Having read all the replies since my last post in this thread, here are a
few remarks, in no particular order.

Firstly -- I'll see you in Reykjavik! (sp?)
What's the catch, there? Perhaps someone who has been to Iceland or knows
more about Scandinavian economies can comment.
Why does it work? Does it, actually, or is the Guardian article just overly
positive?
Because of the basic level of prosperity -- there's enough to go around?
Because of the pagan tradition?
Because most of the people are pretty well indigenous? (Are they?)

Personal note: my kids are 12 and 9 and have been full-status people, worth
talking to!, to me from well before birth. Same goes for other people's kids
-- often I think they're more interesting to talk with than their parents. I
especially like toddlers with their insatiable curiosity about everything.
However, I think my attitude to kids is a bit unusual, when I look at how
most people treat theirs.

It's not that men don't love children -- it just seems that they love women
more. Or possibly it's that they love sex. My DH read in some American book
that what men want from a relationship is 'sexual intimacy' (a special
sexual status with one person, with sexual contact and intimate touch and
conversation) and 'respect'  -- and he agreed with it, based on his own
feelings. Women apparently wanted 'financial and emotional security' (I
don't know about that!). It seems to me that the only one of these that you
need an exclusive sexual relationship for, is the sexual intimacy.
Everything else, you can provide for yourself, or can mutually share among a
larger group of family or friends.

When Andrew Denton asked the elderly Sir David Attenborough, who had an
apparently successful marriage, what made it work, he spoke about commitment
to being a family... actually wanting to be a family. He said that if you
are always wondering if you would be better off somewhere else it's not
likely to work. Therefore, to make it work, you must mentally limit your
options and do what it takes to be happy in your chosen jewelled cage.
Attenborough's wife, unfortunately, is long since dead and not available for
comment.

As to my own 16-year marriage: he's a really nice guy, loving and
considerate, good in bed, and it would be perfect if I could just lose maybe
20 of my IQ points. Then I wouldn't be so bored.

Dom's right, the nuclear family is an economic prison. We are doing
reasonably well by most people's standards, but not well enough to afford
domestic help so I could spend time on writing and other intellectual
pursuits -- and having a social life! -- without our habitat being a mess
(which it is, by my own standards). The best thing that could happen to me
economically would be the accidental death of my husband. I could sell the
house (and most of the contents!) and buy one half the size and still have a
few hundred thousand dollars to invest. But I would lose a good friend and
be left with two very sad, fatherless children -- and if we wanted to be
near a useful amount of extended family, we would have to move to another
continent. Which wouldn't be impossible or necessarily undesirable. I know
it's taboo to think like that, but I do.

Janet
-- 
Janet Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
www.proximity.webhop.net (Poetry)
www.myspace.com/poetjj (Includes occasional arts & culture blog)

The Line Mine, bulletin board for Perth poetry & spoken word:
[log in to unmask]
groups.yahoo.com/group/thelinemine

Breastfeeding info & help: www.breastfeeding.asn.au