lecture 3 getting together: marriage, cohabitation and partnering

intimacy

“a close, familiar and usually affectionate or loving personal relationship w another person or group”

• psychological concept used to describe the feelings garnered from the lvl of quality, frequency or exposure to a physical or emotional relationship w ones self and w everything else; places, things, and people

• sexual relationships w and w out emotional closeness

• for some commitment may develop from intimacy

• for others intimacy may grow out of commitment

  • commitment can be personal/private (between you and a partner or family), legally recognized, religious, or linked to expectations/ideals

• most important developmental task in young adulthood = establishment of intimacy

  • ability and freedom to disclose innermost self to another

important developmental tasks in young adulthood

• establishment of intimacy

  • ability and freedom to disclose innermost self to another

• building relationship foundation

types of intimate relationships

• romantic relationships

  • casual, short-term relationships

    • hooking up

    • friends w benefit

  • courtship - dating to find a long-term partner

  • cohabition

    • alt to living alone

    • precursor to marriage

    • alt to marriage

  • marriage

• monogamous: having one mate

• polygamous: more than one mate

  • polyamorous: having more than 1 loving intimate relationship at a tie w full knowledge and consent of everyone involved

  • polyandrous: more than 1 husband

  • polygyny: more than 1 wife

• platonic: intimate and affectionate but not sexual

  • friendship

  • siblings

  • parent-child

• single

  • celibate, dating and/or sexually active

to be single

• 26.8% of households are single people

• singlehood may be viewed as negative

  • selfish, lonely, immature, unfulfilled, weirdo

• ideologies or marriage and family assume that romantic relationships are always beneficial

• may offer autonomy, fulfilling career goals, building friendships, self-development

dating

• in the 19th century, “dating” was supervised by adults and expected to lead to marriage

• today the dominant dating culture approves of dating between young people without assuming these relationships will lead to marriage

• dating or courtship is still currently the most common way of beginning a romantic relationship in canada

• technology has shaped the way people experience dating relationships and meet partners

• 16% of canadians report finding love online

datings main functions

1. add to a person’s status

2. form of socialization

3. form of recreation

4. part of courtship w the purpose of marriage

exchange theory in dating

• men more than women show off material assets

  • education, job, income, car

• women tend to emphasize physical appearance

• both men and women display sympathy, kindness, helpfulness, good manners and humour as attraction mechanisms

wheel theory of love

4 stages

1. rapport

   • complementarity of needs: needs of 1 partner fit the needs of another

   • needs are influenced by social values

2. self revelation

3. development of mutual dependencies

4. personal need fulfillment

communication

• women use communication to build connections and solve problems

  • closeness built on communication

• men closeness comes from shared experiences

• communication about feelings is often non-verbal

mate selection

• social homogamy

  • similar backgrounds

• theory of propinquity

  • we select people we know

  • friends, high school sweetheart, coworkers

• complementarity of needs

  • attracted to those who have desirable qualities you do not have

mate selection: filter theory

• geography

• mutual attraction

• meeting core needs

• compatibility

• social exchange - best choice?

• similarities

• mutual commitment

marriage

• A SOCIAL INSTITUTION, LEGAL STATUS AND RELIGIOUS
  DUTY
  • WHO CAN MARRY AND LEGAL PROTECTIONS DICTATED BY
  LAW AND RELIGION
  • MARITAL DISSOLUTION ALSO GOVERNED BY LAW

• A PERSONAL AND FAMILY EXPERIENCE

• A SOCIAL NORM & EXPECTATION
  • TYPICAL AND EXPECTED IN MOST SOCIETIES

rights of marriage

• sexual access

• kind treatment

• faithfulness

• use of family assets

• matrimonial home

• financial support of each other and any children

arranged marriage

• MARRIAGE THAT INVOLVES SOME PARTICIPATION OR
  CONTROL BY PARENTS AND EXTENDED FAMILIES
  • MAY NOT MEET UNTIL THE WEDDING DAY OR BOTH THE
  PARENTS AND THE INDIVIDUAL MAY BE INVOLVED IN THE
  PROCESS OF FINDING A MARITAL PARTNER

• WHAT ARE THE PREDOMINANT PERCEPTIONS OF
  ARRANGED MARRIAGES IN NORTH AMERICA?

marriage statistics

• 2006 CENSUS DATA:
  • 69% OF ALL CENSUS FAMILIES IN CANADA ARE HEADED
  BY A MARRIED COUPLE (DOWN FROM 71% IN PREVIOUS
  CENSUS)
  • COMMON-LAW COUPLE HEADED FAMILIES = 16%
  • LONE-PARENT HEADED FAMILIES = 15.9%

• COMMON-LAW MORE PREVALENT IN QUEBEC
  • LESS FINANCIAL AND SOCIAL PRESSURE TO MARRY

why people get married

• status

• economic

  • financial support and joint property

• sex

  • regulation of sexual behaviour

• children

• identity

  • family identity

  • economic identity

• love and support

• enforceable trust

• most superior form of adult relationship

models of marriage

• historical classic

  • emphasizes biological and social complementarity between men and women (heteronormative, trad gender roles)

  • hunter/gatherer

  • considers this the best social system to raise children

• choice model

  • private agreement between individuals

  • sexuality = self expression and should not involve the state

• commitment model

  • intimate, committed relationship centralizing emotional support

  • highest social recognition

modern marriage

• conventional roles

  • separate spheres

• shared roles

  • both partners participate in paid and unpaid labour

• dual-career roles

  • priority on career

• reverse conventional roles

structural functionalist

• courtship and marriage are social processes and institutions that contribute to the smooth functioning of the society

  • courtship or dating:

    • form of socialization into the customs, values, and trads of a society - learning how to engage intimately w others

    • form of recreation

    • means of assessing a potential partner for marriage

    • benefit to the economy - dating ppl spend $$$

• ppl get married because society needs them to

  • regulates sexual behaviour

  • provides a container for the care and raising of children

  • creates a sense of social identity that fits w social norms

  • provides for the emotional needs of both/all partners

critical theory

• DATING AND MARRIAGE ARE NOT ONLY SOCIAL NORMS...
  THEY ARE ALSO NORMATIVE
  • MEANING THAT DATING AND BEING MARRIED ARE PART OF
  WHAT QUALIFIES A PERSON TO FIT INTO THE CATEGORY OF
  'NORMAL' IN WESTERN SOCIETIES.

• THE DESIRES TO COURT AND MARRY ARE SOCIALLY CREATED
  AND BENEFIT PARTICULAR GROUPS AND THEIR INTERESTS

• DATING AND MARRIAGE ARE IDEALIZED SOCIAL IDEAS AND
  INSTITUTIONS THAT HIDE VIOLENCE AND OPPRESSION

• THE CONCEPTS OF DATING AND MARRIAGE REPRESENT THE
  BELIEFS AND LIFESTYLES OF WHITE, MIDDLE CLASS,
  WESTERNERS

• WHEN WE FOCUS ON DATING AND MARRIAGE ONLY, WE MISS
  MANY OTHER VALID FORMS OF BEING ALONE AND TOGETHER

cohabitation

• fastest growing family structure in canada

• a pathway to marriage for young adults

• an alt to marriage (more often for olde adults)

• influenced by changes in employment, housing problems, convenience, response to pregnancy

• expectations to marry a higher among those cohabiting than those who are not

  • INCREASINGLY ACCEPTED, ESPECIALLY AMONG YOUNGER PEOPLE
  • MEN ARE MORE WILLING THAN WOMEN TO COHABIT
  • COUPLES ARE OFTEN MORE EGALITARIAN
  • LESS RELIGIOUS
  • QUEBEC FRANCOPHONES ARE MORE LIKELY TO COHABITATE
  • HIGHER LEVELS OF MARITAL DISCORD AND LOWER LEVELS OF WELL-BEING
  THAN MARRIED INDIVIDUALS
  • MARRIAGE MAY NOT BE NOT DISCUSSED UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF GOALS –
  COMPLETION OF EDUCATION, STABLE JOB
  • NOT ALWAYS A PRECURSOR TO MARRIAGE
  • 2/3 DO NOT SEE THE NEED TO GET MARRIED

• DESPITE THIS, COHABITATION IS BECOMING MORE
  ACCEPTED AS A SETTING TO RAISE CHILDREN

• COHABITATION (BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT CHILDREN) IS THE FASTEST GROWING FAMILY STRUCTURE

when cohabiTATING before marriAGE LEADS TO POORER RELATIONSHIP QUALITY

• IF PARTNER’S “SLIDE” INTO COHABITATION WITHOUT MAKING A
  FORMAL DECISION

• IF IT IS PRIMARILY FOR FINANCIAL REASONS OR TOO EARLY IN THE
  RELATIONSHIP

• IF PARTNERS ARE ON THE “SAME PAGE” ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THEIR
  RELATIONSHIP

• IF ONE OR MORE OF THE PARTNERS FEELS “STUCK” IN THE
  RELATIONSHIP AND/OR FORCED INTO MARRIAGE

• IF ONE OR MORE ARE “SERIAL COHABITATORS”

COHABITING COUPLES RECEIVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS MARRIED COUPLES EXCEPT…

1. CUSTODY RIGHTS

2. INSURANCE BENEFITS

3. FINANCIAL SUPPORT

4. JOINT DIVISION OF PROPERTY

COHABITION AND LAW

• FEDERALLY, IF A COUPLE HAS LIVED TOGETHER LONG ENOUGH,
  THEY COUNT AS SPOUSES FOR:
  • INCOME TAX
  • LIFE INSURANCE
  • PENSION BENEFITS

• OBLIGATION FOR SUPPORT VARIES FROM PROVINCE TO PROVINCE

• IN MOST CASES, COHABITATING COUPLES DO NOT HAVE THE SAME
  PROPERTY RIGHTS AS MARRIED COUPLES
  • DO NOT SHARE ASSETS AFTER BREAK, UNLESS PROOF THEY
  CONTRIBUTED

SAME SEX marriage

• IN 2005, BILL C-38 GRANTED EQUAL MARRIAGE
  RIGHTS TO SAME SEX COUPLES

• IN 2006, THE FIRST CENSUS THAT COLLECTED DATA
  ON SAME SEX MARRIED COUPLES
  • 45,300 SAME-SEX COUPLES (7,500 – 16.5% WERE
  MARRIED)

factors determine commitment lvl

1. satisfaction lvl: relationship quality, good interactions, “makes me happy”

2. quality of alternatives: if you left this relationship, what would replace it?

3. investment size: what you have put into the relationship that will be lost if you leave (sunken cost fallacy)

investment model of commitment

MARITAL SATISFACTION

• WHAT INDIVIDUALS BRING TO THE MARRIAGE
  • EMOTIONAL/PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS
  • RESOURCES

• HOW COUPLES INTERACT

• EXTENDED FAMILIES AND SOCIAL CONTEXTS

GOTTMANS FINDINGS

• CONFLICT IS INEVITABLE IN A RELATIONSHIP
  • HOW COUPLES FIGHT CONTRIBUTES TO RELATIONSHIP
  DISSOLUTION

• POSITIVE AFFECT THE ONLY PREDICTOR OF MARITAL STABILITY
  AND HAPPINESS AMONG STABLE COUPLES

• “... NO EVIDENCE... TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT ANGER IS THE
  DESTRUCTIVE EMOTION IN MARRIAGES.”

• NEVER HAVING FIGHTS IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO A RELATIONSHIP

• HAPPY COUPLES HAVE 5 POSITIVE INTERACTIONS FOR EVERY 1
  NEGATIVE INTERACTION

HORSEMEN OF NEGATIVITY

1. CRITICSM

2. DEFENSIVENESS

3. CONTEMPT

4. STONEWALLING (UNCOOPERATIVE, UNWILLING TO DISCUSS OR ACKNOWLEDGE)

sexuality

approaches to sex among unmarried

1. puritanical: sex only in marriage, to produce children

2. double standard: men allowed more sexual freedom than women

3. sex-with-affection: acceptable w in committed relationships

4. sex-for-pleasure: more egalitarian

   • changes over time

     • attitudes toward premarital sex became more permissive from 50s to 80s

   • recent stats suggest that by grade 11:

     • over half had oral sex

     • 40% of boys and 46% of girls have had sex

   • hiv/aids and safer sex

casual relationships

• ONE STUDY FOUND THAT APPROXIMATELY 64-75% OF
  AMERICAN ADOLESCENTS HAD EXPERIENCED “HOOKING UP” –
  HAVING SEX OUTSIDE OF A DATING RELATIONSHIP

• DIFFERENT TYPES OF CASUAL SEX RELATIONSHIPS, SUCH AS
  “FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS” (WENTLAND & REISSING, 2011)

  • ONGOING SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP WITHOUT ROMANTIC
    COMMITMENT

• RESEARCH INDICATES POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES

infidelity

• ANYWHERE FROM 25-40% OF RELATIONSHIPS

• MEN MORE LIKELY TO BE UNFAITHFUL BUT RATES ARE
  BECOMING MORE ALIKE

• GAY MEN MORE LIKELY THAN LESBIANS TO HAVE
  RELATIONS OUTSIDE THEIR RELATIONSHIP

• DECREASES IN LONG-TERM UNIONS
  • PEAKS FOR WOMEN AT 7 YEARS
  • MEN AT 18 YEARS