Author Topic: Baby Boomers and Family Size (Read 8883 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #45 on:** January 22, 2015, 05:19:59 PM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote from: Matthew
What would you call it? Broadly speaking, as a group most of them "got out of" the normal struggles that life normally throws at a young married couple on this earth. Having a small family of 3 or 4 children in public school is a WHOLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL than having a larger family and homeschooling them.

You focus too much on difficult aspects of a larger family when you use phrases like "cheated" or "got out of".

They also "missed out on" the joys of being surrounded by many, happy children. They, sadly, will never know the blessing of 20+ grandchildren. If you ask me, they were "cheated" by a society that told them there was a better way than letting God direct your family.

To me, that all goes without saying.

I'm strictly talking about the material "goods" of life: free time, material wealth, etc.

They made choices influenced by their generation.

I say the Baby Boomers "cheated" in the same way I say that some converts "cheated" by choosing a spouse before they converted to (traditional) Catholicism. But we should all recall my posts about this -- that you don't get something for nothing. Sure, when you choose from 1,000,000 rather than 1,000 you MIGHT get a prettier catch, but what if she believes in divorce or birth control?

Long story short, I don't envy any group that made ANY permanent life choices (choice of spouse, how many children they would have, etc.) before they were in full understanding of Catholic doctrine.

I consider the Faith and the sweet yoke of the Gospel to be a blessing, not a curse. Being "trad from birth" and having the Faith is the ultimate blessing.
The things God forbids He forbids for our own good.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #46 on:** January 22, 2015, 05:20:55 PM »

Quote from: ClarkSmith

People always blame the Baby Boomers but it was the "Greatest Generation" and the "Silent Generation" that laid the groundwork for the cultural revolution.

People born between 1946 and 1964 are considered Baby Boomers. Most of them would have been very young when Vatican II went down. Baby Boomers should be known as the first indoctrinated. Patient zero.

.

I agree. I went to Mass at a church in the middle of nowhere, where the V2 revolution struck much later, thank God.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #47 on:** January 22, 2015, 05:21:57 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

So help my feeble female mind then. If you don't know if they used NFP, abstinence, something in the water, or birth control, then how do you come to the conclusion/fact that they "cheated"?

The various possibilities (NFP, abstinence, ect) applies to the individuals.
His description of "cheating", applies to the group as a whole.

Marlelar · « **Reply #48 on:** January 22, 2015, 05:31:10 PM »

Quote from: Traditional Guy 20

Quote from: Matto
They did not know war? There was a draft for the Vietnam War, so unless they dodged the draft, many members of the baby boom generation knew all about war in Vietnam.

Yes and what did the baby boomers say about the war? They said that the Vietcong were the real heroes, that Amerika was a racist, imperial superpower, that it was a dirty, immoral war, etc. I realise that baby boomers did serve in Vietnam and would "grow up" so to speak but it is the generation's Woostock values that rule the era these days as the counter-culture is the dominant culture.

Ordinary people who lived through it did not feel that way, that's the propaganda you get from modern media. It was a small cadre of agitators who, like the rudder of a ship, steered the media in that direction. Ordinary people questioned the morality and validity of the war, which is something that needs to be done about any war, but they never said the North Vietnamese were heroes.

Marsha

ggreg · « **Reply #49 on:** January 22, 2015, 05:50:21 PM »

Quote from: ClarkSmith

Some couples struggle having children . There are many natural reasons why couples might not be able to have a large family. Small families existed before birth control. How do we know for certain ?? Secondary infertility happens. I doubt many women would want to talk about it.

Some do struggle.

Most couples don't.

Most couples have the biology and reproductive health to have children perfectly fine, one after another, if they don't interfere with nature or have long periods of abstinence. If most families were large in the past and now most are small then there can only be one explanation for that in terms of the general population.

2Vermont · « **Reply #50 on:** January 22, 2015, 06:30:31 PM »

Quote from: ggreg

Simple. Because any other cause that was not a deliberate act of their will, such as something in the water, would apply to the entire water drinking population. Thus the curve of family size distribution would be an even shape and reflective of the fact that a small minority of women find in difficult or impossible to conceive, a small minority conceive very easily and readily and a majority don't fall into either camp.

It is called a bell curve.

If the shape of the bell curve changes through an external agent affect all parties in a population then the entire curve shifts to the left or right. If one part of the curve shifts but the other stays static then it must be due to a wilful act of a subset of the population.

There are simply too many mature completed families of say 4 children or less to be put down to minority involuntary external causes such as something in the water, low fertility, infertility or a legitimate application of NFP

But, again, the graph you posted earlier showed that the average American woman had 3.5 children in 1950. This was before the Baby Boomer generation was even old enough to have children. Based on the comments in this thread you would think that the number of children in 1950 were way higher and then the Baby Boomers ruined everything with substantially smaller families. But the numbers don't prove this out.

2Vermont · « **Reply #51 on:** January 22, 2015, 06:34:18 PM »

Quote from: ClarkSmith

People always blame the Baby Boomers but it was the "Greatest Generation" and the "Silent Generation" that laid the groundwork for the cultural revolution.

People born between 1946 and 1964 are considered Baby Boomers. Most of them would have been very young when Vatican II went down. Baby Boomers should be known as the first indoctrinated. Patient zero.

Some couples struggle having children . There are many natural reasons why couples might not be able to have a large family. Small families existed before birth control. How do we know for certain ?? Secondary infertility happens. I doubt many women would want to talk about it.

This is in line with the point I made earlier. My parents were born in the early 1930's. They had 3 children. Their parents, born in the early 1900's, had 2 children each. I'm not sure why the focus on the Baby Boomers. It seems to me that large families haven't been in vogue for a long time.

Matthew · « **Reply #52 on:** January 22, 2015, 07:06:25 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

But, again, the graph you posted earlier showed that the average American woman had 3.5 children in 1950. This was before the Baby Boomer generation was even old enough to have children. Based on the comments in this thread you would think that the number of children in 1950 were way higher and then the Baby Boomers ruined everything with substantially smaller families. But the numbers don't prove this out.

I looked that up as well, and I had the same question.

I think the answer is: the Catholics at least kept a more "normal" family size up until the Baby Boomer generation.

Hey, look. I'm not trying to crucify you or any other Baby Boomer. If you find a way to exonerate yourself and all your friends, great. But I'm not looking to judge or condemn in the first place.

I'm looking to get to the bottom of things. I'm looking to figure things out; to find the truth. I'm looking for a deeper understanding between the cultures. And then to move on with a solution.

Many of the problems faced by young families today stem from their isolation -- their dissimilarity -- from their parents' generation. That's my point.

2Vermont · « **Reply #53 on:** January 23, 2015, 04:24:46 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: 2Vermont

But, again, the graph you posted earlier showed that the average American woman had 3.5 children in 1950. This was before the Baby Boomer generation was even old enough to have children. Based on the comments in this thread you would think that the number of children in 1950 were way higher and then the Baby Boomers ruined everything with substantially smaller families. But the numbers don't prove this out.

I looked that up as well, and I had the same question.

I think the answer is: the Catholics at least kept a more "normal" family size up until the Baby Boomer generation.

Hey, look. I'm not trying to crucify you or any other Baby Boomer. If you find a way to exonerate yourself and all your friends, great. But I'm not looking to judge or condemn in the first place.

I'm looking to get to the bottom of things. I'm looking to figure things out; to find the truth. I'm looking for a deeper understanding between the cultures. And then to move on with a solution.

Many of the problems faced by young families today stem from their isolation -- their dissimilarity -- from their parents' generation. That's my point.

The thing is I'm not looking to exonerate myself nor my friends. It is you who keeps making this personal for me. I'm not a Baby Boomer nor are my friends. I'm a Gen X'er (and I'm sure that there are people out there who have a certain negative view of Generation X as well). My friends are also Gen X except for one friend who is a Baby Boomer, but she is single and never married. And even if there are other folks I know that are BB, I just don't focus on their generation. I focus on them as individuals.

I'm also looking for the truth. I just can't seem to buy into what you're saying. I will admit that I don't think this affects me personally like it does you, so my interest isn't nearly as great as your own interest. Perhaps it is yourself who is more attached to this emotionally than I.

Having said that, if this is now solely about CATHOLIC families, then it certainly wouldn't be fair to call out a whole generation, would it? I would be more inclined to believe this about Catholic families as a whole, but I would still want to see numbers.

I am of the mind that even if this is true about Catholic families, it's the past. These Catholic families made mistakes and some of them are in our chapels. There will always be people we can not relate to because we did things differently. Heck, I'm a convert who has no children. Do you think it's easy for me to relate to most of you when it comes to having ANY children? I just accept that and get to know them for who they are and where they are in their current state. Regardless of past life circuмstances, choices, etc we are now all supposedly on the same page. If we're all on the same page with the Catholic Faith, that is where our focus should be.

Traditional Guy 20 · « **Reply #54 on:** January 23, 2015, 06:50:18 AM »

Quote from: Marlelar

Ordinary people who lived through it did not feel that way, that's the propaganda you get from modern media. It was a small cadre of agitators who, like the rudder of a ship, steered the media in that direction. Ordinary people questioned the morality and validity of the war, which is something that needs to be done about any war, but they never said the North Vietnamese were heroes.

Marsha

Um pardon me but by the time of 1968 the anti-war demonstrations suddenly started to march with Vietcong flags, flags of the same people who were killing American soldiers. Look I think Vietnam was obviously a war started over the lie called the Gulf of Tonkin that LBJ used to get us into the war but there is a big difference between disagreeing with Vietnam because it was unwise and misguided and calling it a dirty, immoral war and to celebrate with the NVA like "Commie Jane" Fonda.

The counter-culture at that time period was a child of the cultural Marxism of Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, and Herbert Marcuse.