Military Review

A family is a “home building” and a “scoop”. On liberal rhetoric and modern statistics on marriage and divorce

121
I suspect that one of the first posts after the publication of this material will be a message in the style of “So what does this article do on Topwar?”, As often happens with materials in which there is no mention of APU, Poroshenko or ISIS. So often happens with materials that are not digested by certain categories of our readers in the “National Security” section: articles, for example, about the education or healthcare system. In general, it is worth warning in advance: the material will not consider new “bloopers” when the Americans create their own F-35, Kremlin’s “cunning” plans to exchange Savchenko; questions about how many man-hours Mustafa Dzhemilev will “take the Crimea” at a quick sleep stage and about where NATO will expand after it stops at Russian borders will not be discussed. The material is devoted to a completely different - the Russian family.


And the need to discuss trends associated with the "cells of society" and demographic features, led the statistics published by the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation. And let statistics are often spoken of as worse than cynical lies, but it is completely useless to overlook the data of the Federal Service, whose duties include the study of statistical indicators. Moreover, these data are supported by documents taken into account by the State Statistics Committee in all regions of the country without exception.

So, about the family, and about what today we hear from individual interlocutors and Internet authors about the institution of marriage.

Not being a big fan of LiveJournal, sometimes I still flip through this segment of the Web. Recently, an increasing number of publications devoted to the fact that marriage is a kind of “sovkavshchina” and “domostroevyschina” draws on itself ... Marriage is so, you see, an outdated system of relations between a man and a woman, that any way out of marriage - with beating dishes or even faces of each other is a normal thing, which fits in with the modern norms of “morality”. Morales? - what am I talking about? ..

Judging by the publications that appear in the top-list of blogs, today in Russia reigns the Internet and TV era of justifying divorce and free (overly) relations. If the USSR identified certain persons as the “prison of nations”, then for marriage a somewhat similar definition is “prison of the sexes”. It smacks of a sort of liberal reincarnation of the early Bolshevik (or, rather, pseudo-Bolshevik) fashion that marriage is a relic of "tsarism." If in 1917-1918 in Russia, communities began to appear with speaking names in the style of “Down with marriage!” And articles by well-known authors under the title: “There is no love, there is only bare reproduction”, today materials appear disbelieved (disbelieved, you understand, by 25-t) married girls with attempts to explain that a divorce is, they say, generally great.

I decided not to provide specific links to posts of a similar nature, so as not to create advertising that is completely unnecessary in this case, but if you wish, every reader can find among the top LiveJournal blogs bloggers and brogherds who throw in slogans that they can be happy in their families can not by definition. Buying diapers and escorting a child to kindergarten or school, you see, takes time to start another “cute-mimic” blog or to get a diploma of an “effective manager” remotely.

You see, when they were married, they did not feel the happiness of freedom, could not “normally” (this is how, according to their version?) Raise children, and after the divorce, things immediately went uphill. And, judging by this kind of publications, top bloggers and brogherits got rid of the second half only themselves - supposedly drove them away - why do I need these “shovely” relations with washing socks and borscht cooking ... No one finds the spirit to write he (herself) is guilty (or is guilty), or at least “both were stupid”.

Now directly to the statistics published by the State Statistics Committee (the usual name of the relevant Federal Service). The agency’s website has published information that the number of divorces in Russia (USSR) over the past 25 years does not fall below the bar in 600 thousand per year. For comparison with the Soviet period: year 1960-th - 184398 divorce, year 1970-th - 396589.

The peak in the Russian Federation fell on the 2002 year, when the registrars already registered 853647 divorces. This is 5,9 per 1 thousand citizens (including infants and very old people). The minimum of divorces in the Russian Federation was in the year of 2005, when the number of such divorces was about 605 thousand (4,2 per 1 thousand inhabitants). So-so a minimum ... As a plus you can call the fact that in 2015, the indicator also declined to 4,2, in absolute figures making 611646. However, the positivity of 2015 figures of the year is somewhat doubtful. And it is doubtful for a number of reasons. Firstly, in 2015, Russia had the smallest number of marriages in 10 years - 1 million 161 thousand. Secondly, it turns out that there are more divorces than 52% of the number of marriages. Year 2010 th: 52,6%, year 2007 th: and all 59,7%.

Number of registered marriages by year:
A family is a “home building” and a “scoop”. On liberal rhetoric and modern statistics on marriage and divorce


The number of divorces by year:


To put it simply, less than half of the couples who registered their marriage remain in this marriage. At the same time, most of those couples who have terminated their marriage for various reasons justify their decision. And it’s good if you don’t try to justify your divorce publicly like those LJ-shnye bloggers and bloggers ... If you already decided that in a certain situation it’s impossible to save a marriage with this person, then at least you shouldn’t make self-promotion out of this fact. Or this is where the emphasis is placed on sowing the next “democratic grains”, from which what has grown in the “democratic West” can grow: with pederasts and pedophiles in the command structure of the armed forces, the community of clergy, and in the camp themselves advertising their marriage failures of bloggers. They opened a criminal case for pedophilia in the Russian Federation - he pretended to be a “political refugee” and waved, for example, to the Czech Republic, from which now there is a dirt flow to everything and everyone connected with Russia and traditional values. They don't give them peace, something else ... Something itches in the same place with the sharp urge of another post that the family is “homebuilding”, and the parade of babomuzhikov with beards and breasts is the apogee, you know, freedom and democracy.

With such statistics, we continue to expect that the demographic problem in the country will be solved by itself, and that in order to preserve the traditional basis of the country, it is enough to buy a T-shirt with a patriotic inscription. And conversations about traditional values, which are conducted from high tribunes, activating each time before the elections, in the end often remain conversations.
Author:
121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 06: 50
    +53
    Family is the main value. without Family - Cossack - half Cossack - we have it! Liberasts and every rainbow can not understand but we are different! It is a pity, but the State does not pay attention to the support of the Institute of a Normal Family at all ...... And the feeling when the first time he took the hands of his child ????? and the first little steps ????? for every normal person there is no more natural and more beautiful! I think so. for a fan of Traditional values ​​and most of them are sure here! I have the honor. Cossack Volgin!
    1. mig29mks
      mig29mks 27 May 2016 06: 58
      +43
      and in September I’ll have a third one, I’m very happy! and my family saved me from many troubles !!!
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Volga Cossack
        Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 07: 06
        +15
        Sincerely glad !!!! I have two - Egoriy and Artemy- 7 and 6 year-old — but already Kazachata ........ but for now ..... we still want to ......
        1. Kahlan amnell
          Kahlan amnell 27 May 2016 11: 48
          +14
          Quote: Volga Cossack
          Sincerely glad !!!! I have two - Egoriy and Artemy- 7 and 6 year-old — but already Kazachata ........ but for now ..... we still want to ......

          Very happy about you! My husband and I have four, three sons and a daughter. And in June, a grandson will be born.
          A big family is wonderful. And those who reject the family as some shackles that interfere with having fun or pursuing a career are simply flawed and deeply unhappy people.
          1. Volga Cossack
            Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 11: 56
            +3
            I completely agree. To see how your babies grow, there is no greater happiness !!!!
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Valga
            Valga 29 May 2016 01: 26
            0
            Very many can not create a normal family from what is nowhere. And that is the main reason.
            1. builder
              builder 30 May 2016 08: 09
              -1
              The lack of living space is just an excuse. With a lovely paradise and in a hut. In youth and at parents we lived in rented apartments. If the lad in the family, then temporary difficulties only unite.
      3. SSR
        SSR 27 May 2016 07: 07
        +15
        Quote: mig29mks
        and in September I’ll have a third one, I’m very happy! and my family saved me from many troubles !!!

        +))) I have said and say many times, the family is the very first "cell" of a healthy society and state. There are so many young mothers with strollers in the city and already divorced women. Mine turned me too, but two years later I came back and now there are five of us.))) And how many friends are walking around like barren flowers ... They decided that they would go to rest and the children are a "burden" and now if they want it will be able to.
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 09: 56
          .
          Quote: SSR
          My turned too, but returned two years later

          Have you taken it back? And you haven’t found anyone in these two years?
          1. Homo
            Homo 27 May 2016 11: 17
            +12
            Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
            Have you taken it back? And you haven’t found anyone in these two years?

            Listen to the private, and you like words like fidelity, love say something? Or, for you, it all comes down to a dog’s relationship, one bitch ran away, so how many runs there, to another climb? fool
            1. Zagr9d0tryad
              Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 11: 35
              0
              Quote: Homo
              Listen to the private, and you like words like fidelity, love say something?

              They say words like "self-respect" to me at least.
              And what kind of "loyalty and love" you are talking about in this case, I do not understand.
            2. corporal
              corporal 27 May 2016 19: 22
              +1
              Quote: Homo
              words like fidelity, love

              Listen, Marshal, letting a walking cychk go back- this is not fidelity and love, but Alenism and looting negative , and paired with such a mundane, a normal family will not work, but there will only be a headache for both the peasant and future children. I have seen enough of such families at applications 02, and later, at TsVSNP (center for temporary detention of juvenile delinquents), and at children from such families.
              And I'll tell you what, the most "difficult" children were just from those families where the walking mother. I repeat, not where the walking father is, not complete orphans, but where the walking mother.
              So it's better for yourself fool
              1. a housewife
                a housewife 28 May 2016 03: 48
                +3
                But where did the man say that she was walking with him ?! You never know why people can quarrel. Moreover, she honestly says that it was she who touched him. However, everyone judges by himself. Looks like a walking man - in your opinion - is it good? fool
        2. Sober
          Sober 27 May 2016 10: 20
          +7
          Quote: SSR
          I have said and say many times, the family is the very first "cell" of a healthy society and state.

          During perestroika, the new NEP, I heard a conversation between graduates and a class teacher: What does one say when I get married, then if he is a decent person, when we get divorced, he must provide me!
          Since then, propaganda of a perverted understanding of traditional values ​​has stepped far forward.
          1. gladcu2
            gladcu2 28 May 2016 20: 19
            +3
            Sober

            Logical.

            Everything related to the perversion of morality of the topic is unjustifiably underestimated. Do not indulge in the desired value.

            In fact, the single morality of the people is the basis of the formation of the state.

            Everything related to moral change should be tightly controlled by the state. Any propaganda of moral change should be treated as a crime against the state. This is not verbiage, this knowledge is confirmed by experience.


            To begin with, not many leaders of the state who were able to restore and raise the state to a high level.

            The education system, as an instrument for the formation of a single morality, has always been based on the first importance.
            1. atalef
              atalef 28 May 2016 20: 50
              -2
              Quote: gladcu2
              In fact, the single morality of the people is the basis of the formation of the state.

              What about a state with a different confessional structure?
              Agree that in different faiths the concepts of morality are different.
              Well, at least start a relationship to same-sex relationships? Nutrition rules? Regarding the role of women in the family?
              There can be no single morality among the people, there are moral principles of the majority on which the state and law in this state are built
              maybe law cannot exist without morality (more precisely, moral principles) adopted in this society.
              Moral principles recognized by the majority (usually based on faith) are the basis for building law in this area.
              Quote: gladcu2
              Everything regarding moral change should be tightly controlled by the state

              The state is officials, and therefore people. Moral norms are developed in society on the basis of spiritual development, education and the influence of spiritual or national leaders --- they cannot be forced down from the top.
              Quote: gladcu2
              Any propaganda of moral change should be treated as a crime against the state. This is not verbiage, this knowledge is confirmed by experience.

              We have already gone through this, that in Germany (with Nazi morality), that in the USSR with the communist one, and they continue to take place in S. Korea.
              Do you also want to run after a little book for some Eun to write down the new rules of morality?
              Quote: gladcu2
              The education system, as an instrument for the formation of a single morality, has always been based on the first importance.

              Hitler for example laughing
              1. gladcu2
                gladcu2 28 May 2016 21: 44
                +3
                atalef

                religion is power exercised through moral control.

                I am not familiar with any major religion that allows homosexuality.

                Officials must maintain morality unified with the people; otherwise they must be administratively repressed.

                A people is a society guided by a single morality, a single system of survival.

                Fascism, communism, is an artificially changed morality. Communism has a positive characteristic, because with the help of this morality they restored the country and won the Great Patriotic War.

                Where is the lack of logic here?
                1. atalef
                  atalef 28 May 2016 21: 55
                  0
                  Quote: gladcu2
                  religion is power exercised through moral control.

                  religion in many places laid the foundations of morality, at a certain period its strength was great.
                  At the moment when law and religion split - the power of religion already (if we are not talking about theocratic societies) - pretty small

                  Quote: gladcu2
                  I am not familiar with any major religion that allows homosexuality.

                  Why should we talk about the main religions? Or are other non-monothetic religions not mral?
                  What does morality in your understanding mean, and why is the point of view of the Hindus immoral, but the point of view of a Christian is not?
                  And who is immoral in this case?
                  We are talking about morality.
                  Religion laid the foundations of morality, then after the formation of a legal society, morality is influenced by nouahi, cultural and spiritual authorities.

                  Quote: gladcu2
                  Officials must maintain morality unified with the people; otherwise they must be administratively repressed.

                  Leave these ephemeral words here - a single morality --- I ask again, explain what you mean by this and some of its basic postulates
                  Quote: gladcu2
                  A people is a society guided by a single morality, a single system of survival.

                  How many letters belay , but what did you want to say?
                  Quote: gladcu2
                  Fascism, communism, is an artificially changed morality. Communism has a positive characteristic, because with the help of this morality they restored the country and won the Great Patriotic War.

                  I do not even know . what do you answer this, excuse me, nonsense.
                  But what about the DPRK - the bottom of the Second World War was not, then they are immoral? belay
                  Quote: gladcu2
                  Where is the lack of logic here?

                  Everywhere.
                  1. gladcu2
                    gladcu2 28 May 2016 23: 49
                    +1
                    atalef

                    Isn't it time for you to start apologizing for Zionism, which is an exclusively nationalistic parasitic ideology.

                    Parasitic is taking advantage of the moral behavior of others.

                    You often deny something without a logical explanation. Iti your words "delirium". If you have nothing to say, then you simply deny, not from the "catechesis".

                    You have immoral behavior atalef.
      4. lewerlin53rus
        lewerlin53rus 27 May 2016 07: 19
        +18
        Wow. and my grandson was born three weeks ago. Joy is comprehensive. Anyway, family is the basis of society. and if society does not understand this, it is doomed. If on the scale of life of one generation it seems long, then on a historical scale - instantly
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 28 May 2016 20: 22
          +2
          Lewerlin

          The family is the basis of society, because it is the basis for the formation of a single morality.

          Morality is the basis of the formation of the state.
          1. atalef
            atalef 28 May 2016 20: 39
            -1
            Quote: gladcu2
            single morality.

            Unified morality? What is it ?
            Can you deploy definitions and basics?
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 28 May 2016 21: 48
              +1
              Atalef

              I already gave you a definition. But in any case, I repeat for others.

              Morality is a set of laws of understanding, formed by the family, the street, the living environment. Morality cannot become state law, since the result of a violation of morality does not entail serious consequences.
              1. atalef
                atalef 28 May 2016 22: 02
                0
                Quote: gladcu2
                Morality is a set of laws of understanding, formed by the family, the street, the living environment.

                then how can we talk about a single morality - about which you speak all the time?
                Quote: gladcu2
                Morality cannot become state law, since the result of a violation of morality does not entail serious consequences.

                Thou shalt not kill
                do not steal
                do not bear false witness
                3 out of 10 known commandments on which the Jewish and then Christian morality was built, so now for the violation of 3 of these you can now get a real term.

                therefore, once again we begin with a single morality and what SPECIFICALLY you mean by that.
                1. gladcu2
                  gladcu2 28 May 2016 23: 11
                  +1
                  atalef

                  Do not step on your foot, do not spit in the corridor, do not push your elbow, do not interrupt your interlocutor, park in a place position.

                  Religion forms morality and exercises its power through moral control.

                  Common morality is simply the default morality recognized by all. Want to remove the common word.

                  Major religions do not recognize sects. Therefore, the legitimacy of sects is a conditional concept.
      5. Doomph
        Doomph 27 May 2016 07: 26
        +12
        In August, we are waiting for the second! Yes, family - saves !!!
      6. Gxash
        Gxash 27 May 2016 10: 06
        +8
        I have a 3rd girl born in October!
        Family and children are my main wealth!
        1. Doomph
          Doomph 8 June 2016 14: 23
          0
          When matchmakers can be sent?)))
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 27 May 2016 07: 35
      +26
      How things have changed time. From shame for divorce to public glee. But what if, instead of state ideology, liberal antisocial propaganda crawls out of all the cracks. Instead of the institution of family protection, juvenile justice destroys it. Instead of family education for children, the basics of sexuality and safe sex. Horror! belay
      1. dauria
        dauria 27 May 2016 08: 28
        +6
        From shame for divorce to public glee.


        At the same time, most of those couples who divorced their marriage for various reasons justify their decision


        But but but... negative You and the author have completely beguiled the coast. By the way, the divorce of the "darkest" is also in these charts. And nothing, okay, what a shame ... laughing

        Well, the reason is simple. A family is work, hard work, and a bunch of responsibilities that cannot be avoided. Who cares about it "for just like that"in the century"commodity is money"?

        And the women in our country are actually disenfranchised, compared with the United States. There is a man a divorce even without children, a financial caput.

        Yes, I personally, as in a joke, had no desire to get a divorce, but to kill, yes. So who lived in a marriage less than 35-do not teach !!!!!
        1. boris-1230
          boris-1230 27 May 2016 09: 06
          +5
          Yes, I personally, as in a joke, there was no desire to divorce, but to kill, yes

          Here, here - "it's a pity to kill, and it's impossible to live." But imagine life without - impossible! Something like that! hi
        2. Sober
          Sober 27 May 2016 10: 28
          +5
          Friend, pay attention. You shared your experiences, others yours. My experience is not less than yours. Yes, marriage is work. And what can be achieved in at least some area without long, hard work. But when the fruits of labor nevertheless give good shoots, you get real quiet, long joy.
          1. boris-1230
            boris-1230 27 May 2016 10: 40
            +6
            And what can be achieved in at least some area without long, hard work. But when the fruits of labor nevertheless give good shoots, you get real quiet, long joy.

            Labor made man out of the two, and turns man into a horse! And so that he does not die of happiness, God gave us a WOMAN!
            hi
            1. Kahlan amnell
              Kahlan amnell 27 May 2016 11: 59
              +2
              "Love is stubborn and strong,
              However, we will strictly judge -
              There are many girls in this world,
              And there’s only one head.
              Spherical this subject
              Sometimes we need sometimes
              After all, you need to think with your head
              And there is no other way.
              Consider legal marriage
              The finale for passion is super-successful
              But if the bride is happy,
              That bachelor is twice as happy.
              Is it really just a light in the window?
              Delights unless married?
              Well, whoever believes in these bullies,
              That there is no other way.
              Fall in love and wait for happiness
              But suddenly the tempter snake in a skirt
              It pushes you to do things
              Which makes no sense.
              From women, in essence, only harm,
              But here I don’t see the outcome,
              In their power is procreation,
              And there is no other way. "

              Verses of Pastrano (film "Pious Martha") smile
        3. Homo
          Homo 27 May 2016 11: 21
          +4
          Quote: dauria
          By the way, the divorce of the "darkest" is also in these charts. And nothing, okay, what a shame ...

          It’s not necessary to bring everything together. Divorce after a month and after several decades is not the same. And to be the president’s wife is not on everyone’s shoulder.
        4. gramatey
          gramatey 27 May 2016 13: 27
          +3
          Paradoxically, such an anecdote is not an anecdote at all. laughing , but evidence of a feeling. But divorce often comes from indifference. I sometimes remind my silver-gilded wife that when she is fond of grunts with elevated tones, for me she speaks of her indifference to me, which I’m even glad of.
          1. gladcu2
            gladcu2 28 May 2016 20: 25
            0
            grams

            Why ... You would have thrown socks in the middle of the room. Attention would be very intrusive.
        5. vch62388
          vch62388 27 May 2016 20: 51
          +2
          Although not 35, ten less, but about the joke about "KILL - WAS" - right. Only spouses living separately or completely parallel to each other do not swear.
      2. SRC P-15
        SRC P-15 27 May 2016 08: 34
        +5
        The family is the "seven I", which initially implies the birth of as many children as possible. At the present time, this concept has been "modernized" and degraded. The appearance of children in marriage is postponed to a later date - as a result of an increase in the number of divorces. And this is quite natural: children strengthen the marriage, and in the absence of a fastening element, not a single structure will last long.
      3. Volga Cossack
        Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 12: 02
        +7
        Juvenile Justice - for us it is wildly simple! they are planting their artificial values ​​....... no words. Well, do not be foolish if my son - a Cossack - a dad of a Cossack put in prison for the fact that he got a belt in the case ???? Complete game ..... I understand the situation and the families are different ....... but this is not ours ..... this is my opinion! Sincerely, Kazak Volgin!
    4. castle
      castle 27 May 2016 11: 40
      .
      Cossack? And for whom? by mom or dad. Or how did you define yourself as a Cossack? In what area do you live? Or in relation to the Russians, read "Quiet Don" - that a Russian, then a "muzhik" is a slave, and a Cossack is a free man. Divorced Cossacks! It was not in vain that Stalin took them to the nail.
      1. Volga Cossack
        Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 12: 05
        +3
        according to grandfathers and great-grandfathers! and far away your kind I know! Is this enough?
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Volga Cossack
        Volga Cossack 27 May 2016 12: 31
        +3
        2nd Volga Tersky Cossack Regiment - talking about something ???? and so my Rod has served in it since ancient times .... still have questions? region? I am from the Volga! born and raised there!
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. a housewife
        a housewife 28 May 2016 04: 14
        +3
        Who are you? We do not need to determine here, everyone already knows whether he is a Cossack family or not !!! What a slave you are to the Don and Kuban! And the Cossacks are not only there, you are illiterate ...
  2. Nonna
    Nonna 27 May 2016 06: 50
    +18
    Those who do not want to have children and create a strong good family with the upbringing of their own offspring can do the right thing, because usually they are people with a disturbed psyche, with a broken genetic code. This should not multiply. He was born, for example, with non-traditional sexual orientation and it is very good that his surname will end on it. Still, such as galkins with budding budding would not breed and it would be very good
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 27 May 2016 07: 31
      +17
      No one is born with a non-traditional orientation. She is being vaccinated. Either psychological trauma in childhood, or propaganda.
      1. Zagr9d0tryad
        Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 09: 58
        -2
        Quote: alicante11
        No one is born with a non-traditional orientation.

        Born, born.
        Because attraction is a physiological process and education has nothing to do with it.
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 27 May 2016 12: 19
          +2
          Born, born.
          Because attraction is a physiological process and education has nothing to do with it.


          Yes, I beg you, there are a lot of everything. And psychology and brain activity are not in last place. Want an example? Play your favorite computer toy for six hours, and then try to have sex with your wife. I assure you, figs of what happens, at least immediately.
      2. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 27 May 2016 10: 00
        0
        Quote: alicante11
        No one is born with a non-traditional orientation.

        Born with predisposition (latency). Have you read Grigory Klimov?
        P.S. Hello Alik. hi
        1. Kahlan amnell
          Kahlan amnell 27 May 2016 12: 15
          +2
          In my humble opinion, "non-traditional sexual orientation" is a problem at the intersection of neurophysiology and psychiatry.
          The reasons (if we exclude social and moral factors) why some individuals are attracted to people of their gender have not yet been sufficiently studied.
        2. alicante11
          alicante11 27 May 2016 12: 37
          +2
          P.S. Hello Alik. hi


          Welcome.

          Born with predisposition (latency). Have you read Grigory Klimov?


          I haven't read it, I somehow rely more on experiments in these matters. I have no "blue" experience. But when I was young I watched the life of the BDSM community quite a lot. So, if you dig and observe, then every person has a predisposition. But only two types of people actively practice BDSM. Either those who have psychological trauma (these are the orthodox, they literally live by it), or those who are led to fairy tales about "subspace" and other rubbish. These convince themselves that everything is high. And some are quite successful.
  3. Darth Revan
    Darth Revan 27 May 2016 07: 21
    +5
    Family is the future of mankind. Any other option is the road to nowhere.
    1. gramatey
      gramatey 27 May 2016 13: 15
      +2
      Let me clarify you. A time is when even such basic concepts are maliciously blurred. Therefore, not just a family, but a patriarchal, monogamous (with few reservations), a permanent union of a man and a woman, who is physically happy in his offspring.
      I’ll add - not only the future (there’s no certainty about this), but the great past. In fact, all current earthly sciences, art, religions, cultures have grown precisely from such a family. I agree with you, we can’t even imagine what will grow out of humanity under other forms of the family! Why give up the experience, which has proven itself for narrow-nosed monkeys (people) for millennia?
      1. Zagr9d0tryad
        Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 13: 36
        0
        Quote: gramatey
        Why give up the experience, which has proven itself for narrow-nosed monkeys (people) for millennia?

        Well, let's start with the fact that "this experience" is neither the only nor the only true in the history of mankind (and here it is enough to recall the Muslim countries, which for a long time surpassed European countries in their level of development).
        It’s another matter that you (and I, too) consider this, familiar to us patriarchal experience for us, and today it is only acceptable by virtue of upbringing and tradition, but this is temporary.
        Let me remind you once again that, according to the letters and notes of the same classics of Russian literature in the countryside (talking about the 18-19th century), elements of matriarchy were developed to a considerable degree, with which the church fought until the 20th century!
        And what will happen in 50 and 100 years we cannot know three more.
        1. gramatey
          gramatey 27 May 2016 15: 13
          -2
          True, not the only one, but who has given all modern human wealth, both cultural and material. Muslims are undoubtedly included in my definition of family. Patriarchal. Monogamous (with reservations and real responsibility. In any case, women are definitely monogamous :) Family union is forever.
          You went down only to the level of generalization of the Central Russian plain family, professing Christianity of the Eastern rite. Now the philosophy of the family as such is changing. Better to say, it is changing and it will not be a family at all, but called a family.
          We can’t know, but to make our unsteady forecasts - why not?
  4. alicante11
    alicante11 27 May 2016 07: 26
    +22
    The problem is really very, very serious and it is based on gender equality. I am not against equality between women and men from a psychological or legal point of view. In some respects, a woman should (and does) have even more rights than a man (children). But marriage is negatively affected by equality between women and men in the financial support of the family. That is, if now a woman can easily earn more in the office than her husband at a factory, in a technical school, in a trolleybus depot or a housing office, then in any conflict she has a question. Why do I need this loser husband at all? And, naturally, the threat of divorce becomes one of the arguments in the dispute. And if the argument is presented and did not work, and at the same time its use does not threaten anything, then, accordingly, a divorce takes place. Moreover, this problem is typical not only for modern Russia. In the same USSR, they sounded all the bells due to the increase in the number of divorces. Even the statistics in this article confirm. And the reasons were the same. Women went to work and earned money. Therefore, there was a greater temptation not to solve family problems, but simply to cut the "Gordian knot" by divorce. But then, at least, women massively did not have big earnings. Because hard physical work, like managerial work, was, after all, more a matter of men. Although this problem was already raised then, remember "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears", "Office Romance". Now hard physical work has ceased to be well paid, and is inferior financially to most office work. At the same time, more and more women are occupying leadership positions with their high salaries. So there is no need to expect improvements on the "marriage" front.

    I can not help but throw a stone in our male garden. Although, IMHO, this is not the most important divorce factor and quite old. Life always stuck with a family. If earlier a man made repairs, repaired wiring and plumbing, household appliances, plowed in the country. Now it’s not there. There are specialized firms that are engaged in repairs and electrical equipment and plumbing. And in modern household appliances, you can’t always figure it out. As a result, a man simply does not have responsibilities in the house. He comes home from work and sits down either at the computer or at the TV with a bottle of beer. And the wife, at the same time, remains the obligation to clean, wash, cook. If earlier the man said that he needed to relax after work, because he was the main earner in the family. Now, naturally, a woman has a protest, as it is, he brings little money, and, at the same time, does nothing at home. WHY DO YOU NEED SUCH ANIMAL ANIMAL? The result is scandals that, over time, lead to divorce.
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 27 May 2016 07: 34
      +7
      Quote: alicante11
      Now, naturally, a woman has a protest, as it is, he brings little money, and, at the same time, does nothing at home. WHY DO YOU NEED SUCH ANIMAL ANIMAL? The result is scandals that, over time, lead to divorce.

      So money is nevertheless in society, the main thing in personal relations and for the sake of alliances is to create them and in the absence of this very money these very unions collapse, the conclusion is that the state sets a liberal model for the development of society, where the economic interest of the person prevails, is detrimental to the institution of marriage and family, for society as a whole, on the other hand, such a society is easier to manage in the interests of a limited contingent of people, there is social stratification and internal tension in society ...
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 27 May 2016 07: 44
        +5
        So money is nevertheless in society, the main thing in personal relations and for the sake of them alliances are created and in the absence of this very money these very unions collapse


        Yes and no. Families are not created for money. But after the period of "honeymoon" (year, day, how does anyone succeed), as long as there is love, everyday life begins to seize and here money relations are right there. And further in the text of your comment.
      2. cap
        cap 27 May 2016 08: 13
        +11
        Quote: sa-ag
        So money is nevertheless in society, the main thing in personal relations and for the sake of alliances is to create them and in the absence of this very money these very unions collapse, the conclusion is that the state sets a liberal model for the development of society, where the economic interest of the person prevails, is detrimental to the institution of marriage and family, for society as a whole, on the other hand, such a society is easier to manage in the interests of a limited contingent of people, there is social stratification and internal tension in society ...


        In family life, the role of a man is belittled, and thoroughly. A considerable merit in this modern TV (one TNT is worth it). Who are the heroes? Builder, engineer?
        Quads and cops with their problems and showdowns.
        Something else erupts on the Star. Yes, and even after the arrival of Shoigu.
        The institution of the family is building the state. And through economic levers as well.
        It's my opinion.
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 27 May 2016 10: 08
          +5
          Quote: cap
          (which one TNT is worth)

          "Happy together!" steers! wassat Heroes - Husband fucked, wife - um, as it were softer to say, children are selfish ushlepki. And laughter behind the scenes - prompts when to laugh. And all this is under the jurisdiction of Gazprom, a national treasure. am
      3. vorobey
        vorobey 27 May 2016 08: 23
        +14
        Quote: sa-ag
        So money is nevertheless in society, the main thing in personal relationships and for the sake of them alliances are created and in the absence of this very money these very unions collapse,


        I dare not agree ... for twenty years with my wife we ​​went through a lot. and now is not the best period has come .. yes ... all the same money ... but they love, as a rule, not for something but contrary to something ... here we try to help and support each other ... the main thing in the family is to abandon pride and shove my own I sometimes in my ass ...
        1. Sober
          Sober 27 May 2016 10: 32
          +5
          Straightforward, but true. hi
          1. Kahlan amnell
            Kahlan amnell 27 May 2016 12: 28
            +2
            True, true, but this method only works if both of their pride crush. And if one pride presses, and another swells, it will end, most likely, with a break.
    2. aleks_29296
      aleks_29296 27 May 2016 08: 49
      +4
      Quote: alicante11
      Now it’s not there. There are specialized firms that are engaged in repairs and electrical equipment and plumbing


      Unfortunately, the problem is not only the availability of specialized firms, but the desire to do something with their own hands. I had to deal with situations when changing a light bulb, a male businessman called an electrician. But here you don’t need any specialized skills, you just need to tear your ass from the sofa.
      I found a time when a child from childhood was taken into circulation by various sections and circles, such as "crazy hands". What now? My boy at school in labor lessons is taught the devil knows what, just not what the man needs.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 27 May 2016 14: 35
        0
        Unfortunately, the problem is not only the availability of specialized firms, but the desire to do something with their own hands.


        Well, clear-red. It is not necessary to call the company, even if it exists. But, unfortunately, there are fewer and fewer areas where you can do "without a firm."
    3. Zagr9d0tryad
      Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 10: 05
      +2
      Quote: alicante11
      That is, if now a woman can easily earn more in the office than her husband at the factory, in the technical school, in the trolleybus depot or ZhEKe, then in any conflict she has a question. Why do I need this loser husband at all?

      Indeed, why would a successful woman with a higher education have a stupid husband who can only turn nuts and then only at work ?! Well, let him marry the conductor from his Depot and plow the receivers!
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 27 May 2016 10: 27
        +7
        Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
        Indeed, why would a successful woman with a higher education have a stupid husband who can only turn nuts and then only at work ?!


        love is evil ... laughing laughing I have two higher ones, but I earn more on nuts ... laughing
      2. Sober
        Sober 27 May 2016 10: 34
        +3
        Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
        why a successful woman

        Because they are not successful on the inside, and they clog themselves with external "success."
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 11: 01
          -4
          Quote: Sober
          Because they are not successful on the inside, and they clog themselves with external "success."

          Who said? Where is the proof?!
          1. Homo
            Homo 27 May 2016 11: 41
            +5
            Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
            Who said? Where is the proof?!

            Look at the statistics, look around, talk "heart to heart" (if you can) with "successful" ladies who are over 40. And you will understand everything.
            1. Sober
              Sober 27 May 2016 12: 02
              +2
              Quote: Homo
              Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
              Who said? Where is the proof?!

              Look at the statistics, look around, talk "heart to heart" (if you can) with "successful" ladies who are over 40. And you will understand everything.

              Thank you, they answered well for me.
            2. Zagr9d0tryad
              Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 12: 06
              -2
              Quote: Homo
              See statistics

              Which one? Divorces? What a stupid stereotype to think that divorce is a tragedy for a person?
              Are men or schoolchildren gathered here?
              Quote: Homo
              talk "heart to heart" (if you can) with "successful" ladies over 40.

              Well, one such acquaintance lives, in her 40s she sits at home or travels to spa resorts, every month she has an "interest" of 1.5 million rubles, supports all her relatives, a lover and a servant.
              Oh yes, she doesn’t have children, do you think she’s suffering? But figs there!
              Marriage and children are either the happiness and luck of an insignificant minority, or the stern yoke of a large poor because of the impossibility of normal loneliness.
      3. alicante11
        alicante11 27 May 2016 14: 37
        0
        Indeed, why would a successful woman with a higher education have a stupid husband who can only turn nuts and then only at work ?! Well, let him marry the conductor from his Depot and plow the receivers!


        Secondly, a "successful woman" with a higher education will find another "successful woman with a higher education" and make a lesbian couple. And so we will die out on the sly.
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 15: 06
          +3
          Quote: alicante11
          a "successful woman" with a college degree will find another "successful woman with a college degree" and make a lesbian couple.

          Do you have some unrealized complexes about "lesbian", or what ?!
          I’m upset you, it is her own business, what and how, and she did not ask you.
          And yes, don’t worry, don’t die out.
          Genetic engineering and incubator robots (in the first stage, surrogate mothers) will save us if something happens! laughing
          1. The comment was deleted.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. a housewife
      a housewife 28 May 2016 04: 33
      +3
      All these conversations remind me of my friend’s reasoning that an apartment is better than a house. Do you understand what I mean? If you compare two houses of the same level, then you can argue. But she persistently talks about the fact that the house is a shack, and the apartment is convenience and beauty. When I ask if she tried to compare her kopeck piece with a nice mansion, then she gets lost. If the husband does not earn money in the family, but sits resting at home while his wife is spinning around the house, then yes - why is it necessary. But the question is - did not immediately recognize this treasure? I do not believe! She knew a few of these. And they all said - they saw which swell in the registry office I lead. So why then? Do you know the answer? Thought - re-educate! Yeah, SHCHAZ! One more thing. And love is everywhere - where? We must marry - still marry. And under such conditions, any occasion will be suitable for a divorce!
  5. 34 region
    34 region 27 May 2016 07: 28
    +12
    A sad article. But I think there is also an economic component. With an increase in labor productivity, oddly enough, we are working more and more. It feels like people are already living at work. And the result of such work? It seems that there is an incentive to make money. But it looks more like a donkey and carrot stimulus. Many work in shifts or for days. This is normal? Normal people work and live where they work. At least the North, at least Moscow. People just do not have free time to live. Do we go abroad? Yes they do. Someone twice a year. But the bulk goes to work. Maybe I just talk so much that they come across all those who work. As they say, not in those circles you communicate. We're fine! Maybe. But in my opinion in the modern economy, the family has no place. There is a juicer, but no family. And apparently not provided. Probably the aim is to create incubators for childbirth. There will be mothers of the female (purely for childbirth), then general educational houses, and then the owner-employer. So far, this trend has been observed. You can scream as much as you like, this is wrong, but how to correct the situation? Are family relationships beneficial for management? Judging by the situation, no. Does production need a worker with a young child who will be constantly sick? The situation is quite ordinary. Whether you are an individual entrepreneur or an employee of the team, but how do you feel about a person who will sometimes be absent from work? And of course, you can scream with foam at the mouth — the family cell of society. Now combine the interests of the owner, workers and society. Especially in terms of optimization. Businesses must bring money !!! Where in modern realities is there a place for the family?
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 27 May 2016 07: 41
      +7
      Many work in shifts or for days. This is normal?


      Fine. Shift work saved many families from divorce. When a man thumped and got a penny, and then he got a job for gold, he sits in some Tas-Yuryakh for several months, he coughs the breed without the opportunity to drink, well, they didn’t bring vodka there. He earns good money, which is transferred to his card left by his wife. The family lives. Then he arrives home, as soon as his wife allocates, he drinks and again rests normally with his family. And further on the thumb. Gold, fish, seasonal work for those who are not afraid to work with their hands and hard work - this is it. Plus, the rest is not two days a week and a month of vacation, but you relax for months, being this time with your family.
      The same is the daily charts. If, of course, the rest time is respected, for example, after three days. I liked this schedule even more than 2-2.
      1. Zagr9d0tryad
        Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 10: 07
        -7
        Quote: alicante11
        Gold, fish, seasonal work for those who are not afraid to work with their hands and hard work

        For those who do not know how or do not want to work their heads.
        It's time already in 2016 to prioritize correctly!
        1. Homo
          Homo 27 May 2016 11: 43
          +7
          Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
          For those who do not know how or do not want to work their heads.

          And according to your peasant to work with his hands "flush"? And a man who knows how to work and earn with his hands, a loser?
          1. Zagr9d0tryad
            Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 12: 10
            +1
            Quote: Homo
            And according to your peasant to work with his hands "flush"?

            And you have missile launchers on ava, are you an officer or served under duress?
        2. alicante11
          alicante11 27 May 2016 13: 16
          +4
          For those who do not know how or do not want to work their heads.
          It's time already in 2016 to prioritize correctly!


          And well you will eat, if all "head" will work?
          1. Zagr9d0tryad
            Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 13: 39
            -2
            Quote: alicante11
            And well you will eat, if all "head" will work?

            I’ll deliver a couple more million guest workers.
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 27 May 2016 14: 28
              +1
              I’ll deliver a couple more million guest workers.


              Which will kill you.
              1. Zagr9d0tryad
                Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 14: 40
                +1
                Quote: alicante11
                Which will kill you.

                Yes, yes, propagate stereotypes further.
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 27 May 2016 07: 29
    +11
    I have three, and I think that is not enough. It could have been more. I DO NOT ACCEPT geyropeyskie values. And when he looked at the winner of the Eurovision - the bearded Conchita - he was seriously sick. Is this the future they are preparing for us? So soon the sanitary cordon will have to fence itself off from the geyropa.
  7. From Udmurtia
    From Udmurtia 27 May 2016 07: 31
    +6
    The family is the basis of the whole state and the processes taking place in it. I would say more: the family should be a national idea of ​​the state.
  8. Zomanus
    Zomanus 27 May 2016 07: 53
    +6
    And how many cases of kidalov and spin acquired?
    It seems settled down, found a woman. And after a while you
    thrown out into the street without everything. And who will marry after this?
    And when a family with children and you go nowhere, leaving everything there.
    People are simply afraid to start a relationship.
    1. a housewife
      a housewife 28 May 2016 04: 59
      0
      That is, like this - suddenly for no reason - and to the street ?! Damn, what ungrateful women went!
    2. The comment was deleted.
  9. Sergeant Pank
    Sergeant Pank 27 May 2016 07: 56
    +4
    The article about "how I read LJ and was upset", there is still a narrow section of the society of hyperactive comrades on the Internet. It is not for nothing that all statistical data are collected from documents and by the method of telephone interviews.
    P.S. Keeping up with society, I look forward to adding in September.)
  10. Belousov
    Belousov 27 May 2016 07: 56
    +8
    And how does the state take care of the family? By adopting idiotic laws on fines for celibacy or the absence of children, while paying pennies for children. In Soviet times, there was a similar law, but then social security was at a different level. More precisely, then social security WAS! What's going on on TV? House-2, where everyone slept with everything 500 times, various Pugachev-galkin-Kirkorov-surrogate mothers and other pi ... dew. The conclusion is very simple: our state is not interested in preserving the family as a full-fledged and healthy unit of society. So think in whose interests they "work" up there.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 27 May 2016 08: 17
      +10
      and at the same time paying a penny for children.


      Dear, we are actually raising children for ourselves, and not for the state. Those for the state are in orphanages. And more money is spent on them than in most families.
      Personally, I am generally against any help from the state regarding the family. Since this is a Trojan horse, juveniles will come to us for a good allowance. And what did you want, should the state monitor how HIS money is spent, that you do not swell, do not lose, do not buy yourself a new iPhone. And try to object.
      The only thing that is required of the state to help the family is to create a normal stable economic situation. So that a man could freely, without freaking out at 10 work, earn money to provide for his wife and 3 children. That's all, then kindergartens will not be needed, because the woman will sit at home with the children. And families will become stronger, because the man will again automatically become the head of the family, the breadwinner.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 27 May 2016 08: 27
        +9
        Quote: alicante11
        So that a man could freely, without freaking out at 10 jobs, earn money to provide for his wife and 3 children


        four ... five ... I have four and the children I see mostly just sleeping .. sometimes when I sleep in the weekend .. you open your eyes .. the two youngest are standing near the bed and looking at me ... laughing
        1. Dimy4
          Dimy4 27 May 2016 08: 51
          +4
          they look at me ...

          Paaap, and turn on the cartoons of fixatives. smile
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 27 May 2016 09: 52
            +3
            Quote: Dimy4
            Paaap, and turn on the cartoons of fixatives.


            good good
        2. alicante11
          alicante11 27 May 2016 13: 07
          +1
          four ... five ... I have four and the children I see mostly only sleeping ..


          I (from the point of view of the state) proceed from the simple principle of substitution. One child replaces the mother, one - the father, the third to increase the family. If there are more children, this, of course, is good, but from the point of view of the state it is no longer profitable. Therefore, the fourth you give birth is EXCLUSIVELY for yourself.
          1. Zagr9d0tryad
            Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 13: 46
            +1
            Quote: alicante11
            I proceed from the simple principle of substitution. One child replaces the mother, one - the father, the third to increase the family.

            You forgot about the little detail, with the modern life expectancy when the parents die, not only their children will live on earth, but their grandchildren and maybe their great-grandchildren.
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 27 May 2016 14: 29
              +2
              You forgot about the little detail, with the modern life expectancy when the parents die, not only their children will live on earth, but their grandchildren and maybe their great-grandchildren.


              So what? Each generation must grow numerically, otherwise there is a danger of depopulation. If not now, then in the future, when large generations will "leave."
              1. Zagr9d0tryad
                Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 14: 43
                -2
                Quote: alicante11
                Each generation must grow numerically

                Already grown up.
                On earth, overpopulation, we can’t even feed Europe-USA with the traditional methods of conducting CX.
                But do not worry, consider that resources and oxygen for another billion years will be enough for a billion billion people!
                1. RedBaron
                  RedBaron 27 May 2016 23: 12
                  -1
                  If we keep it up to date with intelligence, then a country like Israel is able to feed not only itself but also half of Europe as a bonus.
          2. a housewife
            a housewife 28 May 2016 05: 04
            +1
            Yeah, that's why they begin to raise their retirement age, under the sauce that there are fewer young people than old people.
          3. The comment was deleted.
    2. olimpiada15
      olimpiada15 27 May 2016 09: 17
      +9
      Quote: Belousov
      ... The conclusion is very simple: our state is not interested in preserving the family as a full-fledged and healthy unit of society. So think in whose interests they "work" up there.

      The state is not interested. The authorities in the country are those who do not need a strong state. They are engaged in providing superprofits for an insignificant part of society, the rest of the population exists to provide these incomes and serve their interests. From the rest of the country's population they only need a supply of slaves and servants, which is evident in relation to the upbringing and development of children.
      But the family is the cell of society, the foundation of a healthy society, capable of developing the country. The real development of the institution of the family was only under socialism. Before the revolution, the family was built on traditions, children were brought up primarily on the basis of the family structure. Very few could get an education. In the USSR, the upbringing of children was primarily done by the state, which also raised and educated their parents. Do not be offended, our people had to work a lot (how many wars and other shocks the Soviet people survived in the 20th century), and there was enough physical work for everyone, there was not much comfortable housing. But the state:
      from 2 months.-day nursery, then kindergarten, then school. Children were taught to speak, walk, taught, and this removed the burden from their parents. Raise children need to teach parents. What now? They called for a commission and gave a fine for poor education. And mothers simply have no time to educate them — to work, to earn extra money and to earn extra money. And it’s not embarrassing for today's bureaucrats to take a piece of bread from an unsecured family - this is instead of help. I’m talking about a specific case, a competent educated responsible mother, a child a day without supervision, near children with bad habits. And the most interesting, the parents of the instigators blamed everything on this kid. She followed my advice, sent to my grandmother, in the village, there is supervision over the course of the day, and there is no urban savagery. The boy began to study well and there were no problems with behavior, a good guy grew up.
      What the media is now promoting is the destruction of civil society. I, too, feel nauseous from the bearded nonsense, from the abomination of House-2, even from magazines that exaggerate the problems in the beau monde's families, and I do not respect Pugachev either. You cannot propagate all this heresy. The man of the old school does not perceive this trash, but the youth accepts it as the norm, and this is scary.
      It is terrible because our already outgoing generation wants our country to live forever, live and develop. And only a person can make such a country, a person with a strong spirit, developed mentally and physically. And children should be brought up, bring up in a family where they love him, where parents are engaged in common family affairs and raising children. And such is the perception of children that they often do not hear instructions, absolutely do not hear words, when they are scolded, but they will remember and repeat everything that they see about adults. Children will grow up like their parents: not only similar in appearance.
      And "homebuilding" and "sovok" are propaganda for future slaves by their future slave owners.
      And I’ll say, since it’s IN. When they say that, in the Second World War they fought for the head of state, this is not so. We fought for the birch, where we first kissed our beloved girl, for children, for mom and father, for brothers and sisters, we fought for the family.
  11. Dimy4
    Dimy4 27 May 2016 08: 04
    +3
    remotely receive a diploma of “effective manager”.

    Now, if you put the letter "D" before the "effective", then it will be the most.
  12. lao_tsy
    lao_tsy 27 May 2016 08: 34
    +4
    So the whole problem is in women! And there is no gender equality. Complete matriarchy. A woman herself decides whether to become pregnant or not, to give birth to a child or not. A man does not have a non-legal, non-moral right in planning a child. As the woman wanted - so be it. And judicial practice when a child is set aside "for any" woman! And the court "does not care" about her moral and material appearance. But how to support the child? And here is the "duty" of a man. And it doesn't matter whether he wanted this child or not. Her task is to "push" the man for alimony! So it turns out in practice that women have the same rights, and men have the same responsibilities! Moreover, a woman knows that the more successful a man is, the easier it is to "fuck" him. A normal man will never leave his child, and therefore will pay alimony. And the woman is in charge of the distribution of these funds! Why does she need a husband? Family? Daily housework? Caring for your husband? There are social networks - where you can meet, and then have another fun in the evening. There is a "sucker" from whom it is enough to give birth, and then tell everyone that he is a bastard and a bastard hiding his income. At the same time, alimony from the "sucker" exceeds the average wage three times. And the famous female: "You must .......!" Should she?
    Family life, first of all, depends on the woman. What is the climate in the family - it will create, such a family will be. But it is hard daily work! And most modern women are not accustomed to work.
    What for? Their first task is to find a successful "sponsor". And life is good! Only some of them succeed, while others do not. But that is another story.
    1. Zagr9d0tryad
      Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 10: 12
      -3
      Quote: lao_tsy
      And there is no gender equality. Full matriarchy.

      Well, in general, in Russia it was and will be, read the classics, how "men" lived in the countryside.
      And do not want to do the same, well, be yourself not a "man", but a Man!
      1. Homo
        Homo 27 May 2016 11: 52
        +4
        Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
        And do not want to do the same, well, be yourself not a "man", but a Man!

        A man is just a sexual sign. "Krivorukye", "brainless", "rags" are also men. And man, if you do not be a pedant and do not take dictionaries and encyclopedias as a basis, but based on folk wisdom, that's all. Father, Son, warrior, master, protection and support, earner!
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 12: 24
          0
          Quote: Homo
          Father, Son, warrior, master, protection and support, earner!

          Well then all! Now we will definitely win, just roll it first! For the men!
      2. alicante11
        alicante11 27 May 2016 13: 27
        0
        in general, in Russia it has been and will be, read the classics, how "men" lived in the countryside.


        How, remember, on Saturday to teach children reins, and after returning from departure - his wife. Quite matriarchy.
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 13: 48
          0
          Quote: alicante11
          How, remember, on Saturday to teach children reins, and after returning from departure - his wife.

          Who and where is it?
          1. alicante11
            alicante11 27 May 2016 14: 30
            0
            Who and where is it?


            Well, first you give examples.
            1. Zagr9d0tryad
              Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 14: 55
              -2
              Quote: alicante11
              Well, first you give examples.

              Well, let's start with what I personally wrote that "according to the letters and notes of the same classics of Russian literature in the countryside (we are talking about the 18-19th century), elements of matriarchy, with which the church fought right up to the 20th century! "
              Therefore, he recognized a person not to joke, but to learn history and read classics.
              Do you recall the names of the classics, or how many famous "Grand Duchesses" gave us the Motherland ?!
    2. a housewife
      a housewife 28 May 2016 05: 10
      +2
      Well, this sucker is not safe? You look, and you would not have to pay. And in general, we are not moving science there. We must come to grips so that a man could give birth. And she, bitch, let him pay child support!
  13. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 27 May 2016 08: 52
    +11
    First you need to close all these disgusting TV channels that promote debauchery, shamelessness and violence! And further down the list.
    In general, such a monstrous, vast, rampant lie, as with edros, even in the USSR under the CPSU.
    At the Zvezdostan we all blame about double standards, while the ones themselves already have triple standards for a long time. Traditory authorities are folding, only the effect is either none or the opposite.
    Well, we’ll see a little more how the authorities are tense and NIHREN do nothing ... Only words, and time passes! ..
    1. Zagr9d0tryad
      Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 10: 15
      -4
      Quote: Volzhanin
      First you need to close all these disgusting TV channels that promote debauchery, shamelessness and violence!

      Oh, her! Again take away and ban!
      Well, there were no such channels in the USSR, and the young people still thumped, flew in at 14-16 and massively and brutally killed passers-by after 21-00, and in large and port cities there was even currency prostitution.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 27 May 2016 10: 30
        +5
        Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
        Quote: Volzhanin
        First you need to close all these disgusting TV channels that promote debauchery, shamelessness and violence!

        Oh, her! Again take away and ban!
        Well, there were no such channels in the USSR, and the young people still thumped, flew in at 14-16 and massively and brutally killed passers-by after 21-00, and in large and port cities there was even currency prostitution.


        see the scale of the comparison in numbers ... otherwise unfounded somehow ... it was but not in such quantity and without such tin as it is now ...
        1. Zagr9d0tryad
          Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 11: 21
          -1
          Quote: vorobey
          get the scale of comparison in numbers

          Do you want me to give you Soviet "statistics"? laughing
          Which one? The statistics of car thefts in the USSR or stolen mobile phones?
          Or convicted in the USSR for prostitution, the presence of which in the USSR was not recognized and there was not even a corresponding article?
          Or how simply muzzles were beaten in the USSR? You yourself then lived, I will remind you.
          "Between 1966 and 1985, there has been an increase in ordinary crime; every five years, the increase in average crime rates nearly doubles." Cool!
        2. Homo
          Homo 27 May 2016 11: 54
          +3
          That's it! These were isolated cases and not an ordinary event (as it is now). And each case raised such a "wave"!
          1. Zagr9d0tryad
            Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 12: 31
            -2
            Quote: Homo
            These were isolated cases and not ordinary events.

            If this is about prostitution, then it was just an ordinary event in the USSR.
            In the USSR, I repeat once again, in every major and port city there was currency prostitution.
            Taxi drivers could take them to them.
            (And they almost always had imported cigarettes in their luggage carriers, and not only, also for currency)
            Yes, what are we talking about, in foreign tourist memos they always wrote "be careful, the" girl "that you will definitely be offered at the hotel may be a KGB employee"
  14. Londa
    Londa 27 May 2016 09: 07
    +5
    Family is hard painstaking work, unfortunately, not everyone is able to withstand it. Then "I" is included.
  15. Zagr9d0tryad
    Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 09: 54
    0
    What exactly did the author want to say? He wants to forbid people to get divorced, as in his beloved "scoop" ?!
    At the same time, I’m sure to introduce corvee for a man, as was the case with my beloved Dzhugashvili? (prolonged applause in the hall, turning into tears and heart attacks from happiness on an empty stomach)
    That is, let people continue to live with a person he doesn't like? With a thumping husband and a walking wife?
    If the author seriously thinks that by forbidding the supporter of "free relations" to get divorced, he will do better for someone there, then he is grossly mistaken! Only the grave can fix such people!
    And the only way out of the situation when a person turned out to be completely different from what he thought about him before is a divorce and the sooner the better.
    Although the author in his life apparently never made a mistake in people, at first glance he sees his whole future fate?
    Young people, I envy that even from kindergarten I have not lost a single friend!
    1. a housewife
      a housewife 28 May 2016 14: 34
      +2
      Do not bother all in one pile! Christ even he fully named the reason why you can get divorced - fornication! If the spouse walks, then no one has the right to prohibit divorce. Another thing is that many suffer or they don’t care, or two boots of steam. And the second reason is the elementary preservation of life, because living with an alcoholic, drug addict, gamer, sadist and fighter is directly dangerous for family life. But this notorious - they did not agree in character. And when you got married, did you look at the character or what else?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  16. Rostislav
    Rostislav 27 May 2016 10: 05
    +4
    How things have changed time. From shame for divorce to public glee. But what if, instead of state ideology ...

    Himself to be engaged in raising their children in the family. Remember that it is your duty and not to shift the responsibility for the formation of personality onto others: "The street is to blame ... the school did not bring up ... I saw enough nonsense on the Internet ..."
    Street and the Internet are taken for our children when we do not pay enough attention to them.
  17. Zagr9d0tryad
    Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 10: 38
    +2
    In general, I read the comments and as a person who is happily married, I come to the conclusion that I'm probably the only one here.
    Owners of 4-7 children, AU, especially amused me, where do you live in real life, or only on the Internet? laughing
    Now on the facts, because the constant repetition of myths from notorious people bothers.
    1. If you do not buy a kept woman, then this automatically means that the woman is marrying you for love. Accordingly, she is the same equal member of your family as you are, you are obliged to respect her, and you can shove any "man is always right" in one place.
    2. Considering the above, we get that a marriage can be either a union of convenience, or a union of equals, where both partners must reckon with the opinion of the other.
    3. Given that everyone has their own "opinion", people eventually get divorced.
    It absolutely normal, especially when marriage is registered in young years, when character and personality have not yet formed.
    And it’s not always possible (and it’s not necessary, there’s nothing to torment yourself and others) to get along with a person completely different from you, and it can be very difficult to immediately correctly evaluate a person, especially when you are young.
    4. But "capturing" another is not right and never ends with anything good.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 27 May 2016 10: 50
      +5
      Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
      The owners of 4-7 children were especially amused.


      Quote: Zagr9d0tryad
      AU, where do you live in real life, or only on the Internet?


      you don’t have to be so categorical ... take an interest in Odessa, Romanov, Atalef, who was visiting my classmates. yes ... four children and there are many ..
      1. Zagr9d0tryad
        Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 11: 24
        -3
        Quote: vorobey
        four children and many

        Well then, I can only congratulate you sincerely, I hope you raised them with good people hi
        But only "such" we have a few, many of them only on the Internet.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  18. moskvashokerru
    moskvashokerru 27 May 2016 11: 44
    +1
    An excellent topic was raised by the author, despite the different focus of the resource. But why in all articles of this direction the figures of the initiators of divorces are not specified. And the initiators of divorces in more than 50% of cases, and sometimes this figure reaches 80%, are women. Are these 80% of men in our country unsuitable for seed relationships?
  19. fix
    fix 27 May 2016 11: 54
    0
    Here we see two aspects that the author meant (but did not voice): moral and social.
    Morality grows precisely in the family, in husband-wife, father-child relationships, between families. And if the family is not held in high esteem, the level of morality of society falls. This is despite the fact that morality is primary in relation to laws.
    The process is objective, it is useless to condemn divorces, here the state institutions need (if they want to raise morality) propaganda of those very family values. Moreover, in conjunction with others. Well, I agree with many that the family is work, but now work is not held in high esteem.
    The second aspect is related to replenishment of the population. Also an objective process related to urbanization. Even our great-grandmothers gave birth to 5-10 children, but then in the village where the new family member is an additional labor force, i.e. income. And our state drew human resources from a seemingly bottomless source - the Russian village.
    Urban residents do not breed like that - there is no dependence of income on the number of family members (this is of course with the mind and not with the heart, omitting value motivation). This is if you take a family. And if not complete families - all the more, a maximum of one child - for themselves - is limited. And outside the family - and even more so do not bother with offspring.
    Again, if the state needs an increase in human resources (no matter how cynical it sounds), the government should stimulate the birth rate, and preferable in families. But money alone is not enough. It is necessary at least to provide (in addition to children's benefits) housing.
    Anyway, children are more likely to give birth when there is confidence in the future.
  20. 31rus2
    31rus2 27 May 2016 12: 10
    +1
    Dear family, this is a unit of society, as they used to show the attitude of the authorities towards the institution of the family, say lofty words, but no, this is camps for children, this is vacation packages, this is the housing queue and much more, all this is forgotten because in a market economy there simply is no place for this, pay-get and that’s the whole point, but it’s easier to live as you like, the question is complicated and you can’t get by with just one article, here everything is economy and politics and simple human relations
  21. Elizabeth
    Elizabeth 27 May 2016 12: 12
    +5
    I suspect that one of the first messages after the publication of this material will be a message in the style of “So what does this article do on Topwar?”, As often happens with materials that do not mention the AFU, Poroshenko or ISIS. This often happens with materials that are not digested by certain categories of our readers in the section "National Security": articles, for example, on the education system or healthcare.

    Thanks to the author for bringing up the topic "Family" on this resource! It is the family that is the basis of state security. Defense of the Fatherland is not the defense of the regime, the government, the king, or even the defense of the territory. This is the protection of the family. The family from which you came, the family you created or dream to create. The family is a home that stands on its own land. The family is a window to the future, if you will, to eternity. A person lives in this world as long as he is remembered. Who remembers? State? King? The answer is obvious. This answer is given by the Immortal Regiment. Not only the body is passed on to the descendants, but also the spirit. It is the descendants who will preserve or lose the spirit of the clan, the traditions of the clan. It is for this that real warriors do not spare their belly, for the preservation of the family. That is why our ancestors won brilliant victories, often over superior enemy forces. That is why for the last hundred years there has been a purposeful war against the family, the basis of which is marriage - an indissoluble union of a man and a woman, based on faith, love and fidelity, an alliance open to procreation and capable of raising offspring in the spirit of a kind. The battle against the family has flared up especially in these days, when the enemy realized that Russia cannot be defeated with guns and tanks and even with nuclear weapons. Moreover, it will no longer be possible to sit between two oceans and admire the picture of the destruction of Russia. Therefore, the main direction of modern warfare is the family! Once again, I thank Alexey Volodin that this topic has finally appeared on VO. The article does not pretend to answer the main question: “What to do?”, But only slightly touches on a painful abscess, and it is already clear from the reaction of the audience how much pain has accumulated in the defenders of the Fatherland and those who support them and support them. And only the living can experience pain! Let's be alive!
  22. Fox
    Fox 27 May 2016 12: 30
    +1
    what I noticed, although maybe I'm spinning in SUCH circles? ... friends over 40, like me. older children all grew up, so we did some new ones (grandchildren can’t wait). they all live mostly in their homes. and the wives support. Here and the kids cheated. I have a daughter younger than 2 months. Older-24 years old. Between them-3 guys. We live, not serious.
  23. atamankko
    atamankko 27 May 2016 12: 33
    +2
    The author is a huge plus, raised a burning question.
  24. Corvetkapitan
    Corvetkapitan 27 May 2016 12: 43
    +2
    So the Russian government should guarantee its citizens: compliance with the labor code, payment of `` white '' wages, the minimum wage and pensions of 15000 rubles, at today's prices ... Then there will be fewer divorces ...
    1. Koshak
      Koshak 28 May 2016 10: 03
      0
      Reminded ...
      In the 90s there were fictitious divorces in order to pay alimony if they did not pay wages ...
  25. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 27 May 2016 14: 11
    -3
    Do not allow marriage to couples who have known each other for less than three years. There will be no divorces at all.
    1. Zagr9d0tryad
      Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 14: 58
      +1
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      Do not allow marriage to couples who have known each other for less than three years.

      Bravo!
      And it is also advisable to prohibit marrying bespectacled and non-serving people.
      Ginger, it’s probably better to ban it, otherwise you never know what !!!!
      But why? An erroneous marriage does this pose any danger to the state and society, what do you think is necessary to deal with them?
    2. Al1977
      Al1977 27 May 2016 15: 31
      -2
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      Do not allow marriage to couples who have known each other for less than three years. There will be no divorces at all.

      Teach your wife cabbage soup to cook better.
      1. ALEA IACTA EST
        ALEA IACTA EST 27 May 2016 16: 09
        0
        1. I have no wife.
        2. Do not poke.
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 30 May 2016 09: 17
          0
          Quote: ALEA IACTA EST

          1. I have no wife.

          So what are YOU accounting for those who are fine with the women. Envy Silently.
  26. Million
    Million 27 May 2016 14: 20
    +4
    When I hear "civil marriage" from my acquaintances, I always clarify that this is cohabitation, not marriage)
    1. Zagr9d0tryad
      Zagr9d0tryad 27 May 2016 15: 03
      0
      Quote: Million
      When I hear "civil marriage" from my acquaintances, I always clarify that this is cohabitation, not marriage)

      Yes you, my friend, pedant.
      Especially for you, I remind you.
      The institute (more precisely, there will probably be a precedent) of civil marriage originated in the Republic of Ingushetia.
      "those who did not want (or could not) marry within the framework of a religious institution for religious, anti-religious or other considerations, had to live without legal formalization of marital relations; those living in such cohabitation began to use the term" civil marriage "as a euphemism to denote it"
      And only then, the Bolsheviks, with their decree "On Civil Marriage, on Children and on the maintenance of books of state acts", abolished church marriage and left only civil.
      1. Koshak
        Koshak 28 May 2016 10: 08
        +2
        Civil marriage -registration in the registry office. The church is a religious rite. Neither one nor the other - alas, cohabitation.

        Family code

        Chapter 3. CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURE FOR CONCLUSION OF MARRIAGE
        Article 10. Marriage
        1. Marriage is in the bodies of registration of acts of civil status.
        2. Rights and duties of spouses arise from the day of state registration of marriage in civil registry offices.
        Source: http://yurist-ekaterinburg.ru/z/semk-razdel-2

        Yes, I am sometimes a pedant.
      2. a housewife
        a housewife 28 May 2016 14: 28
        0
        Aw, well done! And in France and in Germany and other European countries, a long time ago there is a double registration of marriage - in the city hall and in the church. Some are against church weddings, for those who have only assured marriage at City Hall, it is called - civil. And we have the same thing now. Stamp in the passport - civil marriage. And historically, marriage can take any form, at different times in different countries everything is different, but precisely according to the laws existing there and then! In our time, this is also relevant. How many fools have run into that marrying here with an Arab, comes with him there, and there he finds out that in his country she does not even call anyone. The simplest marriage was before among the Chukchi. The guy with the girl came up to her father. Father took her hand, put it in the guy’s hand and said - live. However, it was a marriage. And these cohabitations cannot be compared even with canine and wolf ones, since they, with free will of choice, constitute one constant pair. And together they raise and feed offspring. They have a strong family. By its own laws.
  27. Al1977
    Al1977 27 May 2016 15: 30
    -2
    Ahhh .. tough, patriotic warriors climbed into family values. Maybe they will also tell me in what poses women should love me, well, God forbid, the posture was not liberal))))
    Let’s the old fart, tell us how to live with women, teach already ... what remains for you)))
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 27 May 2016 19: 02
      +4
      Quote: Al1977
      Ahhh .. tough, patriotic warriors climbed into family values. Maybe they will also tell me in what poses women should love me, well, God forbid, the posture was not liberal))))
      Let’s the old fart, tell us how to live with women, teach already ... what remains for you)))


      why should you advise a clever man ... everyone can, and everyone has different opinions here .. lol
    2. realist
      realist 27 May 2016 19: 16
      +2
      the conversation is not about that, but about the country's development prospect — there will be no progress without a family, there will be no children!
  28. realist
    realist 27 May 2016 19: 15
    +3
    there are two children, we live as a family for now, but the elder will soon marry and will live separately. family is not only dad + mom + children, family is a clan - all relatives! the trouble is that the increasing mobility of the population is breaking these ties. the main sponsors of the company against the family, of course, live in the west. They need it to have more gays and lesbians - fewer children. emancipation ?! it is definitely needed - I'm not sure. the program for reducing the world's population is still working poorly, the population is growing (due to China, Pakistan and India) and the process as a whole cannot be reversed, only work to strengthen the family in Russia, increase the birth rate, increase living standards of people ...... I think that everyone is "for"?
    1. Al1977
      Al1977 30 May 2016 11: 21
      +1
      Quote: realist
      The main sponsors of the company against the family certainly live in the west

      If you had ever been to the "west", you would not have written such nonsense. Go to Italy, for example, take a walk around Rome for several days, you can go to Florence. And then tell us about the fact that the West does not honor the family. It is also interesting to visit Germany, take a typewriter and a few days away from large cities, from Munich towards Austria, in small towns ask about the values ​​of the family and about HOW people live all over the WORLD, and not in your muhadransk.
      But you do not need it, you are a warrior, in the trench, partisans of the information field. Forward comrade. To the barricades! The enemy will not pass !!! We write further nonsense for the same ... clever minded.
  29. Undermined ustoev
    Undermined ustoev 27 May 2016 20: 55
    +2
    Where in the article is an attempt to study the causes of such a number of divorces? bugger parades, I ask you, are you to blame for so many divorces? Or maybe there are also economic reasons? How many percent of Russian citizens today are selling their own labor? What is the material position of this social stratum? Are two people living by selling only their own labor able to ensure the existence of a freshly formed cell in society? They can, if they plow 24/7. How long do you think such a family will last?
    The reason for divorce is outrageously banal: "costs have grown" ©. A family in modern Russia is a cost, a big cost. And in a capitalist society, it is customary to reduce costs and increase profits. So the divorces are happy that things have gone up the hill and free time has appeared. Costs have dropped. Fought for capitalism? Have they preserved and cherished "this liberal regime"? "Optimized" the economy? Get results.
  30. esaul1950
    esaul1950 2 June 2016 23: 43
    0
    ... in the morning there is a light stomp of bare feet and a miracle runs into your room, asks: "Grandpa, are you asleep, will I lie with you?" and without waiting for an answer, dives under the covers to you, presses all his hot little body to you and you smell childhood, milk and something else inexplicably pleasant .... Is it possible without a family in the classical sense ????