Author Topic: Are most people not interested in family trees?  (Read 6366 times)

Offline Intevel

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Are most people not interested in family trees?
« on: Friday 09 March 18 07:26 GMT (UK) »
I suppose at what time I didn't think much of family trees. But lately I've really been into meeting new people and it's rewarding to welcome new people into your life. But sometimes I'll have conversations with friends and they don't know the first thing about a family tree. Many of them say they have no interests in getting to know their cousins or 2nd or 3rd cousins. They think that's silly and just want to be with their friends and close family.

I feel the opposite. I think that it's very valuable to get to know more people in your whole family. You can meet more people, make more relationships, learn different things. I'm not sure why people only wanna have their circle of friends but don't wanna meet people that aren't a brother or sister. You can also learn more about yourself and your ancestry and family history.

So the one thing that concerns me is that even if you discover new people, they might have no interest in you. I've heard people say that anything not a mom, sister, aunt, uncle or grandma is not a relative, but just someone that shares some DNA. Not sure why some people are so negative about the topic. They just feel so grumpy.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline River Tyne Lass

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,278
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #1 on: Friday 09 March 18 07:33 GMT (UK) »
I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I think family tree interest is a bit like marmite - you either find you Love this or you have no interest whatsoever.

What I find fascinating is to consider that if one ancestor made a different set of choices then an entire future family would not exist.  We are each dependent on the choices and survival of our previous bloodline ancestors.
Conroy, Fitzpatrick, Watson, Miller, Davis/Davies, Brown, Senior, Dodds, Grieveson, Gamesby, Simpson, Rose, Gilboy, Malloy, Dalton, Young, Saint, Anderson, Allen, McKetterick, McCabe, Drummond, Parkinson, Armstrong, McCarroll, Innes, Marshall, Atkinson, Glendinning, Fenwick, Bonner

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Intevel

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #2 on: Friday 09 March 18 07:36 GMT (UK) »
I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I think family tree interest is a bit like marmite - you either find you Love this or you have no interest whatsoever.

What I find fascinating is to consider that if one ancestor made a different set of choices then an entire future family would not exist.  We are each dependent on the choices and survival of our previous bloodline ancestors.

My cousin was even laughing at how I'm fascinated with family trees.

Offline panda40

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #3 on: Friday 09 March 18 07:47 GMT (UK) »
I grew up knowing some on my second cousins not all of them and still see them now. I know my mums cousins and do family history with them. No one else in my immediate family are interested in the research I have carried out. I think you either catch the family history bug or you donít.
Regards panda
Chapman. Kent/Liverpool 1900+
Linnett.Kent/liverpool 1900+
Button. Kent
Sawyer. Kent
Swain. Kent
Austin/en. Kent
Ellen. Kent
Harman. Kent/ norfolk

Offline CarolA3

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,476
  • My adopted home
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #4 on: Friday 09 March 18 08:06 GMT (UK) »
My cousin was even laughing at how I'm fascinated with family trees.
And you care because ........................  ???

Carol
OXFORDSHIRE / BERKSHIRE
Bullock, Cooper, Boler/Bowler, Wright, Robinson, Lee, Prior, Trinder, Newman, Walklin, Louch

Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 27,727
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #5 on: Friday 09 March 18 08:10 GMT (UK) »
My cousin was even laughing at how I'm fascinated with family trees.
And you care because ........................  ???

Carol

Perhaps this is your answer Carol  :)

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=789456.

Doing your family tree is a hobby.  Are you interested in other peoples hobbies  :-\    I certainly see no reason to get upset if others are not interested  ;D
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline CarolA3

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,476
  • My adopted home
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #6 on: Friday 09 March 18 08:17 GMT (UK) »
Yes I saw that Rosie :)

I don't recall being that sensitive to other people's attitudes in my 30s :-\
OXFORDSHIRE / BERKSHIRE
Bullock, Cooper, Boler/Bowler, Wright, Robinson, Lee, Prior, Trinder, Newman, Walklin, Louch

Offline Intevel

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #7 on: Friday 09 March 18 08:22 GMT (UK) »
Yes I saw that Rosie :)

I don't recall being that sensitive to other people's attitudes in my 30s :-\


Well should I call him my ''sort of friend?''

Offline Intevel

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are most people not interested in family trees?
« Reply #8 on: Friday 09 March 18 08:22 GMT (UK) »
Yes I saw that Rosie :)

I don't recall being that sensitive to other people's attitudes in my 30s :-\


Well should I call him my ''sort of friend?''


But the problem is I would get banned if I continued to argue with you because people like you would get sensitive. People are such hypocrites.