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!
Model of factors affecting Marital Stability (p. 208) Beliefs & attitudes About Part. or Relationship Partner interaction Stability Personality Traits Social Support Satisfaction
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 (p189) 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.
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
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 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 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 Men cannot Control themselves Provoked