.

Portrait of a family in America - real family values ​​in the USA

Overseas families are, first of all, marriage contracts and democracy in all its senses.

What do we know about American family values?

• The decision to divorce is made easily when the former comfort in a relationship is lost.
• A prenuptial agreement is the norm in the United States. They are distributed everywhere. Such a document spells out everything down to the smallest detail: from financial obligations in the event of a divorce to the division of household responsibilities and the amount of contribution from each half to the family budget.
• Feminist sentiments overseas are also very solid. The wife getting out of the transport is not given a hand - she can handle it herself. And the head of the family is absent as such, because in the USA there is “equality”. That is, anyone can be the head of a family.
• A family in the United States is not just a couple of romantic lovers who decided to tie the knot, but a collaboration in which everyone fulfills their responsibilities.
• Americans discuss all family problems with psychologists. In this country, a personal psychologist is the norm. Almost no family can do without it, and every situation is analyzed to the smallest detail.
• Bank accounts. The wife, the husband, the children have such an account, and there is one more common account for everyone. The wife will not be interested in how much money is in the husband’s account (and vice versa).
• Things, cars, housing - everything is bought on credit, which the newlyweds usually take on.
• In the United States, people think about children only after the couple gets on their feet, has acquired housing and a solid job. Large families in America are rare.
• America now leads in the number of divorces - the importance of marriage has long been greatly shaken in American society.
• The rights of a child are almost like those of an adult. Today, a child in the United States rarely remembers respect for elders; permissiveness dominates his upbringing, and a public slap in the face of a child can lead to court (juvenile justice). Therefore, parents are simply afraid to once again “educate” their children, trying to give them complete freedom.

The modern family in Europe is a unique combination of different cultures

Europe is a multitude of very different cultures, each with its own traditions.

• Great Britain

Here people are reserved, pragmatic, prim and true to tradition. In the first place is finance. Children are born only after the spouses have achieved a certain position. Late childbearing is a fairly common occurrence. One of the obligatory traditions is family dinners and tea parties.

• Germany

The Germans are known to be neat people. Whether at work, in society, or in the family - there must be order everywhere, and everything must be perfect - from raising children and design in the house to the socks in which you go to bed. Before formalizing a relationship, young people usually live together to check whether they are even suitable for each other. And only when the test is passed, you can think about starting a family. And if there are no serious goals in study and work, then about the children. Housing is usually chosen once and for all, so its choice is approached very carefully. In general, families prefer to live in their own homes. From infancy, children are taught to sleep each in their own room, and you will never see scattered toys in a German house - there is perfect order everywhere. After 18 years of age, the child leaves his parents’ home, and from now on he supports himself. And you must definitely warn about your arrival to visit. Grandfathers and grandmothers do not sit with their grandchildren, as in Russia - they simply hire a nanny.

• Norway

Norwegian couples have usually known each other since childhood. True, they are not always married - many live together for decades without a stamp in their passport. The rights of a child are the same - both when born in a legal marriage and in a civil marriage. As in Germany, a child goes into independent life after 18 years of age and earns his or her own rent. The child chooses with whom to be friends and live; parents do not interfere. Children appear, as a rule, around the age of 30, when stability is clearly visible in relationships and finances. Parental leave (2 weeks) is taken by the spouse who is able to take it - the decision is made between the wife and husband. Grandparents, like German ones, are also in no hurry to take their grandchildren in - they want to live for themselves. Norwegians, like many Europeans, live on credit, divide all expenses in half, and in cafes/restaurants they often pay separately - every man for himself. Punishing children is prohibited.

• Russians

Our country has many peoples (about 150) and traditions, and, despite the technological capabilities of the modern world, we carefully preserve the traditions of our ancestors. Namely, a traditional family (that is, dad, mom and children, and no other way), a man is the head of the family (which does not prevent spouses from living on equal terms in love and harmony), marriages exclusively for love and the authority of parents for children. The number of children (usually desired) depends only on the parents, and Russia is famous for its large families. Helping children can continue until the parents are old, and grandparents take great pleasure in babysitting their grandchildren.

• Finnish families

Features of the family and the secrets of Finnish happiness: the man is the main breadwinner, the family is friendly, the wife is patient, the hobbies are shared. Civil marriages are quite common, and the average age for a Finnish man to get married is about 30 years. As for children, a Finnish family is usually limited to one child, sometimes 2-3 (less than 30% of the population). Equality between men and women is in first place, which does not always benefit marital relationships (a woman often simply does not have time to take care of the housework and children).

• French people

French families are, first of all, romantic in open relationships and have a very cool attitude towards marriage. The majority of the French prefer civil marriage, and the number of divorces is increasing every year. For the French today, a family is a couple and a child, the rest is formalities. The head of the family is the father, after him the mother-in-law is the authoritative person. The stability of the financial situation is supported by both spouses (there are practically no housewives here). Relations with relatives are maintained everywhere and always, at least by telephone.

• Swedes

The modern Swedish family consists of parents and a couple of children, free premarital relations, good relations between divorced spouses, protected women's rights. Families usually live in state-owned apartments; buying your own home is too expensive. Both spouses work, bills are also paid between the two of them, but the bank accounts are separate. And paying the bill at the restaurant is also separate, everyone pays for themselves. Spanking and scolding children is illegal in Norway. Every little one can “call” the police and complain about their aggressor parents, after which the parents risk losing their child (he will simply be given to another family). Mom and dad have no right to interfere in the life of a child. The baby's room is his territory. And even if the child categorically refuses to restore order there, this is his personal right.

Features of families in African countries - bright colors and ancient customs

As for Africa, civilization has not changed it much. Family values ​​remain the same.

• Egypt

Here they still treat women like freebies. Egyptian society is exclusively male, and a woman is “a creature of temptations and vices.” A girl is taught right from the cradle that a man needs to be pleased. A family in Egypt consists of a husband, wife, children and all relatives along the husband’s side, strong ties, and common interests. Children's independence is not recognized.

This is not my family or even my friends. The article was taken from the Internet. I just want to note that the parents’ professions are quite expensive, so in my opinion, this family lives above average.

Brian and Mairie McManus with three children live in Syracuse, New York State. Brian works as a mechanical engineer, and his wife, Mairie, works as a medical assistant to a surgeon (a physician assistant, a step below a doctor, something like a medical assistant or advanced practice nurse).

Brian maintains a detailed budget for his family, with over 40 separate expense categories. “Every morning I come to work and check my bank accounts and credit cards and record my latest expenses in a spreadsheet,” explains Brian McManus. “I try to do this every day—and it takes maybe three minutes.”

In 2014, they earned a net (after-tax) average of $14,735 per month. Of course, someone might argue that their income is above average. For example, according to statistics, the average income of a family with children is about $7,500 per month after taxes. However, this average income includes a wide variety of families—those in which one spouse does not work, those who live elsewhere in the country with a lower cost of living, and those in which the spouses are uneducated.

Therefore, the income of the McManus family, although above average, is nevertheless quite typical for families like them - two working spouses living in New York State, with a normal professional education and in-demand specialties. The average income of a physician assistant in 2012 was about 90 thousand per year, and the average income of a mechanical engineer in 2012 was about 80 thousand per year. The tax rate for people in their situation (house, mortgage, 3 kids) is about 18% (including federal, NYS, and social taxes).

The table below shows monthly expenses in 2014.

Income (after taxes)		$14,735.00
Expenses:
Mortgage		$1,510.49	debt about 320 thousand at 4%
Kindergarten/school		$2,076.92	It looks like the eldest daughter goes to a private school, and the two younger ones go to kindergarten
Student loan (federal)		$171.77	three different loans, initially there were 54 thousand debts, 14 thousand remained
Student loan (private)		$222.57
Student loan (private)		$119.94
Life insurance		$43.84
Food for home		$1,130.69
Eating out		$122.98
Petrol		$311.21
Phones		$112.90
Electricity		$217.44	heating in the house is electric
Cable TV/Internet		$75.78
Gym		$86.87
Brian's car		$394.01	car loan
Mairi's car		$364.79	car loan
Car insurance		$124.89
Entertainment		$575.79
Household expenses		$377.22	house cleaning, gardener, etc.
Medicines		$29.65
Medical/Dental Expenses		$406.92
Furniture for home		$239.22
Home renovation/improvement		$482.23
Cloth		$160.87
Social Savings Expenditures:
Mairie's 401K Retirement Savings Account		$1,016.67
Brian's 401K retirement savings account		$1,484.74
First Child's 529 Education Savings Account		$114.58
Second child's 529 education savings account		$114.58
Third Child's 529 Education Savings Account		$116.67
First child's savings account		$41.67
Second child's savings account		$41.67
Third child's savings account		$-
Other savings:
For car repairs		$120.00
For the holiday		$400.00
For an emergency		$-
For home renovation		$572.43
For payment of property taxes/insurance		$829.25
On vacation		$370.00
Total expenses:		$9,358.99
Total social savings:		$2,930.58
Total other savings:		$2,291.68

In 2005 (even before their wedding), Mairie bought a house in which they lived until 2013 for $207 thousand. The house had 4 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms. units, dining room, living room, washing room, and a total area of ​​about 240 sq. m. (plus a basement of 500 sq. m. and a garage for two cars).

In 2013, shortly before the birth of their third child, the family decided that they needed a more spacious home. They bought a 1-acre plot of land for $62,000 and built themselves a house like this in the suburbs, spending about $360,000 on construction.

The money to build the house was taken out on a mortgage. The new house is a little more spacious, 300 sq. m. meters of living space, 4 bedrooms, 2 and a half bathrooms, basement, garage for 2 cars. Property taxes on this house are around 12k a year.

- Ada Leontyevna, what, in your opinion, is the main difference between our family and the American one?

The fact is that Americans begin to prepare the child for the upcoming struggle for his place in the sun from the first days. Intense competition, tension, stress - this is the constant psychological background of the sphere in which a business American revolves. Just like our compatriots, however. So, an American parent thinks a lot about how to instill in their child the skills to cope with this life. Newborn children are hardened from the first days. Sport occupies a huge place in education. Almost every child is a member of some sports section, club, or plays on a school team.

Do you think this is good? We have experts who say with disdain that the main subject in American schools is physical education.

Here, of course, it is important to maintain a middle ground. If this is a paid private school, then it has developed sports and a high level of education. In the so-called public, free, both are weaker.

Another goal of American parents is to instill self-reliance and independence in their children. Several times on television talk shows I heard a teenager complain to his parents: they put too much pressure on me! These young Americans would be subject to our parental pressure. Our elders have much stronger influence and word. A sense of independence is a natural consequence of being self-sufficient. And this property is instilled in many ways, including early work. Almost every high school student works several hours a day after school - the so-called part-time job - as a waiter, car washer, or janitor.

Parents solve the problem of instilling independence very consistently. One day in Seattle, Washington, two students approached me after a lecture. We started talking. It turned out that they were from the city of Boston, on the opposite coast of the country. The flight there is six hours. They complained that they were very bored and could not get used to local life. I was surprised: there are several dozen universities and colleges in Boston. What brought them to such a distance? They answer: “Because our families are there.” And, seeing my bewilderment, they explained: this is how it is done here. Usually, after graduating from school, children move as far as possible from their family.

In America there is less crime, everyday life in the same hostels is more organized, there are ways to earn money to rent an apartment. In our country, a child left alone rarely copes with the situation, because parents largely play the role of the state.

On the one hand, of course, the sooner a young man sets out on his own, the easier it is for him to navigate this life later. But on the other hand, finding themselves without the help and support of their parents, yesterday’s schoolchildren feel very lonely. In my book, I quote the words of the famous American cultural scientist Max Lerner from his work “The Development of Civilization in America”: “Americans belong to hundreds of clubs, associations, sisterhoods, brotherhoods. It seems that collective life is in full swing, and a person is deeply immersed in it. But if If you take a closer look, it turns out that the main mental drama of an American is loneliness... Because Americans are characterized by individualism and atomism.”

It turns out to be a contradiction. If you watch any American film, there is a cult of family. For the most part, the cult of family disappeared with old Soviet films. There is always only one hero.

It does not interfere. In America there really is a cult of family. There are endless sociological surveys on the topic of what is the greatest value for a person. And in any study, family comes first.

- Does this mean that there is an insignificant number of divorces in America?

Not at all. In 47 percent of American families, at least one spouse is in a second marriage. Family is the highest value, and at the same time, so many spouses get divorced. Paradox? It turns out there is logic. It was involuntarily explained to me by a forty-year-old schoolteacher, in whose house I lived for some time. She said that her husband left her and was perplexed: “We lived so well. He came home from work, we watched TV, almost didn’t talk. The house was always in order. Lunch was heated. The children were well-groomed.” Then she explained with irritation: “And all because such a stupid fashion has come today: the main thing in the family is emotional comfort.” And I suddenly realized that there was no paradox: Americans really value family. But only a happy family. And, if he doesn’t have one in his house, he quite easily decides to try something else.

- What is this - a happy family?

Many American researchers are studying this issue. Everyone agrees that the main thing is psychological closeness, when the main binding force in the family is love. Americans instill this attitude in their children from a very early age. A children's program with the host Barney, a huge plush dinosaur, each episode ends with a formula song: “You love me. I love you. We are a happy family.” But one day one of the show’s guests, five-year-old Katie, sadly asks: “Barney, I don’t have a family, what should I do?” “Why not, who do you live with?” “With mom and grandma, but we don’t have dad.” Then Barney asks if the girl loves her family and if they love her. “Oh yes,” she replies, “we love each other very much.” The dinosaur hands her a huge plush paw: “Katie, I congratulate you: you have a real happy family.”

But what about divorces in America? In any country, men still leave for other women because they are polygamous...

If you say this out loud in America, you will be accused of lacking political correctness. In fact, no one has yet proven that a man is truly polygamous. But if this is so, then the woman is also polygamous.

Recently, in an interview with RG, our number one feminist Maria Arbatova talked about this concept: two people - one career. Like, if a divorce occurs in developed countries, then the husband continues to support his wife, who helped him make a career, but she herself was left with nothing. In our country, in this case, the woman is left with nothing.

Yes, the American provides for his ex-wife, but on the condition that she did not pursue her career. Because it is a very common situation that a woman has gone far ahead in her career growth. By the way, that’s why she leaves her husband. There it is necessary to pay the wife if it is proven that she did not work, but took care of the children. But, if she herself made a career, then it happens that she also pays the man.

- What if they worked the same way?

He may pay, he may not. The fact is that the legal procedure for divorce is quite complex: it all depends on the situation. The Americans know this and make it easier by drawing up marriage contracts, which we already know quite well about. They all sign it, without this the marriage simply cannot take place. A friend of mine, the director of a musical comedy theater, got married a second time, and her husband gave her the house in which they live. The house costs a million dollars, but the husband is a very wealthy man. But the contract states that if they divorce, the house will not remain with her. She agreed to this. And he says: “I have no other ways to keep you.”

I have always wondered, when very young people get married (although now there is a tendency to get married later), what can they write down in the contract? They don't have anything.

Talking with Gina, an American psychologist and divorce specialist, I asked: my future husband and I are going to go to the registry office and how will we discuss what will happen when we get a divorce?

She answered like this: “Given Russian traditions and mentality, marriage contracts are unlikely to take root in your country. In Russia, great attention has always been paid to what is called romantic love. In America, this goes in parallel: love is separate, businesslikeness is separate. And with you Prenuptial agreements can disrupt the harmony of relationships."

- What do you like about a Russian family?

Close relations. This is most often caused by a poor solution to the housing issue. But even when parents and children do not live together, the contact is still very close. And also the relationship between spouses. In America there is such a term - separated spouses. This is not a guest marriage, do not be confused. This is a normal family, where just one of the spouses got a job in another place. I know a lot of such families. They live in different states, in different countries. My friends’ mother and children live in America, and their husband lives in London, because he is a specialist in English literature and was given a chair there.

- But you have been studying the problem for so many years - can the American family be considered the standard of family?

No, he can not. In her, for my taste, there is a certain overkill of efficiency and common sense. Sometimes this comes at the expense of the spontaneity and warmth of relationships. Our families sometimes quarrel and suffer from the need to live under the same roof. But at the same time, the relationship between relatives is closer.

P.V. Ivanova; S.V. Shishonkov, Art. teacher

(FSBEI HPE Ivanovo Institute of State Fire Service of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia, Ivanovo)

American family today

Respect for common family traditions, as an integral part of family life today, guarantees the preservation and further development of American culture. The American family is the building block of the nation because it is where the process of becoming the individual who will live and work in a given society takes place.It is in the family, through love, support, tolerance and care, that family members are raised to first become good people, and then respectable citizens of their country.

The typical American family model is a nuclear family consisting of two parents and their children. This trend traces its historical roots back to the time of the resettlement of the colonists, in whose families the responsibility for housekeeping, cooking and raising children lay entirely with wives and mothers, who did not receive any help from other female relatives due to the fact that they remained in another country. continent. And these days, after marriage, couples form their own household, separate from their biological families.

The nuclear family is an American cultural ideal, but it is not always achievable in reality.According to studies, in families andmigrants, married couples rely on the support of relatives in their family life.A similar situation occurs inAfrican-American families, where an adult male husband is often absent, and kinship support is critical for women raising children alone.

Americans consider blood relationships to be more important than family ties. Arising after marriage. Kinship ties among nuclear families are closer than among members of extended families. Adoption is a common practice in American families, but reproductive technologies that allow infertile or gay couples to have children are highly valued. This reflects the importance of the concept of biological relatedness in culture.

There is a lot of talk these days about the decline of the American family. Proponents of social conservatism argue that traditionalAmericanthe family is under constant attack, for example:

1) influence e MASS MEDIA, which feedalarmed by stories about women,choosinga lonely life, without family, marriage, children. This can be explained by the fact that women do not want commitment, they want independence, a career, and marriage and children will only get in the way. Menin turn also, I didn't want to Itake on long-term responsibility, are not associated withfuck you bonds ami marriage A.

2) nnon-traditional connections: Civil in most states marriages legal only between heterosexuals in pairs. However, the number of same-sex marriages is growing regardless of whether they are officially recognized by the state. Some religious denominations and churches recognize and celebrate same-sex marriages.

3) Liberals point to economic factors. The first of them is the slowdown in wage growth. Over the past 30 years, average earnings for American men have increased by less than 1%, adjusted for inflation. By the way,women are paid seventy cents for every man's dollarfor the same job. Such “pink collar” positions as withsecretarybor administratoropareentirely femininemi. In the world "white collar workers"women often occupy middle management positions.WITHsystem of views in society,called "glassceiling", not allowedno women,with rare exceptions,to positionstop management.This situation is justifiedappearsthe fact that women, running the homefarmingand while raising their children, they cannotgive awayso much worksametime as men.Professions requiring skillseducateI, such asteachingAt schoolAndkindergarten arestill femininemi. The blue collar sector does not have a very high proportion of women in occupations that by definition require physical strength, such as the construction industry and firefighting.

The second most important economic factor is the lack of satisfactory child care facilities.The problem of sending a child during the daytimeaffectsall sevenand, who are mostly participants in day care programs.Bogatesesevenwe're tryingfindeliteecentersday care for children; less richesevenyilooking forscarceeplacesAVfederalfundedx institutions. Day care for all working familieslooking after the childrenmay be a cause for concern. Stories of child abuse in these centers reported in the media only increase this concern.Statecreates few conditionsfor caring for small children, given the fact that most mothers work outside the home. Wealthy parents often hire nannies to care for their children. Some employers provide short maternity or paternity leave.

Family orelationships become more chaotic, not what they were before. But the institution of marriage is not disappearing and is not going to do so. Stepping aside, you can consider the indicators of the number of marriages since the 50s. There is a declinequantities conclusions earlymarriages, this is explained by the desire of Americans to get an education and make a career.However, toBy the age of 45, 89% of women and 83% of men had tied the knot at least once. 67% of American families are still formed by married couples, and the vast majority of Americans still believe that marriage is the best basis for personal intimacy, economic stability and raising children.

Of course, it cannot be denied that the nature of the family has changed over the past 50 years. Although the divorce rate in America has decreased by 21%, half of all marriages still end in divorce. 60% of divorces affect children, 33% of all children are born out of wedlock and 34% of children do not live with their real fathers. These trends are most common among African Americans. And it could very well be said that the African-American nuclear family is on the verge of collapse. Since the 1950s, the marriage rate for black women has plummeted from 62% to 36%. Between the 1960s and 1990s, the number of African American children living with two married parents dropped by more than half. Today, 54% of all African American children live in single-parent households, compared with 23% of white children.

Children living with single mothers are 5 times more likely to be poor than children living in intact families. Also, in such families there is a greater likelihood of leaving school at an early age and becoming parents themselves. Everyone agrees that teenage pregnancy can pose a variety of challenges for both mother and baby. Since 1990, the teen pregnancy rate has dropped by 28%, which is good by any measure. But teenagers still account for almost a quarter of all children born out of wedlock.

In the 60s and 70s, a family where the mother stayed at home and the father was the sole breadwinner was the norm. Today the ratio has reversed. 70% of families are headed by either two working parents or a single working parent. A family in which parents struggle to pay bills, look after children, and support the household is called a “family of jugglers.” This constant juggling has a negative impact on family life. Americans today have 22 fewer hours per week to spend with their children than in 1969. Working mothers lose almost an hour of sleep every day trying to cope with everything.

American society understands thatIt is important to preserve the marriage and try to encourage couples living together to form a more durable union. And in thishelp,as the study showed, seminars on family life. ManysameAmerican conservatives believe that seminars may not be enough, and it is necessary to return to the past, in which sexual relations outside marriage entailed punishment and shame, obtaining a divorce was much more difficult, and marriage offered not only personal fulfillment, but also clearly defined social roles for men and women. women,Whenwas consideredThe norm is a family where there was only one breadwinner - the husband, and the wife was at home and did household chores (everyday life, raising children, etc.).

The federal government takes family values ​​seriously. Namely, drawing up programs that will make juggling work and raising children much easier. We need to start by creating quality day care facilities that are accessible to any family that needs it. It's time to modernize schools, not just for the benefit of working parents, but to help prepare children for an increasingly competitive world. Countless studies support the benefits of early childhood education programs. The same applies to after-school programs, summer school, and after-school programs.

First of all, we need to ensure that employers make the work schedule more flexible. The Clinton administration took a step in this direction with the introduction of the Medical and Family Leave Act. It is also necessary to provide parents with a flexible schedule for their daily needs. Large companies already have flexible work programs and have reported improved employee morale and decreased turnover.

By combining such methods, technical support, and public opinion, the government can help preserve the intact American family. Create favorable conditions for the formation of a social unit and the birth of children as the future potential of your country.

Bibliography

Obama B. The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reviving the American Dream / Trans. from English T. Kamyshnikova, A. Metrofanova. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House "Azbuka-Classics", 2008.

Barak Obama The Audacity Of Hope. Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. Copyright 2006 by Barak Obama.

http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000004/st10.shtml