劳伦斯•斯通的《英国的家庭、性与婚姻 1500—1800》一书是研究16至18世纪英国社会史的重要著作。在书中，斯通“尝试图绘、记录、分析、解释从1500年到1800年大约三百年期间英国的世界观和价值体系上的巨大变化” 。对于近代早期的家庭变迁，社会学家、历史学家建构了一系列的现代化理论。社会学家耐斯比提出在1530年至1660年中，社群意识、威权意识、扈从意识、社会稳定、神的概念这五种社会价值逐渐崩溃，对自主性和独立性的追求导致了传统价值的断裂，新家庭就在这种断裂中产生。恩格斯认为新家庭类型的发展是工业资本主义的产物，劳资关系的自由契约体系预设了婚姻关系的自由契约体系，工业化带来了婚姻的平等。托克维尔认为家庭变迁的关键是民主精神，民主精神经新教培养而后由自治权的增强而得到保障，最后被政治习惯和宗教见解注入家庭圈……展开全文
原生家庭
!belovedsmother“父母无恩，老贼有罪”。父母不对子女享有天然的不可更改的“养育之恩”。历史已经做出了决定，非自卫的故意杀人都是犯罪，无论以何种方式。生而不养就等于杀了这个婴儿，是犯罪。生育者没有选择不养的权利，养育是责任，而非恩情。但至今那些自称最爱他们的子女的那些父母，却拿着已经不存在的养育之恩道德绑架他们的子女，打压他们子女的自由意志，妄图随意捏造子女的人生。这种亲人无亲近可言，他们是老而不死的贼，是毒亲。
如想加入社区参与讨论，请参考 lemmy 教程：https://exploding-heads.com/post/61705
还可以加入社区的官方 xmpp 聊天室：
JID: mybelovedsmother@rooms.dismail.de
Refering to https://allthetropes.org/wiki/My_Beloved_Smother , the parents couldn’t enjoy natural and unchangeable “kindness-to-repay of fostering” toward their children as traditional Chinese morality suggests. The history has judged that non-self-defensive murder is a crime, no matter how, so giving birth to a child without fostering them is not different than killing them, which is a crime. Those who have children do not have the right not to foster them. Fostering is an obligation, not a kindness-to-repay. However, many parents self-praised to love their children with all their heart are hijacking morality with the nonexistent “kindness-to-repay of fostering” to condemn their children, beating down their children’s free will, vainly attempting to fabricate their children’s life. Such parents are not parental. They are moribund harmful old scoundrels. They are “beloved smothers”.
Read the lemmy tutorial https://exploding-heads.com/post/61705 for how to join us.
You can also join the official chatroom of the community on XMPP:
JID: mybelovedsmother@rooms.dismail.de
- 0 users online
- 1 user / day
- 1 user / week
- 1 user / month
- 1 user / 6 months
- 39 subscribers
- 58 Posts
- 19 Comments
- Modlog
- mods:
- @Frews0