Longing For The Days Of The Child Bride
Michael Gerson’s Washington Post’s Lost In A World Without Courtship article is silly and shallow. It also completely ignores one of the major factors determining when people decide to marry. Economics.
But the facts of life for 20-somethings are challenging. Puberty — mainly because of improved health — comes steadily sooner. Sexual activity kicks off earlier. But the average age at which people marry has grown later; it is now about 26 for women, 28 for men.
This opens a hormone-filled gap — a decade and more of likely sexual activity before marriage. And for those in that gap, there is little helpful guidance from the broader culture. Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, argues that the “courtship narrative” in the past was clear: dating, engagement, marriage, children. This narrative has been disrupted without being replaced, leaving many 20-somethings in a “relational wasteland.”
Relational wasteland? The article continues its downward spiral until Gerson is forced to play the think about the children card. Guess he’s one of those who think that a marriage without children isn’t really a marriage, or it could be halfway through writing this drivel it dawned on him how ridiculous it sounded.
But the main problem with this piece (besides the oh so predictable “sex is bad and should be punished” conservative meme) is that Gerson completely ignores the economics of marriage, and since he’s longing for the good old days… wasn’t there a time when a man had to prove he could afford to marry?
And, let’s face it, without the maturity to plan for the economics of marriage, the “courtship” will end quickly when the newlyweds end up moving into mom and dad’s basement. But – hey – at least they’ll be married, so sex is now permissible. And isn’t that really the entire point of this article?
Tags: Conservatives, Marriage, Sex
WOW–you walk away with such a different take. Gerson isn’t demonizing pre-marital sex–he’s merely pointing out that the “lost decade”; as I would prefer to call it of these young adults getting their ducks in a row prior to marriage; may produce offspring from a relationship more casual, or loosely committed, than a joint venture of marriage.
Just wait till your kid, or kids’ friends start coming home pregnant in their 20s, and announce “yea we wanna wait and see how things work out, before we commit to getting married”…..I guess it’s just easier to commit to a new child’s life, financial and emotional welfare….because babies are easier to be responsible, and committed to than a spouse–they don’t complain.
JC,
I don’t get how you equate marriage to responsibility? If that’s the case then we wouldn’t have divorce, no? Because there is “true” commitment in marriage vs. a casual relationship. I hate to burst your bubble but marriage has nothing to do with responsibility or with commitment. Case in point, is the lovely Mike Duvall fiasco. I’m a guy so I can “understand” why he did what he did but doesn’t this basically explain why marriage isn’t the end all for all answer?
Sorry, Joanne, but this article is about how sad and dangerous (to society) it is that people are having sex in their twenties without a ring on their finger. It’s also about missing the “happiness window” if you marry after 27.
It’s just the same old moralizing with the same old dash of fear – Ooh, if you don’t marry soon you won’t have a happy marriage.
Also, getting married because you’re pregnant isn’t a cure all. A lot of times it simply makes a bad situation worse.
When will people stop regurgitating the usual “the kids are making it all worse” mantra — the world changes and your kids adjust to those changes. Most kids no longer come right out of high school or even college into employment that is capable of supporting a family. Add on to that the need to pay back the mortgages they take out for college, it is not unreasonable for kids to wait to be somewhat more financially settled to get married. Besides, the American divorce rate is still about 50% and has been for some time now. I don’t think that having kids marry younger will change that stat much.
This article also goes against the actual studies of marriage. People who marry older are less likely to get divorced than people who marry younger, and the bride’s age is the important factor.
Higher education levels also mean less divorce.
So, Gerson is actually arguing the opposite of reality. If we want stronger marriage we want to encourage people to wait until they are older and have more education. In the meantime, 20-somethings are going to go around having pre-marital sex. It depends on what it is that Gerson really wants to stop – does he want to stop divorce or does he want to stop 20-somethings from having non-marital sex.
It’s about the sex, Cassandra, as usual.
UI makes a great point too — this guy’s editorial points to no real data and some of what he is lamenting doesn’t sync up with current studies.
Of course it is about sex — people who thought that kids need opportunities to settle down earlier would be talking about strategies that would help these kids be in a position to support marriages and families. As in not saddled with school debt or stuck in jobs with no benefits.
Reminds me of when in junior high school the class was lectured about “recreational sex” and the evils it entailed.The only sex allowed was “procreational”. For the record the lecture was given by a Catholic Priest, a Rabbi and a Protestant Pastor. We listened respectfully and duly ignored everything they said. We were young, not stupid.
“Also, getting married because you’re pregnant isn’t a cure all. A lot of times it simply makes a bad situation worse.”
Amen to that Pandora. I wish I knew that before I got married the first time. LOL…
In conservativeland it seems that no sex act should go unpunished. But what’s really amazing is what Cassandra hit upon: education. My kids have already mentally signed onto graduate school and a post doc. That should be their committed relationship during their twenties. After that they can think about marriage… or not. Yeah, I’m not one of those everybody should get married sort of people.
“In conservativeland it seems that no sex act should go unpunished.”
Especially ass sex.
The problem there is a failure to use proper birth control. Marriage isn’t necessarily the best solution, either. You have to accept that they will choose to be happy, and then guide them to the wisest decisions they can make so that their happiness will be long term rather than short term. A truly bad marriage is worse than being a single parent for both the couple and the child.
Isn’t sex between pompous conservative moralizers “ass sex” by definition?