In my opinion, it's because they don't fall within the acceptable range of normalcy.
For example, in the US if you're a 40-year-old adult it's normal to have 2-3 children (because most 40-year-old adults in this country have 2-3 children). If that makes you insecure, that's not my fault! Are we supposed to condone the welfare mamacitas with 7 or 8 kids and who can't properly pay for their upkeep? Or we should approve of those people who don't contribute to society by producing any offspring (either because these adults are defective in terms of their reproductive organs, they are so repulsive (physically, emotionally, and/or mentally) that they can't attract someone, or they're afraid that having babies will contribute to global warming)? For those of you who have dropped your lollipop and are about to cry, grow up!
2007-10-23 19:37:18 · 9 answers · asked by BobbyJoe Horowitz 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Etiquette
Lest you all start attacking me (that I should "take my own advice"), I have 2 boys and a girl. Three is within the normal range. And we're of European ancestry (which is also normal in this country - still).
2007-10-23 19:49:19 · update #1
I think what I am going to do is send you a lollipop and ask you to grow up! In the mean time just live and let live and don't dabble in matters far beyond your mental capacity! OK! LOL!!!
2007-10-23 22:55:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Who are you to judge what is normal and what is not? Are you that concerned with fitting into a socially defined slot? Why must everyone have children? And how dare you be so shallow as to assume that what is unattractive to you cannot be attractive to someone else?
In the US it is also "normal" to be unable to afford a home. So are all homeowners "abnormal"?
In the US it is "normal" to be a Democrat or a Republican. Should members of the Green Party or Independents be categorized as "abnormal"?
In the US it is "normal" for a male to read/watch pornographic material. Is it "abnormal" for a female?
In the US it is "normal" to have more televisions in your home than people. Would a person who has less or none at all be "abnormal"?
Are handicapped people "abnormal"?
People get offended because one person's peanut butter is another person's hummus.
In my opinion, you cannot produce such a vehement, one-sided opinion and not expect people to, erm, "drop their lollipops"? Perhaps you should grow up as well, and realize that your opinion is important to you as are your ideas and morality, but this opinion you have is not necessarily the informed, tolerant one.
2007-10-23 20:21:30 · answer #2 · answered by Weaslette 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your diatribe is a perfect example why some people don't like the term "normal" when referencing behavior.
Norms are for measuring. You cannot measure others based on YOUR measurment of what is normal.
And, you blatantly show your complete and utter ignorande of society by your absolutes concerning childbirth, welfare, race, language. You have proven yourself to be just a normal bigot.
2007-10-24 06:57:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
People get offended at just about everything these days. It's like they never grew up mentally. What's normal to you, may not be normal to me. Therefore there are many different "normals" in the world. If people could only take a chill pill and LISTEN to the question and understand the "different norms" concept, no one would be offended.
2007-10-23 23:29:34 · answer #4 · answered by DB 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To come up with your "normal" 2-3 kids, aren't all those with 7-8 kids added into the equation, and also all those with zero kids? If so, then what actually is "normal". You might have some sort of point, but using normalcy as your guideline doesn't easily make good sense to me.
2007-10-23 19:48:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sounds like you have a maturity problem as well as a stereotyping problem. Take you own advice!
OK now you are being silly...it is normal to be of European ancestry...please? So you are saying people who are not of European ancestors are not normal.
What you are really talking about is averages. The average family has...2 to 3 children, two cats and one dog, three cars, three TV sets, been divorced at least once, ect. So a person is not "normal" unless they fit the average statistic?
2007-10-23 19:40:49 · answer #6 · answered by suigeneris-impetus 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"Average" is a better term. Who is to determine what is considered "normal"? "Normal" tends to lump people in a box of what one person deems is right. What's right for one may not be right for another.
2007-10-24 01:30:17 · answer #7 · answered by Lady G 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because used that way it is incorrect-typical or average is much more precise.
2007-10-23 20:42:48 · answer #8 · answered by barbara 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
typical is a better choice of words
2007-10-23 19:42:36 · answer #9 · answered by worldstiti 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋