11: Reframing The American Dream (Part 1)
The nuclear family has been held up as the ideal for generations, but it's actually a relatively recent invention. From college dorms to pandemic pods, some of our happiest moments come from living in community with others. So why do Americans cling to independence as a marker of success? In our Season 2 premiere, we explore how our individualistic lifestyle developed, what it's costing us, and how reimagining family structures could create a more connected future.
The nuclear family has been held up as the ideal for generations, but it's actually a relatively recent invention. From college dorms to pandemic pods, some of our happiest moments come from living in community with others. So why do Americans cling to independence as a marker of success? In our Season 2 premiere, we explore how our individualistic lifestyle developed, what it's costing us, and how reimagining family structures could create a more connected future.
Our guest is Dr. Kristen Ghodsee, professor of Russian and Eastern European Studies at the University of Pennsylvania and author of Everyday Utopia: What 2,000 Years of Wild Experiments Can Teach Us About the Good Life.
Referenced in this Episode:
__________________________________________________________
Episode transcript is below. Transcripts may not appear in their final form.
__________________________________________________________
Julia Winston: Hey everybody. I know it's been a really big week here in the United States. I think right now we're all going through a big change and we are reorienting around how we relate to each other in this country. it doesn't really matter who you voted for. The stories that we tell here on ReFamulating are meant to be an invitation for you to see yourself through someone else's eyes, to see people that you know and stories that are familiar to you through the stories of others who you've never met before.
Because one thing we all have in common is the ways that our families are changing and the ways that our families are changing us. It's such a human thing to have a family and for that family to be changing, for you to be changing as a result of what's happening in your family. And together, collectively, we're all facing a moment of change. So I hope you enjoy the stories that we're here to tell this season and that you relate to people through the stories that we're bringing you.
THEME MUSIC
This is Refamulating, a show about different ways to make a family. I'm your host, Julia Winston. Welcome to Season 2!
We’re not the only people talking about non-traditional families. You’ve probably been hearing examples of refamulating all over the place lately. It was a hot topic on both sides of the presidential campaign
Doug Emhoff: Hello to my big, beautiful, blended family up there.
JD Vance: We're effectively run in This country via the Democrats by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made.
Newscaster: According to the Pew Research Center, 44 percent of non parents aged 18 to 49 say it's not too or not at all likely they will ever have children
Julia Winston: And not just the news, It’s been all over pop culture…
Lala Kent: I know that this is not the norm. And I just feel like going the donor route is the right decision for me.
Ali Wong: And now, there's all these men after my divorced mom energy. A divorced mom is very special because she doesn't want commitment. She doesn't want to have your kids.
Julia Winston: Refamulating is everywhere. And the examples you just heard are part of a bigger story that involves all of us. We Americans tend to cling to the nuclear family as a beacon of success, but the data shows that most of us don’t have nuclear families. This gap has been growing for quite some time. The definition of family is changing. It’s kind of a big deal, and people are talking about it all the time. So I made up a word for it. Refamulating.
Most of our episodes feature stories about individuals who are making change within their own worlds. And we’ve got some great personal stories coming your way this season. But first I want to zoom out and start with a focus on what refamulating means for us as a society.
As it stands, our systems here in the U.S. are set up to benefit nuclear families even though nuclear families are not the majority. For example, married couples with kids have advantages that single people don’t, like tax breaks and family insurance plans. Housing is another great example. There’s just not a lot of range. Apartments and single-family houses are designed for couples or small family units, but we don’t see many options for larger groups like multigenerational households or people who want to live communally.
So what would it mean for us to refamulate as a society?
Today’s guest is going to help us think through different ways we could live - how we could think more expansively about housing, the people we live with and how we raise our children.
Right now, with so much change in the air, we have the opportunity to write a new story, one that includes families of all kinds.
And to start telling that story, first I want to take us back in time to 2020.
Not March, when the pandemic was just starting and we were all terrified. But let’s say….August 2020. When we were five months into lockdown and realizing we weren’t just gonna be staying home for a few weeks. For most people, five months into the pandemic felt like a grind. Our entire lives had shrunk.
Millions of us spent hours each day working on one screen just to log off and go watch tv on a different screen.
Parents were hanging on to their sanity by a thread after months of remote school and a summer with no camps or activities to entertain their kids.
It felt like most of us were tip-toeing around each other and judging each other out of fear that we would get each other sick.
We had little to look forward to, our days were bleeding together, and most of all, many of us were lonely.
I was devastatingly lonely. I was one of those single people who’d had a break up and suddenly found myself living alone in a little house in Oakland with no physical contact whatsoever. There was no one around to hug me, or share meals with me, or even ask me about my day. I had just moved, so I didn’t know my neighbors and my friends were all taking care of their own families. I sat on my laptop all day working, then I logged off and cooked for myself and watched tv and went to sleep and started all over the next day. Every day.
Everyone had to adjust to a whole new reality during this time. Our weeks had once been filled with so much casual socialization: chats with co-workers, nights out with friends, playdates and babysitters to give parents a break. All of that went away, and when we were left to socialize with just the people in our homes or on our screens, we started getting itchy.
It’s around this time that we started hearing the phrase “pandemic pod.”
NPR 1A CLIP: When it comes to education, there are no easy choices for parents this fall. Well, there's a growing wave of parents exploring a different approach. They're forming learning cooperatives with other families. A handful of families pools their resources to form a so-called pandemic pod led by a parent, a tutor, or even a private teacher.
Julia Winston: Many of us without kids adopted the concept as well. We banded together with friends, neighbors or family members and created tight-knit circles so we could socialize with a select group while socially distancing ourselves from people who weren’t in our pods. We didn’t have a word for it yet, but I think it’s safe to say… we were refamulating a little bit.
Meanwhile, Kristen Ghodsee was sitting at home watching this unfold, fascinated. These social pods were forming out of desperation, but Kristen saw something different: a return to our natural state.
Kristen Ghodsee: Humans, we have lived communally. Like deep, deep, deep, deep, deep, in our evolutionary anthropology for thousands of years, we've been living this way.
Julia Winston: Kristen, also known as Dr. Ghodsee, is a professor of Russian and Eastern European studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Most of her academic career has focused on the transition from socialism to capitalism in Eastern Europe. But also…
Kristen Ghodsee: I've always been very interested in utopian experiments and the ways in which human agency and dreams and desires for a different future can actually end up changing the world.
Julia Winston: So when Kristen saw hyper independent Americans sharing resources and helping out with other people’s kids, she felt energized to start a new project.
Kristen Ghodsee: It seemed the appropriate moment to really think about all of the pandemic pods that people were suddenly spontaneously forming or the mutual aid societies that popped up in Brooklyn or popped up in West Philly. There was suddenly all this energy around communal solutions in what is otherwise a very individualistic society. So I was really inspired by both this idea of finding bottom up solutions, but then also the sort of unique way that the pandemic kind of broke our society and showed us the limits of the nuclear family and the limits of being as isolated as we are from each other..
Julia Winston: That’s when Kristen started working on a book called Everyday Utopia: What 2,000 Years of Wild Experiments Can Teach Us About the Good Life. The book, which was published in May 2023, explores different ways people around the world throughout history have structured their homes and families. It’s full of real-life examples about community-oriented ways of living that are very different from what we see in today’s nuclear-family-oriented America. I read this book when I started working on Refamulating, and I loved the provocative ways that Kristen challenges the status quo.
Kristen Ghodsee: Where do the ideas that we have today come from? Why is it that the nuclear family feels so natural when it's actually such a recent invention? Why are other ways of organizing our lives feel so unnatural when actually they have a much deeper evolutionary anthropological base to them? And I'm really curious always in the ways in which discourses and ideas and narratives about what is natura l or unnatural sort of come down to us, how we inherit certain perspectives. The way we see things in the world, and then we internalize those perspectives. And then we feel like failures if we don't live up to the expectations of those perspectives. So for me, thinking about the family as a, as a feminist and as a scholar, and as somebody who has spent a long time thinking about people and movements and political projects that really wanted to change the world by, also changing the family and really looked at the family quite critically as a place from which the world could be changed.
Julia Winston: I want to be clear here that Kristen doesn’t think the nuclear family is bad. She’s just done a lot of research about families around the world and wants us all to know…there are many ways to have a strong, loving family. The nuclear family is not the only way, and for many of us, it may not be the best way. We have mountains of empirical evidence showing us that human connection is what’s most crucial for health and happiness, yet Americans seem to be more separated than connected.
Think about it, most of us spend our free time tucked away in our own houses with our own stuff, commuting alone in our own cars, rarely interacting with neighbors because anything we could ever leave the house for can be delivered to our doorsteps.
Humans are not built to be so isolated from each other. This is what the pandemic taught us, but in the years since we’ve actually taken a giant step backwards! In 2023, the Surgeon General of the United States, Vivek Murthy, published a report called “Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation” and declared that we have a full-scale public health crisis. All the things we were told to strive for are actually making us sick! We’ve gone too narrow. So now seems like as good a time as any to stop and ask ourselves: is the way we’re living actually working? Maybe it’s time to think bigger.
Kristen Ghodsee: If we're talking about expanding our families, if we're talking about expanding our communities, if we're talking about living more collectively, it redefines our definition of success in the world, of what it means to be an adult.
Julia Winston: To question how we live in America, is essentially questioning the American Dream. This idea that in order to reach our highest potential we’ve gotta get married, have babies, and make as much money as possible. Buy your own house for your own family and own all your own stuff. If you’re successful, you don’t have to live with a roommate, or do laundry with strangers. You can drive yourself to work instead of taking public transportation. These are the goals we set for ourselves. This is the American Dream.
But what if the American Dream as we know it really isn’t so dreamy after all?
And more importantly, what would it look like to center connection instead of achievements? This is the question Kristen poses in Everyday Utopia. What would it look like to redefine success? We’d be reframing the American Dream. And maybe that’s just what we need.
When Kristen started writing Everyday Utopia, she viewed it as an academic project. She wrote the first few chapters, no problem. Then she started writing a chapter about the history of the nuclear family…and she was completely blocked.
Kristen Ghodsee: I could not start the family chapter. And I was like, what's wrong with me? You know, I know exactly what I want to say. I have so many ideas and so many thoughts, but I was totally just blocked. I could not do it. So I finally called my mom and I started talking to her about like my own childhood and my own experiences. And that was extremely painful and extremely difficult, but It explained why I was so blocked writing those chapters. I asked her if it was okay and I started writing kind of the story of my own experiences and my own hesitations about, you the idealization that people have about the nuclear family.
Julia Winston: She realized that her hesitation was coming from a deep seeded belief based on her own lived experience: that a nuclear family doesn’t equal a functional family.
Kristen Ghodsee: I'll just say that my family of origin was not a happy family. It had all the outside appearances of a happy family. We did the whole suburban you know, two car garage thing, like most people did in the 70s and 80s in Southern California. My dad was an immigrant, my mom was Puerto Rican, and my mom herself had actually had a very difficult childhood. So there were a lot of complications in that family. And I spent, I would say the vast majority of my adult life not really thinking about it.
Julia Winston:“From the outside, my family fit every stereotype of middle class America,” she writes. “But those quaint four-bedroom McMansions on the cul-de-sac hide a lot of misery. My mother clung to her fantasies of the 2.3 kids and the two-car garage on the other side of my father’s fists.”
On the outside Kristen’s parents seemed like the epitome of the American Dream, immigrants who bought a house and raised children in America. But for Kristen, that dream was a nightmare. The fantasy of the American Dream was so strong for Kristen’s mother that breaking up the family wasn’t an option. So she stayed in an abusive relationship, which trapped them all in a cycle of abuse.
As Kristen wrote this chapter of the book, she realized she wanted to share her own experience of finding love and support beyond her nuclear family.
Kristen Ghodsee: Betty Olson was my English teacher. I had known her over multiple years and she had kind of witnessed firsthand the fallout of my parents, partially because we had these extra credit assignments that allowed us to kind of reflect on our own lives through the books that we were reading in our English class. And when I finally couldn't handle my own nuclear family, I ran away from home, found myself quite late at night alone in a Greyhound station in downtown San Diego with not much money and the bus schedule, wherever I was going, Northern California, I didn't leave until the morning and I needed a place to crash.
And so I had her phone number because she had actually helped me with the SAT. She had actually convinced me to go to college. Believe it or not, I wasn't going to go to college. I find that very ironic now that I'm a university professor. I almost didn't go to college.
So she got herself out of bed and came down to a not so savory part of downtown San Diego in the late 1980s, then picked me up. And I basically lived with her, uh, for over six months, her and her husband, they had their own, uh, children that had all grown and moved out. And so they had their, uh, the bedrooms of their children available and they basically let me move in and they cared for me and helped me sort of get myself on my feet until I was able to, to move away and start university.
And it was an incredible act of kindness and generosity that was, I think, not just directed towards me. I later learned when Betty Olson died, there was one of those online obituary things where people leave comments. And I went on and was reading some of the comments and there was some other person, I think it was under a pseudonym who said, like, I was a very troubled teen and Miss Betty Olson kind of came in and helped me and kind of righted my life.
And so this was a woman and her husband, Tom, who transformed the lives of children who were not their own, including me. And I am so grateful to them and I'm so grateful to have had that experience. And I realize only now, I think how rare it is in the world for people who aren't your parents or some kind of blood relation to sort of step in and take responsibility for a young person who is really in need. And I think that's just an incredible gift that I'm really grateful for.
Julia Winston: Kristen stayed with Betty and Tom as she finished high school, and then went to college with their encouragement. Tom and Betty Olson played a very important role in Kristen’s life. She even dedicated her book to them. Kristen refers to people like Tom and Betty as “an extended kin network”: people who are not blood-related but support you like family. Betty Olson is also an example of an alloparent, which is a word Kristen uses to describe another adult who provides parental care for a child who isn’t biologically theirs.
Kristen’s perspective about the nuclear family struck me so deeply when I read the book and learned her personal story, so that’s where I wanted to start in our interview.
Julia Winston: So I want to talk about the nuclear family for a moment here. How did the model of the nuclear family come to be the default in American society at least? And why is it actually not normal in a historical context?
Kristen Ghodsee: From an evolutionary anthropological perspective, we are cooperative breeders. We have always raised our children in larger groups than just two parents, and that's not just our blood related kin. It's also not blood related kin. This is, you know, pretty well established in the anthropological literature. And from a historical perspective, most historians think that the nuclear family, our model of it, which is called socially imposed universal monogamy. So it's important to understand that mating practices and child rearing practices are separable. So you can be in a pair bond with somebody who is a primary romantic or even platonic partner. Pair bonds, we are pair bonders as humans, but we've always raised our children cooperatively.
Julia Winston: So how did we end up with this one family structure becoming the norm? Kristen gave me a very good history lesson.
Kristen Ghodsee: The key thing is that historians suggest that socially imposed universal monogamy comes from ancient Greece and from ancient Greece it jumps to Italy, Antiquity, the Roman Empire, and from there it sort of infiltrates the Catholic Church.
And the historian Laura Betzik makes this wonderful I think argument about why it was that monogamy was so important to the Catholic Church from a financial perspective. And what she says is that in societies where you have a inheritance structure that is based on the doctrine of primogenitor, which means that the oldest son inherits the entirety of the father's estate.
Julia Winston: In this culture the second son often joined the church as a clergy member.
Kristen Ghodsee: And so if the first born son fails to produce a male heir, then upon the death of the father, the estate will go and, and the death of the oldest son, the state transfers to the second son, which means that it goes directly into the coffers of the Catholic church.
So the Catholic church had every single motivation to ensure monogamy. And obviously Catholic missionaries spread out all along, all around the world. And the indigenous studies scholar, Kim TallBear talks about what she calls white settler sexuality, which is this imposition of monogamy on non European populations around the world.
Julia Winston: Okay, so… how did this practice infiltrate American culture?
Kristen Ghodsee: It has everything to do with the Cold War, and it has everything to do with in the aftermath of World War II, women's rights, and civil rights were very much associated with communism and deviation as was atheism, right? And so there was Elaine Tyler May has a beautiful book called Homeward Bound, which is all about the ways in which the United States government very deliberately tries to isolate returning GIs into the suburbs where they have their private cars and their wives and children are kind of isolated in these single family boxes and they have to consume all of the products of American capitalism.
Narrator from 1960 government video promoting suburbs: This new age builds a better kind of city, close to the soil one more, as molded to our human wants as planes are shaped for speed. New cities take form, green cities. They're built into the countryside, they're ringed with trees and fields and gardens.
Julia Winston: This was the lifestyle we should all strive for. A bigger home for our family, more time to focus on our kids, with amenities like washing machines in the home and personal cars that helped us spread out from each other.
Narrator from 1960 government video promoting suburbs: The daily marketing's part of the fun. In fact, the market's just an annex to the kitchen. Another chance to chat about the children's measles or the weather.
Kristen Ghodsee: And so, you know, it gets rigidified in the fifties. And then between the fifties and the present day, suddenly people have this kind of historical amnesia and they think this is the way that families are. When in fact, for the vast majority of our history, we've actually lived in much more extended kin networks.
Julia Winston: Remember, an extended kin network is a fancy way of saying non-blood relatives who feel like family. Many of us already have something like this informally - our friend’s kids call us aunt or uncle. We house sit for someone who’s out of town. Or we have dinner every Sunday with the same group of friends.
But when Kristen talks about extended kin networks, she’s encouraging us to legitimize this idea a bit more. Bring it a little closer to home, so to speak. Maybe live with more people or more intentionally look after each other’s kids. Expanding our families in this way is something many Americans consider fringe behavior.
Kristen wants to educate people about other ways of living because she knows how lonely we are in America.
Remember the Surgeon General’s report I mentioned earlier about our epidemic of loneliness and isolation? The main point of the report is that, and I quote, “social connection is a fundamental human need, as essential to survival as food, water, and shelter.” Social connection means expanding beyond the nuclear family.
I am also an advocate and educator on this subject. I teach a class at the University of Texas called Design for Human Connection and have my undergraduate students read this report as their first homework assignment. I strongly believe that community is not just a “nice to have” - it’s a fundamental human need that we’re basically ignoring in modern American society. And that’s making us sick. I agree with Kristen that it’s time to expand our networks of love and care.
After the break, Kristen talks about the idea of living more communally and how this can help us combat our epidemic of loneliness and isolation.
Julia Winston: When I say “living communally,” I’m referring to a group of people who share physical space and daily life in an intentional way. Americans tend to think that if you live communally it must be some kind of cult, and obviously there’s the cult version of that set up- we’ve all seen the docuseries.
But there are a million other ways to live communally that are not cultish at all: think summer camp, college dorms, sorority houses, and retirement homes. These are all familiar situations where people are sharing space and resources in their day-to-day lives.
But all of these cases involve either young people, or old people. Kristen writes about people who’ve found different ways to live communally in mid-life - in their 30s, 40s and 50s.
Most of us in this age range idolize the dream of having our own homes, with our own appliances and our own cars. It’s so much more CONVENIENT! Here’s a crazy stat: Nearly 30% of American households are single occupancy- meaning only one person lives in them.
Kristen Ghodsee: Oh, that's a big percentage of Americans who are living alone.
Julia Winston: And I’m one of them.
Kristen Ghodsee: That means heating and cooling individual dwellings, which is completely inefficient as the climate changes. So that's the first thing, is that we know that it's actually more sustainable in the long run. The reason it's more sustainable, obviously, is because people buy less stuff. And if people buy less stuff, that's really bad for the people who sell stuff. I'm not saying that this is a conspiracy. It's not a conspiracy, but, but, but there is pressure on us to live as individualistically as possible, because it increases spending. Two thirds of the American economy is consumer spending. So it's incredibly important for our economy that we all have individual refrigerators and washing machines and dryers and stoves and dishwashers.
So from an environmental perspective, um, It makes sense, but from a capitalist perspective, it's an incredible threat. So of course you're going to say anybody who lives collectively is either a loser or a cultist or some weird hippie, druggie, communists, right? Um, that's the narrative that we have to have about these people.
Now, that being said, that isn't to deny that some of these experiments have gone terribly wrong in the past, right? There are cults, uh, and there are communes that have not thrived, right? They've fallen apart for one reason or the other. So I'm not denying the somewhat sordid history especially in the United States, but in balance A lot, most of these utopian communities, they either kind of fizzle out of their own accord, or they persist, or they're smashed by mainstream society.
Julia Winston: And it’s natural to be influenced by mainstream society so much that we take on these perceptions as our own. I’m guilty of it as much as the next person. I’ve totally internalized the idea that living alone is a sign of success. A few years ago I bought my own house, which was a huge milestone for me. The fact that I can afford to support myself in this way makes me feel independent and successful. Plus, I love my space. But I gotta admit… something’s missing.
Kristen Ghodsee: this narrative of privacy and convenience And lack of contact with other people in the world is a mark of success. The thing that makes people most happy at the end of their life has nothing to do with money or jobs or career success. It's relationships. We actually know that really clearly. And yet people associate autonomy, this is a very American thing, autonomy and privacy and, you know, Lack of connection with success. And so, so much of what we need to do, if we're talking about expanding our families, if we're talking about expanding our communities, if we're talking about living more collectively, is redefine our definition of success in the world, of what it means to be an adult.
Julia Winston: She’s right - we don’t talk about it enough. Because the truth is, I’m proud to be a homeowner, but what I long for the most is to live in community. I went to sleepaway camp as a kid, which is probably where my love for communal living started. Then I lived in a dorm with some of my best friends while studying abroad in Prague during college, then I lived communally on a kibbutz in Israel in my mid-20s, and again with a group of other creatives in San Francisco in my late 20s. In all these cases, I loved being part of a small community where I got to contribute, where I felt like I mattered. It felt so good to belong. But it also felt like a pit stop on the way to something more “mature.” Like if I wanted to become a successful adult someday, I’d need to have my own place. And now here I am, a single homeowner, longing for more community.
Kristen Ghodsee: The other part of this, and this is the part that I think I struggle with the most, is that some people just don't want to share. In unit laundry is a big thing. People want to have their own washer and dryer. I wrote about, my experience, uh, living on a kind of academic commune back in 2006, 2007, when my daughter was four and five and how I, I lived in a, in a group of, um, through group of apartments where there was a shared laundry and it was pain having a kid, you know, and having to go, you know, And do the laundry and like wait for the machine and wait for the dryer and hang around. And, and yet it became one of the most joyful communal things that I did in the week because I met other people with kids my daughter's age who are also doing their laundry. We, so I often want to give up community for convenience, and I am just as much to blame as anybody else.
Julia Winston: I can totally relate. My heart wants community and my head wants convenience. Why hassle with sharing when you can just place an order on Amazon Prime? This is how we end up with an epidemic of loneliness and isolation.
Kristen Ghodsee: One thing that we do have, which I find really interesting, is an obsession with wellness and self care, right? If you really want to be well, true wellness, true homeostasis is only found in community with others. Then we might be able to, to, to, to twist the narrative. And the irony of that, I think is that in some ways, I think that's already starting to be true. That like wealthier people are starting to recognize that community is really important. And it's, it's socioeconomically disadvantaged people that are becoming increasingly isolated. And so that makes me really sad in a way.
But on the other hand, it means that this could become It could become something, right? Like co housing, co living, building, you know collectives of, let's say, older women who are, um, sharing, pooling resources, sort of golden girl style, or things like mom-unes, right? Single moms buying a house together and raising their kids in common. So there's, there's all these, these models that are out disdained, partially because they're associated with, you know, being a loser or not being successful, but also because they actually do represent a real threat, I think, to capitalism.
And so I write in the book about Johnson County outside of Kansas City, where they have banned co housing, right? They've banned more than three non-consanguineous people living together in the same house because they don't want people, especially young people, to do the kinds of things that we're talking about.
Julia Winston: By the way, non-consanguineous is an academic term that means: non blood related.
But we gotta pause here for a second and talk about this thing in Kansas. Shawnee, a large suburb of Kansas City, passed a law a few years ago that essentially bans roommates. It’s now illegal for four or more unrelated people to share a home. That means no more than 3 roommates. The city said that they were seeing more interest in creating co-living spaces, and they wanted to prevent this type of housing in neighborhoods with mostly single family homes.
Why does this have to be such a threat? Especially with so many people struggling to afford housing. And because we know communal living can be so enriching!
Julia: One thing that struck me when I read the book was just like, what are some of the, the best years of our lives as we talk about it in the U. S.? Like college, like, yeah, those are the best years of your life. Why is that? Why is that?
Kristen Ghodsee: Because we live communally, I mean, obviously, like I work at a university, I see the students. But they eat communally, they walk everywhere, they go to the lectures, they have a gym, they have parties that they can sort of stumble home to, they have all their friends around them. There are events and, you know, cultural activities, clubs, a cappella concerts. There's so much going on and it's all within walking distance and it's all within a very, very tight knit community and all universities, residential universities, at least residential college, the residential college model.
That's the model that people really associate with the best four years of their lives. And they think, Oh, it's because I was young and I was learning and, you know, I was starting out and I didn't have any responsibilities. But if you stop and think about it for a second, it's probably actually because you were living with a whole bunch of people who had kind of shared interests and you were able, you had a kind of freedom of, you know, Moving in a space where everything was interconnected and walkable.
There are examples of people like older little old ladies who are forming kind of grandma communes and living together in their kind of, you know, after their husbands or they're divorced or, you know, widowed or whatever.
Julia Winston: My college friends and I have a fantasy of living together in our golden years. We call it “Jiggle River” and joke that one day when we’re old ladies with jiggly arms we’ll live in a big house and laugh all day long sitting in lawn chairs down by the river. I love it so much. And I’m also kinda like… can we just do that now?
Kristen Ghodsee: They're choosing communal ways of living. There are matriarchal eco villages like, uh, Nashira in South America. There are these incredible new communes in even places like China. So there’s an incredible diversity of ways of living in the world that do not replicate this particular model of the nuclear family.
Julia Winston: Yeah, I find it so inspiring hearing example after example of the types of expansive families that exist right now out in the world. And I really love this one line that you say in the book, which is: “it's silly to be dismissive of radical social dreams when there are so many people already showing us how to turn these dreams into practical realities.” And I think These are practical ways of living, they're just not the ways that we see reflected in our media all the time.
Julia Winston: Kristen thinks people are ready to start considering communal living as a viable path. This comes back to what she observed during the pandemic. One point she makes in her book is that living communally or at least with a larger village when raising kids would make parenting so much easier.
Kristen Ghodsee: We live communally when we're young. And we tend to want to live communally when we get older in retirement communities or Golden Girl type houses. But precisely in these middle years when we need the most help from allo parents, it could be godparents, friends, colleagues, neighbors, what have you, grandparents in some cases, we tend to isolate ourselves in the nuclear family. And there's a real reason for doing that. And that's because parenting in the United States in the 20 First century is a contact sport. There are limited amounts of resources out there and it's very competitive.
And so the reason we raise our children in isolation from each other is because we believe that in order to maximize the potential of our own children, we have to give them exclusively all of our resources and attention. And we can't squander any of those resources and attention on other people's children, because then we're disadvantaging our own children. And so there is this desire for precisely this moment when we need help from others to isolate, to create the boundaries. And that's what broke down during the pandemic.
That's what I think was so interesting is that parents particularly mothers who thought they had it all hacked, right? They were paying for, you know, a nanny or an au pair, or they had a really good childcare situation or whatever it was, you know, while they went off and sort of hashtag slayed the boardroom, boardroom or whatever, girl bossed it and we're making an, enough money to hire a cleaner and hire, um, a cook or whatever, there was this way in which that whole system broke down and suddenly they were sort of stuck. Guess what? You got to raise your own kids and clean your own house and cook your own meals and do all of that stuff on your own. And people were like, this is impossible. I can't do this. This is really, really, really hard to do. And so. What do they do? They went out and formed pandemic pods with other people to share the labor. So it was like the most natural thing in the world was to say, Hey, there's another way of doing this. And it's to share it with other people who have young kids. And it took the pandemic to open people's eyes to that reality.
Julia Winston: And especially during the pandemic, people clung to their pods out of necessity. But once we were vaccinated…everyone slowly started retreating back to their own worlds. And that’s probably because living in a larger community has its challenges
Kristen Ghodsee: If you're in a pandemic pod, you're, you're, you have to nurture these mutual obligations, right? Other parents, and you might actually get attached to somebody else's kid. You might actually not feel comfortable like buying your kid an iPhone 15 when the other kid has like a lame Samsung flip phone or whatever.
I don't know. There may be guilt associated with Massive levels of socioeconomic inequality in our society that could be uncomfortable, but that not might not necessarily be a bad thing in the long run. I think that the more we expose ourselves and we allow ourselves to open our hearts and care for other people's children, we actually do become a more compassionate and connected society, which ultimately benefits everyone. everyone, including our own biological children. Even, you know, somebody like the conservative David Brooks had this article in the Atlantic called the nuclear family was a mistake, right?
Julia Winston: Brooks’ point was that nuclear families don’t have strong enough support systems, especially in a world with waning faith communities. If someone dies, gets divorced or moves, the family fractures. We linked to an interview with Brooks in our show notes if you want to hear more.
Kristen Ghodsee: I mean, this is a, this is actually a well documented historical and evolutionary anthropological argument. I think we just live in a society where we are inundated with nuclear family propaganda.
I mean, that's what we are fed constantly, a constant diet of this idea that we are not really functioning, reasonable, decent human beings, unless we are in a pair bonded monogamous relationship, hopefully, you know, um, with, uh, a partner with whom you have children. So many of us in the world today are If we don't have it or we don't want it, we are made to feel lesser than those who do have it and do want it.
Julia Winston: Oh, I feel that fully. I mean, that is, that is definitely like where That's where I'm at, you know, and, and part of why I wanted to even create this show was just that I heard the statistic that More than half of all adults in the United States of America are unmarried and I was like, I'm sorry What? How is it that the narrative that we've been fed about what we're our lives are supposed to look like at a certain age is so radically Different than what's actually happening. To me that just means there's a lot of people out there who are suffering and who are feeling less than. I'm one of them As a single 40 year old person without children I am, I mean, this project for me is a way of reckoning with that, almost maybe in a way that everyday utopia has been, you know, was subconsciously on some level for you also of trying to make sense of, well, that's not how my life looks.
Julia Winston: In your foreword. You say, for over two millennia, people have dreamed of building societies that reimagine the role of family. Everywhere you look today, people are exploring new and different ways of organizing their personal lives. Why do you think that is? Why now? And what are some examples that you're seeing that show us that there is this appetite for something different now?
Kristen Ghodsee: In my book, I use the word family expansionism. we should create wider lateral networks of love and care and support. And I think that it's really key to understand that this has so many different permutations. And when we look out, Across the world, we see an incredible variety of practices around mating and childbearing.
Obviously there are group marriages where you have multiple men and women that are in relationships for one reason or another. We also have polygyny and polyandry. So polygyny would be one man, many wives. And we also have polyandry, which is one woman who has several husbands within that category. Then you have, for instance, in Brazil, you have things called partible paternity, whereby a woman will have a child with multiple fathers and they all feel themselves to be those fathers. Then you have a kind of traditional pair bonding, which can look like heterosexual. It could be homosexual. It could be people of multiple genders. And then there's celibacy and, uh, and what we call asexuality today, but there's a long tradition of people who are unpartnered and who are what we call allo parents.
Kristen Ghodsee: Kristen has written a lot about socialism and capitalism around the world, so she studies family structures through that same lens. Many people throughout history have used the word “utopian” to describe a better society. I asked Kristen what “utopia” meant for her as she wrote this book.
So many of the things that we take for granted today, free public education in public schools at public expense was the 10th biggest Point of the communist manifesto, you know, people who send their kids to public schools, don't even think about the fact that that was once a utopian demand. Childcare was a utopian demand. No fault divorce was a utopian demand. Same sex marriage, right? Utopian demand.
These were people who went out and dreamed differently. So for me, utopia is not a point. It is not a place that you get to. It is a constant conversation let's say between where we are now and where we might be in, let's say 50 years or a hundred years or 300 years if we've survived that long. And I, I think that that's the beautiful thing about utopia as a concept. is that it's always kind of pushing us forward. It's kind of pulling us into the future. It's kind of forcing us to reimagine things that we might take for granted in our daily life.
And so everyday utopia for me is this idea that utopia is a big thing, but it's also a little thing. It's also about showing kindness to your neighbors when your neighbors are not being very kind. Sometimes utopia is about imagining that we all have good in us and we have the capacity to forgive and we have the capacity to create unconventional ways of being that, that will help us all thrive in the long run. And I, and I find that like, Just being kind, just sharing sometimes is the most utopian thing you can talk about in the United States.
Because we are, especially in the United States, an incredibly individualistic and selfish and materialistic society. And so even just saying, wow, You know, a whole bunch of people could live together in harmony and share their stuff and raise their kids. People will go like, you're just the most utopian person I know.
So yeah, it's a, it's, it's an appropriation of a word that some people use as a pejorative to refer to those who are naive. And I think that it's important to Embrace that and say, yeah, okay, fine. Maybe this is a utopian vision that people will be nice to each other in the future, but it's a utopian vision that I'm willing to fight for. And I think that a lot of people will actually benefit from, and I know that there are a lot of people who agree with me.
Julia Winston: the whole end of the book is really about practicing radical hope and This gives me so much comfort in my heart because it can be overwhelming to think about, Oh my gosh, how on earth, like if we know that we're healthier and happier and that historically it's totally possible and normal for us to live more collectively, for us to help each other, raise our Children for us to have company for us to share resources to share spaces. But oh my gosh, it's so overwhelming. We live in a capitalist society. What do we do? Where do we start? So What is radical hope? And what are some small steps that each of us can take in our private lives to actually have more happiness and connection?
Kristen Ghodsee: Yeah. So in the book, I make a distinction between hope as an emotion and hope as a cognitive capacity. So hope is an emotion. We know what that is. It's like, I'm hoping that the rain will stop. Uh, and it's the opposite of anxiety and fear as an emotional feeling.
Hope as a cognitive capacity is the ability to imagine a particular future, an outcome that you want to see in the world, and then developing pathways is to get to that goal While recognizing that there are going to be challenges and obstacles around the way and also developing ways to deal with the challenges and obstacles. If you join arms with others, if you create a community of others, that your actions today can actually build that future. That's what radical hope means. This is really a committed form of political engagement with the future. I'm not saying it's easy. I often myself fall into despair. What do I do to get out of it? And that's not always easy.That's where I think the everydayness of my everyday utopia book title is really important.
If you volunteer your time to spend or share your time with somebody else's kids. Take them down to the park, maybe take them to a movie, maybe do Lego with them or do a puzzle. Share one of your passions. That is political work.
We need to support each other, if we're going to make it into the future as a species, the most important thing that we can be doing is creating those communities of trust and kindness, because that's, what's going to sustain us in the long run. And even though I despair, like everybody else despairs, every time I see another headline, I think, Oh my God, how are we going to get through all of this? I think back to all of the examples in history where ordinary people and ordinary acts of kindness and generosity lifted each other up. People lifted each other up and they made it and they survived
Julia Winston: I think what I hear you saying is, Any act, large or small, whether it's like organizing community or just calling a friend outside of your own relationship and spending time together or going and spending time with with children in your community, all of these acts are ways of creating more connection and ways of you don't have to go join a commune in order to be more communal and that even these small things are really acts that can help all of us move more towards a utopian way of being even during a time that feels really dark and really dystopian
Kristen Ghodsee: Exactly. Okay. Yeah, because we are so social, we are so embedded, whether we like it or not, we are embedded in our social worlds. And it's those social worlds that sustain us and that we also have a part in sustaining. sometimes it's as simple as smiling at somebody on the street rather than averting your gaze, right? That can mean the world to somebody who's having a bad day. And you may never realize, you may never know the impact that you've had on that person. But sometimes that can make a huge difference.
Julia Winston: In the last decade, I’ve changed my point of view about family a lot. I started my 30s assuming that one day I’d get married and have kids. Then, when I donated my eggs, it forced me to address my own ambivalence about having kids of my own, and start embracing my life as a single, childfree woman. This path led me to ask myself, “what do I truly want?” Now, at 40, I’ve realized that community is what I truly want. I want to feel the presence of more love, care and support in my day to day life. I want to share the experience of being alive with a family of friends. I’m trying to figure out what that means right now, and I think it means being in closer proximity to certain friends.
Another big shift for me has been re-defining what success looks like for me as an adult. I’ve come to this conclusion: Success for me is how connected I feel to the people I share my life with. When I look back at my life from my death bed, I’m not going to care about money or achievements. I’m gonna care about the quality of the relationships I had.
This conversation with Kristen helped affirm all of these new mindsets I’ve been adopting. And it also helped give me a better framework for how I decide to set up my life from here. Now I’m asking myself, what is my version of utopia?
In this season of Refamulating, we invite you to imagine your version of utopia. If you allowed yourself to open your mind and remove all judgements or expectations, how would you structure your life? What would your perfect romantic relationship look like? How would you raise your kids? What roles would your friends play? What is your ideal living situation?
The more we talk about our truest hopes and dreams, the more we can shed stigmas that hold us back from living more connected lives. Even if it means doing things a little differently.