Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Modern parenting, extended family, and why "village" life looks a bit different now

101 replies

FoxInGarden · 10/08/2026 09:20

Hey everyone,
I’ve been doing some reading lately on how family and parenting structures have evolved, and it got me thinking about the whole concept of "it takes a village."
We hear all the time about how hard raising kids is right now—childcare costs are through the roof, local support networks are stretched thin, and parents are exhausted trying to do it all in isolated nuclear family units. But looking at how families actually function, it’s so clear that we rely heavily on people who step outside the traditional "mum, dad, 2.4 kids" mould to help hold communities together.
Anthropologists and evolutionary folks talk about how, in nature and across different cultures throughout history, having a "reserve army" of extended family, aunts, uncles, and community members who don't have biological children of their own has always been vital. They act as alloparents—extra hands for mentoring, emotional support, fostering, adopting, and just buffering the community.
Even looking at modern data here in the UK, it’s amazing how much heavy lifting LGBTQ+ and diverse families do in the foster and adoption systems, stepping up for kids who desperately need stability.
It just makes me roll my eyes when older public intellectuals try to throw a fit in the weekend papers, acting like gender variance or non-traditional lives are some brand-new "modern psychosis" or fad. Human societies have always had a diverse mix of roles, and frankly, modern parenting is hard enough without posh old biologists gatekeeping who is allowed to care for, protect, and support children.
Has anyone else noticed how much we rely on our wider, non-traditional "village" these days? How do you guys find your local support networks?

OP posts:
FlirtsWithRhinos · 11/08/2026 13:26

Kingdomofsleep · 11/08/2026 11:15

No, I am talking about babies who are young enough to be exclusively breastfed before eating food: their mothers will always be nearby to feed the baby. A newborn is fed basically constantly and the "extra women" have to pass the baby back for that. An aunt or cousin might have a quick cuddle but the mum will be spending much more than half her time attached to the baby.

Unless in the occasional circumstance where an aunt is also postpartum to breastfeed her niece/nephew, which is far less taboo in many places than it is here.

When you see babies being strapped to the other women or sitting about playing within a group of women, they're not newborns any more but 6-12 months old.

The requirement to breastfeed keeps the mother and baby near to each other and this has a safeguarding benefit.

When the baby starts breastfeeding less frequently (4-6 months plus), that's when the family members take on more of a key role.

Edited

Genuine question - are wetnurses a common human thing or was that very specific to Western culture at a particular time?

Not meaning commercial nurses or enslaved women here, just whether it's fairly usual in human cultures that women nurse babies that they are not the mother of.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread