Example+wiki+post

Family: “What We Really Miss About the 1950s”

While reading the passage “What We Really Miss About the 1950s” I was very surprised to find out that there were so many problems in the ‘50s that were worse then than in later years like the ‘60s or ‘70s. Problems like high divorce rates were unexpected; how could there be the “perfect” family if a husband and wife were divorced? There would no longer be one big happy family - no working dad and no stay at home mom, just two separated parents. That’s not how a “nuclear family” works! What also helped diminish the idea of the “nuclear family” was that poverty was higher in the 1950s than it is today (40). How could we have this perfect family picture in our heads when so many people were impoverished? I think of a family in the ‘50s as living white picket-fence, suburban homes, meanwhile most were struggling, I must've been wrong... However, by the ‘60s many were working their way back up to middle-class. I feel as though the “nuclear family” concept came about through media. Televisions shows and ads along with magazines tried to create the “perfect family,” but people became too obsessed with trying to imitate what they saw. Now, that’s what we remember from the ‘50s, just images from shows and movies, not what actually happened throughout the decade.

I don’t understand why it was a problem if both parents worked. People didn’t //have// to play the specific roles of “Breadwinner” or “Homemaker.” There was no rule against two working parents. Although these roles were common, there could have been the exception to the “Nuclear Family.” After all, there were the poor families and the minorities who went against the grain. This was the result of people thinking too much into becoming this picture-perfect image they saw everywhere. Families were too easily influenced. When the men came back from WWII they were an outcast in their own families; when the husband/father tried to regain his authority he was rejected. Why would the wives give up their jobs, especially if they enjoyed being able to work for the first time. Plus, if both men and women worked it would mean more money, making the family even better-off in the long run. Our society has come a long way since the ‘50s; many husbands and wives work and become successful.

“At the time, everyone knew that shows such as //Donna Reed//, //Ozzie and Harriet//, //Leave It to Beaver//, and //Father Knows Best//were not the way families really were (38).” Everyone knew, but obviously everyone still let sitcoms influence them and how to define a “normal” family. Our views of what a “normal” family is have changed from what they once were. The way families are portrayed today and the “nuclear family” are worlds apart when put side-by-side. Although we still think of the 1950s to have the “perfect family” made up of a working father, a homemaker mother, two kids, and the family dog, it’s clear that “nuclear families” are even farther from existence now than they were in the ‘50s. We aren’t made to believe that a family isn’t normal unless it had these certain aspects. What’s common now wasn’t in the ‘50s; we’ve come to except both men and women in the workplace and real problems in society like divorce. Shows on television now are the opposite of shows like //I love Lucy// or //Leave it to Beaver//. We have access to shows that portray the real-life situations we face in society everyday. Shows like //Modern Family// and //The Secret Life of the American Teenager// depict the truth when it comes to how actual families work. The quote from page 38 really helps create a picture for readers how the myth of the “nuclear family” came about. We see it on T.V. so it must be true...? But as time has passed Americans are no longer influenced to be something they aren’t. This section helped me figure out that this book is about questioning the way we think about our country... we thought of the '50s one way be it shows what really happened. We think something is one way, but is it really?