Message from @Leaf
Discord ID: 636565483574919168
you would go with your wife, and children if you had them
peopel all work on a farm
Family units migrated together generally, not in parts
and live together
no, old people were not moving west
family unit yes
"evolutionary behavior" is not at all clear
but how large of a family unit
The average life span wasn't that high even lol
one brother stayed in the original territory
Usually was not the case
life span stats are misleading, they include a lot of infant and childhood mortality
especially when you drastically cahnged the environment, then "evolutionary behavior" doesn't help much to predict what happens
well you mean amalgamation of families basicaly handrubbing,yeah for sure
we need a Chinese/Japanese clan system
if you made it to 22 you would be likely to live quite a long time
My entire family spent the last thousand years of their history living on just three islands
what may have evolved will no longer be beneficial in a drastically different environment
you're in the East, aren't you?
cuck island?
😉
Only the second most recent generation of my family left the rest and only within the last few decades
none of this refutes what I'm saying
yes "absolute nuclear family" has only been possible post ww2 or so
old people were not moving west, and at least one brother stayed behind on the original land
so people may actually have evolved in UK to get as away from family as possible for some reason, but because of economics they could not until recently, then when it became possible, the families fell apart
or certainly post urbanisation/ind rev
It does, when you there are labour and resource shortages, people don't split up and head into unknown territory full of hostile foreigners, they stick together
colonization ***did*** drive the Nuclear family for a long time
but they literally did though
This whole 'moving west' thing just applies to the U.S. out of dozens of colonial countries and also disregards entirely who exactly 'moved west'
it doesn't just apply to the US, it happened in Canada as well, the east was settled first
you cant have children without extended family support
there is reason to believe that having excessively tight families was so economically detrimental in the last thousand years in northern europe that it would have reduced birth rates
Yes, but the family units of eastern Canada didn't split up to populate the west, most of the families that peopled the land were new migrants from the UK
those willing to break family ties could have more kids by finding better opportunities
then, when it became much easier to separate, the families fell apart
Migrants that came with their entire families
For the most part
'economically detrimental' *rub hands*