Caitlin Flanagan's Is There Hope For American Marriage

There comes a point in everyone’s life that this question or subject is brought up - “Are you dating anyone?” “When are you guys getting married?” When these questions are asked from family and friends, it pressures people into finding that special one. Even though, people do experience those desires and questions for themselves; does it make it right to feel that need? What is marriage? Is marriage a contract or love? What if marriage is not what people perceive it to be? What if marriage is not the happily ever after often seen in the movies? Laurie Essig and Lynn Owens are two scholars that wrote a piece entitled, What If Marriage Is Bad for Us? that contended the institution purpose of marriage is obsolete and in reality bad for society, and how marriage can lead to changed, unhealthy, and distressed.

In Andrew J. Cherlin’s essay “American Marriage In Transition”, he discusses how marriage in America is evolving from the universal marriage. Cherlin’s definition of the universal marriage in his essay is the man is the breadwinner of the household and the woman is the homemaker. In the 20th century according to Cherlin, the meaning of marriage has been altered such as the changing division of labor, childbearing outside of marriage, cohabitation, gay marriage and the result of long- term cultural and material trends (1154). During the first transition of marriage, Cherlin discusses how in America, Europe, and Canada the only socially accepted way to have sexual relations with a person and to have children is to be married (1154). The second change in marriage occurred in 2000, where the median age of marriage in the United States for men is 27 and women is 25 (1155). Many young adults stayed single during this time and focused on their education and starting their careers. During the second change, the role of law increasingly changed, especially in the role of law in divorce (1155). It is proven in today’s research marriage has a different definition than what it did back in the 1950’s. Today marriage can be defined as getting married to the same gender or getting remarried to someone who already has kids. The roles in a marriage are evolving to be a little more flexible and negotiable. However, women still do a lot of the basic household chores and taking care of the

     In years past, the American Dream for most young girls’ is to grow up and be married to Prince Charming and to “Live Happily Ever After!” Although this may be expected - it is rarely fulfilled. Marriage is the legal and binding union between a man and woman. Yet when couples marry, they vow to stay by their partner’s side ‘till death do us part.’ Currently that vow seems to have little or no value in today’s society. The current statistics for survival of marriage are quite grim. The divorce rate in the United States is somewhere between 50 percent and a startling 67 percent. (KSL News) One contributing factor the growing epidemic of divorce is the parting of different family

Marriage unites two people for better or worse, in sickness and health, until death they do part. In earlier times, some people might say wedding vows were taken more seriously; other say divorce was different back in the day. Looking at Katie Chopin and Nathaniel Hawthorne, who both exemplify martial vows in their short stories, “The Story of an Hour” and “The Birthmark.” It is clear in one instance, it was because divorce was different but then on the other hand the stories demonstrate the seriousness of the wedding vows. However, these stories express a husband-dominated relationship, in which the men possess ideals such as possession, perfection, and being all knowing.

Marriage has changed dramatically over time in the many years it has been around. What do think Marriage was like 100 years ago? The article, “American Marriage in Transition”, describes how many different types of marriage there are and how people have changed their view on it. Andrew Cherlin (the sociologist of the article) does a great job going in depth explaining American marriage. He arranges the different marriages in three different categories; Institutionalized which was the earliest type of marriage, then Companionship around World War II, and currently we are considered Individualized.

In the article “What if Marriage is Bad for Us?” Laurie Essig and Lynn Owens summarize the things that

The definition of American family is based on the idea that a legally married couple shares a household, which has been considered as a male that provides the income and a female who is responsible for taking care of the husband, household and children. Even though, Maggie Gallagher in her essay the benefits of marriage in “Why marriage is good for you,” states that she is trying to promote the return to more traditional view of marriage within the society. However, there is a controversy that American family is experiencing changes in every aspect, being on decline as a consequence of three factors. First, more babies are born in extramarital relations, second, individualism of men and women including same sex couples, and third, the high

“Will Your Marriage Last?”, by Aviva Patz, is a cohesive article about marriage and divorce. Aviva Patz is the executive editor of Psychology Today. Patz narrates the story of Ted Huston, a professor at the University of Texas, who followed the lives of 168 couples for 13 years after their wedding date. She was then able to draw conclusions about what makes a couple stay together or end up filing divorce papers. Although marriages and divorce are the themes of this article, it is really about society’s pressure on young people to be perfect.

Stephanie Coontz is a sociologist who is interested in marriage and the change in its structure over the time-span as love became a main proponent of the relationship involved in marriages. In her article, “What 's Love Got to Do With It,” Coontz argues that the more love becomes a part of the equation the less stable the institution of marriage becomes. Marriage at one point was a social contract that bound two families together to increase their property and wealth as well as ally connections. Each party entered into the contract knowing their roles and if one partner failed to meet the expectations, they were still contractually obligated to one another and were not allowed to divorce. As love became part of the equation, each partner was less sure of their obligations and often chose to end their marriages if at all possible.

Marriage has been a heated controversy for the past few years because people often marry for the wrong reasons. Anyone who thinks of an ideal marriage would think of two people loving each other and sharing a personal bond or goals together. Marriage is regularly defined as the legally or formally recognized union of two lovers as partners in a personal relationship. This definition remarks there is an actual connection between two people in marriage, but do people actually consider this when committing to “love” and “support” their partners forever? As research and studies have shown, people ultimately get married for many reasons, except love. This philosophy can be easily applied to the short poem, “Marriage” by Gregory Corso. In this emotional poem, the author argues marriage is more effectively understood or known for culture and convenience rather than through the abstract considerations of love. Here, we can identify people generally decide to marry for the incorrect reasons, for instance the story of the author himself. Corso finds himself confused multiple times, wondering if he should marry to not be lonely, for tradition and for his physical and mental health. He disregards love, a relationship or a connection with his future wife. General ways of convenience like loneliness, health and economic status between cultural stereotypes and religion are usually the true reasons of why people chose to have the commitment of marriage with another person.

When we are young we play house and we play doctor, we pretend we are husbands and wives to the kids we play with. Marriage is imbedded into our minds at a young age and we value marriage as we get older. We see examples of marriages through personal experience, the TV, and through the media, but how much has marriage changed now compared to the 1950’s? The idea of marriage has been altered and improved since the 1950’s because of feminism, views about individualism, and views of same-sex marriage.

Warner contends that the institutional system of marriage implicates couples who are not married as being “less worthy” than their married counterparts, not just through the tangible benefits of marriage but through the

America is eventually headed toward making this the way we do marriage” (tony campolo). This act of

Divorce is an unfortunate event for any family, especially those which have children. ”Currently, about 46 percent of all marriages are projected to end in divorce” (953). It is slowly becoming considered more, and more normal everyday. In the article “Strengthening marriage is an appropriate social policy goal”, Paul R. Amato discusses how government funded programs are crucial to the stability of a healthy marriage, and how this further contributes to the upbringing of a healthy, functioning child. Frank F. Furstenberg then presents a counter-argument in response to Amato’s article. While both Amato’s and Furstenberg’s articles use logos as their main rhetorical appeal, Amato also uses pathos to strengthen his argument and persuade his

Today, the idea of marriage conjures images of bashful brides beautifully draped in all white, of grandiose flower arrangements climbing towards the ceiling, of romance personified. As an institution in this modern world, marriage represents the apex of romantic love, with an entire industry of magazines, movies, and television shows devoted to perpetuating marriage as an idealized symbol of the ultimate love between two people. Contrarily, as a sociological institution, marriage comes from much more clinical and impersonal origins, contrasting with the passion surrounding modern understandings of the institution. Notably, french anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss theorizes that the institution of marriage emerged from a need to form alliances between groups, with women functioning as the property exchanged so that such alliances could be solidified (Levi-Strauss).