Family, Community --> Society "The Polish Way"

If I write it from my own perspective, it would become my own interpretation of it. Although I do wish to contribute in this very important part of human and national life, still, I feel that everyone must give their own insight, as to what they have noticed - felt or lived on this context in Poland!

So, in my way of seeing it, the role or man and woman are different naturally and scientifically aswell - however their reason, respect, rights and importance are definitely equal in all respects.

Can any culture or society, in today's world, remain significantly and predominantly away/different in a significant manner from the other? It is really possible in this increasingly globalized Global Village where the margins separating one from other is increasingly fading away?

I for one think that it is not so simple to describe ones culture anymore. However, to stick to Poland would be recommended for this topic. Even though you might bring on the modern situation of the Polish family, community and thus the society. It does not need to be traditional version of it. Because the "current" is what really does count - while the rest becomes only for entertainment ...

Where are we in this context? ... Where are we heading? ... What would be the perfect thing to do to head in the right direction?

So what do you think?

It is just such an individual topic, no one family is the same. Though in opinion, even though i believe that most families will remain quite 'traditional', I would like to believe that Polish society will become more accommodating for less conventional families. I hope that this will happen between the next 10-15 years.

Yes its not. But the level of cohesion is something that has similarities. Not to mention the hierarchy, the decision making process, the roles or each parent ... the unity of the family. The beliefs ... the system in which a family operates and the role of the characters present in the family.

Such criteria decide the structure and nature of the family, its success factors ... and thus shapes the community, which in turn defines that particular society.


What do you mean by that? ... and do you think of its "traditionality" as an imagination or have you really got any clue to say that it is traditional?

Haguey - you might be right if Tusk gets his way.

I hope you're wrong in certain respects. Not that for any ostracising in any way - the girl across the road from me is an unmarried mother but - and very importantly - she is living at home with her parents and siblings; I have a homosexual friend who I hope will be able to enter into a civil union sometime - tax/inheritance issues.

BUT if we successfully destroy the family unit we're heading for social disaster - as Britain has so eloquently shown us.

Children who do not grow up in a two-parent family are 75 per cent more likely to fail at school, 70 per cent more likely to be a drug addict, 50 per cent more likely to become an alcoholic and 35 per cent more likely to sink into welfare dependency.

Now consider this: the data suggest that scarcely one in 12 married couples splits up by their child’s fifth birthday, while half of all parents who are cohabiting do so.

Encouraging alternative family structures breeds misery. The British intellectual elite should be ashamed of themselves into duping the gullible.

Some materials of interest:


Article: nytimes.com/2010/12/06/op...that.html?_r=1

I think there is a very great issue of mismanagement of functions within the family, and global consumerism playing its part to distort the fabric of families further to create more consumption and aggravate the problem further.

So let's see. In this modern world the first thing we think when thinking of relationships is either 'sex' (if we are thirsty to find a place among the current world which focuses entirely on that somehow) or 'life time of reliable companion' (which is my way of thinking, actually beyond the life! ... but then just to make it simple here).

If we talk about the latter (you guyz can bring about the former too, if you wish to elaborate on that), then its not really something easy. Or maybe its just us who have made this so complicated. So how does a reliable marriage work with two parties becoming one in its full meaning?

The man and wife have equal rights in a marriage, but will it be safe to say that their roles in society, relationship and towards the household happens to be different.

Ofcourse the women have the right to be a bread winner. But after she married a man who can provide the "bread" and "shelter" aswell as the basic needs (such as childcare, healthcare etc) is it really morally or technically correct for her to go out and earn an income for herself too? Or maybe my question should rather be, "is it technically correct?". Does this help in the bringing up of the child, or the economics of the home?

Oh no I am not anti-female work. I do agree that in certain situations, and when the household really needs an extra income to maintain atleast the basic functioning level (which is not the "high living standards" of a materialistic yet self-assessed-spiritualistic-in-a-convenient-way couple) of the family. But beyond that, if she really keeps the field before the home - then what really happens to our foundations - the youth of the next generation? YOU GUYZ REALLY THINK that day care or letting teens "just be" is the wisest of all actions a family should take? Not to mention the example created by the parents (and we know what's been going on in the west since examples after examples - gradually getting bolder - being set by what used to be families).

Now for men ... is it right for them to think that they are doing anything more special by earning those bank notes by which they can buy stuff? Isn't it supposed to be a partnership where one is supposed to manage and the other supply? Even biologically one supplies and the other manages !

Lodz

I don't agree with you. I don't have any problems with women working as a norm, but it so happens in my family that my wife can work part-time. When she worked full-time it caused problems - no grandparents available to babysit small children - and the family suffered.

What I don't understand is "girls' night out", "lads' night out", separate bank accounts, me and you mentality ... or even worse 'marriage = social death so don't do it until you're 30'.

By delaying marriage and kids, society is effectively saying that grandparents are worthless (as on average they're going to be dead or near death by the time the first grandkid appears). What a sad society.

There is a saying here. Bread is in the mouth of lion. Would you prefer the woman to take it or yourself?

I'd love her to earn more than me - and had no problem when she was the money-earner and I was studying.

Cats don't like bread - at least mine didn't. Cheese, yes.

I'm not saying that women shouldn't work in industries, or even lead them. They can ofcourse, if the household really needs another income, she is the one to stand up (to keep the family functioning). If she is a single mother, ofcourse... all I am saying is about THE BASIC PRIORITIZATION OR ROLES ... what you keep before what! ... in this way, family and values must come before income generation (whose role is to keep the family at a functioning level, and not just raise the standard of living at any cost, even if it costs the basic role or values of a family as a unit).

Tell me why she needs to do a part time job when she can in that time manage the micro economic activities of the household? The child? Also, play a very important role in the broader society in many activities which are always missing among us.

Woman are the first educator of tomorrow's generation. Grand parents can be helpful, but they cannot take the place of parents. They've done their part with you, now its your business with your children.

To put better values in the hearts of children starts from their birth, with both the parents being effective in their roles (which also evolve with time), and take care of the bringing up with close supervision till they are 18 or sometimes 20 even. Day care or elderly grandparents cannot do what PARENTS can do. I know it ... thats why I am saying this.


Complete agreed. But this is the consumerist media playing its role.

Some really mean and greedy forces at work around the world try to play many cards to feed their same old greed (e.g. consumerism). By trying to frame that "Homemaking or family management ... or the management of the micro economy at the foundation of culture and society" is not actually a work. In this way they can use this entity (the female) for their purpose of increased greed and consumerism. By indoctrinating them with the idea that income is the only achievement of freedom, and through this what can they do better? ... OFCOURSE... consume :). Consumer more, keep purchasing. Inflate the bank accounts of the ever expanding Corporation, and eventually, being intoxicated (addicted) to this ever increasing and never ending lust for more - if necessary - even sell you last portion of the VALUE framework.

Ever seen a badly addicted boy, in drug? ... Even if he/she had great values once (ofcourse which he couldn't hold, perhaps due to lack of many variable which if I discuss will expand our discussion unreasonably), they finally succumb and resort to many wrong doing for the drug. This is the fate of anyone so badly addicted, and over-emphasis of money and career (a bad sense of prioritization of the elements of life) can also cause equal or worse forms of addiction. Almost in a similar way as Judas kissed Jesus (and Judas was a great follower) for the sake of money and other intangible facilities of material value to him (this ofcourse is a very epic and extreme example due to various other variables - however, I feel, still relevant).

Male and Female are both equal, non-uniform, wonderful creation of God. Both have similar as well as specific spiritual, material and mental attributes. We both complete each other in all the dimensions of life, and then this union brings a miracle :). I think, this miracle (child) is the trust of God, also the sign of His love for mankind.

Now, as we unite ... it is only in our favor, and the favor of everything good/Godly ... to manage family, society and values in the best way possible. For that, we need earnings aswell ... but the other elements of life cannot go down the drain. While the highest priority can never be mistaken ... which is so obvious ... FAMILY, SOCIETY - and thus the evolution of Civilization in the Right direction.


I don't believe in your saying. Sorry.

Infact, the term "bread winner" is also very stupid term by the English I think. There is nothing extraordinary in playing the role of a supplier of finances into the micro economy of the family. The family's economy is to be managed by the wife - in consultation with the husband. She is a great and equal player in the household ... and the "money" don't make a lion or a cat out of anybody. He doesn't win the world by earning ... he just plays his role and nothing else.

I'm uncomfortable with the way you say things, but I suppose I can let most of what you say go.

However, my wife finds satisfaction in work that engages her brain - teaching English, French and Latin. She also hopes to find time to co-write a book with me and to take on more translation work when her time is freed up a bit (we need to concentrate on keeping our 16 year-old son switched on to schoolwork).

We are all free to agree and disagree. But maybe I just couldn't get you the message that I wanted to transmit. I find what you write to be in total agreement to my own opinions. I didn't find too much difference.

All I am talking about is the concept.

Perhaps, that saying was imported from Africa to here Turkey. There is no lion here.

Ok, I agree, some women may be better at managing house hold economy. Is there any tight hand woman around who will punch this?

Every woman can ... but it depends on the economy of the household. Tell me, did you really read my post completely?

If you had you wouldn't have said that. I am not against women who work for an income. There are instances when it is highly praiseworthy that they do. Single mothers, or women who want to play a role by adding to the income to a household which terribly need it to run its basic functions. If the women of the house don't step up here, who will?

But when the finances are adequate for the basic function of the family, then the management of the micro economy of the household, the bringing up on children in close supervision (along with the help of the husband) as well as playing an active role in society to build up moral and ethical awareness is a job which is VERY VERY GREAT. This job needs to be fulfilled by someone who matches all the wisdom, kindness, talent of decoration, beauty, creativity that women are endowed with in a very thorough way.

The men of the house are sick?

I am trying to read your every work, but, it is not so easy anymore for old man like me.
Btw, don't say this expression "woman of the house" to your darling. She can take the house and can make it "house of the woman" and you cry like a little kid then. There are many such guys.

Ok. So, you saying women are not working. I know they are lazy creatures who do nothing, but, word word word... while we expect them to do work work work...

Ps: It is a dark night here now. I need to go out to buy a bottle of wine now. Heck, I don't have even a woman who will do this work for me.

You are taking my words in the wrong way NomadatNet

Don't sink, enough. You are loading the boat too much with the wine. It may sink if you don't pee some.

Ps: I'd love to have a woman now who'd do belly dance work for me.

The eternal Turk.

There is an eternal Turk here. in this news video I am watching.

video.mynet.com/vifobi/Yasli-Adam-Boyle-Olume-Terkedildi/1102993/

A camera record in a cafe on a street, Bagdat Street in a rich district, of Istanbul when a natural gas explosion inside the cafe happened sometime ago. Everybodys escaping in panic. An old man with prothesis leg is unable to escape, falls down. Some people return into the cafe and run out.

TV news headtitles are somethings like that: "The moment when the humanity ended."

Lodz, how would Polish society's way be? Is it different? What about Egypt society? Or, Sudan? where the revolts there is no news anymore. or, anywhere else?

The sentence has no shape no structure. How an I supposed to understand what you are trying to say. Tell me, are you drunk?

Polish society is literally disintegrating. Family as a unit is failing ... future is not too bright. I never like to say it, as you might've noticed throughout the forums. But just, I felt I mention this truth at least once.

This was said even in old Greek/Hellen times, when there was liberalizm in relations, maybe, even more than today. What family are you talking about? If you ask king Bush and prince Bush, whole USA is their family. Overloaded Boats always sink.

Poles are in less critical stiuation. Losing their many top people didn't affect them much. On the other hand, even a few punches of university youngs to the car of Britain prince was a big news. Why? Cause there was his love in the car? Before Poles, there are other societies who need to worry more about themselves.

Ps: I posted that video here for that. Even if people watch somethings many times, they can not learn somethings.

We are all heading u pizdu lepu materinu Lodz :))

To hold hands.

In the same sort of way you have described it above.

moved from:


That is a most interstign and IMO fiarly accurate assessment. I have you pegged as a liberal/leftist/libertine progressive, but your sober appraisal suggests you are also a realist. That is quite unlike most of PF's progresesives who fail to see that shifting tides. Jon for example openly denies that the pendulum is swinging in a rightist direction.

That is only normal. Ruling elites do change every so often. The roundtable elite have ruled for most of the past quarter-century which is an exceptionally long time. The ferocity with which they badmouth and try to derail the current govt simply proves that thay cannot come to grips with reality.

I think however that you may be overstating the ulterior-motive mentality -- that everyone is only in it for jobs and perks. Realism need not mean cynicism. There are many idealistic conservatives who truly believe in God, family and country not because there's something in it for them.

I support what works. PO worked pretty well for a time but it's day is probably over. Obsessing about 1992 and cliques that never existed don't work.


The pendulum isn't swinging back to God, family and country, that's as over as progressivism. Again, this is something new that has room for both more traditional liberal/progressives and conservatives but cannot be monopolized by either.

Milo Yiannopoulos and Paul Joseph Watson are good examples of different.... poles in the emerging movement (both are Brits). The flamboyant gay guy with a thing for black men defends Christianity and describes himself as catholic while PJW is mostly kind of neutral about religion (though very much against the current european push in favor of Islam into the public sphere).

Not in the West, but in Poland it definitely is. 75% youth participation in national pilgrimages is the norm in Poland. Haven't got comparative stats but I'd wager that other than Poland not many other countries would place the family at the top of one's priorities. The "sex sells" pansexualism that began infecting the West in the 1960s has made inroads into Poland, but considerably smaller ones than elsewhere. Dunno where you're based, but any perceptive person living in Poland can see that whether or not they personally support it.

A few years ago few kids would think of wearing a PW (Polska Walcząca) T-shirt or other patrioic gadget. Now they're growing in popularity. The PO scamster & greed climate ideally correpsonded to the MTV mentality of instant of gratification and glamourisng the outrageous. That is no longer the

prevailing Zeitgeist.

You know what happens on those pilgramages don't you? The reputation is walk and pray by day, party hardy at night.... (just google pielgrzymka i seks and get back with what you find).


First, that's incorrect use of the word "gadget" in English. Second, yes, selected parts of the communist or pre-communist past are growing in popularity. Especially those parts dealing with heroism (and/or struggle against a government - like the wyklęci). That armed rebellion against the government is a trending idea (even symbolically) should worry some politicians but Polish politicians are no more aware of what's going on than western ones.

You know what has no traction whatsoever with Polish youth? Smolensk and Magdalena. Only old fossils like you care about those.

Have you ever been on one? There's all kinds of stuff on the net especially in the sensationalist, titillating and outrageous departments.
I agree that Smopensk does not grab the young, but the consequences of Magdalenka certainly affect their opportunities. Magdalenka fossilised the KOR/Commie monopoly which with a few short breaks (1992; 2005-2007)

have undeservedly reaped excessive benefits from transformation at the expense of the majority of Poles.
The young may not know much about Magdalenka, because the post-commie powers that be tried to sweep it under the carpet. But as PiS develop one good change after another, the full truth about what actually happened in Poland will come out.

I had hoped you had been cured of name-calling. I will not reciprtocate with something like "creeps like you...", because I truly cherish open but civil discussion about issues. I can sling mud with the best of 'em, but why bother?!

>>75% youth participation in national pilgrimages is the norm in Poland.

It really, really isn't. Can you support that data somehow? WYD was massive, but even this had much lower numbers. And it was not only christianity that brought people together, but also cultural interest.

Based on my perception youth participation in pilgrimages is in single digits. Unless you mean that in any given pilgramage 75% of people are youths, in that case you might be right. But this doesn't mean anything.

I think I saw it in one of the newspapers or some Internet news site, but I go through so much copy that I'm at a loss to pin-point it.