In her essay “The Radical idea of Marrying for Love,” Stephanie Coontz expresses her views on the evolution of marriage from its former survival and connection based purpose, to its now personal and emotional fulfillment motives. Coontz explains that in the past “it was inconceivable that people would choose their mates on the basis of something as fragile and irrational as love.” For most of history marriage was a mere tool for survival and political gain. Coontz provides several examples of such marriages motives but goes on to explain that in recent years, the focus has changed to a more personal motive. This shift of motives in marriage is primarily seen in Western societies and can be tied to the media driven idea of a “happily ever after” seen, heard, and advocated in a plethora of ways throughout Western societies. Today, marriage is based on the idea of love.
The fact that it’s described as portentous is symbolising the importance of what is about to become for the married couple this seems ironic has Daisy and Tom have not valued they’re marriage so far yet it is still a serious relationship that is not easily broken. The wedding march may symbolise the re-birth of Daisy and Tom’s marriage. Fitzgerald could be using this symbolism as a forewarning for the future; to subtly hint to the reader that Daisy and Tom will keep their marriage together. Fitzgerald uses the wedding march to create ironic juxtaposition. The wedding march obviously means that one marriage is beginning and ironically right above the wedding on appears to crumbling.
Almost all people think that getting married the one who he or she loves is natural. But there are some situations when someone cannot get married to him or her because it is socially unacceptable. The definition of marriage for different people means different things. Marriage has some forms, but nowadays the same sex marriage is the most discussed topic. So in this essay I’m going to compare the traditional marriage and the same sex marriage.
Furthermore, this would lead to a lot of people expecting more from relationships after getting divorced, as they wouldn't want to fall victim to what cause their last marriage to end again. This is part of the high expectations people now expect from relationships. Young people may have experienced divorce or bad relationships in their life, so they do not want to fall into it themselves, making them wary of marriage. Sue Sharpe's study in the early 1970s showed that young girl's main concerns were 'love, marriage, husbands, children, jobs' in that order. When she then returned in the 90s she found that the list had flipped, with jobs and careers being in first place.
Many couples end up deciding that the woman and the children will take the males last name, because that it just how it has always been and why change the tradition. Many women find that having the same last name as their husband helps them feel more like a family, and a new name is an important symbol of the journey they are taking together. Personally, when I get married, I will gladly change my last name to whatever my husband happens to be, because following the tradition is important to me. Williamson gave her own experience on how not following tradition can affect everyone in the family when she stated “He’d just delivered the happiest news of his mother’s life - that her first grandchild had been born and followed up with a sucker punch to the heart. The baby was going to have my last name” (69) Williamson’s mother-in-law is woman who
Whereas, the couples must love each other unconditionally and decide on choosing each other without the input of anyone else but themselves, it is assumed that “married couples should be best friends, sharing their most intimate feelings and secrets. They should express affection openly but also talk candidly about problems. And of course they should be sexually faithful to each other.” (Coontz 381) In my opinion, I do not agree with Stephanie Coontz saying George Shaw theory of marriage has unrealistic expectations even though each culture has their own interpretation of marriage. No matter what each culture is different, if they believe that having more than one wife or having cospouses it is their choice and some will stay true to the values they were raised on. Finally, Coontz brought forth if someone is not marrying for love but just for the status then what is the point of getting married.
In the article “Just whom is this Divorce good for? By Marquart she explains, “We found that children of so- called “good” divorces often do worse even than children of unhappy low- conflict marriages. They say more often, that family life was stressful and they had to grow up to soon. They are themselves more likely to divorce and children of divorce feel like divided selves”. I would have to agree with that because I am actually going through my parents getting a divorce and when I found out I didn’t want to believe it at all I didn’t want to see my parents split up it just wasn’t right to me.
In reading the article “Can We Talk”, self-disclosure in a relationship means a lot to both men and women when communicating and interacting with each other. I’ve been married twice- not to the same person twice and being self-disclosed to them was a nightmare. Things that I would share with them would get told to their friends, my family or strangers in general. I cannot say I had a good experience being self-disclosed. The article talks about the gender role between men and women role during intimacy and how affectionate they can become.
Communication in Happy Marriages Patrick Thompson COM200: Interpersonal Communication Instructor Debra Austin May 20th, 2012 I believe that communication is very important in not just marriages but also when you are dating. If you do not know the person that you are dating or married to then I believe that the relationship would be setting up to fail. I can say that my fiancée and I have decent conversations but I am pretty sure that there is a lot more that we could learn about each other. Due to the lack of conversation between my fiancée and me early on in our relationship, there were hardships. After almost coming to a breaking point we had to learn how to conversate in a way that didn’t come off as hostile or not actually hearing
As I stated earlier Cherlin broke marriage down in three types, the first that he spoke of was the companionate marriage. This type of marriage is based on the companionship, friendship and love shared between couples. He spoke of the pride couples took in their rolls in the family, dad as the breadwinner and mom as the homemaker and caregiver to her children and husband. As transitions continued, companionate marriage became more of an ideal than a norm. The roles of husbands and wives became more open to negotiation, and a more individualistic idea on the benefits of marriage took shape.