yo mama: a perspective study

pre-script: take from this what you may. some words might not apply to you, others might strike a chord all too true. it is important to remember how unique any one person is from the next.

some people are born into grand families of tight-knit relatives who adore one another's company. some people belong to a snippet of that reality, with a mother and father who care for their child(ren) in everything. some people begin this way and slowly experience painful differences as they grow older. some people are born into a broken relationship; some infants serve as the bandage to help hold that relationship together and heal it in time, while others may instead suffer the side effects of parental separation or disagreement. some people are born into families that don't want them, or that are otherwise unready for their presence. and still others live their lives never having contact with their birth parents.
no one's family is perfect, but it seems like such a basic thing in life should be as close to it as possible. after all, nurture plays as much a role as nature in life. one's family is often his first lesson in how the outside world may treat him. a parent can offer a child the safe haven of comfort from the world, or it can act to prepare that child for the harshness that is beyond the family, particularly by acting just as cruel. and this is all well and dandy for explaining the 'what,' but how about the 'why'?

"i don't get how someone can bring another person into this world and then treat them like they do"

what makes a person seemingly unfit to raise a child? and not the anthropological, psychological reasoning behind it. why do they act as they do? we are human beings, just like them. we have minds and hearts, thoughts and feelings, perhaps more than them. we don't want the scientific explanation of how this comes to be. we want a helpful answer so maybe we can change the status quo. because knowing the past in these circumstances only helps us to avoid becoming like that, which is a great endeavor, but how much better it would feel to have the parent change and treat us as we should have been treated all along: with love, respect and equality as a person.
the science may be that they were once like us, with a parent that didn't give them what they wanted, whether it was a new bike or a morning kiss. that can harden a person, and when they finally enter the world they feel at home, because their heart was not with their family. the science would suggest that we will most likely act the same if and when we become parents. but we know that's the last thing we want, "to be like him."
the science would say, you're obviously not a genetic replication of one parent, and perhaps their problem is that you did not turn out as they had hoped, that they tried to institute certain ideas in your head and you just didn't take to them; or maybe they didn't teach you anything and were "disappointed" that you couldn't learn these things on your own. i'm not suggesting how they treat you is your fault; neither am i outright defending you and blaming them, because you may against all odds end up just like them toward someone else one day, whether child or friend.
physical mistreatment is a separate topic entirely. from differentiating between negative and positive reinforcement, between abuse and punishment, between spoiling and loving, physical mistreatment may be a result of a child's poor actions or a parent's. in the latter, the question returns: how can they rear a child and treat them so? it is perhaps more understandable, though equally horrible, when it is a step-parent, but in either case there is a responsibility owed to that child for calling oneself his parent; it is not enough to claim the title just to gain authoritative power over the child. if a child does something wrong, then he should be reprimanded -- the means through which punishments are dealt can be argued for or against, but it is clear that if a given punishment yields no change in behavior, the means should be changed, not increased.

now for the part that's hard to swallow: i believe the father holds the responsibility as the head of the family, and it is often the father who proves troublesome to the children, while the mother is often the loving one who must take her husband's side should a dispute break out. this may come across as unfair to a child. this does not mean the father is always right, but that he should try to be. it is the father's job to bring up his family in truth, but also to lead them unfalteringly as "the final say" when others disagree. being in a position of leadership can bring with it much stress, and if the father is unable or unwilling to cope with that stress, what is his responsibility can weave its way into the fabric of his family.
the mother "serves" the father as his partner, because unity between the parents is the foundation of a family. this does not make her less of a person. the world has us thinking submission is such a horrible thing, when it is pride and independence that disrupt the natural order; an example of this may be seen within the military.
you may find that when the father is stern and strict, the mother counters that attitude with care and understanding. both parents see their actions as love, but the child is taught through their own reactions that one is more attractive. as unnatural as it may be, it is often the case that the father demands respect, whereas the mother is given it willingly -- unnatural because, it should be that both are honored willingly.

"you have to give respect in order to get it"

i've personally tried to live by this, to the point where i exhausted myself in never having received it, and applied it to his case rather than mine; that is, if he wanted it, he'd have to give it. i didn't completely give it up. i didn't deliberately disrespect him. i basically ignored his status as "father" and merely treated him as landlord or perhaps "antisocial tenant." it was not until i moved out that i finally gained some insight about his actions. throughout the years, i had been partly at fault for how he chose to treat me. scientifically speaking, if i do this, he will do that. well, at times i spoke out against his leadership, trying to interject reason when he was least likely to listen. however advantageous that was, there were punishments for insubordination, and however much i disagree with his unloving response in each situation, it is one understandable possibility when i see his God-given responsibility.
as i was saying, when i moved out, i witnessed the change in his association with me, as if all along he had been increasingly making my living status more difficult in the hopes to push me out of the nest. after all, much of the reality of reproduction is that one day the child will have to take care of itself, and ecologically, to take care of its own children. a parent cannot be expected to always provide for the child, and tough love is one means for accomplishing this division of interests as it were; albeit a poor choice, it is an option nonetheless. why it was chosen is a personal question, and if the answer can be given, it is best asked within a close relationship, one i believe i can only start to develop now that the factor of "living under his roof" is out of the way.

humans need love. regardless of whether one is deserving, the gift of pure, pleasant, heartfelt love is never a bad thing. "tough love" is not love. respect given for the sake of getting it, is not love. good actions based on good conditions, is not love. it is the hardest thing in the world to make someone love you, whether that is a parent or a crush or a friend whom you have wronged. in fact, it's impossible, because if they love you simply because you want them to, it is not love. the love you seek must come from their heart.
the harsh reality is, your life is not supposed to be perfect, or even close to it. some people might seem to have things better off, but once you connect with them and see life through their eyes, you have a chance to see how alike you are. maybe in one area of life you take for granted, someone else struggles. maybe their family really is borderline perfection compared to yours, but somewhere along their years they are guaranteed to have problems. if you had a perfect or even decent family, perhaps one you were proud of, you would have other areas of your life that would not match up.

post-script: to whom it may concern: "'they' is plural. 'his' is sexist." stop being so focused on rules that you ignore truth.