Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ghost wrote

Family is the people who love you, and they may not have any blood relation to you, and you may never have met them face to face (offline).

As for maintaining bio family bonds or birth family bonds… I don’t much care. I have no contact with my extended family. Some are terrible people and some have never made an effort to know me as I was growing up so we just don’t know each other. My immediate family is… meh. They don’t know me and they’re emotionally immature, borderline narcissistic, so I’m safer and healthier if I keep a good distance between us. I have a lot of guilt about it but I’m trying to overcome that. I wouldn’t want my loved ones feeling obligated to maintain ties with people as toxic as my family, so I’m trying to treat myself as a loved one.

I’m envious of people whose families love them unconditionally, supporting them in whoever they are and whatever they do. I don’t have that and I can’t fault anyone who decides blood ain’t thicker than water.

9

moonlune wrote (edited )

It's nice when they're there, but it's not something worth sacrificing mental health for.

I'm lucky because my family is decent and we've lived together long enough for us to know how to live with each other. It's routinely but not unpleasant and I can see myself sharing a house like multigenerational families do throughout history and the world. Although I'm very low maintenance so I could live with anybody (imagine a cat that likes to do chores and it's me, pretty much).

6

asterism wrote

Parents are a construct and I'll be damned if I am going to let that control what I do. Like some dude creampied some chick and now I am supposed to give them respect for that? Like millions of people are getting creampied everyday idgaf.

But of course my family is toxic as fuck so I am always going to encourage people to give their families the middle finger. Without my wife's intervention I would have zero contact with mine.

The sound advice boils down to what /u/cicada said. Treat your family like you would treat anyone else. If the relationship is actually worth keeping than keep it otherwise ditch it and don't look back.

But of course it isn't always that easy because sometimes a family is the only support system you have (even if its shitty). To that I say build another support system and then cut them out (but that's easier said than done)

8

capitan wrote (edited )

I'm close with my sister. I think because we grew up together, lived through a lot of the same shit, and inherited a lot of the same flaws.

I don't talk with my pops at all.

Pretty badly enmeshed with my mum.

5

ruinsociety wrote

Biological family for me means nothing. I do have close bonds with my brother, cousins, grandma, but it's not because they are family. I just like hanging out with them.

Everyone else I either do not care or don't know them at all. My parents are complete ass holes, for example. They don't get me at all and I don't get them. I barely talk to them anymore. It's better that way. Otherwise we will argue every time. My parents have this funny phrase whenever I argue, "Respect your elders." Why? You don't respect other people or me so why should I? Fuck off.

6

NOISEBOB wrote

a social construct that must fall.

7

moonlune wrote

But taking her out to lunch to have this conversation now is something that is socially unacceptable

Huh that's interesting, I feel like it'd be socially acceptable around here. Caring for your sibling in law is ok in my circles as they counts as family, and protecting ur family against an abusive spouse is good even if it means betraying your brother. Or am I disconnected from reality? lmao

4

Fool wrote

I really miss living on the other side of the world to my family.

I actually get along well with my siblings, but I hate the obligation to attend things and give gifts.


In saying that, my parents look after my kids two days a week.

3

stagn2 wrote (edited )

Fuck family!!! but unfortunately sometimes theory does not coincide well with reality I'd love to fuck off my family and never see them again, but I've realized that for now it's not good for me, I don't like them and they are not related and often create problems but despite all the problems and contradictions, I'm realizing that FOR NOW I'm better off taking advantage of what little support they give me. I have to admit that my future prospects are relatively better now "with family" than when I lived in a squat whit comrade. Obviously I still want to get rid of the family but when it is advantageous for me to do so. Ideals are nice but....

4

CaptainACAB wrote

I've never known anyone that gets along well (as in, actively attempts to maintain contact on any basis) with all of their biological family members; so I'm in the "pick your favorites and move on" camp.

I'm lucky in that I'm fond of several blood relatives (they still piss me off sometimes, but I can't see myself cutting ties with them; that's basically how love works, I think); my inner circle is basically full at this point; others aren't so lucky and have to form that circle on their own.

The worth of maintaining said bond is proportionate to how much you value keeping that person in your life (nostalgia won't heal the rift. I've tried. Three times with three different people.); I haven't spoken to two of my brothers, but actively maintain contact with my Dad.

I think the best way to tell if you're not haunted by the ghost of "family" is if you're able to ruthlessly prioritize which individual members you value more than others and live your life.

4

Majrelende wrote (edited )

I think that if there is a chance of transforming authoritarian familial relationships into egalitarian or anarchic ones, it should be taken. Strong social bonds are, from what I know, very important for cultural resilience, and family bonds, because they don't tend to end until death, can be very strong.

Authority finds it easiest to conquer when people are atomised and disconnected; it finds its power in the lack of healthy human society. Any strong relationships are important to try to enhance and maintain in this light.

In general we may not want to reject and divide, because that feeds Leviathan; it may be better to accept, enfold, consider.

2

roanoke9 wrote

This very much aligns with my personal practice. This means I keep very strong connections with my direct descendants especially as well as their chosen families. I pick and choose with my own generation or older. I'm lucky my chosen family overlaps some with my biological and consider a person's chosen family paramount though and would not pressure anyone to keep contact with abusers.I guess my position is midway between yours and Captain ACAB. If an abused child could opt to "get new parents" without negative repercussions, much suffering could be mitigated. My own abuser is not living anymore and I am as over it as can be so is a moot point now. I should write something longer and more coherent on this. Sorry for some of the vagueness but I hardly want to map a family tree online :). Also I' m totally blanking on paragraph breaks atm.

2

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

this is actually why I asked the question. I feel there are reasons to maintain familial bonds for anarchist reasons tho I don't have any good reasons. The interact with them if you want or don't is what I expected but I think there is a hot take to be had I can't think of. Organized crime often relies heavily on familial bonds for several reasons and a big one being you can have a large group without infiltration. Or with people you grew up with so you bc you know if they were ever a cop. And like historically the whole separate from your parents at a young age from my understanding is a pretty new capitalist concept. Which I ovi like but I imagine there is a critique to be had of it.

So i'm glad someone else kinda sees how bio family has some anarchist merit. Sadly I don't have any unique thoughts on it other than that

3

Fool wrote

historically the whole separate from your parents at a young age from my understanding is a pretty new capitalist concept

While recent history is fairly against it, I think it was fairly normal for children in more communal society to be independent of parents. With children gravitating to children's groups or adults more inclined towards raising children.

2

Fool wrote

I came across this since the previous comment: about the Yamagishi Movement, which started in Japan in the 1960s and are still around.

When kids turn ten years old they generally move out of their parents’ apartment on the jikkenchi and into a dormitory with other Yamagishi kids. Parents maintain intimate ties, but from then on children are more a part of the community than an individual family. Boarding schools in Britain might work in a similar way, but children are still thought to primarily belong to the family rather than the school community. At Yamagishi, rather than direct parental authority, “all the adults are responsible for seeing to the welfare and safety of the children.” [3] Rather than idyllic, the results are, like the results of mainstream society, mixed.

3