nemorathwald (
nemorathwald) wrote2005-01-19 10:14 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
The Twixters, and Fandom
TIME Magazine's January 2005 cover story is on The Twixters, a new life-phase that's emerging between teenager and adult. Modern educations have ceased to be worth much in the job market, so they can't afford a home, a marriage, or kids. They're renowned as Secret Masters Of Friendship, the "New Tribes."
I don't live with my parents, which would be wrong to them, but as long as I don't have kids or get married, I have no one to be irresponsible to. Why does the transition to so-called "adulthood" create more neediness in this world just in order to level it back out to zero in their lifetimes? If you're worried about being selfish, there's plenty enough pre-existing need to be met without having more kids.
And don't get me started on permanent, institutionalized romantic commitment as a pointless anachronism and "The One and Only True Forever Love" as a hormonally-deluded illusion.
And career? Anything worth loving is worth doing as a labor of love, for free, like open source software. People pay someone else to do the rest, which is called a job.
The article talks about "settling down" as if its value needed no defense whatsoever. What's that, a real-estate ad? The best they could do was question-begging, vague moral tut-tutting and undefined fear. We are expected to follow the railroad tracks of normality "because... uh... hmm... um... Peter Pan!" It should have asked, "why shouldn't everyone be a Twixter?"
Has this resulted in an influx into Fandom, which seems tailor-made for the tribalizing Twixters? Even though I'm 30 and therefore outside the high end of the age range, I am a Twixter and so are my friends. It occurred to me while reading the article that I don't spend time with anyone who has children. At M.O.F.O., I can only think of three couples, and none of them have kids. Is it just me, or do there exist two distinct hermetically-sealed contingents of Fen? I speak of those who have a house, a spouse, a career, and children; and those who have one of the above at most. Never the twain shall meet except at Concom meetings?
I don't live with my parents, which would be wrong to them, but as long as I don't have kids or get married, I have no one to be irresponsible to. Why does the transition to so-called "adulthood" create more neediness in this world just in order to level it back out to zero in their lifetimes? If you're worried about being selfish, there's plenty enough pre-existing need to be met without having more kids.
And don't get me started on permanent, institutionalized romantic commitment as a pointless anachronism and "The One and Only True Forever Love" as a hormonally-deluded illusion.
And career? Anything worth loving is worth doing as a labor of love, for free, like open source software. People pay someone else to do the rest, which is called a job.
The article talks about "settling down" as if its value needed no defense whatsoever. What's that, a real-estate ad? The best they could do was question-begging, vague moral tut-tutting and undefined fear. We are expected to follow the railroad tracks of normality "because... uh... hmm... um... Peter Pan!" It should have asked, "why shouldn't everyone be a Twixter?"
Has this resulted in an influx into Fandom, which seems tailor-made for the tribalizing Twixters? Even though I'm 30 and therefore outside the high end of the age range, I am a Twixter and so are my friends. It occurred to me while reading the article that I don't spend time with anyone who has children. At M.O.F.O., I can only think of three couples, and none of them have kids. Is it just me, or do there exist two distinct hermetically-sealed contingents of Fen? I speak of those who have a house, a spouse, a career, and children; and those who have one of the above at most. Never the twain shall meet except at Concom meetings?
no subject
On the fandom question, having a child means that if one is going to go hang at Mofo or Tio's, one must also have a babysitter. This costs $4 an hour in the Ann Arbor area in general; local mileage may vary (ie. you may have a swap arrangement with another family, or your mom may live nearby, etc.). In any case, add some inconvenience and about $20 to the cost of the evening. It makes it non-trivial to stop by.
There is an entire spectrum in fandom, from folks who are kid-phobic (there's just no other word for it; they get nervous and shaky when a small child enters the room) to folks with several kids, and everything in between. It does form a commonality - you have something to talk about. Oddly, people without kids tend to get bored hearing about my kids...hmmm....it's one of my favorite topics.... :-)
So clumps of 'With kids' tend to form, and also other clumps of 'Kid free' tend to form. The 'Kid free' can take off and go places on random weekends with minimal planning; the 'With kids' tend to have the next three months planned out like a military expedition. That's just how it winds up going.
Few are doing this intentionally; it happens because of economics and individual interest level.
no subject
no subject
My youngest brother, who just turned 29, lived with my parents pretty much non-stop until he started grad school last fall. I don't think that my parents regretted having him home for one minute. My mom says she misses him now, and my dad now has nobody to boss around on his home improvement projects. I know that my brother also benefited greatly from living rent-free, so for them it was largely a win-win situation. My other brother had largely the same experience, and moved out at about the same age (though he spent several years away at school in between).
By contrast I have really only visited my parents since I started college at 17, and I've been financially independent from them since age 20. I'm pretty happy with the hand I got dealt as well.