Monday, February 1, 2010

Living Small, Living without Kids?

I read two articles lately that were very interesting to me for several reasons.

The first was on the new little cars that use small amounts energy to run and conserve fuel and the second on the growing trend of "living small" which includes the building of tiny homes no bigger than an average bedroom in some cases.

The gentleman in the link article began by building his own tiny 89 square foot home without any previous building skills and now builds them for others, so well done was his own.

The tiny house is cute, well done and efficient,though the loft bedroom would be hellish on a hot night I think. The home costs him less than $100.00 a year in utilities and is on wheels.

At first the idea of living small looks appealing. Cute house, cute little cars, living off the land as much as possible, keeping garbage to a minimum. All very appealing in some ways, but on closer look you note , as I did with the small cars, that there is no room for a family. The same is true with the tiny houses.

The trend toward things made for single living seems to be urged on by a global change agenda that considers people more of a nuisance to the environment rather than the rulers of the environment as G-d intended.
An article, HERE, by NASA of all things, shows that living tiny is now being promoted by government .

Where are the children in the living small agenda? There are none. If there were any, the living little sheds would need living slightly bigger additions! The living small trend is about you, yourself and you and maybe a "significant" other if you can squeeze them in and that seems to be the growing trend in the world today. There has been a decrease in the desire to have and raise children. People , single, solitary people with tiny cars, tiny homes are to squeeze themselves into the vast expanse in as tiny a way as possible. They should be hardly seen and very rarely heard.

At one time a large family was to be desired but by the 1960's anyone wanting more than two children was mocked and derided. G-d says the person with children is blessed and happy. Children are the gift of G-d but the world sees them as an imposition it seems.

Even with immigrants changing the face of nations, people are still not interested in procreating.'Self' is very powerful today for that and we see abortion as the birth control device of choice. So desperate are people not to have children that abortion has become a highly charged issue. 'Self' also is part of the increase in depression.

The desire for family has fallen by the wayside for most people and it seems that the focus is on anything other than on creating a family. The focus seems more oriented to self. You rarely if ever see articles on the joy of family or its benefits. Many never speak of how nice it is to come home to the sights and sounds of a real family brimming in a house. We do see articles on the joy of not creating garbage, living little and recycling and saving the earth, however. Home buyers look for extra bedrooms not for children but for "office space".

Some of the greatest memories of childhood can be the sights, sounds and smells of home and the close relationship with others in the family. The fun, the spirituality and the support one found there can be a rich blessing. Quilts on neatly made beds, the smell of dinner cooking in the kitchen, fresh linen on the clothes line, family meals, talks, games, religion.... home. Home included grandparents in bygone days too and families were not far flung and disjointed as they are today. In this advanced society, family members are all over the place and hardly know one another. Some members bounce around like some piece in a wild arcade game.

Today, young people are mainly alone, off on their own wandering, looking for meaning , purpose and direction which seems to allude them more and more. There is no family that is a rock from which to step out into the world, only a tenuous situation from which to walk away. Without a firm footing behind you going out into the world is a scary proposition. One needs strong family behind to step off. It is a wonderful thing for a child to be born into a situation where there are parents, grandparents and cousins to rely on. Adventure is great but family is more important.

What happened to change the idea that children are one of life's ultimate blessings?

When did they become merely an obligation or something that just happens?

When did family break up and each part move to separate outlets around the globe without much family feeling? Without family unity cultures fall apart.

Children, if families have them , are farmed out to day care and Mommy is a person they see at the end of the day only. Overworked already, she is stressed and tired when she picks them up and they receive what is left over.

Yes, it costs money to have children but I can't help but believe that the necessity of two incomes was bolstered by a large work force of women. Once the world found that two income families had more disposable income they demanded higher prices. Prices are usually exactly all that the traffic allows. If you can spend it, they will charge it. No one will build half million dollar homes if they can't sell them to you. If you don't buy it, they will have to come down in price. If no one is willing to pay very high prices for a pound of meat, the rotting surplus will convince the seller that the price has to come down.

When people had one income, business understood that prices could not keep increasing exponentially as they seem to do today. Prices rose and fell according to what the market could bear. From 1890 to 1960 prices for food increased relatively little, but from 1974 prices have skyrocketed wildly upwards. Yes, I realize that is not the only reason, but I believe it is a powerful reason. Another powerful reason is that people are willing to pay exorbitant prices for things without so much as a whimper. Not bright at all, but, another symptom of today's declining , accepting, far too laid back world.

Mommy has been denigrated. Addressing the question of " what do you do" was answered with head down and a small , ".... just a housewife". Feeling small, insignificant and unimportant and with political movements making quite a deal of women fulfilling themselves and their potential outside the home it was the only way they thought to answer such questions.

I recall one article entitled , "Not Just a Housewife Anymore!"

Not "just", as if it were some insignificant thing.

So some thought they had to liberate women from that insignificant thing.Being Mom was insignificant , they reasoned, and therefore that was the problem. No one believed that perhaps the problem was ungratefulness to mothers and wives, or to wrong priorities in the world.

A woman didn't have to have children or raise them anymore. Instead, she could get out there and slug it out in the corporate world, which, according to most, was the whole reason for being!
Being a housewife had to take a back seat to what the world considered better. Being Mommy was something you do in your off hours.

It was not long until women realized they actually wanted children very badly. Still, the world told them that home and family was just not enough and without both children and a high paying job of some kind, a woman was still a loser. Woman found herself holding down a full time job, having children , cleaning house and making meals from early morning to far into the night. She was expected to pull her weight and then some.

A family , such as it was, had to move to get to the better jobs. Grandparents now became people you see on holidays or every few years if you can afford it. Strangers replaced extended family for child care and eventually having more than one or two kids became just too much trouble.

Today, people put off marrying until later in life with women scrambling to have children in their late 30's and even 40's, with or without benefit of marriage. Many men don't care much about marriage at all since sex is now available outside in many cultures. Self satisfaction is the order of the day for so many people. Family goes beyond that and is not a priority anymore. Homes are either McMansions on postage stamp plots of land or now, the ultra tiny shed-like houses on vast stretches . Middle ground is fading fast.

The planet is taking precedence over people and the humans are asked to take up less space and use less resources while the rain forests are encouraged to run rampant and wild. The people are made for the planet, not the other way round !

Somehow our priorities got scrambled very badly.


Here is the list of reasons to to live in a tiny home on the NASA site:
  • They are inexpensive to build.
  • They are inexpensive to maintain.
  • Utility bills (electricity, water, heating gas or oil) are tiny.
  • They are quick and easy to clean.
  • They are very efficient—everything is within reach.
  • They make a tiny carbon footprint compared to regular-sized houses.
I will add to that:

  • If you are elderly or handicapped they are impossible to navigate but then renewed interest in euthanasia might help here.
  • If you want children, you are out of luck, no room for the little guys.
  • If you like to read and have a bit of a library you will find no room for your books.The powers that be don't want you to be too bright anyway it seems.
  • Hospitality won't be easy. Family meals? Not easy to manage.


  1. they want to bring on the age of poverty, after impoverishing the country in the name of environmental dogma

  2. And of course most of the top preachers of the "small" doctrine live in mansions, and fly on gas guzzling private airplanes. But we're not supposed to notice the utter hypocrisy.

  3. How true, how true …

    I'm not sure just how much W. W. II can be blamed for women … moms who left the home to go to work to support America's war effort in place of the men who left to fight, but that had a huge affect on family life.

    Once mom found out how much more money could be added to the budget it was all over. Keep up with the Jones. Too bad, for I still remember what the home I was raised in was like in the late fifties through the sixties.

    Things were pretty good until Elvis died in the seventies … and then everything fell apart.

  4. I dont blame WW2 for it. Women have always worked but before the 60's it was not an institutionalized push to get all women out of the house.
    The women's movement pushed at women by making them feel inadequate for being Mothers, or as they put it "only a housewife". They pushed and pushed at the fact that women were "unfulfilled", though that was not the truth.
    The lie was kept up until people began to believe it.

  5. On the other hand--the house I grew up in was very large. Huge eat-in kitchen; large living room and dining and a park-like backyard with two walnut trees, big lilac bushes and a cherry tree. We never needed to rent a hall or picnic shelter for large family events. We had plenty of room.

    Our large kitchen was the focal point. Even friends I haven't seen in years still remember all of the family discussions we had at that table. LOL. Why are kitchens more intimate places for families than living rooms?


Please Don't use bad language.
or mock other religions. or our President etc.
Please do not use racial or sexual slurs about anyone.

Thank you :)