Some Thoughts on The Extended Family


by Shariq
27th February, 2008 at 3:05 pm    

Last week, Steve Sailer and then Razib Khan had a couple of very interesting posts on the negatives of large extended families. Their arguments are essentially that having lots of relatives with whom you socialise, means that discussion is reduced to a mind-numbing, lowest common denominator i.e. family gossip, at the expense of creativity and individuality. However, I’m not convinced that their link holds up.

At a certain level they are correct. In fact, at least among men, I think that banal discussions of politics, cricket, hindi films and religion probably come before family gossip.

Like Razib i do try and seek out family members with unconventional and interesting ideas, or who have interests similar to my own. However while there may be a correlation, I don’t think that there is a causation between large extended families and dumbed down social interaction.

Instead I would suggest that it is Razib’s own interests which are quite unusual amongst all types of social groupings that leads to his frustration, rather than the fact that he happens to have an extended family. I remember Ezra Klein commenting on bloggingheads a couple of weeks ago about how he generally hated the people he grew up with in Orange County and I doubt he interacted with a lot of extended family. Similarly, responding to some of the comments in Steve’s blog, I’m struggling to believe that west asians stick out as being very materialistic in Southern California of all places, although I’m happy to be proved wrong on this.

Admittedly, from what I know Orange County is extremely wealthy, but I suspect that the average white, middle/working class man spends, most of his time watching, discussing, or watching people discuss sports. My guess is that people who end up interacting a lot with their family have a lot in common with them, especially in the UK/America where although there may be some pressure to interact with family, its not so much that people can’t choose who they want to invite to their dinner parties.

Moving on to some positives, I didn’t really experience this but it can also be a lot of fun to grow up with cousins who are a similar age to you. Especially for people who are more introverted, it can provide great experience in learning how to socialise and interact with people from your age group in a non-school environment. Apart from this, as much as I despise going to random weddings, I pretty much always have a great time when someone closely related is getting married and there are a bunch of relatives around from all over the world who you haven’t seen in a while. On the other hand, the mandatory dinners after a wedding in which you see the same people again and again and again aren’t so great. This makes me the think that the key to enjoying your relationships with your extended family is to ensure you see them in suitable doses.

On the whole, I accept that the extended family may stifle creativity and individuality in third world, west asian countries. However they also help provide essential stability in otherwise fragile environments. This is probably something for another post, but it could be that one of the reasons people in the West think things are worse off in developing countries then they actually are is because they under-estimate the role of the larger family unit in keeping things sane.

I think that as these countries become more prosperous, people will be able to afford familial bonds becoming weaker. This is probably already happening and can be most clearly witnessed amongst the rich, for whom socialising in the right circles is far more important than keeping very close bonds with second and third cousins. Also as people are more affluent they could also probably afford for their kids to engage in more creative activities.

To finish, I want to make clear that I don’t fetishise south asian culture in anyway and I do think that there are cultural mores which need to evolve. However, I strongly doubt that the extended family is the root of the problems which Steve and Razib have identified.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Culture,South Asia






40 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. sonia — on 27th February, 2008 at 3:54 pm  

    what do we mean by ‘extended family’? everyone has ‘extended’ family – by default, do you mean keepin in touch with them regularly, living in the same house (indian subcontinent style) or -like – down the same street or something? or just hanging out/keeping in touch with the ‘extended’ family members? i.e. having lots of ‘family reunions’ every sunday/every second week or something?

    what are we actually talking about?

    i think the extended family setup – in the ‘traditional’ sense means you value your family less, actually.

    in the indian subcontinent, you see so much enmity resulting from petty disputes ( so and so’s wife didn’t let so and so’s wife do x or y) have your own kitchens and many disputes – a) dont come up and b) you actually enjoy each other’s company more when you actually see them.

    also, extended family setups mean that often relatives won’t even SPEAK to each other because they ‘live’ with them, they don’t have to make ‘an effort’.

    so – solution, live close to each other, just don’t live in same house. i never had any ‘family’ near by growing up – they were in bangladesh and had to be seen ‘en masse’ so i feel i missed out. i also don’t like being in the same space with family members for too long, it tends to drive me up the wall, i like my space and escape, so i would like to have family close enough so i can drop in for tea, and then go home. i’d love that. but alas, i have to go and stay with family to see them, we have fights, then i come back, feel bad, cycle goes on. Ish!

  2. sonia — on 27th February, 2008 at 3:57 pm  

    but i know what razib is getting at.

  3. sonia — on 27th February, 2008 at 4:10 pm  

    The problems only start when other family members start sticking their nose into ones affairs

    but that’s cos they’ve given you all that money! can’t expect something for nothing. part of the reason many other people manage to not have interference from family is because of financial independence. they are very much linked.

  4. Leon — on 27th February, 2008 at 4:45 pm  

    I can’t begin to imagine how Caucasians operate without the moral and financial help of family members.

    That’s quite a comment.

  5. shariq — on 27th February, 2008 at 4:49 pm  

    interesting comments sonia. i’m defining extended family in the same way that razib did i.e spending considerable amounts of time with them, which he argues leads to a dumbing down effect.

    i can see the disadvantages you talk about about people not talking to each other and so on, but i think that people living in those circumstances do that because they can’t afford otherwise.

    also, a lot of people probably don’t like the social company their parents keep whether or not they are family.

    finally, i agree completely with your assessment of how close family should be. there’s an excellent everyone loves raymond episode on this, in which ray draws concentric circles around his parents home to figure out where he and debra should live after they are married.

  6. Sunny — on 27th February, 2008 at 5:17 pm  

    On the whole, I accept that the extended family may stifle creativity and individuality in third world, west asian countries.

    I think that too. I can’t stand the closed environment that many close Asian families foster, where people know your business and everybody wants to interfere.

    I much prefer a hands-off approach. Close and extended family are great, but at arms length. In which case, I think having an extended family in a city is the best solution, because they’re around whern you need them but it doesn’t feel like you’re living in a village (Leicester, Birmingham!).

  7. shariq — on 27th February, 2008 at 5:23 pm  

    Sunny, a couple of points on your comment. I don’t think that the close extended family is the cause of things which are bad in south asia. its because things are bad, that south asia has a greater emphasis on the extended family.

    Secondly, I still think my points about asian people in the west choosing to spend more time with their families, rather than being forced into it still stands up.

  8. Arif — on 27th February, 2008 at 6:04 pm  

    For me the most important issue is the dynamics of any particular extended family. They are as different as in nuclear families – some can be abusive, some neglectful, some supportive, some inclusive, etc etc.

    “Escape” from bad dynamics can be easier because you are from an extended family and therefore can find at least one ally or similar spirit. Or it can be more difficult because there are more people/entanglements to leave behind.

    What I think shariq may be getting at is the balance of individual relationships inside and outside the family – eg the more links you have outside, the easier to escape completely, the more your awareness of other ways of living your own life. I don’t think extended families necessarily have to be inwardly focussed, but some may regulate members to avoid external contact (as may some nuclear families) as one of the possible internal dynamics. I can see the link there with stultifying the imagination.

    But otherwise, extended families can also offer many other possiblities for close relationships and interpersonal politics to launch a thousand novels and theories of human science. Especially as they have the potential for developing subcultures relatively insulated from “mass society”. Their most obvious possible benefit is making lots of close relationships easy, but the fact that these relationships are less regulated or mediated by mass media models is more interesting – letting us explore other sides of our humanity. But they can be nasty sides as well as nice.

  9. Bartholomew — on 27th February, 2008 at 6:36 pm  

    Happiness is having a large loving family in another city.

    - George Burns

  10. Sid — on 27th February, 2008 at 6:47 pm  

    Unhappiness is having a large extended family in your house.

    -Sid

  11. sonia — on 27th February, 2008 at 7:49 pm  

    heh sid! yeah i agree Sunny. dropping in for nice meals and steaming cups of tea, then legging it :-)

    shariq, yes the ‘extended family’ has effectively been the dominant mode of social organisation in -certainly the subcontinent – and historically – in societies which did not have laws/etc. other forms of collectives/social organisation. Which is why – similar comparisons to the ‘welfare’ state can be made, – effectively in the absence of a welfare state, family is/was the only thing people had. which complicated the familial relationship, and involved a significant ‘regulatory’ role for the ‘family’ and made the ‘authoritarian’ angle quite significant. the economics also becomes significant. which makes it more like the ‘firm’ and of course it was the historical precedent of the firm. hence the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ would be all rolled up together. and in the same way one doesn’t always have a pleasant relationship with the boss, or co-workers, so it was with the traditional extended family.

    but don’t underestimate how the ‘extended’ family thing literally seems to keep itself going – in situations where people can afford to live on their own – e.g. well-off people in London or something, I think this goes back to the issue of a ‘son’s duty’ to look after his parents. some incredibly stubborn parents make it about ‘familial responsibility’ and keeping up the old ways, and force their sons – even if they own more houses even just down the street – which they will rent out! – to still live with them and bring ‘bahu’ into the house, just to keep it all like back in the day, and because there seems to be some perception ( and competition amongst the aunties) that keeping your son at home is a good thing and a sign of how much he loves you and looks after you, and what a good obedient daughter in law you have chosen.

    there are many poor lads in that situation, here in the UK, its terrible. reminds me of the pink floyd song.

    of course, its all about achieving the balance. but if you have unreasonable parents who emotionally blackmail you, it can be very difficult.

  12. sonia — on 27th February, 2008 at 7:55 pm  

    also, to introduce the darker note, ( yes i had to!) a little anecdote:

    when i visit my parents in dhaka, my mother loves to read the news and tell us all what gory murders/etc. happened that day with all the gruesome details( and in bangladesh, you can imagine what that involved) – everyone getting ‘slaughtered’ in their houses in the middle of the night etc. etc.

    she would always then say, see, what a dangerous place this is, you girls shouldn’t wander around on your own and should stay in the house blah blah. and my niece would invariably take the newspaper and point out, that in 9/10 cases, these had not been random psychopaths attacking young women out on the streets, but 2nd cousins/uncles/distant rellies etc. settling their disputes (usually financial/inheritance related but other squabbles too) in what appears to be the good-old fashioned way. Now there’s something to put in our pipes and smoke..

    this is why i think some economic independence and distance is very healthy for all!

  13. thara — on 27th February, 2008 at 8:18 pm  

    I don’t like how english people (not all) are frigid and reserved. They dont socialise like us. They leave old people to die in their house and rot for weeks before discovery. Remember all you people will get old one day.

    I like extended families because of cameraderie with so many other young people from my age. I can live and eat in three different houses in any given week. There is freedom to that as well. We can help each other because someone knows someone who can help like get a kitchen done up for less or something. but you do lose something if you have to share your room with a sister or your older bros are always on your back. Extended famili is one reason asian guys are so dependent on their sisters, mothers and wives heh

  14. thara — on 27th February, 2008 at 8:24 pm  

    Sonia. You a single Bengali women living alone in a foreign country? How did you get your family to agree to that? That aint Bengali since most rents think if they gives their daughter that much freedom she will get up to no good. People will talk. Then she wont be considered a good bride and all that rah rah stuff.

  15. Jai — on 27th February, 2008 at 10:23 pm  

    Sonia is married, I believe.

  16. razib — on 28th February, 2008 at 2:24 am  

    However, I strongly doubt that the extended family is the root of the problems which Steve and Razib have identified.

    sure, i agree with that. i don’t think the extended family is the-root-of-all-evil. in a third world society where there aren’t many systems to dampen economic “shocks” the extended family is necessary. it’s pretty much the norm in human history to depend on relations.

    there are two things i would say though.

    1) it might be a stifling stationary state. there is some thinking that the west is peculiar in part because of the demographic chaos after the black death, when there was more value to labor because of the population decline. that might have pushed european societies in a different direction through historically contingent processes. in other words, these clannish societies constrain themselves to remaining the way they are because

    a) without broader non-familial civil society institutions which push the economies of scale can’t flourish (bureaucracy, corporations, etc.)

    b) without those institutions as an alternative to familialism then it is necessary to reject non-familialism because you need fallback positions

    2) familialism is NOT necessary in a modern western nation where there is the welfare state. familialism can slowly erode away civil society too if too many people just opt-out of the system so that spillover effects no longer occur from prosocial behavior which fosters civil society.

    the main exception i see to #2 are family businesses. but familialism is common among some immigrant groups where they want their offspring to become professionals, where integration into broader society is probably the best bet in terms of long term success.

  17. razib — on 28th February, 2008 at 2:35 am  

    also, on me being strange. that’s probably true. i would submit that perhaps societies which are “familial” are just as happy as societies which are “non-familial” in terms of total summed satisfaction. but there is a difference in distribution, i would bet in non-familial societies the abnormal non-stupid is more likely to flourish to a far greater extent. now, granted, there are far fewer abnormal non-stupids than normal stupids in any society, but the familialist societies are really geared toward maintaining tard-satisfaction IMO. conformity to majority norms means by definition conformity to tardishness. in a non-familial society the normal stupids might have slightly less satisfaction because they have fewer fellow tards to talk with and go about their main activities of eating, breeding, gossiping and excreting, but it will be a marginal difference for them since they are the vast majority in any society anyway. they can always find someone “interesting” to interact with.

    all that being, the non-tard segment is important in the production of innovation and economic growth on a macroscale. only a small proportion of the population contributes to this, and i suspect that extended family societies don’t encourage the extension of these individuals into areas where they might make an impact. familial societies are good at perfecting and perpetuating pededstrianism. not that there’s anything wrong with that.

  18. People Power Granny — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:16 am  

    We need to be in solidarity with those strangers who suffer among us. What do you do and what would you like to do, or do you just don’t even want to think of it? Participate in my poll at peoplepowergranny.blogspot.com, and see how I would like to react myself.

  19. Desi Italiana — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:27 am  

    “how he generally hated the people he grew up with in Orange County and I doubt he interacted with a lot of extended family. Similarly, responding to some of the comments in Steve’s blog, I’m struggling to believe that west asians stick out as being very materialistic in Southern California of all places, although I’m happy to be proved wrong on this.”

    It’s not only West Asians who are incredibly materialistic in OC, it’s everyone. Most people in OC are incredibly wealthy, esp. the folks in Southern Orange County.

    What there is a difference is in how that consumption is expressed; this is usually seen in what kinds of clothes are worn as social status indicators. Many rich Asians are yuppy like their white counterparts.

    “Admittedly, from what I know Orange County is extremely wealthy, but I suspect that the average white, middle/working class man spends, most of his time watching, discussing, or watching people discuss sports”

    Again, that’s everyone who has money- not just the white folks.

  20. Desi Italiana — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:30 am  

    Desi families are overrated, IMO. I’ve heard tons of Desis go on and on ad-nauseum about how much Desis take care of their own in comparison to white folks. This is absolute baqwaas. That are Desi families which don’t give a shit about their familial ties, and there are also white families that take care of their kids even past marriage, esp. the rich ones.

  21. Desi Italiana — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:31 am  

    Close knit families are a huge deal in Italy, Spain, Mexico, Arab countries, etc. It is not true that Desis are the only ones.

  22. Desi Italiana — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:34 am  

    “I remember Ezra Klein commenting on bloggingheads a couple of weeks ago about how he generally hated the people he grew up with in Orange County”

    I can say that w/r/t the white folks I grew up with. I’m not singling out the white kids because I’m being racist; but when I was growing up, racism from whites was a major issue many of us non-white kids had to deal with, even to the point of hate crimes and violence, so people from my generation have been somewhat scarred.

  23. Desi Italiana — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:38 am  

    Privacy is a concept that is sort of non-existent when it comes to close knit extended families (and as I mentioned, this is not an exclusively Desi thing). Everyone is up in your business, and more than half the problems come from folks interfering in your shit. Nosiness is something I really hate, as well as active involvement in things that don’t concern you.

    I remember when my ex-fiance’s mother, who’s Sicilian, got really disturbed when I closed myself into a room because I needed a break from everyone for at least 10 minutes. “What’s wrong, DI? Are you feeling depressed? Come, come, I’ll make you coffee and you can tell me all about it.” Grrr…. I mean, she was being incredibly nice, but yo.

  24. razib — on 28th February, 2008 at 4:47 am  

    Close knit families are a huge deal in Italy, Spain, Mexico, Arab countries, etc. It is not true that Desis are the only ones.

    my fiance has lived in italy for 2 years. we meet her italian friends now. italians are grown-up babies, especially the men. the tendencies we’re talking about are not desi vs. white, they’re “modern northwest european” vs. everyone else. i think the “modern northwest european” modality is going to spread though….

    (some of the reasons that people are familial in bangladesh are prosaic, the country is f-king small!!! you move 50 miles away, and you can still keep in touch)

  25. Ravi Naik — on 28th February, 2008 at 8:41 am  

    “my fiance has lived in italy for 2 years. we meet her italian friends now. italians are grown-up babies, especially the men. the tendencies we’re talking about are not desi vs. white, they’re “modern northwest european” vs. everyone else. i think the “modern northwest european” modality is going to spread though….”

    Different degrees though. It is not just a question of close knit families: Indian “immediate” families are larger than southern Europeans, as they include cousins, second-cousins, in-laws and their families.

    Personally, I think it is not healthy to be dependent on your family when you reach adulthood, and let them decide on your life. However, my perception of Northern European families is that it is somewhat cold and distant… surely there must be a balance.

  26. Sofia — on 28th February, 2008 at 10:23 am  

    I think it is a balance…extended families can be healthy when it comes to support mechanisms, however they can also be the source of great stress/depression etc. Especially mother in laws!!!
    Also, if the extended family includes women who don’t work out of their own environment, then this is where the idle gossip comes in…they don’t have much else to do but talk about other people as their lives are so boring. I sometimes am at a loss to speak to women like this as I have nothing in common with them and they aren’t prepared to think out of their narrow experiences. All they seem to care about it what they need to feed their “ug” husbands. I know this is totally anecdotal and that it may not be the norm, but this has been my own individual experience.

  27. A councillor writes — on 28th February, 2008 at 10:50 am  

    You’d be surprised at how close knit white extended families can be on “council” estates. Including cousins, in-laws and even just close neighbours of long standing. This is weakening these days, partly due to cultural changes (mainly in entertainment etc.), partly due to housing policy.

    Sofia’s very, very right about the gossip though, get chatting to an estate matriarch of any ethnicity and you’ll be there for hours.

  28. bananabrain — on 28th February, 2008 at 11:20 am  

    speaking as someone who’s just spent a week on holiday with a large part of the extended family, i’d tend to agree with a lot of this. my family’s also a matriarchy – but a triumvirate, in this case. i guess i’d agree with the whole “round the corner but not in the house” rule – i moved specifically to be near friends and family particularly and am now fortunately 2-10 mins on foot from three sets of cousins and my auntie/uncle, as well as 40 mins from my sister & kids. one thing about being an observant jew is that you have to live within reasonable walking distance of people in order to see them on the sabbath, let alone drop in unannounced as we can do.

    i attribute the success of our interfamily dynamic to the “short but frequent” strategy – we’ve been in the habit of family visiting on late saturday afternoons since childhood and the same goes for overseas relations, they’re always welcome for short visits and vice-versa. it’s when you don’t see people very often that you feel you have to get maximum value out of it – and it’s when you see them too much that you squander your time on minutiae and gossip.

    i also think it’s much better to borrow money from family providing that trust is maintained and nobody takes the piss – and we’re not talking a lot of money here either or long-term. the larger the amount, the more often in my experience it goes horribly wrong. my parents paid the deposit on my first flat, but i made dam’sure i paid them back with interest when i moved and even given trust, i felt they got a bit jumpy around the time of the sale, because they just had to trust that i wouldn’t stiff them. sure, it’s perhaps not a profit-maximising arrangement, but my mum thinks it’s better to borrow from family than to pay interest to a financial services company. i guess the more financially interdependent you are the more beholden you are to your “stakeholders”. mrs bb has had a awful time with her family who are well-off and terribly paranoid and controlling; in fact, it’s the same story all over, the more money, the worse the arguments and the more likely to end up spending money on lawyers, which is no help to anyone at all.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  29. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:04 pm  

    i think if you’re borrowing money that’s one thing. what bugs me about the traditional extended family is it is more often actually’give me’. which is a weird attitude. I’m still trying to give my parents something back towards paying for my unfortunately expensive education, and i don’t technically have to do that, and i can only afford a small bit of the overall cost, but its very important to me.

    heh sofia totally hear you! and desi..i know what exactly what you mean..i get really uptight about my privacy the more it gets threatened. perhaps this is why i learned to lock myself into bathrooms so much around family – its the only place you can actually get some privacy!

    good points razib. i think if you’re a bit ‘odd’/differnet in some ways, the super-conformity aspects of familial societies/families can feel like prison. anything a bit out of the ordinary is commented on – can’t escape the scrutiny. ‘oh my god! everyone will think you’re a pagal!’. this is of course much worse when folks live in ‘desh’ as everyone is so bloody appearance oriented and worrying about what the joneses will think. i really hate that, i can’t ever go home without people scrutinising my attire and saying ‘YOU CANT go out like that, people will say YOU’RE Mad’..and its something minor as like slightly ripped chappals or not combing your hair or something. and god help you if you express socialistic views or something, or even worse – a lack of patriotism. What you don’t love your country? no i don’t love ‘countries’. Pagal! Bad person! after a while you keep things to yourself, unless you enjoy courting more controversy, or you can’t help yourself. ( like me) of course the worst is religion, which really makes me itch, its this whole ‘WE are …’. Are ‘we’? Speak for yourself! Of course some families are better at these sorts of things than others. i find my extended family very very frustrating because of our background and what seems to me to be inbuilt imperialism, or certainly a widely held perception that people can carry on being imperialist. try to challenge that and you get accused to not honouring your family and all that. certainly its had a lot to do with influencing my thinking and current outlook. i guess we are all shaped by our families aren’t we..

  30. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:04 pm  

    good points bananabrain

  31. Raul — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:23 pm  

    Exceptions aside, more people in the family construct means more judging and more pressure to confirm. This can be especially limiting for girls in their growing years. Nuclear families are more adaptable and open to change.

    Guys seem to have all the fun, whatever the religion, culture or context. Nothing much to limit our freedom to do as we please.

    Arif’s comments @8 are particularly illuminative. Very accurate and perceptive.

  32. Raul — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:25 pm  

    Oops, that should be conform in line 2.

  33. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:25 pm  

    Extended famili is one reason asian guys are so dependent on their sisters, mothers and wives heh

    yeah ain’t that the truth thara old buddy.

    Sonia. You a single Bengali women living alone in a foreign country? How did you get your family to agree to that? That aint Bengali since most rents think if they gives their daughter that much freedom she will get up to no good. People will talk. Then she wont be considered a good bride and all that rah rah stuff.

    that provided me with a good deal of amusement, thanks thara, i haven’t had such a good laugh in ages. Yes, me poor dear, that’s a very good analysis that of vat a lot of people would people say! ( and yes, as jai points out, i am indeed married) however i haven’t always been, and indeed was a single young bengali girl who has lived without momma and poppa since she was 17, and a different country too! shock horror indeed. (the joys of university eh? i never understood why more people don’t go somewhere else other than home town to study) obviously my poor mummy daddy always knew i was never going to be considered a ‘good bride’ anyway.. and that i’d prob. have to find my own husband anyway…(plus if anyone was ever going to get up to no good the best place for that is dhaka, and id already had my fill of that when i was 14, as my poor parents already knew, and probably figured good ol’ blighty could be hardly any more corrupting, and they were right :-) }

    21. yep..but don’t forget the irish desi! :-)

  34. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:27 pm  

    yeah good points Raul and yes Arif as usual was subtle and as you say, perceptive.

  35. Ravi Naik — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:40 pm  

    Of course, in countries where the welfare system is limited, you are bound to need the support of your extended family. Independence, of course, is the price you pay. It is an economic issue as well as cultural.

  36. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 12:51 pm  

    yep, ravi, independence is a luxury in those cases..

  37. Sofia — on 28th February, 2008 at 1:36 pm  

    Yup, men do have it easy. I can easily imagine a mother saying “my son is a drug dealer, doesn’t matter at least he looks after the family”…”my daughter is good for nothing, she’s educated and has a job and has even married a kaala”

  38. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 2:20 pm  

    exactly…
    mind you, if mummy’s boy didn’t marry HER choice of girl he’d probably get an earful too, especially if she were a ‘kaala’ or something! ‘Oh you dont want to give your mother nice looking grandchildren? oh! you dont’ care for your family at all!’..

  39. Ravi Naik — on 28th February, 2008 at 2:53 pm  

    “mind you, if mummy’s boy didn’t marry HER choice of girl he’d probably get an earful too, especially if she were a ‘kaala’ or something! ‘Oh you dont want to give your mother nice looking grandchildren? oh! you dont’ care for your family at all!”

    Heh. Do you think you will be like that when you get older, Sonia? ;)

  40. sonia — on 28th February, 2008 at 3:20 pm  

    heh ravi :-) who knows? if i did it would be funny of course they would simply retort that their daddy had married someone “kaala” so why couldn’t they?!

    but things always move on.. far more likely i might be trying to get them to have a relationship ( i know i’m not bothered if any kids i might have didnt want to get married } with a human rather than say a machine or cyborg or something. Or stay on planet earth even though it were crumbling and everyone was going to Mars. so it would probably be getting used to having your kids having relationships with Martians..

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.