|
|
|
|
|
|
by jldugger
4025 days ago
|
|
|
> So, does affluence naturally lead to a weakening of strong family ties? IMO, what you call strong family ties, others might call patriarchy. When women have improved ability to support themselves, they're more inclined to leave abusive relationships. And like Sandberg, they're less willing to accept menial household roles traditionally assigned to them. There's a podcast from Planet Money about how this plays out among textile workers, if I recall correctly. |
|
|
They are often correlated and found in similar cultural sources, but they are distinct elements. The US idealization of the nuclear rather than extended family and corresponding weaker family ties didn't (and still often doesn't) come with the breaking of patriarchy -- in fact, it is rooted in a time when patriarchy was quite strong -- though you sometimes (especially now) find non-patriarchal arrangements along with it.
Strong family ties and non-transactional view of family interactions doesn't have any essential tie to patriarchy, nor do weak family ties and a transaction approach to interactions have any essential tie to the absence of patriarchy.