Choosing a Partner Selecting a Spouse Two Models

Choosing a Partner

Selecting a Spouse: Two Models

The Function of Arranged Marriage (Ahmed) 1. Where does power reside? 2. Reaffirming which system? 3. Strategic in consolidating what? 4. Arranged marriage & Collectivist Culture 5. Too big of a decision for two youth!

Courtly Love

Model of factors affecting Marital Stability (p. 208) Beliefs & attitudes About Part. or Relationship Personality Traits Partner interaction Social Support Satisfaction Stability

Exchange Theory The process of looking for a mate 1. Hence, “the marriage market!” 2. What do you bring to the table? 3. What can you do for me? !

Permanent Availability Model of Marriage (Faber) All adults are in effect, permanently available to marry, even if already married

Traditional Marriage Exchange RELATED TO: 1. Traditional Gender Roles 2. Morality of Sexual Restraint

Traditional Marriage Exchange Women * Sexual Favors * Attractiveness * Ability to bear Children

Traditional Marriage Exchange Men * Protection * Status * Economic Support

Marriage Exchange in a Changing Society Optimistic: as women gain occupational & economic equality with men, the basis for exchange will also become more equal, with both partners valuing the same set of resources: * * * What’s the downside of today’s model, i. e. , pessimistic view?

Principles of HOMOGAMY Endogamy : marrying within one’s social group (opposite-exogamy) Heterogamy, marrying someone of different race, EDU. age, religion or class) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Different Dimensions of Homogamy (Whyte) Three different Marriage Cohorts: 1. Married between 1925 -44 2. Married between 1945 -64 3. Married between 1965 -84

Different Dimensions of Homogamy (Whyte) RACE: Significant across all groups ETHNICITY: some influence in groups #1 & #2; decreasing influence in group #3 RELIGION: some influence in group #1 & #2; decreasing influence in group #3

Different Dimensions of Homogamy (Whyte) SOCIAL CLASS: Important across all groups, however, how it’s measured changed from family origin characteristics (father’s occupation & money earned) to personal characteristics (education, own job and money earned) PARENTAL INFLUENCE: not a factor in any group. Parental pressure toward homogamous marriage actually produced opposite effect.

Theories of Mate Selection Individualistic Theories Sociological Theories

Parent Image Theory (Freud) The Oedipus Complex: we seek a partner who is like our mother (for boys) or our father (for girls).

Attachment Theory (p 189) During infancy and childhood, we learn a system or style of attaching to others: 1. 2. 3.

Theory of Complimentary Needs (Winch) After “filtering” for similar others (homogamy), we then look for important differences Three complimentary needs: 1. 2. 3.

Stages of Intimacy (Backman & Secord) 1. 2. 3. 4.

Murstein’s “Filtering Theory” Stimulus-Values-Roles (SVR) S: Initial physical attraction V: Partners compare values to see if there is an “appropriate” match. R: Prospective spouses test and negotiate how they will play their respective marital and leisure roles

Courtship: Three Styles 1. 2. 3.

Dating as Courtship Mead’s Criticism A competitive game in which Americans, preoccupied with success, try to be the most popular and have the most dates. Two major problems with dating: 1. 2. Solution: Two-Stage Marriage

Getting together Characterized as large groups coming together for a party or shared activity. 1. How does meeting in groups differ from going on a date? 2. How does going out with the girls differ from going on a date? 3. How have attitudes toward marriage change? 4. Why might going out in groups help you pick a better spouse?

Cohabitation Selection Hypothesis: Assumes that people that choose serial cohabitation are different from those who do not. a. Less effective in problem-solving and communication skills b. more negative attitudes toward marriage

Cohabitation Experience Hypothesis: Posits that cohabiting experiences themselves affect individual so that, once married, they are more likely to divorce a. b.

Courtship Violence: Where do you Learn to be Violent?

Courtship Violence 20% in Cohabiting 20 -40% in Dating relationships Date Rape 50% of Freshman and Sophomore Women report unwanted attempts at intercourse (83% “Men they knew moderately well”) 50% of these attempts succeeded Non of the women reported the rape 1 in 15 college men admit to behavior classified as rape

Rape Myths Stranger Rape/ Rapists are mentally ill l Almost 2/3 of rapes were committed by someone known to the victim (RAINN, 2008): www. rainn. org ¡ 73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger ¡ 38% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance. ¡ 28% are an intimate ¡ 7% are a relative l 93% of juvenile sexual assault victims know their attacker (RAINN, 2008): www. rainn. org ¡ 34. 2% of attackers were family members ¡ 58. 7% were acquaintances ¡Only 7% of the perpetrators were strangers to the victim l Men cannot Control themselves l Provoked