Jane Doe's Essay I Wish They D Do It Right

For example, Kingsolver defends the notion that families of nontraditional arrangements do not need to be examined, ridiculed or treated differently with pity or tolerance as traditionally married families when she says, “Arguing about whether nontraditional families deserve pity or tolerance is a little like the medieval debate about left-handedness as a mark of the devil” (Kingsolver 16). By this statement, the author clearly expresses her belief that nontraditional families are just as successful in their roles as traditional or married families, though evidence gathered has rejected Kingsolver’s argument. In an article by Naomi Gerstel and Natalia Sarkisian, the authors present the benefits of marriage as opposed to divorced or single parenthood families. Naomi Gerstel writes that, “advocates [of marriage] such as David Popenoe and Linda Waite assert that marriage is good for one’s pocketbook, health, happiness, sex life, and kids. Both men and women who are married tend to have higher incomes, more wealth, better health, and more property than those who are not.” The article goes on to describe the negative impacts of divorce and nontraditional families by introducing National Census statistics of relationships between married parents and their children compared with

　　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 Caitlin Flanagan’s Is There Hope for the American Marriage, she establishes the foundation for what the American Marriage means in today’s world by arguing that marriages are likely to collapse over time. With this being said, Flanagan goes on to depict the fragility of marriage during times of adversity, and how susceptible the couples can be when searching for alternative bonds from people other than their own partner, even if it means making moral sacrifices. Through a series of anecdotes from sources like herself to politicians, she further expands on this idea that the ideal marriage is nothing but a hoax for the likelihood of publicity. Flanagan includes sources from sociologists, such as Andrew J. Cherlin and Maria Kefalas, both whom

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 The Cohabitation Epidemic, Neil Clark Warren talks about the two sides of cohabitation which are those who do not have thoughts or intentions of marriage, and to those that want to benefit “a trial marriage”. One of the reasons of forgoing or delaying marriage is “Marriage has lost a lot of its luster in our society. The truth is, many people have never seen a successful, thriving marriage, mainly because great marriages are becoming scarce.” (pg.505-506). This would be a fallacy of appealing to an emotion and tradition since many children these are born to unmarried parents due to divorce, or there is lack of understanding of marriage. Because the children live with unmarried parents, this would lead to a tradition of not having to be married

Cohabitating has its pros and cons some of the advantages of it are: Sense of well-being, Delayed marriage, Knowledge about self and partner, and Safety. The disadvantages are: Feeling used or tricked, Problems with parents, Economic disadvantages, Effects on children, and other issues.

Marriage is a signification that one’s commitment to another will last a life time, it is in that life time that the consideration of creating a legacy begins. Laura Lagrange, the protagonist in Francis Harper’s short story “The Two Offers”, has to make a decision between two men who have asked for her hand in marriage. “But to tell you the truth, I do not think that I regard either as a woman should the man she chooses for her husband. But then is I refuse, there is the risk of being an old maid, and that is not to be thought of” (462). Like any other marriage Laura wanted a family, family is the construction of any home, family is a product of unconditional love. Her cousin Janette Alston ends up being labeled as an old maid because she never marries. In my opinion Laura settles for a man to marry because she refuses to be like Janette. In my opinion I think that Janette desired to fulfill her interpretation of family, she desired to create a home for her family. She lost her child but desired to press on and try again but it is hard to accomplish something you so desperately want, when the person that you need to help you achieve that goal has absolutely no regard for you wellbeing.

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

In Ralph Richard Banks’ book entitled “Is Marriage for White People?” the definition of marriage varies from different cultures and views. The most popular and idealistic notion is that marriage is a result of the unconditional love of two people wanting to share this union for the rest of their lives, in a long committed way. For some however, marriage is more of an economic arrangement, like a pact for two people to catch each other when the other one falls. And for others, it is only a piece of paper that can be thrown away if not needed, or by simple saying, marriage is not important.

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.

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.

According to Robinson, couples prefer to simply live together without ceremony or state license. Robinson also includes this type of relationship between couples are also referred to as “common-law marriage.” Today, it is common to find more couples living together as if they are married. Since 2001, the number of couples living together without the traditional ceremonial traditions by law has risen throughout the states (Slater). This type of marriage can become challenging because the commitment to one another is tested in more ways than one. Robinson explains how this type of marriage is also one that is “…an informal arrangement which may be temporary or permanent.” Marriage used to come before purchasing a house or having children however theses life changing moments are becoming the foundation of a marriage (Cherlin, 139). In doing so, couples living together and supporting one another as if they are indeed married in front of friends and family, has become a more common practice in

Bruce Wydick argued that, “cohabitation may be narrowly defined as an intimate sexual union between two unmarried partners who share the same living quarter for a sustained period of time’’ (2). In other words, people who want to experience what being in a relationship truly is, tend to live under one roof and be more familiar with one-another. Couples are on the right path to set a committed relationship where the discussion about marriage is considered as the next step. However, many people doubt the fact as to live or not together with their future

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