Settler words&music in S'ólh Téméxw, (leanpub.com/upsun) living where privilege meets precarity in MST country. she/her/they———– Novels: Midnite Moving Co., Upsun; Sweep Off Those Waves coming soon, Hair Sinister after that. —Restore All Indigenous Lands!
Born when atmospheric carbon was 316 PPM. Settled on MST country since 1997. Parent, grandparent.
View all posts by Allegra
4 thoughts on “Messing with mOm’s head”
All I can say is ARRGH!!! Family trees are tough enough without the emotional component. And I think that for practical purposes one wouldn’t want to delve into those relationships in one’s own kin. Objective professional could do it, maybe, but I got dumped on for wanting include my first cousin’s husbands #2 and #3 in the family tree. #1 she had children with; #4 she’s still with, but her view was why rake over past mistakes? And I recently connected with a grandmother (kin but distant) who couldn’t give me the names of all her grandchildren. That was because three of her six children had been married three times each, with stepchildren entering the mix with second and third marriages. One had been married only once, and one. She THOUGHT she had 18 grandchildren, all told. In each case of multiple marriages among her children, she had a preference for a spouse other than the current one, and therefore for the children of that spouse by a previous marriage. And in each case she had gossipy soundbites about her children-in-law, past, present and presumably future. That would be a DANDY family to try this emotional relationships thing on – or not.
All I can say is ARRGH!!! Family trees are tough enough without the emotional component. And I think that for practical purposes one wouldn’t want to delve into those relationships in one’s own kin. Objective professional could do it, maybe, but I got dumped on for wanting include my first cousin’s husbands #2 and #3 in the family tree. #1 she had children with; #4 she’s still with, but her view was why rake over past mistakes? And I recently connected with a grandmother (kin but distant) who couldn’t give me the names of all her grandchildren. That was because three of her six children had been married three times each, with stepchildren entering the mix with second and third marriages. One had been married only once, and one once. She THOUGHT she had 18 grandchildren, all told. In each case of multiple marriages among her children, she had a preference for a spouse other than the current one, and therefore for the children of that spouse by a previous marriage. And in each case she had gossipy soundbites about her children-in-law, past, present and presumably future. That would be a DANDY family to try this emotional relationships thing on – or not.
Plus of course the british study that found that approximately 15% of putative fathers were in fact not the actual fathers.
Seeing as that is being used in medical circles, won’t that be a dandy bit to be carrying on a chip once they get issued/inserted?
All I can say is ARRGH!!! Family trees are tough enough without the emotional component. And I think that for practical purposes one wouldn’t want to delve into those relationships in one’s own kin. Objective professional could do it, maybe, but I got dumped on for wanting include my first cousin’s husbands #2 and #3 in the family tree. #1 she had children with; #4 she’s still with, but her view was why rake over past mistakes? And I recently connected with a grandmother (kin but distant) who couldn’t give me the names of all her grandchildren. That was because three of her six children had been married three times each, with stepchildren entering the mix with second and third marriages. One had been married only once, and one. She THOUGHT she had 18 grandchildren, all told. In each case of multiple marriages among her children, she had a preference for a spouse other than the current one, and therefore for the children of that spouse by a previous marriage. And in each case she had gossipy soundbites about her children-in-law, past, present and presumably future. That would be a DANDY family to try this emotional relationships thing on – or not.
All I can say is ARRGH!!! Family trees are tough enough without the emotional component. And I think that for practical purposes one wouldn’t want to delve into those relationships in one’s own kin. Objective professional could do it, maybe, but I got dumped on for wanting include my first cousin’s husbands #2 and #3 in the family tree. #1 she had children with; #4 she’s still with, but her view was why rake over past mistakes? And I recently connected with a grandmother (kin but distant) who couldn’t give me the names of all her grandchildren. That was because three of her six children had been married three times each, with stepchildren entering the mix with second and third marriages. One had been married only once, and one once. She THOUGHT she had 18 grandchildren, all told. In each case of multiple marriages among her children, she had a preference for a spouse other than the current one, and therefore for the children of that spouse by a previous marriage. And in each case she had gossipy soundbites about her children-in-law, past, present and presumably future. That would be a DANDY family to try this emotional relationships thing on – or not.
Plus of course the british study that found that approximately 15% of putative fathers were in fact not the actual fathers.
Seeing as that is being used in medical circles, won’t that be a dandy bit to be carrying on a chip once they get issued/inserted?