Giving a big room to a son and a small room to two daughters, is it considered patriarchal?

Of course, it's patriarchal, and the two daughters should be more suitable in the big room, after all, the activity space for two people needs more, and a child in a small room is enough, you are too partial to your son, and you are embarrassed to say it, it is a typical patriarchy.

The big room for the son to give the small room to the two daughters, this must be patriarchal, a son lives in a big room, two daughters have a small room, which in itself is unfair, the two daughters should be a big room in the space is relatively large, and the small room is not enough, don't be patriarchal, there is an old saying in the folk called hurt children must not remember.

Giving a big room to a son and a small room to two daughters is not considered patriarchal, because daughters always have to marry and leave this room when they grow up, and sons will stay in this room when they grow up to marry a wife and have children, so it is normal to need a larger room, tell this reason to your daughters, and they will understand when they grow up that this is not patriarchal, this is an inevitable fact.

Give the big room to the son, give the small room to the two daughters, so it is indeed a bit patriarchal, the two daughters should live in the big room, because the small room is a bit crowded with two people, of course, your consideration may be that the son is going to get married in the future and live in the big room, this can first let the two daughters live in the big room, the son lives in the small room, and then leave the big room to him when the son gets married in the future, so that he can get married, and the daughter will also marry in the future, if you go back to her parents' house, you will not stay long, It can also be made do in a small room.

It's not patriarchal, because the son wants to go to the daughter-in-law, and the furniture in the room needs to be bigger, and the daughter is out of the house and doesn't need a big room, so the son is generous, and the daughter's small room is suitable, and it is not patriarchal.

Because it is not clear how old the three children are, it is difficult to judge whether it is patriarchal.

If the son is older, objectively he needs a larger room, and the two daughters are younger, and you give the big room to the son, which is not patriarchal.

If you let your two daughters live in a small room because your son will be the heir or breadwinner of the family in the future, and your daughter will marry someone with a foreign surname in the future, then you must be a patriarchal person. Even if you don't let your daughter live in a small room, it can reflect your patriarchal mindset from other places or issues.

Giving a big room to a son and a small room to a daughter is not patriarchal, because after the son gets married, the space for two people to live must be larger, and the daughter is not at home to get married enough to live!

Of course, it is only fair that the two daughters should live in a big room and a small son room, otherwise the daughters will have ideas.

Hope, thank you.

Giving a big room to a son and a small room to two daughters is not considered patriarchal, because the son has to get married, and he will need a big room in the future, and since history, daughters are going to get married, as long as there is a room, this is not a patriarchal idea.

Of course, it can't be said that since ancient times, there has always been a difference between men and women in China, when there is a son, if there is only one suite, it will always be given to the son first, and the two suites will be one set per person.

This is not patriarchal, it's just that the daughter has no inheritance right legally after she becomes a monk, and whether she wants to give it or not is only the will of her parents, and her parents will give it if they want to, and if they don't give it, they won't give it.

The law protects the inheritance rights of children, and daughters also have legal inheritance rights to real estate, so real estate should be divided evenly and not in preference for sons.

This can't be generalized, after all, patriarchy depends on many aspects of life, and if the son needs it, it doesn't count.

I think that's how it goes. If there is only one house in the family, then I think it is normal for boys, after all, it is more stressful for boys to marry a daughter-in-law. But if there are many houses in the family but they are not given to their daughters, then I feel that they are patriarchal.

Not really, because in Chinese society, girls rarely go home after getting married, but the son is different, he may always be with his parents.

No, if the in-laws married to the daughter have a house, you don't need to give the house to the daughter, but if the in-laws married to the daughter do not have a house, you should consider dividing the house to the daughter.

Personally, I don't think it counts if you give her something in other ways, but if you leave something for your son, then it feels a bit patriarchal.

Hello, since your question is not very detailed, I can only talk to you about it in general. First of all, the inheritance of the estate without a will belongs to the statutory inheritance, so the first heirs are the spouse's parents and children, that is to say, the old man and the deceased's wife and children have the right to inherit, but after the inheritance begins, not all legal heirs participate in the inheritance at the same time, but participate in the inheritance in accordance with the order prescribed by law, and the legal heirs in the first order have priority to participate in the inheritance, and only when there is no inheritance of the heirs of the previous order, the heirs of the later order will inherit. That is to say, even if the deceased's estate is divided, in the presence of its first heir, it is not his siblings to inherit, the old mother has no civil capacity, but her children can be used as a legal **person** to carry out civil activities, so the old man's children have the right to request the distribution of the estate, and the share that belongs to the mother after distribution is not allowed to be used in the name of others can be supervised to enforce this part of the property, and the other brothers and sisters of the deceased have no right to use or embezzle this part of the estate in their own name.

The nature of the death compensation should be determined first: if it is a life insurance compensation of the deceased, then this part of the property belongs to the beneficiary, and only in accordance with the provisions of Article 42 of the Insurance Law, the insurance money can be used as the inheritance of the insured under one of the following circumstances: (1) there is no designated beneficiary, or the beneficiary designation is unclear and cannot be determined; (2) The beneficiary dies before the insured and there are no other beneficiaries; (3) The beneficiary loses or waives the beneficiary right in accordance with the law, and there is no other beneficiary.

If it is a bereavement pension, that is, this part of the money is generated by the relevant units to the family of the deceased in accordance with the regulations after the death of an employee or soldier due to work, illness or other accidents, and cannot be listed as an inheritance because it has the ability to compensate the family of the deceased. The subsistence allowance paid by the relevant departments to employees and servicemen who have lost their ability to work due to work-related injuries and disabilities shall be owned by the individual, and such pensions may be inherited as inheritance. Since they didn't know the specific situation, they had to rely on themselves to confirm.

Among the two sets, if the property owner is the deceased, then it is treated as an inheritance, but if the property owner is not the deceased, it cannot be divided as an inheritance, and if you live by yourself, you can use the joint property of the husband and wife as the reason, according to Article 26 of the Inheritance Law of our country: "The jointly owned property obtained by the husband and wife during the existence of the marital relationship, unless there is an agreement, if the inheritance is divided, half of the jointly owned property shall be divided into the spouse's own, and the rest shall be the inheritance of the decedent." "So half of this set belongs to the deceased, and the inheritance can only be distributed from this half, you should first determine the ownership status of the son, and then see how to deal with it.

Finally, it is recommended that you go to the judicial department of the local neighborhood or district, or the legal aid center, and explain the specific situation in detail, and then they will provide some suggestions, and it is best to negotiate and resolve it internally, or find a mediation committee to mediate, and if it is really not possible, file a civil lawsuit with the inheritance dispute. Hope it helps.