Summary Of A Temporary Matter

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

The family shows both continuity and changes which can be seen by looking at nuclear families and single parent families respectively. Before 1940s, marriage was considered an important part of society and thought to be a social institution essential for order. Divorce and single parent families were considered dreadful, sex outside marriage was not acceptable, it was a moral offense. The tempo of divorces was very low, but this social behavior soon ended in the post war era. By 1960s, this was no longer the case, as women started to work. They became much more independent, laws were changed and increase in divorces and cohabitation rates had shown that marriage was not compulsory in one’s life.

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

An important issue for sociologists, and indeed for all of society, is why these changes in marital patterns have occurred. In this essay I will seek to critically examine a number of sociological explanations for the 'divorce phenomenon ' and also consider the social policy implications that each explanation carries with it. It will be argued that the best explanations are to be found within a broad socio-economic framework.

In the 1930’s, marriages began to go downhill. The rates of them occurring began to drop rapidly, along with the birth rates (Gender Roles and Sexual Relations). The men were usually seen as the providers and protectors in the relationship, and that they should be the ones that were to support the family. After they lost their jobs, they lost that role.

There is a staggeringly large amount of divorces in the United States (US). In total, the US had a recorded total of 2,140,272 marriages in the year 2014 alone, and of those marriages, 813,862 ended up in divorce or annulment (Center for Disease Control). This means that as recently as 2014, there was a divorce rate of approximately 40%. This supports the statistics that the divorce rate for the US has stayed within 40-50% since the 1970’s (Austin Institute, 2014). While the numbers themselves are important, it is also important that the causes for the high divorce rate be explored, so that it can be known what pitfalls to avoid when participating in such an important union as marriage. There are many causes of divorce in the US such as conflicting gender roles, socioeconomic status, religious conflicts, physical abuse, emotional abuse, alcohol addictions, and many more (Amato & Previti, 2003). This paper will look at many of these reasons, but it will also focus on the differing reasons reported by men and women.

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 “For better, for worse: Marriage means something different now,” Stephanie Coontz reveals the worldwide changes in people’s attitudes and behaviors towards marriage. According to Coontz, education and the social norms are the reasons why marriage has become nonessential. Being single and going through a divorce are more acceptable now. The motivations of marriage have turned from economic dependence into personal willingness. In fact, Coontz’s words make me wonder the true meaning of marriage. Even though the meaning has changed over times, I believed that I still hope to get married.

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.

A nuclear bomb sent the Yanakakis family in an underground bunker but not all of them made it into the compound. Eddy and his grandma died on the way to the compound. Eli and Eddy are twin brothers there is Lexi who is the oldest and Terese is the youngest. After 6 years in the compound food is starting to go bad. The mom finds some green flour and only make Eli’s dad Rex eat the flour. But the mom won’t let he kids eat the flour.

Stephanie Coontz is a sociologist who is interested in marriage and the change in its structure over the time-span as love became a main proponent of the relationship involved in marriages. In her article, “What 's Love Got to Do With It,” Coontz argues that the more love becomes a part of the equation the less stable the institution of marriage becomes. Marriage at one point was a social contract that bound two families together to increase their property and wealth as well as ally connections. Each party entered into the contract knowing their roles and if one partner failed to meet the expectations, they were still contractually obligated to one another and were not allowed to divorce. As love became part of the equation, each partner was less sure of their obligations and often chose to end their marriages if at all possible.

There are three main causes of divorce: changing in woman’s roles, stress in modern living, and lack of communication. The first significant cause of recent rise in the rates of divorce is a woman’s role being completely changed. In the past, men had to earn all the money to afford the expenses of the family, whereas woman only did housework. That led to the woman having no money

While reading “A Temporary Matter” by Jhumpa Lahiri, there are two main characters named Shukumar and Shoba in the story who seemed to once have great affection towards one another. Indeed, the honeymoon phase in their marriage dwindled after a tragedy of losing their child. As the storyline progresses, the story provides clues of details in the setting of the short story to give the reader insight into each main character. Nevertheless, the main character that is noticeably clarified through the setting of “A Temporary Matter” by Jhumpa Lahiri is Shukumar and changes in the setting of the story that included a blackout and candlelight in the house illuminate Shukumar as a character and provide insight into his drive and emotion.

“Americans often talk as if marriage were a private, personal relationship. But when two people live together for their own strictly private reasons, and carve out their own, strictly private bargain about the relationship, we call that relationship not marriage but Cohabitation.” (Waite 1) Cohabitation is becoming increasingly common and is a growing trend in America. According to the latest Census Bureau, couples living together outside of marriage has reached an all-time high, almost eight times as many as in 1970. Most believe that cohabitation is a way to experience the pre-marriage life. And it is true. Majority of the people who chose to cohabitated chose to cohabit first rather than marry directly. Recent figures show that the majority people cohabited consisted of two-thirds of young adult men and women. Most of the cohabitations are temporary. They typically last about a year or a little more and then either disintegrate into marriages or dissolve. According to Linda J. Waite, cohabitation is not long-term alternative for marriage. It remained in the courtship process or a temporary expediency, not a stable social living arrangement. Cohabitation is unsettled, and does not require any legal joint residency. It is not a lifetime commitment. In fact, many couples chose to cohabitate because it required no formal restraints or responsibilities.

Marriage is the most sacred and valuable cultural institution of all time. Nevertheless its status has been reversed excessively with the pass of the years, and in the last ten years singleness has gone from being a challenge to overcome for those who were marriageable age to merely an option for the majority of people. In The Week article, “In the 17th and 18th centuries, when Enlightenment thinkers pioneered the idea that life was about the pursuit of happiness. They advocated marrying for love rather than wealth or status. This trend was augmented by the Industrial Revolution and the growth of the middle class in the 19th century, which enabled young men to select a spouse and pay for a wedding, regardless of parental approval.” (Royals, R. 2016). Unfortunately, over the time, marriage lost the value and expectation of those centuries. Correspondingly, with the decline of marital intentions with the pass of the time for the society, when a couple decided to get married a new problem arises, one that has been increasing in the last years, divorce. Comparatively, a century ago, divorce was practically non-existent, based on the principles in the cultural and religious pressure imposed upon married couples. Nevertheless, today that has radically changed, considering the sharp decline in the statistics of marriage that do not end in a separation. The increased in the divorce rate through all this year is a disturbing situation considering that has countless causes and