These writers argue that the idealized, self-contained nuclear family is a source of stress, inequality, and isolation, and that it's a relatively recent historical construct. 1. The Historical and Sociological Critics · Stephanie Coontz: Perhaps the most essential author on this topic. Her book The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap brilliantly dismantles the myth of the "traditional" 1950s nuclear family. She argues it was a historical anomaly, and that looking to it as a model is based on a false nostalgia that ignores its many problems and the diverse family forms that have always existed. · David Brooks: While not a harsh critic, the conservative commentator has written thoughtfully about the "nuclear family’s breakdown" and the need for a broader "web of support" he calls the "influencer family" in his essay "The Nuclear Family Was a Mistake" in The Atlantic. He argues that the isolated nuclear unit is too fragile and that we need to return to more extended, community-oriented kinship models. · Judith Stacey: A sociologist known for her work Brave New Families and In the Name of the Family. She documents the emergence of diverse family structures (like single-parent, gay and lesbian, and blended families) and argues that the nuclear family is not the only or necessarily the best way to organize care and commitment. 2. The Feminist Critics These writers focus on how the nuclear family has historically been a site of gendered oppression. · Silvia Federici: A central figure in the Wages for Housework movement. Her book Caliban and the Witch links the rise of capitalism to the subjugation of women and the creation of the nuclear family as a unit for the reproduction of labor and the privatization of women's work. · Sophie Lewis: A contemporary feminist theorist. In her book Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family, she offers a radical critique of the "family unit," arguing for the abolition of the private, nuclear family model in favor of "family abolition"—not the end of kinship, but its reimagining as a more communal, collective responsibility for caregiving ("It takes a village to raise a child" as a political program). · Angela Davis: In her essay "The Radical Potential of Motherhood," and other works, she critiques the white, bourgeois nuclear family model and highlights how Black communities have historically created alternative kinship networks for survival and resistance. 3. The Anthropological Perspective · Megan Stack: In her powerful book Women's Work: A Reckoning with Work and Home, she provides a modern, journalistic account. After having children, she explores the global crisis of care work and how the isolated nuclear family forces us to outsource domestic labor, often along racial and class lines. She personally experiments with creating a more communal living situation. Writers on Alternatives and New Models These authors not only critique but also explore and advocate for different ways of living and caring for one another. · bell hooks: In her book All About Love: New Visions, hooks redefines love as a verb, an action, rather than a mere feeling. She argues for creating "beloved communities" where care and commitment extend beyond blood ties, challenging the insular nature of the nuclear family. · Ross Douthat, David Brooks, and other Communitarians: While from a conservative perspective, they often lament the loss of social capital and community cohesion that came with the rise of the nuclear family and advocate for a return to stronger extended family and community bonds. · The Disability Justice Movement: Thinkers and activists in this movement (like Mia Mingus, who writes about "care webs") have long been creating practical, non-nuclear family models for interdependent living and care outside of state or traditional family structures. · Evan Kleiman: Host of the podcast "Start from the Beginning," which often explores themes of non-traditional family structures, queer kinship, and chosen family. Concrete Alternatives They Discuss The writers above point to several real-world alternatives: 4. Chosen Family / Fictive Kin: The quintessential queer and marginalized community practice of building deep, committed, family-like relationships with people who are not biologically related to you. This is a central theme in bell hooks's and Sophie Lewis's work. 5. Co-housing and Communal Living: Intentional communities where families or individuals live in private homes but share common spaces, meals, and responsibilities. This directly addresses the isolation David Brooks and Megan Stack describe. 6. Multigenerational Households: Living with grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins, which was the norm for most of human history and is still common in many cultures. 7. Single Parenthood by Choice & Platonic Co-Parenting: Individuals or friends deciding to raise a child together outside of a romantic relationship. 8. Strong "Pod" Models: Creating a tight-knit network of nearby friends who function as an extended family, sharing school pickups, meals, and emotional support. Where to Start Reading · For a historical foundation: Start with Stephanie Coontz's The Way We Never Were. It's accessible and thoroughly debunks the myth we often compare ourselves to. · For a modern, personal exploration: Read Megan Stack's Women's Work. It's a gripping narrative that makes the theoretical crisis of care very real. · For a radical, forward-thinking critique: Explore Sophie Lewis's Full Surrogacy Now or the essays of bell hooks. This body of work collectively argues that human flourishing requires a "village," and that clinging to the nuclear family as the sole ideal sets us up for failure and loneliness. [[Osho]] time’s article >The Sickness of Man’s Mind Is Created by the Family  10 min read ### _Osho, __Is the small family the main cause of neurosis in this society? Is the total dependence of the child on the parents, and vice versa, the cause of [[hypocrisy]], fixations and all kinds of neurosis, fear and anxiety?_ “The family is certainly the cause of all kinds of neurosis, psychosis, schizophrenia. The whole sickness of man’s mind is created by the family. The family is the basic unit of the old society; unless the family disappears the old society will continue, because its basic unit is intact. “In my own way, without my saying anything, my communes are helping make the family disappear. A commune means the disappearance of family ties. You may be here, your wife may be here, your child may be here, but you are no longer a separate unit competing against every other separate unit. In a commune you are not competing, but on the contrary, you are pooling all your energies together. The child will not get fixated – which is one of the most significant things to be understood. “Scientists have discovered in [[Animals]] a certain fact – the first impression…and very strange conclusions they have come to. When the egg opens and the bird comes out of it, whatever the bird sees first – his first impression – becomes his lifelong thing. That will almost decide his whole life. And it is a very crazy thing…. Ordinarily the bird comes out of the egg and finds his mother or father close by, but once in a while… “It happened when a scientist was working on this fact of the first impression. He was moving around while one egg opened, and a bird came out. His first impression was of the shoe of the scientist, that was the first thing the bird saw. And you cannot think what pathology that created. “He would not take any note of his mother or father, but the moment he would see the shoe…. He would play with the shoe, go inside it and have much fun. But how long can you have much fun with a shoe? You will be surprised: when the bird became young, sexually mature, he started making love to the shoe! He was not interested in females of his species, not at all; his love object was the shoe. Now it is an established fact that the early impressions go on forever in your unconscious. “The early impressions should be wider, richer. For example, a boy is born. While he is coming out of his mother’s womb, many women should be there, rejoicing, singing, dancing. He should know not only his mother as the woman, he should know many women just as he knows his mother. He will get a very vague idea what a woman is, not a very accurate picture from the mother. “Psychologists have become aware that no couple in the world is happy, for the simple reason that the woman is searching for her father in the husband. This is something unconscious that she does not know. Now, the husband has not married her to become her father. He has no idea at all that that is what is expected of him. And if he does not behave like her father, then the woman is frustrated. “And vice versa: he himself is looking for his mother. And you cannot find your mother again. Existence never creates similar people; its creativity is original. You will find millions of women, but you will not find your mother anywhere. Perhaps a few things may be similar: the color of the hair, the color of the eyes, the way the woman walks, the way she laughs, the sound of her voice-something similar, and you will fall in love. “But this is only a part of the woman. After marriage you will have come to know one hundred percent of the woman; and what you had fallen in love with may have been only five percent. And the same is true from the side of the woman: five percent of you is somehow similar to her father, and ninety-five percent is a stranger. Now, there is no possibility of these two people living peacefully, lovingly – almost impossible. “Five percent against ninety-five percent from both sides? There is bound to be continuous quarrelling, fighting, arguing; never a moment of peace. “So thousands of women are capable of becoming beautiful partners in life. And the girl also carries…in the same way the girl carries the impression of thousands of men. It is difficult for her to draw a picture of the man she would like. She knows only vaguely, and only qualities, not personalities. And she has learned that every man has unique qualities, and all these qualities don’t create the impression of a shoe. There is a possibility that people will be more in love with their life partners. The words “intimate enemies” will disappear, but “intimate friends” will take their place. “A child should be just an inquirer. It is impossible for a child to grow in a religious family and not be impressed by the beliefs, superstitions. And by the time he is able to inquire he already has the answers – but they are all borrowed. “In a commune it is possible, because a commune has no religion – everybody is an inquirer. Nobody is interested in imposing his ideas on the child, because he himself is finished with the ideas of others and is trying to find his own way. He will help the child to become an individual and inquire on his own, because truth is discovered by individual inquiry; it is not to be acquired by communal knowledge. “The child is going to gain immensely if the family dissolves into a commune. And the family is also going to be benefited immensely because they are no longer burdened with the child; the commune will take care of him. “Their experiences are rich. Nobody is trying to mold them, their freedom is infinite. Everybody is pouring his love on them. Why create this nonsense of nations? Why create this nonsense of races, of black and white…? “And the responsibility of parents in a family – it is a burden. They are continuously in anxiety: What is the child going to become? How to raise the child rightly so nothing goes wrong? “But everything seems to be going wrong. And there are hundreds of books which teach you how to raise a child, [how to be a mother,](https://www.oshotimes.com/insights/the-times/children-parenthood/the-art-of-motherhood/) how to be a father. In fact, there should be books on how to give birth to a child and not be a mother! – because that is one of the most hated words in everybody’s unconscious. “It is not only Jews who are against moms. Everybody is! “In a communal setting things are totally different. More than father and mother, uncles and aunts become important. “And you will be surprised to know that as far as [[Language]] is concerned, aunt and uncle are older words; mother and father are later additions, because there was a time when there was no family. There were tribes, an ancient form of the commune. “In the tribe nobody knew who his father was, because there was no question of marriage. People were producing children, people were making love, but there was no question of family. It was a tribe, all were living together. The child grew in a tribal atmosphere. That is the most natural atmosphere for the child to grow up in. “A commune is the most up-dated tribe. With all the facilities that science has made available, something tremendously revolutionary has become possible. “For example, there is no need that your child should have something to do with your wife’s egg or with your semen. This is something very stupid. You should think of the child, not of the semen and not of the egg. And how do you know which egg is your wife’s egg…? “The family want their child because he will inherit their property. “In a commune, whatever you have is the commune’s, and whatever you will leave behind will be the commune’s. There is no question of inheritance, so you need not be worried that somebody else’s child will inherit your property. In a commune, the property is the [[Community]]. “And you need not be worried that if you die or something happens to you, who is going to take care of your child? In a commune the child will not miss you. He will have so many women, more loving and more compassionate because he has lost his mother. The family is out-dated. The future belongs to the communes…. The small family is the cause of many troubles to humanity; it has to die, it has to disappear, and it has to be replaced by a bigger commune where marriage is a game you can play if you want. “And you can marry today and tomorrow you can divorce. Or in the morning you can marry, and in the evening you can divorce. It is just your decision. “There is no need to promise for the future, because the future has to be left open. Only then do people grow. If you promise for the future you have already blocked and destroyed it. No intelligent man can promise for the future. “Who knows what tomorrow is going to bring? You may meet a beautiful woman and suddenly your whole attention shifts from the wife to the new woman. There is [no need for jealousy.](https://www.oshotimes.com/insights/health/emotions/is-it-possible-to-live-without-jealousy/)You have to say to your wife that this has happened. “I am grateful to you for all those beautiful moments that you have given to me. Perhaps the time has come that we part, and I hope that you will find a better man than me.” “Naturally, if you have experienced a few people you always find better ones, because your understanding, your experience becomes bigger and bigger. You know whom to avoid – your old husbands! “It is beautiful to fall in a new ditch; at least it is new, fresh – rather than falling in the old ditch again and again and again. That becomes mechanical, it loses adventure. I am not against falling in ditches, just don’t fall in the same ditch again! Find some other ditch! There are so many ditches all around – why remain poor in your experience? And why keep somebody else remaining poor in her experience? In a small family the child is the problem. In a commune the child is not a problem. “The father and mother go on changing partners – that does not matter to the child. The child is being taken care of by the commune. He can go to his old father to see him, to meet him; he can go to his mother. It does not matter that they no longer live together. “In fact, it is enriching, because he will be meeting a new father, a new mother. When he goes to meet his father, he will introduce him to his new mother. When he goes to meet his mother, she will introduce him to his new father. And this is going to happen so many times that he becomes introduced to the whole commune. “This is more human. And he is no longer tied to a very small thing, he is flowing in a vast sea of human beings…. “These are going to be the predecessors, the pioneers for the whole [humanity in the future.](https://www.oshotimes.com/insights/lifestyle/spirituality/the-new-man-zorba-the-buddha/) There is no other way. [[Future Primitive]] The old family is finished; it is just dragging on somehow because people can’t see any alternative.” **Abridged from Osho, _From Death to Deathlessness,_ Talk #33 – The Nonsense of Nations**  **You can read the complete talk and see all the available media formats** [here](https://www.osho.com/osho-online-library/osho-talks/individuality-society-compromise-2b48c903-b58?p=35e75d183651e35e49ade499667d1e8b)[.](https://www.osho.com/osho-online-library/osho-talks/religion-bible-man-419ad0c6-863?p=83758d320e30bc56df949058c5ea1c26) ## Families Are Out of Date [<Back](https://www.osho.com/read/[osho/vision/the-greatest-challenge-the-golden-future]) NEW FORMS OF collectivities will have to come into being. I would not like to call them a "society," just to avoid the confusion between the words. I call the new collectivity a "commune." The word is significant. It means: where people are not only living together, but where people are in deep communion. To live together is one thing – we are doing it. Every city, every town, thousands of people are living together – but what togetherness is there? People don't know even their neighbors. They live in the same skyscraper, thousands of people, and they never come to know that they are living in the same house. It is not togetherness, because there is no communion. It is simply a crowd, not a [[Teams|community]]. So I would like to replace the word "society" with the word "commune." Society has existed on certain basic principles. You will have to remove them; otherwise the society will not disappear. The first and the most important unit of the society has been the family. If the family remains the way it is, then the society cannot disappear, then religions cannot disappear. Then we cannot create one world, one humanity. The family is the root cause of millions of diseases; it is the basic brick that nations are made of, races are made of, religious organizations are made of. **And the family has destroyed the blissfulness of men and women of the whole of mankind.** Today in the West every third marriage ends in divorce with all the horrible legal battles over kids and possessions. A majority of all violent crimes and murders in the world happen within the family between family members. The basic structure of the family is of possessiveness: the husband possesses the wife and they both possess the children; and the moment you possess a human being you have taken away his dignity, his freedom, his very humanity. You have taken away all that is beautiful and you have given him only handcuffs; perhaps made of gold – beautiful cages in place of his wings – but those golden cages cannot give him the sky and the freedom of the sky. The family tries to disconnect you from the whole society, just as the nation divides you from other nations; it is the same strategy of division. Once the family is gone, much of psychological disease will be gone; much of political insanity will be gone. **So the first thing is, a model commune will not have families.** The implication is clear: it will not have marriages. Love, for the first time, should be given the respect that has been its due for centuries. Love should be the only law between two human beings. If they decide to live together, only joy should be their binding force. And remember, like everything real, love also changes. Only unreal things, plastic things, remain permanent. Marriage is permanent, but it gains permanence by killing love. It is on the grave of love that marriage makes its house. Naturally it brings only agony, anguish, suffering, slavery and a total destruction of man's spirituality. A model commune will be a communion, a gathering of free spirits. Children should belong to the commune, not to the parents. Parents have done enough harm; they cannot be allowed to corrupt their children anymore – although their intentions are all good. But what to do with their good intentions? The results are all ugly. They teach their children to be competitive, and competition brings jealousy. They teach their children to become somebody in the world, to "make a name" for themselves. That makes life a struggle, not a rejoicing but a continuous fight – so destructive that it takes away all your joy, all your juice, all your flowers, leaving behind only skeletons fighting for power, for money, for position. Life becomes a battlefield. The whole blame goes to the parents. They have lived as ambitious beings, they have destroyed themselves. Now they go on giving to their children as a heritage, their unfulfilled desires, their incomplete ambitions. This way diseases go on from one generation to another. **We have to protect children from the past.** The only way is for them to belong to a commune. Children should not live with their parents but in communal hostels so the parents cannot poison their minds. Parents can meet them and spend weekends with them, but basically they will grow independently. And the commune should take care that there is no question of any religious or political [[Ideology]] or nationality, race, caste – all these things which divide. This is the only way to create a break with the past. It will help tremendously if children can see things in a different light. And having one father and one mother is psychologically dangerous because if the child is a boy, he starts imitating the father; if the child is a girl, she starts imitating the mother – and great psychological problems arise. Father and mother should recede, and uncles and aunts should take their place. There should be so many uncles and so many aunts...perhaps the mother should be the chief aunt and the father should be the chief uncle, but not more than that. **It is good that the family is disappearing.** If the children are in the hands of the commune – I have experimented with it and found it immensely successful – the children are far more happy, because they are far more free. No conditioning is stamped on them. They mature earlier, because nobody is trying to make them dependent, so they become independent. Nobody is trying to go out of their way to help them, so they have to learn how to help themselves. This brings maturity, clarity, a certain strength. And with the family disappearing, nations will disappear, because the family is the unit of the nation. So I am tremendously happy whenever I see the family disappearing, because I know behind it will go the nation. With it will go the so-called religions, because it is the family which imposes religion, nationality, and all kinds of things on you. Once the family is gone, who is going to force Christianity on you, Hinduism on you? **Right now everybody is forced to be according to the ideas of others.** That causes misery and great anguish, and takes all joy and gladness from life. Everybody should be himself and contribute to life according to his way, by creating music, or by creating paintings, or by writing poetry, or by producing better fruit, better crops, making better roads. Everyone should be allowed to have his own potential fulfilled. A model commune will give dignity to every individual. A model commune will create as much intelligence as possible, and will allow people to grow intelligently, to search and seek for their truth, because that is how one becomes more intelligent. By searching and seeking, intelligence is sharpened like a sword. Man has lived in unintelligence because all the religions of the world have emphasized only one thing: belief. And belief is poison to intelligence. They have emphasized only one thing: faith. And faith is against all growth. **The new man I conceive will not have any belief system and will not have any faith.** He will be a seeker, a searcher, an enquirer; his life will be a life of tremendous discovery, discoveries in the outside world and discoveries in the inside too. I want every human being to be a discoverer: a Galileo, a Copernicus, a Columbus in the outside world; and a Gautam Buddha, a [[Zarathustra]], a Chuang Tzu in the inside world. My whole effort is concentrated on one thing: to create the new man as "Zorba the Buddha." In a model commune everybody will have both qualities, the qualities of the Zorba and the qualities of the Buddha – tremendously interested in the outside world, and in the same way in love with the inner search. The day you are both together you have become the new man, and the new man is going to be the savior of humanity. A commune should be a gathering of seekers, of lovers, of friends, of creative people in all dimensions of life. We can produce a paradise here, on the earth. Family structure in society could be called [[Nepotism]] `Concepts:` [[Community]] `Knowledge Base:`