This morning while I was in the car in the usual endless queue on the A2, I was thinking of the concept of a traditional family; the one with a father, a mother and children. A micro community that was generated by two others and so far back into the mists of time. In the logic of survival the family is the perfect way to reproduce and continue the species and above all in natural conditions, let’s say more wild or in any case less favorable to life, this type of family is surely the safest strategy to continue the species. And so far there is no question.
I also thought that if once it could only make sense to reproduce, nowadays human beings are really many and probably the cause of so many problems on the planet, so if it is true that we must evolve to survive, what is the point of considering how is the only family possible as traditional? I mean that the family is also a place where people love each other, support and help each other, exchange experiences and not necessarily reproduce.
But then, when the reproduction and therefore the mere biological utility of the family fails, why is it so difficult to consider alternative models? Why not extend the concept of family to other types of families? For example, couldn’t a group of elderly people helping each other take care of each other be an example of a family? Or the community of a Box, why can’t it be considered a family? Or two people of the same sex who love each other? or Aunt Luciana and her dog Toby. Or a group of friends or any other group where people spend most of their day.
So, I thought, it’s just a problem of definition and not of composition. There are traditional families in which the components are unhappy, maybe they are beaten or abused of any kind, yet despite what is probably anything but love, we insist on calling them families. Perhaps we could review the family pardigma and consider other parameters besides those of mere biological utility linked to reproduction, as I know. the affections, the loves, the good feelings that bind people beyond the definitions.
I’m not making a political statement about it, I’m just reasoning according to logic and since everything fits the times, maybe it’s time to rethink this family, even in terms of space. Who said that a family has to live under the same roof? My example is a large family in which, in addition to my ascending relatives, it includes some dear friends and some neighbors. With some I share the spaces, with others I spend and with others, those far away are always present also thanks to the communication possibilities we have.
Perhaps this family is worth less than a traditional one? Is it that being single makes me a worse person than a married person? Does not all of us live together make us less united? In my opinion, not because I believe that what really matters is how much we can surround ourselves with people like us with whom we can build solid relationships, whatever the composition of the group. What do you think?