2017: Has marriage & 4-6 kids become the ultimate signal of real wealth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my circle it's 3-4 kids, private school, a country club and a house at the beach or in the mountains and a SAHM.

This, except I would say the cutoff is 4 kids

+ 2

4 is the max. Any more and people wonder if you're religious (usually the answer is yes - and that type of patriarchal mom is always pregnant lifestyle is NOT aspirational to aetheists).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That woman is gorgeous. I'd have six kids if I could look like that

Oh man. Same

[Anonymous]

Is this a real family or models?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you should have seen my face when I pulled this photo up



lol. Fwiw I have 3 kids now and there is no way I would want 5 or 6 total! Four would be my absolute max! I don't see how I could give 5-6 kids the level of individual attention I give my 3 kids now.

Nanny, au pair, tutors, housekeeper ... kids off to boarding school in grade 9. Hence, signal of wealth.

But as the parent, I still want to be able to give each child a certain amount of my attention each day. And I want my H to do so as well. Maybe I am too much of a control freak but as it is now I don't trust babysitters to oversee hw and I like to put them to bed myself and give cuddles, go to their activities and games myself, etc.

We're pretty maxed out time wise with 3 kids. I could see adding a 4th but no more than that.

Agree. I only have two (and done) and I still feel pulled between them sometimes. I'm not great at multitasking so it's very hard for me to, say, cook dinner and supervise two kids' homework. We are fortunate that DH makes a high salary so the decision to stop at 2 was 0% financial and 100% emotional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sheer fantasy. We'd all look like her after popping out six kids in six years.

Loser

[Anonymous]

https://youtu.be/xLTTX35LNJo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this a real family or models?

LOL it's obviously models. Those "parents" are like 24 and 26.

[Anonymous]

I'm not impressed whether you're poor or wealthy. This world needs to stop populating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that OP is shallow ~ the ad is an interesting talking point. ARE we glamorizing this Kardashian type breeding?

No, we aren't.

It's just an ad. An ad with a handsome gay model and a stunning teen model in their undies surrounded by adorable child models. They aren't trying to make a statement about socioeconomic status and family size. D&G doesn't even want house fraus and breadwinners to buy their brand.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you should have seen my face when I pulled this photo up



lol. Fwiw I have 3 kids now and there is no way I would want 5 or 6 total! Four would be my absolute max! I don't see how I could give 5-6 kids the level of individual attention I give my 3 kids now.

Nanny, au pair, tutors, housekeeper ... kids off to boarding school in grade 9. Hence, signal of wealth.

But as the parent, I still want to be able to give each child a certain amount of my attention each day. And I want my H to do so as well. Maybe I am too much of a control freak but as it is now I don't trust babysitters to oversee hw and I like to put them to bed myself and give cuddles, go to their activities and games myself, etc.

We're pretty maxed out time wise with 3 kids. I could see adding a 4th but no more than that.

Agree. I only have two (and done) and I still feel pulled between them sometimes. I'm not great at multitasking so it's very hard for me to, say, cook dinner and supervise two kids' homework. We are fortunate that DH makes a high salary so the decision to stop at 2 was 0% financial and 100% emotional.

+1

That is because you actually care more about your children's well being and less about using your kids for your own personal gains.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not impressed whether you're poor or wealthy. This world needs to stop populating.

.


X100000

Obvious to anyone with a brain. Plus, ever notice parents with four or more kids can't handle them.

[Anonymous]

Those kids are too close in age to be siblings.

[Anonymous]

So much judgement from people who claim tolerance. I think if some of you really stopped and thought about the words you just typed, you might feel a little less smug.

We have five children. We are not wealthy, at least not by DC standards. I SAH. My DH makes 200,000 a year. We do not live in DC right now. My DH is based out of DC and we spend about 18-24 months in DC every five or six years. So no. Not rich.

We attend a Unity church. We are spiritual but not particularly religious. All larger families are not Mormon or Catholic.

I think we spend plenty of time with our children. At least I hope we do. Four of them are grown. They all appear to be happy, healthy, productive members of society. They all received merit based scholarships to college. We are a very close family. Our children are home often for visits. Unless I am reading them wrong, they seem to feel they received plenty of attention. I guess the jury is still out on the 17 year old. He seems to be a happy kid. Our biggest gift to our children is a mom and dad who have been happily married for 29 years.

I don't see a significant negative environmental impact. We are very environmentally conscious. We have always recycled. We reuse. We have a large garden and grow about 70% of our fruits and vegetables. We always have enough to share. Our home is solar powered. We collect rainwater for the garden. We compost. We create very little garbage compared to most smaller families. We usually don't even fill one trash can a week.

I think living in a large family can be a good thing. Our children learned responsibility at a very young age. Even at two years old our kids had simple home and farm chores like helping collect eggs or pulling vegetables. Some of our kids love life in the country and have chosen to stay closer to home. Our daughter loves DC and lives a very urban life. The thing they have in common is responsibility. Our four oldest kids left for college, graduated, got good jobs, two got married, and all four live completely independently. No one is crashing on our couch. At least not yet.

I would caution you to be careful with stereotypes. You don't know the details of other people's lives. You don't know how their family was created. You don't know why they chose a houseful of kids. I've learned that I'm usually wrong when I make quick, uninformed judgments about other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No! One son, one daughter. That's the traditional "Rich man's family" in the United States.

Not anymore. Most of my ivy educated friends have 3 or 4 kids with mom staying at home. For a while 3-4 seemed like the new 2.

There are very very few families with four kids at my kids' private schools -- it definitely isn't a "thing." Three pretty common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much judgement from people who claim tolerance. I think if some of you really stopped and thought about the words you just typed, you might feel a little less smug.

We have five children. We are not wealthy, at least not by DC standards. I SAH. My DH makes 200,000 a year. We do not live in DC right now. My DH is based out of DC and we spend about 18-24 months in DC every five or six years. So no. Not rich.

We attend a Unity church. We are spiritual but not particularly religious. All larger families are not Mormon or Catholic.

I think we spend plenty of time with our children. At least I hope we do. Four of them are grown. They all appear to be happy, healthy, productive members of society. They all received merit based scholarships to college. We are a very close family. Our children are home often for visits. Unless I am reading them wrong, they seem to feel they received plenty of attention. I guess the jury is still out on the 17 year old. He seems to be a happy kid. Our biggest gift to our children is a mom and dad who have been happily married for 29 years.

I don't see a significant negative environmental impact. We are very environmentally conscious. We have always recycled. We reuse. We have a large garden and grow about 70% of our fruits and vegetables. We always have enough to share. Our home is solar powered. We collect rainwater for the garden. We compost. We create very little garbage compared to most smaller families. We usually don't even fill one trash can a week.

I think living in a large family can be a good thing. Our children learned responsibility at a very young age. Even at two years old our kids had simple home and farm chores like helping collect eggs or pulling vegetables. Some of our kids love life in the country and have chosen to stay closer to home. Our daughter loves DC and lives a very urban life. The thing they have in common is responsibility. Our four oldest kids left for college, graduated, got good jobs, two got married, and all four live completely independently. No one is crashing on our couch. At least not yet.

I would caution you to be careful with stereotypes. You don't know the details of other people's lives. You don't know how their family was created. You don't know why they chose a houseful of kids. I've learned that I'm usually wrong when I make quick, uninformed judgments about other people.

You're writing paragraph after paragraph apologizing for your huge family because you know, deep down, that none of what you said above is true.