It 's Your Wedding Night

　　Neil Clark Warren in his essay “The Cohabitation Epidemic” starts by using tennis stars Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf’s case to mention the “cohabitation” issue and then quoting the data from the U.S Census Bureau and researcher Larry Bumpass to show that the number of people involved in cohabitation has significantly increased in the U.S in the last few decades. After that, Warren concludes that we should be alarmed over the recent increase of cohabiting couples. Before arguing against cohabitation, Warren introduces what kinds of people are cohabiting and why they are cohabiting. Followed by that, the author first uses the

In this essay, “The Cohabitation Epidemic,” by Neil Clark Warren, is talking about why many people decide to live their lives in cohabitation instead of getting married right away. Older generations would look at cohabiting as being something bad or even immoral. In this century, this epidemic is something common and, notwithstanding, normal. Over the years, the U.S. Census Bureau has kept up with how this lifestyle has evolved. In 1970, they had 1 million people that were “unmarried-partner households,” and that number rose to 3.2 million in 1990. In the year 2000, they had 11 million people living in those situations.

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

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.

Many couples find themselves cohabiting today because it is cheaper and more convenient while others take it as a step forward in their committed relationships. Regardless of reason cohabiting has become a union of choice. In recent years cohabitation has transformed from an act of deviance to a norm in many societies. We will be focusing on how time and social change determines cohabitation and divorce.

It says in the Introduction Straight women, on the other hand, often don’t seem as threatened by lesbianism. If according to the article Designing Men: Reading the Male Body as Text, Culbertson states that woman rarely have power (Culbertson 3), then why does he also go on to later say that, masculinity as a gender construction in virtually every society must be constantly defended (Culbertson 4). If men are the more powerful people then why are they so easily threatened by something that rarely has any effect on women? Also, if men are the more powerful then why does Culbertson also state that, the homosocial system can be maintained only when men avert their gaze from each other; the gaze figuratively, must remain focused on a woman (Culbertson).

People believe that marriage is easy and is the key to love and happiness, but in reality marriage is harder than it looks. Everyone marries for different reasons, for good or for bad. People today don’t understand the meaning of marriage; it is more than just money and appearance. Seeing today’s world of marriage is being influenced by media shows like Jerry Springer, Judge Judy, and Murray makes you realize how society today identifies marriage different. Couples who live unmarried will be happier and have more choices than those that are married in agreement with Catherine Newman’s essay called I Do. Not.: Why I Won’t Marry in the book “Acting Out Culture: Reading and Writing “, by: James S. Miller. Catherine Newman is a writer and an author

Although marriage is a societal value, there has been a sharp increase in the instances of alternative family relationships, a phenomenon the law has been relatively quick to respond to. BOCSAR figures show that from 1987 to 2007, the number of married couples developed from 63% to 62%, which in the same period the number of de facto relationships (both heterosexual and homosexual) grew from 6% to 9%. As such, a new movement sources desire for

SIN office had done our best to coordinate all local operation for this damaged case.

Today, alternative long-term relationships are growing in times in heterosexual and LGBTQ relationships. Cohabitation is defined by “Recent Changes in Family Structure” as quote: “an intimate relationship that includes a common living place and which exists without the benefit of legal, cultural, or religious sanction.” Between 2005 and 2009 2/3 of relationships approximately were preceded by cohabitation (“Rise of Cohabitation” 2014.) This arrangement is less committed and therefore it takes longer to end, without much emotional devastation of a pricey divorces. Most marriages still begin with cohabitation. However, it is becoming less and less likely that cohabitation will end in a marriage. Marriage is still common in today’s culture, with approximately 60.25 million married couples in 2016 (“Number of married couples in the United States from 1960 to 2016 (in millions)” 2016.) This is evident why it is killing the nuclear family standard. People are having less desire to fully commit to a marriage in the first place. 1950 social standards would have never accepted an unmarried couple as a part of a normal life so only can a legal marriage constitutes the ideal set forth. Another, way to break the standard is remove some components.

What use to be an environment with one simple concept to improve fitness and health has

Therefore, living together will ensure the couple whether or not they can get along in the future. Those people consider pre-cohabitation as an effective way to prepare themselves for being a family. According to Popenoe David, “in case the relationship goes sour, they can avoid the trouble, expense and emotional trauma” (4). It is a good idea to live together because if the couples have troubles they can just move out and continue with their separate lives without being obliged to undergo the different procedures of divorce. In the end, perhaps after living with various people, a person will finally find their appropriate partner for marriage and be happy. Popenoe points out that, “living together helps you see past romanticized notions and clue in to what marriage will really be like”(8). Accordingly, choosing reality as a primary factor to determine the result of cohabitation is a wise decision. People who cohabitate get a clue to see whether or not they will be able to share their lives with the partners they have chosen and what kind of disagreements might proceed within the relationship. Overall, the best opportunity of living up to one-another’s assumptions is to apprehend what they really are in advance and know what they care about.

Cohabitation is replacing marriage as the first living together experience for young men and women. When blushing brides walk down the aisle at the beginning of the new millennium, well over half have already lived together with a boyfriend.

Cohabitation is defined as a man and woman living in the same household and having sexual relations while not being married. There is relatively little data on health outcomes for people who have cohabitated, although there is some evidence that cohabitating couples have lower incomes (15% of cohabitating men are jobless while 8% of married men are jobless) and there may be negative academic effects for children of cohabitating mothers (Jay, 2012). Cohabitation rates are highest among those who have never married with just over a quarter of people surveyed reporting cohabitation before their first marriage (Jay, 2012). Of these, half reported that they expected their cohabitation to end in marriage; about one quarter to one third of cohabitations end either in marriage or dissolution of the relationship within 3 years (Jay, 2012). Further, cohabitation rates are highest for those who have not completed college, accounting for all but 12% of men and women reporting that they are living with their partners (Jay, 2012). Cohabitation and marriage are two significant decisions college students will make, but very little is known about what college students think about living together before marriage. Given the nearly 50% divorce rate in the United States (Jay, 2012), understanding how young adults view cohabitation as on option for life relationships needs further investigation.

Although marriage has been a central factor and gives meaning to human lives, the change in people’s lifestyles and behaviors through a long period of social development has resulted in alternate choices such as being single or nonmarital living. As a result, cohabitation has become more popular as a trendy life choice for young people. The majority of couples choose cohabitation as a precursor to marriage to gain a better understanding of each other. However, there are exceptions, such as where Thornton, Azinn, and Xie have noted: “In fact, the couple may simply slide or drift from single into the sharing of living quarters with little explicit discussion or decision-making. This sliding into cohabitation without