Has it hit a well deserved decline? Has the divorce rate soured my generation on the whole institution? And is this a bad thing, or is it time for a new definition of family units?

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

Answers

It's way past time for a new definition of family unit.

Marriage is a legal arrangement that should be open to any adults who want to enter into it. I'm not really in favor of "domestic relationship agreements" for people who aren't allowed to marry legally (like gay couples). I think instead that they should be allowed to marry legally, so that way they can get the same legal benefits that other married couples have, but also get the same downside - namely, having to pay higher income taxes when married partners both work for $$$.

As far as living together vs. being legally married goes, I don't blams people for not wanting the legal entanglement, but the emotional entanglement is the same either way, IMO, so avoiding getting legally married is no way to avoid a broken heart or a broken homelife.

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

My parents have been married for 25 years, sometimes happily, sometimes not. So has pretty much everybody in my community. I think marriage is a great thing.

For other people.

And that's what most of my girl friends think, too, and I obviously don't think it's because we were all hardened by divorce rates. I just think we had different values growing up. I know that I and my girlfriends grew up with the mantra of "treasure your independence" pounded into us. Maybe it was pounded into us a little too much, but I just don't feel the need to get married. I treasure my independence, and while I love my boyfriend and my relationship, I just don't think marriage is neccessary and, as irrational as it is, I *do* feel it's somewhat of a threat to my independence. I'm not inspired to do it. I didn't grow up dreaming of white dresses and flower arrangements. It isn't something that's been my goal since I was a little girl, like it was my mother's or my aunts.

I'm sure this isn't the total explanation, but I'm pretty sure it's the explanation for me, and I'm also pretty sure there are other women out there for whom it's the explanation, too. I'm not saying anything we all don't know when I say the individuals of a society will reflect the values that that society promotes, and when we raise a generation of girls to feel like they can rule the world and be empowered without anybody else, we can't be surprised when institutions that are based on the opposite value, the value that sucess and happiness are based on the combination and, for lack of a better word, co-dependence, of two people, begin to show a decline.

I don't think it's a bad thing, though. I think hesitation about marriage just makes people take the decision that much more seriously, which is a good thing.

Of course, I say this after one of my best male friends, who is 22 years old, just got married to a 20 year old woman who's verbally admitted to everybody that she intentionally got pregnant to get him to marry her, so what do I know?

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

I think my opinion of marriage was greatly scarred by my parents and my upbringing. My parents were married 25 years when the divoriced while I was in college. And I believe that they should have split up long before that.

But I know it had nothing to do with my parents being "married", it was their toxic relationship that turned me off to relationship and also marriage.

I grew up around a lot of divorced people. Almost all the women in my family are divorced. My sister is nearly 31 and unmarried, I'm unmarried at 28. But I just got engaged and I'm getting married next year.

But I dont' think everyone has to get married. It's not about the dress or the cake or the super expensive reception. It's about your committement to each other. It's the decision to spend the rest of your life with the person, through good and bad, trying to work it out. I bought a house with Dave already, that piece of paper doesn't matter. We made our committment to each other long ago.

But we're getting married. Mostly for the party! We feel like we want to have our family and close friends there with us on our special day. I didn't dream about it my whole life, and my mother instilled independence too. I have a good job and I can support myself. Dave is my partner and we share our lives together. And we have our own lives too.

I dont' have any problem with couples committing to each other without getting married. It's not a requirement, it's a choice. Everyone has their own way to express their committment.

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

Jeremy had a good explanation: maybe for some people, the only importance of a legal marriage was always the social sanction. Maybe if there had not been a social stigma against remaining committed but unmarried, plenty of people would not have bothered. Now that there is less of a stigma against living together without being married, there's no particular benefit to marriage and no reason to get married at all.

In fact, as Judy mentioned, there's a significant drawback to marriage, at least in the U.S. A few years ago, when Jeremy was going to school full time and not working, getting married would have saved us about $1,800 in taxes -- because the U.S. tax laws are still stuck in the era when most marriages had one party staying home and not earning money. Now, with two incomes, we'd pay a heck of a lot more in taxes if we got married. So there's not a lot of point, since we aren't religious and we don't have children. (I know some people who don't otherwise care about marriage do get married so their children won't have to deal with the social stigma of having unmarried parents -- I'm just not sure how much of that stigma is left these days.)

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

Absolutely, time for a new definition of family units. Open the door to gay and lesbian couples, bring stepsons and -daughters all the way into the fold, give people more opportunities to belong because we all need them ("them" includes both the people and the opportunities to belong).

But hurrah for marriage as it currently exists, too. There is no other bond so deliberate and unconditional. You take on your spouse and inlaws the way you take on a child - in fear and trembling, with doubts about whether it could ever be a good idea for anyone. And your spouse and inlaws get you, too, warts and all. I think the institution is thrilling for its vast danger and possibilities. It amazes me that the English tolerated anything so inherently chaotic and disorderly.

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

On NPR last night, they had a sto ry about how happiness rates in the US are declining. This was an unexpected result from recent studies, as happiness usually increases in a good economy. The researchers directly attributed the decrease in happiness to the decrease in marriage rates. In fact, they said that marriage increases happiness at a rate equal to an additional $100,000 of income.

It seems kind of crass to put an monetary value on marriage or happiness, but I do think it's an interesting statistic.

That said, I've been married for two and a half years now and am the product of divorced parents. Rather than souring me on the institution, I spent my childhood yearning for the "perfect family" and hoping I could create one when I grew up.

Maybe rather than soured, we're just empowered to make our own decisions about our lives in a way that our parents generation wasn't. Certainly the varied family options that are available (if frowned on) today, weren't even available a generation or tw

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

In my faith you're sealed (married) for time and all eternity - how's that for bond? Going on that feeling of an extra $100,000 a year - I'm a happiness millionaire (I'm sure we had a few years of negative return there where we came out showing a loss, so soon.)

It works for us and on that alone I'd probably run around advising it.

*shrug*

-- Anonymous, November 18, 1999

I've known since I was eight or so that I didn't want to get married, and stubbornly fantasized my life as a strong single lawyer with a grey cat, and a hip city apartment.

When I came out a few years ago, I thought "huh, I guess this seals the no-marriage thing".

Now, I'm pretty much anti-marriage, as an institution. I think it is great that people find other people with whom they want to spend their lives, be intimate, be friends, raise children, have a home, etc. What I just don't get is why people want such a personal bond to be mixed up in legal matters. It seems uselessly complicated and rather irrational to me. So yes, I guess you could say I believe the institution of marriage is experiencing a well-deserved decline.

I'm not sure what the answer is- clearly, relationships in which one person is the 'breadwinner' require some kind of social safety net for the partner who doesn't work and children. But then, I think that kind of safety net should include all kinds of households: Traditional heterosexual couples, gay and lesbian couples, a parent helping their adult child raise children, etc, etc. Perhaps a kind of 'household registration', that would forego specific associations with heterosexual coupling, could be used for insurance and tax purposes.

-- Anonymous, November 19, 1999

I think what's changed about marriage is that roles for women changed enough that women can support themselves and no longer need, economically, that man to be a good breadwinner. I'm not saying it's not easier for some women to depend on a man, or that it's not easier to raise children with two parents than one, but it's not the necessity that it once was.

My parents divorced when I was in college, and before that only me and two other people had parents who wern't divorced. My parents had always given me a lot of mixed messages about marriage (it's important for reasons of respectability; you're nothing without a husband; it's a trap; don't rely on men). I always thought I'd get married but it would be different from my parents indifferent marriage (and friendly divorce.) We'd be everything to each other, it would be us against the world.

Years later, having face my co-depencency issues, I found the desire not to get married was stronger than the need to marry. However, we got married last spring after 8 years together, because we bought a house from his parents and get to pay the same taxes if we're married. We'll pay more income tax because we both work, damn it.

We feel we've gotten so much closer this year, and am delighted by it, but think it's because we went through buying a house together.

His parents are still married but their children sincerely wish they'd divorce - they snipe at each other and know how to hurt each other in the way that only long married couples can. Periodically one of them will start making plans to leave, then stay. It's hard to watch. At least with my parents I got a postive role model of someone who wanted to make a change, and did it, and everyone was happier afterwards.

Anyway, I'm not sure this has been anything other than me dumping my feelings about this. I think it's time for a new definition of family. I know so many families who are gay couples, polyamorous groups, people who chose each other as family, etc. I know an awful lot of people who have "normal" hetero marriages, despite their parents divorces. A lot of them seem to feel that their parents married or stayed together for the wrong reasons, but they will do things differently. That may be folly, but I don't see a generation soured on marriage.

-- Anonymous, November 19, 1999

Sorry, but I think the suggestion that a stay-at-home mother is "depending on a man" is a little icky. My wife stays at home, and I definitely depend on her as much as she depends on me. The "little woman" role didn't die only for those who went to the workplace - feminism has opened a lot of doors to women who chose not to work, too. Just because the paycheck is in my name doesn't put the non- wage-earner in a subordinate role. Do you think we're capitalists, or something?

-- Anonymous, November 19, 1999

i think that much the same thing has been happening for centuries - only covered up a little better. marquis de sade is one example - people who had money and or influence did pretty much as they pleased and called it what would satisfy mrs. grundy. i also think that the independance of women and their abilty to make it on their own tends to make the men become more reasonable mates. maybe many people will not marry because they don't want to put themselves in a partnership position. i also think two people both working, plus living in a bedroom commuinty should not have children - as i feel that at least one nurturing parent should always be at home and not have the worry of a job on the off hours. whether it is the man or woman i feel it is up to them. along with that i feel people should not have children unless they can afford them. whether married or not i believe that commitment is the key word - without that the children are the lost tribe.

-- Anonymous, January 16, 2000