hroughout this comparative essay between the United States and Spain I will be focusing on a number of themes by covering their past and their progression towards its current day standing in these societies. The themes covered will be marriage and casual sex, gender roles and expectations, and religion and its influence on sexuality.
To start things off I will be talking about the history of marriage and casual sex in the US during this past century and its key events starting with Dr. Kinsey. Considered one of the most iconic figures when it came to human sexuality, he was one of the first to openly express and talk about sexuality in the US, during a time that sex was taboo and a topic with false information. The Kinsey Reports worked as a sort of catalyst and father for the sexual revolution in the 1960’s and 1970’s which also lead to sexuality based research and surveys to be conducted. With the Sexual Revolution came
…show more content…
It wasn’t until the 1990’s that sexual activity peaked for both sexes and started to decline for both men and women, however more for men (McAnulty & Burnette, 104). As time progressed, the median age at which women had sex for the first time decreased from 19 in the 1960’s to 17 in the 1990’s (105).
With casual sex becoming more socially acceptable in the US, we see the effect it has on marriage and cohabitation. Because premarital sex started to become more popular in the US, it was found that the median age for first time marriage rose from 22.8 to 26.8 years for men and 20.3 to 25.1 years for women (105). Another effect of having sex before marriage was the idea and lifestyle of cohabitation, something that was seen a lot less than today. Since the 1970’s, cohabitation has risen 6 times in the 1990’s from 2% to 12% (105-106), and is probably a lot higher with current
Modern, contemporary society’s mindset on marriage has shifted considerably over the years. Some research has noted the increase in early sexual experiences, greater acceptance of cohabitation and the increase in narcissistic tendencies, are complicating and muddying the ideals of what marriage means to people today. Research done on this subject resulted in several studies that found that spouses who did not believe that marriage would last forever, were less likely to commit to the relationship financially and were more likely to have extramarital affairs.
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
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.
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.
Waal (2008) predicts that “there will be 2.93m cohabiting couples by 2021” (p. 47). This would be a 90% increase in the past 25 years. Cohabiting couples have become more common due to the increase in social acceptance. An article in the New York Times (2012) contributes the increase to the sexual revolution and the availability of birth control.
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.
The sexual cultures of New Spain, New France, and New England evolved differently because of the “[d]ifferences in religious orientation, labor systems, demographic composition, and political authority” (Peiss 70). A couple of the main religions were catholic and puritan. The labor systems varied greatly since there was farming, trading, or conquest by soldiers. With over a hundred different tribes of Native Americans throughout the Americas as well as the Spanish, French-Canadians, and English, the demographic composition was very different in each settlement and colony (Anderson-Bricker “Native Americans” Notes). The political authority for the Spanish on conquest and missions was military officials and the Franciscans, while the political
In over half a century, marriage has transformed from being a social requirement to simply being an option in today’s society. What has caused this change? Many institutions in our society have changed drastically along with marriage. Although these institutions have not caused marriage to be optional, they do strongly correlate with the decreased value. The economy, education, religion, and government have all altered since the 1950s. When any institution encounters a change, all other institutions are affected. Family is a major institution in society, and I believe that marriage is an important aspect of this institution. Cohabitation, religion, women in the work world and divorce have all effected the way marriage is viewed today.
Different types of sexualities and relationships are constantly being acknowledged and accepted all around the world. However, heterosexuality still remains as the dominant discourse because the society continues to promote it in the media, in literature and in many other things, such as legal documents and weddings. Weddings and marriages are usually promoted as a wonderful celebration that legally unite two people, but Bernstein’s, Hunter’s and Ingraham’s articles argue that the institution of marriage exists mainly to reinforce heterosexuality. Their articles, along with other scholarly texts demonstrate how marriages center around the state’s interests, social and cultural beliefs of what relationships are considered most acceptable and beneficial and gender roles.
The study of social sciences is different than the rest of the perspectives because it focuses on the social evolution of infidelity with respect to married couples. Overtime, perceptions of marriage in the United States have shifted from a social obligation to a decision based on personal fulfillment (Campbell, K., Wright, D. W., & Flores, C. G.
According to psychologytoday.com Cohabitation (i.e., living together in a sexual relationship before marriage) is an increasingly common trend in United States. Today, most heterosexual couples live together before marriage. A survey of over 12,000 heterosexual women aged 15-44 between 2006 and 2010 showed that approximately half (48 percent) of women cohabitate prior to their first marriage. This number is up from 34 percent in 1995.
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
These constraints lead some cohabiting couples to marry, even though they would not have married under other circumstances. On the basis of this framework, Stanley, Rhoades, et al. (2006) argued that couples who are engaged prior to cohabitation, compared with those who are not, should report fewer problems and greater relationship stability following marriage, given that they already have made a major commitment to their partners. Several studies have provided evidence consistent with this hypothesis (Brown, 2004; Rhoades, Stanley, & Markman, 2009).
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.
In today’s society, adolescents have a positive opinion about cohabitation before marriage. The view of marriage as an institution has faded and cohabitation has taken a new part of this culture (Martin, Specter, Martin, & Martin, 2003). It has often been questioned whether or not premarital sexual activity causes marriages to be disrupted. According to Teachman, Premarital sex and cohabitation has not