Sociology Midterm

Front 1

The Marriage Go-Round

Back 1

Cherlin

Front 2

Promises I Can Keep

Back 2

Edin and Kefalas

Front 3

Soft Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and Husbands

Back 3

Wilcox

Front 4

Premarital Sex in America

Back 4

Regenerus and Uecker

Front 5

Schnitzer and Ewigman

Back 5

Child Deaths Resulting from Inflicting Injuries

Front 6

The Case for Marriage

Back 6

Waite and Gallagher

Front 7

Waite and Gallagher

Back 7

• Americans still marry a lot, but our ideas about marriage have changes, becoming a “postmarriage culture”
• Power of marriage vows, specialization, support/emotional bond/sexual fidelity basic for marriage and good for society and has not changed
• Benefits men in that they can maintain their masculinity
• Cohabitation may offer short-term benefits but it is not good for the long run
• Married people live longer and are healthier (men especially), men are tamed from their reckless ways, psychological health/always having a friend, married people are happier, married people are more satisfied with their sex lives
• Cohabitation bad for kids, marriage decreases domestic violence
• Having children creates more stress on women than getting married, marriage has improved since the 1960s so that women get more benefits
• Marriage works best when husbands and wives need each other

Front 8

Wilcox

Back 8

• Religious relevance decreased in the 1960s and 70s
• Lots of big scholarly words that hurt my eyes
• People assume that marriage and family are moving to a more individualist path, but this is not happening in all sector of society
• Conservative Protestantism has flourished in order to combat this trend
• Familism is a good thing, related to positive emotion work
• Most women agree that household labor is divided fairly (even if she does most of it), religious husbands more gracious of this
• Women’s happiness in marriage is important, eglatarian marriages are not associated with more emotion work in men

Front 9

Cherlin

Back 9

• marriage shows that you have gained the necessary skills to earn the badge but a lot of people don’t know what to do with the badge after they win it (hence why so many marriages end in divorce)
• the idea of cultural lag- when technology changes faster than a social norm/behavior
• religion/ plays an important role. Modern American religion is often more focused on individual happiness than community or scripture. The US built on Protestant values and immigration- we’ve never been worried about not having enough people, public battles about polygamy in the 19th century, slavery as a threat to marriage.

Front 10

Institution

Back 10

 Specific features of an institution
 Common social practices that structure social life in a given domain
 Norms that guide practices
 Practices & norms cluster in roles
 Roles legitimated by beliefs
 Supported by structural & cultural resources

Front 11

Example of the family as an institution

Back 11

 Functions: procreation & care of children, socialization of children, organization of kinship relations
 Practices: spousal sex, reading to child
 Norms: fidelity, sacrifice, being together for holidays
 Roles: Husband, Wife, Grandmother, son
 Resources: Job & Wedding Ceremony

Front 12

Liberal views on the family

Back 12

 Liberal ultimate beliefs
 Moral authority found in this world
 Morality changes with the times
 Family implication:
▪ Family changing, not declining
 Family process depends on social structure more than family structure
▪ process (quality of relationships) most important
 Liberals stress autonomy
 Adults & children in family should not be constrained by too many norms
 Obligation/commitment should be balanced by needs of self
 Gender is socially constructed
 Family promotes gender inequality
 Men & women should do 50-50

Front 13

Conservative views on the family

Back 13

 Moral authority in transcendent source
 Moral law is unchanging
 Family implication:
▪ Departures from married/child-centered family = decline
 Family structure and culture strongly influence family process
▪ structure (married or not) most important
 Conservatives stress commitment
 Norms & roles help guide adults & children in their families
 Commitment to family is paramount; may need to sacrifice self’s desires
 Gender/Sex differences rooted, to a degree, in nature
 Some gender specialization good when kids in home
 Specialization is more efficient than 50-50

Front 14

Norm

Back 14

A commonly-held guideline that informs and often directs (but not always!) behavior — usually maintained by institutions, accompanied by sanctions/stigma, sometimes arbitrary and sometimes oppressive, but at its best promotes the transmission of cultural ideals and practices that promote human flourishing from one generation to the next

Front 15

History of courtship

Back 15

Important shifts:
 From home and community as the setting to anonymous public spaces
 From parental authority to youth culture and “relationship experts”
 From women regulating calling to men controlling dating through spending
 From marriage as the main goal to popularity as the main goal
 From character to personality

Front 16

Deinstitutionalization of courtship

Back 16

-marriage delayed for career/prolonged adolescence
-sexual norm shift (college life not as strict)
-gender norm weakened
-divorce revolution

Front 17

How many Americans get married?

Back 17

almost 90 percent (Cherlin)

Front 18

Three models of courtship in urban America

Back 18

 Seeking multiple partners
 Romantically-involved but uncertain future/unstable
 “Decent” love & maybe marriage

Front 19

Similarities and differences with college-educated courtship

Back 19

 Similarities to courtship among college-educated
 Function: not clearly linked to marriage
 Sexual and gender norms unclear
 Relationship confusion/distrust
 Differences
 Culture: Marriage not a strong hope/norm for many
 Culture: Differences in self-control & commitment to the Mission/Lifescript
 Social structure/Culture: Childbearing largely separated from marriage
 Social structure: Economic basis of marriage very weak

Front 20

What percentage of people cohabit before marriage?

Back 20

65%

Front 21

Why cohabitation?

Back 21

 Opportunity to evaluate potential spouse as a person
 Share expenses
 Convenient (sex/emotion)
 Find out if the relationship seems good, test-drive
 Breaking up is easy, fear of divorce
 Flexibility & autonomy

Front 22

How much does cohabitation increase the risk for divorce?

Back 22

25%

Front 23

Negatives of cohabitation

Back 23

▪ Less commitment (4% married men unfaithful, 16% cohabiting men*)
▪ More confusion & conflict
▪ More autonomy
▪ Premarital birth
▪ Multiple partners
▪ Sliding, not deciding

Front 24

History of marriage

Back 24

19th century: Many functions reinforced strength & stability of marriage, marriage was an economic, parental, social welfare, & religious undertaking.
— 1950s: Functions narrowing: emotional fulfillment, childrearing, keeping house. Familism & Gender specialization balanced search for fulfillment. Divorce was generally off the table. Clear gender norms, common practices roles. Men and women took pride in performance of husbandly & wifely roles*
— Contemporary: Narrow Functions: “soul mate” relationship Focus more an intense emotional satisfaction w/ spouse*. More contingent approach to marital commitment. Economic, religious, parental, gendered functions of marriage are less important.

Front 25

Causes of changes in marriage

Back 25

Affluence, Men’s & Women’s changing economic position, Divorce revolution of 70s, Psychological revolution of 70s, Sexual revolution of 70s, Secularism

Front 26

Consequences of soul mate model

Back 26

Lower fertility, less time w children, Less gender specialization, More religious intermarriage

Front 27

How many years does marriage add to men's lives?

Back 27

10

Front 28

How much higher are married men's salaries than single men?

Back 28

10-20%

Front 29

What percentage of first marriages now end in divorce?

Back 29

43%

Front 30

Why has the gender revolution come to an end?

Back 30

 Married parents more religious
 Motherhood is voluntary/selective
 Choice Feminism, some women, even progressive women, taking this message to heart
 Biology, some women are biologically-inclined towards motherhood and domesticity (Rhoads 2005).

Front 31

Companionate model

Back 31

 More egalitarian marriages should be happier (Pepper Schwartz)
 Role sharing solidarity
 Elimination of difference
 Egalitarian-minded men
 This approach is consistent with a commitment to formal equality

Front 32

Institutional model

Back 32

 Institutional model (Brad Wilcox):
 Strong normative commitment to marriage
 Social support for marriage from marriage-friendly institutions (e.g., churches)
 Legitimate the marriage – “family myth”
 Altruism
 Trust
 Long-term view

Front 33

Equity model

Back 33

 What is “fair” is determined by women’s (Arlie Hochschild)
 Ideology
 Earning position
 Home/family focus
 Equity and conflict
 Women who think things are unfair may be more likely to initiate marital conflict

Front 34

Gender model

Back 34

 Men & women are invested in “doing gender” (Steven Rhoads)
 Acting in stereotypical masculine and feminine ways
 Even when they hold egalitarian gender attitudes
 In marriage:
 Men more comfortable providing & protecting their wives
 Women are more comfortable when husband provides
 50-50 model recipe for conflict