3 Oct. 2019
There are so many ways on how to interpret marriages. Marriages go all the back
to around 2350 B.C. in Mesopotamia. In the following hundred thousand of years,
marriages have evolved dramatically. All religions have different ways they interpret the
meaning of marriage. No one depicts marriages the same way. In some religions two
people get married even before they know each other and then they hopefully do fall in
love with one another.
While both authors address modern marriage and past
marriages, Stephanie Coontz focuses on what went into marriages, while Andrew
Cherlin emphasizes how marriages evolved and what their roles are.
During the time, the importance of marriage has changed. The purpose of this
change is a direct result of social patterns, for example, division of work, living together,
and gay marriage. In the article American Marriage in Transition, Andrew J. Cherlin
clarifies how this progresses, which happened in the public arena between the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries, changed the importance of marriage.
the various kinds of relationships into three particular sorts; institutionalized,
companionate, and individualized. All through the article, Cherlin gives different
instances of how it has changed. Like he discusses the Great Depression, which is an
example of a companionship marriage, and how the Division of Labor became
effective. Women began to work the jobs in the city and did men work and when the
men returned home, the women had a sample of the work-life and they did not want to
surrender it. Then on to what Cherlin considers institutionalized marriage, this is where
the men were mostly the providers and the ladies stayed home with the children and do
tasks around the house. Last of all, he goes on to individualized marriages, which its
more common for both men and women to have jobs and have kids outside of marriage.
Cherlin was strong in many parts of his article and gave a sufficient amount of examples
to support his claim. But he was weak in describing why marriages are being
deinstitutionalized throughout the years.
In the article The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love, by Stephanie Coontz, she
gives a historical backdrop of marriage all through the world, uncovering its authentic
purposes and the methods of reasoning encompassing it. Coontz clarifies how after
some time and through the changing thoughts regarding love and the genders that
individuals currently wed for affection, friendship, and individual satisfaction. Prior to the
current time, marrying for affection was disheartened. Coontz gives many examples
throughout her article, for instance, in many cultures they believed that love develops
after marriage and that your spouse is not your top priority.