This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Is this just an American English term? I'm in the UK and have never heard of it. If it is specifically AmE, we should say so. If I'm just clueless, we don't need to say that. :P 86.143.53.52 12:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I've heard this used in international schools that mimic the British system. Has anyone else ever heard of the term "Expat Brat" though? It was tossed around quite a lot back in my international school Jademushroom ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC).
This term (and the research it describes) seems to have an anglo-centric bias. What about the experiences of second generation (or more accurately, 1.5 generation) migrant children who accompany their parents to another country? It seems that these children's experiences mirror the TCK experience except in reverse - they are usually going from a non-English-speaking country to an English speaking one.
Why is there no mention of this in the article? Surely the experiences of non-English-background migrant children merits some research.
This is a new online service for all military brats (former and current). I just added this to the "external links" section of the article--
Does anybody else have no idea what the charts in the "career decisions" section is trying to portray? Hku04 01:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone provide a source for the following:
The term "third culture kid" is sometimes used in an unrelated sense to describe autistic children and people with Asperger syndrome who grow up in their childhood in considerable isolation and without much social relationship, largely in a conceptual world. citation needed
I have never heard of this and I have done a lot of reading on TCKs. It doesn't even make sense in this context. I suggest we remove it, unless someone can provide a reputable source.-- Thorwald 20:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I added a "citation needed" stamp to this phrase/term and abbreviation as I have never seen this used in literature. I also view it as a dichotomy of sorts (i.e. "Adult ... Kid"). I understand what the term is attempting to convey: These TCKs are now adults. I am an adult and a TCK. I view "Kid" as simply part of the term, TCK, and continue to refer to myself as a TCK. If you can provide a source for "ATCKs" I will agree to keep it in the article. Otherwise, I think it should be removed (it really adds nothing to the article and sounds forced).-- Thorwald 22:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
"Global cultural rainbow?" Who in the world wrote that?
I am not sure I like the new "Question" additions. They don't seem to be set in an encyclopaedia style. Also, the new references are not complete. For an example, "Brown, 1993" is not a reference. Where was it published? What is the title of the journal? Etc.-- Thorwald 07:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
What are your guys feeling on Barbara Schaetti has proposed a developmental model for third culture kid identity development based on earlier identity literature, primarily on nigrescence, in which a number of different mechanisms are explained for the wide range of identity outcomes that third culture kids may have. Nigrescence literally means "the process of becoming black." I've found some questionable resources that define it loosely as the "Negro to Black Conversion Experience." I looked up Barbara and most things dealing with her relate to public speaking engagements/coaching on intercultural subjects. When I combined the two terms (Negrescene and Barbara Schaetti) the only thing that I could find were a few second hand sources that I don't consider to be authoritative mentioning her PhD dissertation. Most of the things I found for her were links that referenced Wikipedia as its source. Personally, the sources that I can find seem pretty weak and the fact that I can't find anything on Negrescene makes me question if this should be in here. Balloonman 15:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
To the person who keeps changing, * TCKs are unlikely to work for big business, government, or follow their parents' career choices to likely. Please provide a reference to your assertation that TCK's are likely to do it. You wrote International School Service 8(4) on your response, but that isn't a recognizable reference. ISS, does however have Ruth Useem and Ann Cotrell's research article wherein they state, "One won't find many TCKs in large corporations. Nor are there many in government." [3] If you have a reference that is contrary to that, then let us know. But until you can cite something authoritative, I'm going with the major study's conclusion performed by Ruth Useem and Ann Cottrell. Balloonman 17:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The above research also states, Although they may have been influenced by their parents' work overseas, they have not followed in parental footsteps. Twenty percent of this sample were MKs, but only 2 percent have a career in the church. Likewise, 25 percent were military dependents, but only 6 percent are in the armed forces. Balloonman 17:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, with the concern about blog style creeping in, I'm going to undertake the task of getting this article up to FA status. I think this article would make a great FAC... and I would love the assistance of those of you who are regular contributors here. Thus, I'll be making my changes directly to the actual article. Balloonman 09:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
As a TCK, I have first-hand knowledge of what it "means to be a TCK" . . . however, because of this, I can be biased of/on my input. My "peers" (other TCKs) can back up my contributions. My concern is that this article is being written by those who only have "academic" knowledge of this phenomenon. There is too much more to the story than what very little the academics have studied. We are a very under-studied group of individuals and this article does not do justice to what we are really all about. It has been my experience that it is very much not the case that the majority of TCKs are "military brats" (as the article suggests). The vast majority of us are from diplomatic families (as I am; my father is a third-generation diplomat) and/or from philanthropic backgrounds (again; the case with my family). That is, there is a very concerted effort by certain families/groups who intentionally live in an international environment and who are, by the very definition, TCK-families . . . this article does not represent this group. I have purposefully abstained from contributing my very personal experience because I feel it could interfere with the "objectivity" of the article. However, I must challenge those contributing to this article to back up their contributions with very creditable information from the very sparse academic input; not just hearsay! I can, and will, summon my TCK-peers for pertinent information for this article.-- Thorwald 10:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
If the Category is added again, I will delete it again and call it Vandalism at that point. Children of God <> Missionary Kids. Missionary Kids is a sociological term that has specific connotations that "children of God" does not fit. Please provide sources before making this claim again. Right now I'm assuming good faith, but this is not a content dispute. Provide sources that indicate that you understand the term and that it is used to describe COG, and I will accept it. But right now, it is nothing short of OR that is unrelated to the subject and in my opinion inflamatory to TCKs/MKs. Balloonman 05:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
as tck american, living in germany and going to an international school where the language we learn in is english, i found this article very intersting. for most of the points it made, i found its hypothesis correct, but some points also completely contradicted what i have experienced as a tck. for instance, the point that stated most tck's don't have a feeling of belonging to any one country, is quite the opposite. there are a few students (such as myself) who no longer feel they can call any one country home, but for the most part, being displaced from their home country has made my fellow tck's connection to it even stronger, not weaker. another point made that i found inncorrect was 'a desire to remain in close contact with friends from their adopted country as well as other TCKs that they have grown up with." because you make friends, and then lose them again so quickly, i know from observing and personal experience, that you purposly distance yourself. you never allow yourself to get too close, only on a superficial level. and once your fellow tck friends are gone, you often leave it at that, they are gone, the end, you knew it would happen so you didn't let yourself care as much. its the sad part of being a tck, you meet many people from different cultures, and learn from it, you are more worldly because of it, but also because of it you don't develop in the way that having a long lasting commited friendship could allow you to. as a tck, i am very lucky, and am introduced to so many experiences that most kids never get to imagine, but after all there is a downside to every good thing.
I am a tck. I felt like this article was written by a bunch of tcks/atcks who feel that they themselves are "misunderstood." I get the sense that tcks are altogether the same as regular kids. I'm sure we've all met other tcks who love (and pretend to hate) that moment when people ask us where we're from because we get to show off our posh international upbringing and sound exotic and cultured as a way to impress. If anything, I'd say we're an overstudied social group, pored over by monolingual sociologists who want grant money to travel abroad but don't have the language skills to study anyone but "tcks"/expats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 ( talk) 15:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
There is no reason to include the cacaphony of statistics, particularly uncited ones like: Some studies show a desire to "settle down" others a "restlessness to move". I mean, how much more vague can you get? If you poll Americans as a whole, you'd probably get similar results. Statements like "Teenage TCKs are more mature than non-TCKs" are absurd and would never appear in a peer-published journal of sociology--and serve as obvious proof that the article was written by TCKs interpreting articles about themselves as they see fit. This applies to "More welcoming of others into their community." and "Lack a sense of "where home is" but often nationalistic." which doesn't even make grammatical sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 ( talk) 17:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm unsure of why my link to http://www.globalistgirl.net is constantly being removed. I searched for COI and assume it means conflict of interest in this context, but I'm not sure of what SPA means. The website is a summary of cited academic research on third culture kids and globalization that in and of itself would be in line with Wikipedia guidelines on no original research. However, the material is synthesized by me but not published, so I am the legal copyright holder. I'm not sure what the problem with the link is - is it that I can't create a link to my own site? I would appreciate it if someone could clarify. Globalistgirl ( talk) 02:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Alright, could one of you take a look at my site and consider adding it? It is a summary of academic research on TCKs, globalization and bilcultral people. Everything is properly referenced in APA style and I think it contributes something to this site to have a link to, for those who are more academically inclined. That way, this page can stay fairly informal, but access to more rigorous material is provided. Globalistgirl ( talk) 04:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Let's be honest, that's pretty much what it seems to be about. The categorisation is uniquely based on US citizens, most assertions are unsupported (the whole Intercultural Experiences section needs citing or removing, so does the third paragraph of the next one)and just about everything needs "US-American" slapped on the front of it (especially the statistics!). Some references are broken (#2 and other refences to tckworld) and reference #13 is a fluff piece that provides no evidence for the quoted assertion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.45.22 ( talk) 12:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
This subject has already been discussed. I am a TCK but not an American. I know many hundreds of fellow TCKs who are not American. Sure the article could do more to internationalise the content, but it should, by no means, go in the opposite direction. Also, please stop using "US-American". -- Thorwald ( talk) 09:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the post just above this one. TCK is a much more accurate discription--
It references how children who grow up in more than one country become a cultural fusion (are a combination of all the countries that they grow up in). This is true whether you were an American or non-American overseas child. TCKs of all countries have more in common with each other than they do with their countries of citizenship. There fore TCK and NOT "US expatriate Children" is the proper terminology for this article and the subject in general.
By the way I am an American TCK and former military brat.
Sean7phil ( talk) 01:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. There is an unreferenced mention of TCK's being more suicide prone - unreferenced like all the other items on that list, but I'm especially interested in that particular statement, could somebody be a bit more detailed on this? Thanks. Fluttermoth ( talk) 09:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Spartacus, thank you yes sorry, I can see the references now. Chill, it was a genuine error. The point was not criticism but a request for information. Fluttermoth ( talk) 00:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Spartacus, You are forgiven ;) Thanks again, I will look. You see! All these community psychiatry people and local social workers! what do they know about ME! WIKIPEDIA has the answers. I like this. Cheers. Fluttermoth 21:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluttermoth ( talk • contribs)
Actually, the reference quoted (27) is for Cottrell's article, published on the TCK World website, and nowhere in it does she mention suicide. When I googled TCK's and suicide,as Spartacus suggests, there are lots of references to the claim, and 2 reprints of a personal anecdote about Caleb, a missionary's son? who committed suicide. Responders on the Denizen website think that he is a friend of Steph. Maybe so. Brittani Sonnenberg, in "Towards a TCK Curriculum" says the anecdote comes out of a published article (no reference) titled: "Keeping Third Culture Kids Emotionally Healthy: Depression and Suicide among Missionary Kids" by Esther Schubert,in which she reports that TCK suicide rates go up after their first year home. There is a comment on the Denizen website that implies the writer knew the same Caleb, and that his problems had alot to do with his parents religiosity. Informally (LOTS of blogging on the internet and original research)I am sure TCK's can relate to the idea of depression, and maybe even suicide (I personally have come across one suicider who was within his first 12 months back in passport country). The idea that TCK's are emotionally dysfunctional is one worth exploring, as alot of the websites seem to encourage the notion that TCK's are by and large so "successful" as a group - based on markers like higher education degrees. Indeed, through reference 27 of the Wikipedia article, if you go from Cottrell's Article 3 to her Article 4, she says that Adult TCK's by and large can NOT relate to feeling alienated. Personally, I would not like to see research which pertains specifically to Missionary kids being willy nilly extended to encompass claims made about all TCK's (despite my OPINION that depression/alienation/confusion is common). I would like to see this reference more academically researched please. I believe suicide is referenced in the Pollock/Van Reken book, but I do not have a copy. Genevievea ( talk) 01:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was page moved. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Third Culture Kids →
Third culture kid — Per
Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the article title should use the singular, "Third Culture Kid". Additionally, the leading characters should be in lower case unless it's a proper name, which this isn't. So the article should be moved to "Third culture kid".
Dismas|
(talk)
07:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The move appears to have deleted the talk page and article histories... but I'm not sure I agree with it.. I didn't see notice of the move (but with the holidays it is possible I just missed it.) I can reluctantly accept the lower case use, but I have a problem with making it singular. The common form of the term is the plural, thus I would argue that it is the proper form per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Common_names.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 20:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I believe that the names of Useem's children are incorrect (Flopsi, Penny, and Dipsi). According to this website with her obituary, their names are Michael, Howard, and Bert. -- Gwen0511 ( talk) 19:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I am not a TCK nor have I contributed to a Wikipedia talk page before. I apologize for any failings here (of the experimental sort) but when I did as suggested and went to the "sandbox" (whatever that is) I got -- no kidding -- "Goatse in Wikipedia table format."
Anyway, sorry, this article is genuinely awful. It is full of unsupported assertions, e.g "Third culture kids have incorporated different cultures on the deepest level, as to have several cultures incorporated into their thought processes." And that is only one example. An assertion I will make, although I can't really support it, either, is that this entire article is very deeply biased culturally. That is, it appears to me that the whole agglomeration of unsupported -- and when supported, slanted in terms of very (dominant-)culture-specific concepts and terms -- pseudo-facts really needs a major overhaul. (Well, consider the title: "Third Culture Kids." Sheesh.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.58.144 ( talk) 04:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
There has been a lot of research on this subjects and there are many citations available. But the work hasn't been done to include them (more since thhe post above, but more should be done).
Anyway the research does support the articles main assertions but the citations need to be worked in.
Sean7phil ( talk) 01:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
~
I apologize for any misconceptions I may have here, but it appears as though some of you are simply whining about the fact that third-culture kids are able to truly understand other cultures while you are limited by your own culture's bearings. I am a TCK. We really can understand other cultures, and our thought processes are fundamentally inclusive of cultures. We are able to step outside of a culture and evaluate what is truly "common sense" and what is simply the product of that culture. We can understand and adapt, and we are more accepting of other cultures and ideas than you are. I know you may not like to hear this, but our "third culture" is the ability to see and understand all world cultures in a way most people only dream of.
One of you says that Wikipedia should not be our "therapy" and that we are merely trying to make ourselves feel special. Wikipedia is superfluous. Our ability to understand cultures is not only documented, but really is special, depending on if you define special as unique. To say we have just incorporated two different cultures to form a combination of the two simply flies in the face of facts. Third culture kids from the US who lived in Africa behave in much the same way as kids with South Korean parents who grew up in Afghanistan. The combination of US culture and African culture does not equal the combination of South Korean culture and Afghan culture. The experience of having two different cultures incorporated into a developing brain, on the other hand, does in and of itself produce similar behavioral characteristics. These kids all adapt to their cultures. We all understand others and tend to have multicultural thought processes. At what point do we cross the line from fishy coincidence to discernible pattern? Think about it.
Also, to say a child is simply incorporating - say, Iranian culture with US culture - is absurd. Do we go to the beaches in Bikinis and then shower after every time we have sex? Because that's what we would look like if we were simply products of the two cultures combined. Of course not. What an inane assertion. Don't fool yourself.
And then you come to downright contradictions between cultures. In America, it is rude to interrupt people when they are speaking. It shows you don't care about what they're saying. In Italy, it is rude to not interrupt people while they are speaking. Unless you interrupt them, they will assume you do not care about what they are saying. How, pray tell, would someone who is simply a product of those combined cultures behave in a conversation? Would their head explode? Really? Who are you kidding here? Obviously, they have formed a culture outside of all cultures they were raised in - even more, their thought processes include, on an intimate level, the ability to step outside of (and into) two or more cultures. Once learned, this ability can be applied to any culture. It's like learning to run. When you go to a new location, do you have to learn how to run again? Of course not. You already know how. When we meet a new culture, do we have to learn how to understand other cultures again? Don't be silly. Once the skill is attained on a fundamental level, it can be applied anywhere. That's how we are able to be multicultural.
And we don't need Wikipedia to tell us that.
On the flip side, it would also seem as though you are, by your own upbringings, fundamentally incapable of understanding the concept of an individual who can truly step into and out of any culture and understand it with greater clarity than those in it. It is possible that you literally cannot wrap your head around that, and so you are denouncing it as impossible. Well, buddy, I have news: we exist, we are documented, and we understand the nature of what you believe and how you reason more than you do.
That's something you'll have to square with.
-A TCK
~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.149.124 ( talk) 18:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
This section is in dire need of references. Since it deals with BLP's without references, it could be deleted.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 18:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
I am an Australian TCK, although I have only ever come across the terms dipkid and military brat before. I wrote my senior thesis in Anthropology at Swarthmore in the US 30 years ago on this subject: at the time I was very preoccupied with defining my experience of growing up as an outsider. I understand that the purpose of this page is to provide academically sound information and references on the Wikipedia website, but am intrigued by the conversation going on on this talk page. None of the references you've sighted are references I recognize from the research I did for my thesis, but oh what I field day I would have had! One of the contributors to this talk is very scathing ("Get over yourselves. Wikipedia is not therapy"). Obviously I have a biased interest in the topic, but delving into it can provide material that might helps us all to negotiate that balance between Individualism and concern for Community at a time when Community is becoming more and more Global, and families more and more fractured. The reference to Suicides in the first year back in country of Origin I find very interesting. Coming from a perspective of how it took me a long time to "pull myself together" as an adult, and having recently met a TCK who killed himself within the first year of his return to his supposed home country I am personally drawn to understanding what happens psychologically with TCK's. On the question of TCK's and ATCK's, I would suggest there is validity to the distinction IF most TCK's in the world over the age of say 30, were children of monoculture parents who grew up in one country: in other words that because of Economically/Politically driven changes during the 20th Century, the numbers of FAMILIES moving BACK AND FORTH from homeland to foreign land, worldwide, significantly increased. If there is indeed a unique (and newly formed) culture to be associated with TCK's, then ATCK's would be the first generation, and one would expect some evolution in terms of adaptation to be observable in subsequent generations. But other than looking at it from an Anthropological point of view, obviously TCK's will at some point become ATCK's, and the distinction is spurious (In every Culture there are adults and children). This notion of Third Culture is completely new to me, but intriguing. For instance: when I looked through the list of Famous TCK's, I am personally connected to 2 of them. This is literally evidence that I am part of a diaspora, almost. It would be fascinating to see how many random TCK's might have crossed paths with "famous" TCK's. 6 degrees of separation notwithstanding, can we find papers written on the CULTURE TCK's are creating, are part of, over and above their psychological experiences? Barack Obama is an example of a successul TCK, my recently suicided acqaintance not. The national dialogue happening around Obama has alot to do with his TCK-ness. I think this list is interesting and has some kind of purpose. I would be interested in a more blog type conversation with people around this: any links? Genevievea ( talk) 04:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)genevieve 29.9.10
Someone just added a few new "TCKs". In my opinion, these do not meet the criteria of a TCK, as they only lived abroad in a single other country as children. The "T" in "TCK" means 'third'. That is, they are not "from" the one culture their parents are from or where they were born, nor are they "from" the second culture they grew up in. They are from a "third" culture, a mixture of all three. If you were born in one country but grew up in another, you are not a TCK. That would be many millions of people. The distinction is not being "from" two separate cultures (the one your parents and/or you were born into and the second you grew up in), but 'three': Neither of the the previous two, but a mixture of more than these two. These recent names should be removed, unless they are really TCKs. -- Thorwald ( talk) 06:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure why credit for the definition quoted from the book Third Culture Kids (Pollock & Van Reken) is continually changed back to Useem. As the book writes "Coauthor David Pollock developed the following definition...." Useem did not write that definition, nor is the citation from her literature.
I've tried to correct it, but find it repeatedly reverted. Please stop changing it to an inaccurate statement.
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.197.72 ( talk) 21:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Even if there is no article about others authors, it is dishonest and unethical to attribute their writing to someone else. The citation given is from Pollock's book!-- Globalfamilies ( talk) 05:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm just quarantining this section (which lacks any citations) here for now, since much of what it discusses is covered elsewhere, including the 'Origins and research' section (which has citations), and having both sections is excessive and repetitive. If people want to add material from here back to the article, please include citations.
Thanks! --
TyrS
chatties
10:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
This section needs additional citations for
verification. (September 2011) |
Useem and her husband studied children, including their own, who grew up in two or more cultures, and termed them simply "third culture kids". Their idea was that children from one culture who live in another culture become part of a "third culture" that is more than simply a blend of home and host cultures.
Two circumstances are key to becoming a third culture kid: growing up in a truly cross-cultural world, and high mobility. By the former, Pollock and van Reken mean that instead of observing cultures, TCKs actually live in different cultural worlds. By mobility, they mean mobility of both the TCK and others in their surrounding. The interplay between the two is what gives rise to common personal characteristics, benefits, and challenges. TCKs are distinguished from other immigrants by the fact that TCKs do not expect to settle down permanently in the places where they live.
TCKs grow up in a genuinely cross-cultural world. While expatriates watch and study cultures that they live in, third culture kids actually live in different cultural worlds. TCKs have incorporated different cultures on the deepest level, as to have several cultures incorporated into their thought processes. This means that third culture kids not only have deep cultural access to at least two cultures, this also means that thought processes are truly multicultural. That, in turn, influences how TCKs relate to the world around them, and makes TCKs' thought processes different even from members of cultures they have deep-level access to, a phenomenon known as cultural jet lag. TCKs also have certain personal characteristics in common. Growing up in the third culture rewards certain behaviors and personality traits in different ways than growing up in a single culture does, which results in common characteristics. Third culture kids are often tolerant cultural chameleons who can choose to what degree they wish to display their background.
As a result, Pollock and van Reken argue, TCKs develop a sense of belonging everywhere and nowhere. Their experiences among different cultures and various relationships makes it difficult for them to have in-depth communication with those who have not experienced similar conditions. While TCKs usually grow up to be independent and cosmopolitan, they also often struggle with their identity and with the losses they have suffered in each move. Some may feel very nationalistic toward one country, while others call themselves global citizens.
I've made some changes last night. I'm still working on it, but if you need to know where the references are (which I haven't added yet) check the Military brat (U.S. subculture) page. Many of the references here are there as well... but there are a number that won't be there either. It is something I will add ASAP---I just didn't have the time to add it last night while working on the article. Balloonman 18:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I am a TCK and an ATCK and the father of three TCK's. We live in communities in the middle east and in particular Saudi Aramco communities. We don't generate the numbers like the diplomatic and military folks but I think we have something to contribute.
Most expatriates with Aramco are long term employees and consequently, Aramco brats tend to stay their entire childhood, many are born here. Most view their peers as family and kids rarely date for that same reason. They progress up until ninth grade and then as a right of passage are sent to often elite boarding schools (education assistance is an employee benefit). Children who fail in boarding school and forced into other circumstances are often unfairly viewed as failing by their peers. Being a brat is so important to these kids that many keep in touch for years and years. As the film trailer link below indicates;
http://www.aramcobratmedia.com/site/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=8
Like recidivism in institutionalized people, many employees that leave, also tend to return after only a few years and stay until mandatory retirement age. In addition, like myself, there are also several second and third generation employees that can trace their memory almost to the days of the camel.
Those of us that have had the privilege to have a multigenerational view of such dramatic change in the Saudi culture and indigenous people feel very proud of our history here. We maintain the connection to the early Americans who arrived in a most inhospitable environment and built the largest integrated oil company in the world.
In either case Military, Diplamatic or Aramco, I suppose we all share a unique prospectives
{{
cite book}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Is this just an American English term? I'm in the UK and have never heard of it. If it is specifically AmE, we should say so. If I'm just clueless, we don't need to say that. :P 86.143.53.52 12:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I've heard this used in international schools that mimic the British system. Has anyone else ever heard of the term "Expat Brat" though? It was tossed around quite a lot back in my international school Jademushroom ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:46, 21 January 2011 (UTC).
This term (and the research it describes) seems to have an anglo-centric bias. What about the experiences of second generation (or more accurately, 1.5 generation) migrant children who accompany their parents to another country? It seems that these children's experiences mirror the TCK experience except in reverse - they are usually going from a non-English-speaking country to an English speaking one.
Why is there no mention of this in the article? Surely the experiences of non-English-background migrant children merits some research.
This is a new online service for all military brats (former and current). I just added this to the "external links" section of the article--
Does anybody else have no idea what the charts in the "career decisions" section is trying to portray? Hku04 01:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone provide a source for the following:
The term "third culture kid" is sometimes used in an unrelated sense to describe autistic children and people with Asperger syndrome who grow up in their childhood in considerable isolation and without much social relationship, largely in a conceptual world. citation needed
I have never heard of this and I have done a lot of reading on TCKs. It doesn't even make sense in this context. I suggest we remove it, unless someone can provide a reputable source.-- Thorwald 20:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I added a "citation needed" stamp to this phrase/term and abbreviation as I have never seen this used in literature. I also view it as a dichotomy of sorts (i.e. "Adult ... Kid"). I understand what the term is attempting to convey: These TCKs are now adults. I am an adult and a TCK. I view "Kid" as simply part of the term, TCK, and continue to refer to myself as a TCK. If you can provide a source for "ATCKs" I will agree to keep it in the article. Otherwise, I think it should be removed (it really adds nothing to the article and sounds forced).-- Thorwald 22:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
"Global cultural rainbow?" Who in the world wrote that?
I am not sure I like the new "Question" additions. They don't seem to be set in an encyclopaedia style. Also, the new references are not complete. For an example, "Brown, 1993" is not a reference. Where was it published? What is the title of the journal? Etc.-- Thorwald 07:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
What are your guys feeling on Barbara Schaetti has proposed a developmental model for third culture kid identity development based on earlier identity literature, primarily on nigrescence, in which a number of different mechanisms are explained for the wide range of identity outcomes that third culture kids may have. Nigrescence literally means "the process of becoming black." I've found some questionable resources that define it loosely as the "Negro to Black Conversion Experience." I looked up Barbara and most things dealing with her relate to public speaking engagements/coaching on intercultural subjects. When I combined the two terms (Negrescene and Barbara Schaetti) the only thing that I could find were a few second hand sources that I don't consider to be authoritative mentioning her PhD dissertation. Most of the things I found for her were links that referenced Wikipedia as its source. Personally, the sources that I can find seem pretty weak and the fact that I can't find anything on Negrescene makes me question if this should be in here. Balloonman 15:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
To the person who keeps changing, * TCKs are unlikely to work for big business, government, or follow their parents' career choices to likely. Please provide a reference to your assertation that TCK's are likely to do it. You wrote International School Service 8(4) on your response, but that isn't a recognizable reference. ISS, does however have Ruth Useem and Ann Cotrell's research article wherein they state, "One won't find many TCKs in large corporations. Nor are there many in government." [3] If you have a reference that is contrary to that, then let us know. But until you can cite something authoritative, I'm going with the major study's conclusion performed by Ruth Useem and Ann Cottrell. Balloonman 17:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The above research also states, Although they may have been influenced by their parents' work overseas, they have not followed in parental footsteps. Twenty percent of this sample were MKs, but only 2 percent have a career in the church. Likewise, 25 percent were military dependents, but only 6 percent are in the armed forces. Balloonman 17:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, with the concern about blog style creeping in, I'm going to undertake the task of getting this article up to FA status. I think this article would make a great FAC... and I would love the assistance of those of you who are regular contributors here. Thus, I'll be making my changes directly to the actual article. Balloonman 09:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
As a TCK, I have first-hand knowledge of what it "means to be a TCK" . . . however, because of this, I can be biased of/on my input. My "peers" (other TCKs) can back up my contributions. My concern is that this article is being written by those who only have "academic" knowledge of this phenomenon. There is too much more to the story than what very little the academics have studied. We are a very under-studied group of individuals and this article does not do justice to what we are really all about. It has been my experience that it is very much not the case that the majority of TCKs are "military brats" (as the article suggests). The vast majority of us are from diplomatic families (as I am; my father is a third-generation diplomat) and/or from philanthropic backgrounds (again; the case with my family). That is, there is a very concerted effort by certain families/groups who intentionally live in an international environment and who are, by the very definition, TCK-families . . . this article does not represent this group. I have purposefully abstained from contributing my very personal experience because I feel it could interfere with the "objectivity" of the article. However, I must challenge those contributing to this article to back up their contributions with very creditable information from the very sparse academic input; not just hearsay! I can, and will, summon my TCK-peers for pertinent information for this article.-- Thorwald 10:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
If the Category is added again, I will delete it again and call it Vandalism at that point. Children of God <> Missionary Kids. Missionary Kids is a sociological term that has specific connotations that "children of God" does not fit. Please provide sources before making this claim again. Right now I'm assuming good faith, but this is not a content dispute. Provide sources that indicate that you understand the term and that it is used to describe COG, and I will accept it. But right now, it is nothing short of OR that is unrelated to the subject and in my opinion inflamatory to TCKs/MKs. Balloonman 05:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
as tck american, living in germany and going to an international school where the language we learn in is english, i found this article very intersting. for most of the points it made, i found its hypothesis correct, but some points also completely contradicted what i have experienced as a tck. for instance, the point that stated most tck's don't have a feeling of belonging to any one country, is quite the opposite. there are a few students (such as myself) who no longer feel they can call any one country home, but for the most part, being displaced from their home country has made my fellow tck's connection to it even stronger, not weaker. another point made that i found inncorrect was 'a desire to remain in close contact with friends from their adopted country as well as other TCKs that they have grown up with." because you make friends, and then lose them again so quickly, i know from observing and personal experience, that you purposly distance yourself. you never allow yourself to get too close, only on a superficial level. and once your fellow tck friends are gone, you often leave it at that, they are gone, the end, you knew it would happen so you didn't let yourself care as much. its the sad part of being a tck, you meet many people from different cultures, and learn from it, you are more worldly because of it, but also because of it you don't develop in the way that having a long lasting commited friendship could allow you to. as a tck, i am very lucky, and am introduced to so many experiences that most kids never get to imagine, but after all there is a downside to every good thing.
I am a tck. I felt like this article was written by a bunch of tcks/atcks who feel that they themselves are "misunderstood." I get the sense that tcks are altogether the same as regular kids. I'm sure we've all met other tcks who love (and pretend to hate) that moment when people ask us where we're from because we get to show off our posh international upbringing and sound exotic and cultured as a way to impress. If anything, I'd say we're an overstudied social group, pored over by monolingual sociologists who want grant money to travel abroad but don't have the language skills to study anyone but "tcks"/expats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 ( talk) 15:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
There is no reason to include the cacaphony of statistics, particularly uncited ones like: Some studies show a desire to "settle down" others a "restlessness to move". I mean, how much more vague can you get? If you poll Americans as a whole, you'd probably get similar results. Statements like "Teenage TCKs are more mature than non-TCKs" are absurd and would never appear in a peer-published journal of sociology--and serve as obvious proof that the article was written by TCKs interpreting articles about themselves as they see fit. This applies to "More welcoming of others into their community." and "Lack a sense of "where home is" but often nationalistic." which doesn't even make grammatical sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 ( talk) 17:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm unsure of why my link to http://www.globalistgirl.net is constantly being removed. I searched for COI and assume it means conflict of interest in this context, but I'm not sure of what SPA means. The website is a summary of cited academic research on third culture kids and globalization that in and of itself would be in line with Wikipedia guidelines on no original research. However, the material is synthesized by me but not published, so I am the legal copyright holder. I'm not sure what the problem with the link is - is it that I can't create a link to my own site? I would appreciate it if someone could clarify. Globalistgirl ( talk) 02:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Alright, could one of you take a look at my site and consider adding it? It is a summary of academic research on TCKs, globalization and bilcultral people. Everything is properly referenced in APA style and I think it contributes something to this site to have a link to, for those who are more academically inclined. That way, this page can stay fairly informal, but access to more rigorous material is provided. Globalistgirl ( talk) 04:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Let's be honest, that's pretty much what it seems to be about. The categorisation is uniquely based on US citizens, most assertions are unsupported (the whole Intercultural Experiences section needs citing or removing, so does the third paragraph of the next one)and just about everything needs "US-American" slapped on the front of it (especially the statistics!). Some references are broken (#2 and other refences to tckworld) and reference #13 is a fluff piece that provides no evidence for the quoted assertion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.45.22 ( talk) 12:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
This subject has already been discussed. I am a TCK but not an American. I know many hundreds of fellow TCKs who are not American. Sure the article could do more to internationalise the content, but it should, by no means, go in the opposite direction. Also, please stop using "US-American". -- Thorwald ( talk) 09:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the post just above this one. TCK is a much more accurate discription--
It references how children who grow up in more than one country become a cultural fusion (are a combination of all the countries that they grow up in). This is true whether you were an American or non-American overseas child. TCKs of all countries have more in common with each other than they do with their countries of citizenship. There fore TCK and NOT "US expatriate Children" is the proper terminology for this article and the subject in general.
By the way I am an American TCK and former military brat.
Sean7phil ( talk) 01:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. There is an unreferenced mention of TCK's being more suicide prone - unreferenced like all the other items on that list, but I'm especially interested in that particular statement, could somebody be a bit more detailed on this? Thanks. Fluttermoth ( talk) 09:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Spartacus, thank you yes sorry, I can see the references now. Chill, it was a genuine error. The point was not criticism but a request for information. Fluttermoth ( talk) 00:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Spartacus, You are forgiven ;) Thanks again, I will look. You see! All these community psychiatry people and local social workers! what do they know about ME! WIKIPEDIA has the answers. I like this. Cheers. Fluttermoth 21:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluttermoth ( talk • contribs)
Actually, the reference quoted (27) is for Cottrell's article, published on the TCK World website, and nowhere in it does she mention suicide. When I googled TCK's and suicide,as Spartacus suggests, there are lots of references to the claim, and 2 reprints of a personal anecdote about Caleb, a missionary's son? who committed suicide. Responders on the Denizen website think that he is a friend of Steph. Maybe so. Brittani Sonnenberg, in "Towards a TCK Curriculum" says the anecdote comes out of a published article (no reference) titled: "Keeping Third Culture Kids Emotionally Healthy: Depression and Suicide among Missionary Kids" by Esther Schubert,in which she reports that TCK suicide rates go up after their first year home. There is a comment on the Denizen website that implies the writer knew the same Caleb, and that his problems had alot to do with his parents religiosity. Informally (LOTS of blogging on the internet and original research)I am sure TCK's can relate to the idea of depression, and maybe even suicide (I personally have come across one suicider who was within his first 12 months back in passport country). The idea that TCK's are emotionally dysfunctional is one worth exploring, as alot of the websites seem to encourage the notion that TCK's are by and large so "successful" as a group - based on markers like higher education degrees. Indeed, through reference 27 of the Wikipedia article, if you go from Cottrell's Article 3 to her Article 4, she says that Adult TCK's by and large can NOT relate to feeling alienated. Personally, I would not like to see research which pertains specifically to Missionary kids being willy nilly extended to encompass claims made about all TCK's (despite my OPINION that depression/alienation/confusion is common). I would like to see this reference more academically researched please. I believe suicide is referenced in the Pollock/Van Reken book, but I do not have a copy. Genevievea ( talk) 01:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was page moved. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Third Culture Kids →
Third culture kid — Per
Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the article title should use the singular, "Third Culture Kid". Additionally, the leading characters should be in lower case unless it's a proper name, which this isn't. So the article should be moved to "Third culture kid".
Dismas|
(talk)
07:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The move appears to have deleted the talk page and article histories... but I'm not sure I agree with it.. I didn't see notice of the move (but with the holidays it is possible I just missed it.) I can reluctantly accept the lower case use, but I have a problem with making it singular. The common form of the term is the plural, thus I would argue that it is the proper form per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Common_names.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 20:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I believe that the names of Useem's children are incorrect (Flopsi, Penny, and Dipsi). According to this website with her obituary, their names are Michael, Howard, and Bert. -- Gwen0511 ( talk) 19:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I am not a TCK nor have I contributed to a Wikipedia talk page before. I apologize for any failings here (of the experimental sort) but when I did as suggested and went to the "sandbox" (whatever that is) I got -- no kidding -- "Goatse in Wikipedia table format."
Anyway, sorry, this article is genuinely awful. It is full of unsupported assertions, e.g "Third culture kids have incorporated different cultures on the deepest level, as to have several cultures incorporated into their thought processes." And that is only one example. An assertion I will make, although I can't really support it, either, is that this entire article is very deeply biased culturally. That is, it appears to me that the whole agglomeration of unsupported -- and when supported, slanted in terms of very (dominant-)culture-specific concepts and terms -- pseudo-facts really needs a major overhaul. (Well, consider the title: "Third Culture Kids." Sheesh.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.58.144 ( talk) 04:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
There has been a lot of research on this subjects and there are many citations available. But the work hasn't been done to include them (more since thhe post above, but more should be done).
Anyway the research does support the articles main assertions but the citations need to be worked in.
Sean7phil ( talk) 01:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
~
I apologize for any misconceptions I may have here, but it appears as though some of you are simply whining about the fact that third-culture kids are able to truly understand other cultures while you are limited by your own culture's bearings. I am a TCK. We really can understand other cultures, and our thought processes are fundamentally inclusive of cultures. We are able to step outside of a culture and evaluate what is truly "common sense" and what is simply the product of that culture. We can understand and adapt, and we are more accepting of other cultures and ideas than you are. I know you may not like to hear this, but our "third culture" is the ability to see and understand all world cultures in a way most people only dream of.
One of you says that Wikipedia should not be our "therapy" and that we are merely trying to make ourselves feel special. Wikipedia is superfluous. Our ability to understand cultures is not only documented, but really is special, depending on if you define special as unique. To say we have just incorporated two different cultures to form a combination of the two simply flies in the face of facts. Third culture kids from the US who lived in Africa behave in much the same way as kids with South Korean parents who grew up in Afghanistan. The combination of US culture and African culture does not equal the combination of South Korean culture and Afghan culture. The experience of having two different cultures incorporated into a developing brain, on the other hand, does in and of itself produce similar behavioral characteristics. These kids all adapt to their cultures. We all understand others and tend to have multicultural thought processes. At what point do we cross the line from fishy coincidence to discernible pattern? Think about it.
Also, to say a child is simply incorporating - say, Iranian culture with US culture - is absurd. Do we go to the beaches in Bikinis and then shower after every time we have sex? Because that's what we would look like if we were simply products of the two cultures combined. Of course not. What an inane assertion. Don't fool yourself.
And then you come to downright contradictions between cultures. In America, it is rude to interrupt people when they are speaking. It shows you don't care about what they're saying. In Italy, it is rude to not interrupt people while they are speaking. Unless you interrupt them, they will assume you do not care about what they are saying. How, pray tell, would someone who is simply a product of those combined cultures behave in a conversation? Would their head explode? Really? Who are you kidding here? Obviously, they have formed a culture outside of all cultures they were raised in - even more, their thought processes include, on an intimate level, the ability to step outside of (and into) two or more cultures. Once learned, this ability can be applied to any culture. It's like learning to run. When you go to a new location, do you have to learn how to run again? Of course not. You already know how. When we meet a new culture, do we have to learn how to understand other cultures again? Don't be silly. Once the skill is attained on a fundamental level, it can be applied anywhere. That's how we are able to be multicultural.
And we don't need Wikipedia to tell us that.
On the flip side, it would also seem as though you are, by your own upbringings, fundamentally incapable of understanding the concept of an individual who can truly step into and out of any culture and understand it with greater clarity than those in it. It is possible that you literally cannot wrap your head around that, and so you are denouncing it as impossible. Well, buddy, I have news: we exist, we are documented, and we understand the nature of what you believe and how you reason more than you do.
That's something you'll have to square with.
-A TCK
~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.149.124 ( talk) 18:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
This section is in dire need of references. Since it deals with BLP's without references, it could be deleted.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 18:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
I am an Australian TCK, although I have only ever come across the terms dipkid and military brat before. I wrote my senior thesis in Anthropology at Swarthmore in the US 30 years ago on this subject: at the time I was very preoccupied with defining my experience of growing up as an outsider. I understand that the purpose of this page is to provide academically sound information and references on the Wikipedia website, but am intrigued by the conversation going on on this talk page. None of the references you've sighted are references I recognize from the research I did for my thesis, but oh what I field day I would have had! One of the contributors to this talk is very scathing ("Get over yourselves. Wikipedia is not therapy"). Obviously I have a biased interest in the topic, but delving into it can provide material that might helps us all to negotiate that balance between Individualism and concern for Community at a time when Community is becoming more and more Global, and families more and more fractured. The reference to Suicides in the first year back in country of Origin I find very interesting. Coming from a perspective of how it took me a long time to "pull myself together" as an adult, and having recently met a TCK who killed himself within the first year of his return to his supposed home country I am personally drawn to understanding what happens psychologically with TCK's. On the question of TCK's and ATCK's, I would suggest there is validity to the distinction IF most TCK's in the world over the age of say 30, were children of monoculture parents who grew up in one country: in other words that because of Economically/Politically driven changes during the 20th Century, the numbers of FAMILIES moving BACK AND FORTH from homeland to foreign land, worldwide, significantly increased. If there is indeed a unique (and newly formed) culture to be associated with TCK's, then ATCK's would be the first generation, and one would expect some evolution in terms of adaptation to be observable in subsequent generations. But other than looking at it from an Anthropological point of view, obviously TCK's will at some point become ATCK's, and the distinction is spurious (In every Culture there are adults and children). This notion of Third Culture is completely new to me, but intriguing. For instance: when I looked through the list of Famous TCK's, I am personally connected to 2 of them. This is literally evidence that I am part of a diaspora, almost. It would be fascinating to see how many random TCK's might have crossed paths with "famous" TCK's. 6 degrees of separation notwithstanding, can we find papers written on the CULTURE TCK's are creating, are part of, over and above their psychological experiences? Barack Obama is an example of a successul TCK, my recently suicided acqaintance not. The national dialogue happening around Obama has alot to do with his TCK-ness. I think this list is interesting and has some kind of purpose. I would be interested in a more blog type conversation with people around this: any links? Genevievea ( talk) 04:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)genevieve 29.9.10
Someone just added a few new "TCKs". In my opinion, these do not meet the criteria of a TCK, as they only lived abroad in a single other country as children. The "T" in "TCK" means 'third'. That is, they are not "from" the one culture their parents are from or where they were born, nor are they "from" the second culture they grew up in. They are from a "third" culture, a mixture of all three. If you were born in one country but grew up in another, you are not a TCK. That would be many millions of people. The distinction is not being "from" two separate cultures (the one your parents and/or you were born into and the second you grew up in), but 'three': Neither of the the previous two, but a mixture of more than these two. These recent names should be removed, unless they are really TCKs. -- Thorwald ( talk) 06:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure why credit for the definition quoted from the book Third Culture Kids (Pollock & Van Reken) is continually changed back to Useem. As the book writes "Coauthor David Pollock developed the following definition...." Useem did not write that definition, nor is the citation from her literature.
I've tried to correct it, but find it repeatedly reverted. Please stop changing it to an inaccurate statement.
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.197.72 ( talk) 21:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Even if there is no article about others authors, it is dishonest and unethical to attribute their writing to someone else. The citation given is from Pollock's book!-- Globalfamilies ( talk) 05:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm just quarantining this section (which lacks any citations) here for now, since much of what it discusses is covered elsewhere, including the 'Origins and research' section (which has citations), and having both sections is excessive and repetitive. If people want to add material from here back to the article, please include citations.
Thanks! --
TyrS
chatties
10:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
This section needs additional citations for
verification. (September 2011) |
Useem and her husband studied children, including their own, who grew up in two or more cultures, and termed them simply "third culture kids". Their idea was that children from one culture who live in another culture become part of a "third culture" that is more than simply a blend of home and host cultures.
Two circumstances are key to becoming a third culture kid: growing up in a truly cross-cultural world, and high mobility. By the former, Pollock and van Reken mean that instead of observing cultures, TCKs actually live in different cultural worlds. By mobility, they mean mobility of both the TCK and others in their surrounding. The interplay between the two is what gives rise to common personal characteristics, benefits, and challenges. TCKs are distinguished from other immigrants by the fact that TCKs do not expect to settle down permanently in the places where they live.
TCKs grow up in a genuinely cross-cultural world. While expatriates watch and study cultures that they live in, third culture kids actually live in different cultural worlds. TCKs have incorporated different cultures on the deepest level, as to have several cultures incorporated into their thought processes. This means that third culture kids not only have deep cultural access to at least two cultures, this also means that thought processes are truly multicultural. That, in turn, influences how TCKs relate to the world around them, and makes TCKs' thought processes different even from members of cultures they have deep-level access to, a phenomenon known as cultural jet lag. TCKs also have certain personal characteristics in common. Growing up in the third culture rewards certain behaviors and personality traits in different ways than growing up in a single culture does, which results in common characteristics. Third culture kids are often tolerant cultural chameleons who can choose to what degree they wish to display their background.
As a result, Pollock and van Reken argue, TCKs develop a sense of belonging everywhere and nowhere. Their experiences among different cultures and various relationships makes it difficult for them to have in-depth communication with those who have not experienced similar conditions. While TCKs usually grow up to be independent and cosmopolitan, they also often struggle with their identity and with the losses they have suffered in each move. Some may feel very nationalistic toward one country, while others call themselves global citizens.
I've made some changes last night. I'm still working on it, but if you need to know where the references are (which I haven't added yet) check the Military brat (U.S. subculture) page. Many of the references here are there as well... but there are a number that won't be there either. It is something I will add ASAP---I just didn't have the time to add it last night while working on the article. Balloonman 18:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I am a TCK and an ATCK and the father of three TCK's. We live in communities in the middle east and in particular Saudi Aramco communities. We don't generate the numbers like the diplomatic and military folks but I think we have something to contribute.
Most expatriates with Aramco are long term employees and consequently, Aramco brats tend to stay their entire childhood, many are born here. Most view their peers as family and kids rarely date for that same reason. They progress up until ninth grade and then as a right of passage are sent to often elite boarding schools (education assistance is an employee benefit). Children who fail in boarding school and forced into other circumstances are often unfairly viewed as failing by their peers. Being a brat is so important to these kids that many keep in touch for years and years. As the film trailer link below indicates;
http://www.aramcobratmedia.com/site/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=8
Like recidivism in institutionalized people, many employees that leave, also tend to return after only a few years and stay until mandatory retirement age. In addition, like myself, there are also several second and third generation employees that can trace their memory almost to the days of the camel.
Those of us that have had the privilege to have a multigenerational view of such dramatic change in the Saudi culture and indigenous people feel very proud of our history here. We maintain the connection to the early Americans who arrived in a most inhospitable environment and built the largest integrated oil company in the world.
In either case Military, Diplamatic or Aramco, I suppose we all share a unique prospectives
{{
cite book}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)