1-02, Starter Marriages (SMS) Pamela Paul’s book The Starter Marriage and The Future of Matrimony, Villard, 2002; based on about 60 interviews with persons experiencing starter marriages (the author a thirty-something journalist—reviews for the prestigious The Economist--in NYC experienced her own starter marriage; The Economist said of her book it identifies a new phenomenon not unlike failed dot.com millionaires)
1. Defined 5 years or less and no children; “starter” to connote likely dumping like an old resume’ or a first, starter home. 2 trajectories toward SMS, meteor-like (quick within weeks moving toward marriage); plodding, slow going over extended period, long engagement. Then 4 out of 5 dissolutions of SMs occur unilaterally—one wants out & other doesn’t. Biggest regrets of those in SMs refer to when of marriage, how of marriage, & to whom of marriage. In our marrying world, of course, almost all SM couples expect to remarry & most believe they gained some perspective from these quick & out marriages.
2. Believed to be especially common among Generation X, born between 65-78, thus in 30s in early 21st Century; may become similarly common among “Echo Boomers,” born 79-94.
3. Paul believes Gen X may be vulnerable to such marriages in part because they are very romantic: believe in love at first sight & starter marriages are built on too little experience with and information about one’s partner, especially in terms of the partner’s relationship tendencies. Gen Xers yearn for return to “Leave it to Beaver” period, including “traditional parental responsibility” and even “traditional homemaking,” more than Baby Boomers. Gen Xers use words like “family, stability, security, life-long love” in reference to what marriage means to them.
4. Argues there has been a politicization of marriage. Covenant marriage legislation proposals are illustrative. She says the “marriage police” are omnipresent. In 2000, marriage movement meeting by policy analysts, lawyers, clergy, judges…conducted with goal of re-sanctifying marriage & discouraging divorce. This movement plans to find 2 million married couples to serve as mentors for young couples. Paul implies similar logic to that of Constance Arons in The Good Divorce that many want to be rid of no fault divorce laws & emphasize negative labeling of divorce: “failed marriage,” “broken homes.” Paul concludes pro marriage forces want people to get married but don’t articulate very good “whys”, and what people to stay married without much careful scrutiny of “hows.” Suggests logic of pro marriage movement simplistic, biased & non-empathic toward people divorcing—they know too little of the pain/issues (including those in the bedroom—most intimate areas of interaction) those divorcing couples are experiencing. So politics inextricably hooked into marriage, divorce issues of 21st Century?
5. Half of marriages today preceded by cohabitation. The Case for Marriage by Gallahher & Waite argues apocalyptically against cohabitation, because it’s seen as conducive to divorce. They also argue against no fault divorce.
6. Many in Gen x & Echo generations have experienced divorce in families of origin & want to avoid in their own created families; too many have experienced “missing dads,” mom’s dating life, child support-alimony disputes and the like. Disillusioned accordingly.
7. Paul claims many see women miserable in career-driven lives, missing out on being there in raising children. She says 55% Gen X women haven’t found careers that rewarding—buying more into “stay at home logic of wives of 20th Century until about 1970s. Even recent Cosmo had article on new house-wife wanta-bes.
8. Decreasing number of women married who are 15 & older; why downward trend? Grandparents married in 1920s-40s most marrying generation (the “Silent Generation”). Answer divorce & skepticism about marriage?
9. The divorce trend really hit big in 70s (when lots of today’s 20-30 somethings were growing up), with 50% of new marriages ending by 1975. Average length of marriage little over 6 yrs. Weddings costing $10K to $20K & more not uncommon now & so many then followed by divorce even before the wedding bills are paid off—usually by parents.
10.Whys of SMS & Their Demise?
*David Popenoe conservative sociologist at Rutgers says entire popular culture antimarriage, including Hollywood.
*But Paul notes the pressure toward marriage in the media:
egs of NY Times increased coverage of weddings including courtship and anecdotes about how couples met. Emphasizes time people spend on planning weddings vs. time spent getting to know partner & issues of relating over long haul.
*Not much support from others for starter marriage couples; need people in whom can confide (parents not much in this role, nor other young couples).
*False expectations: “Sex sucked before marriage, but I thought it would get better.” “I thought he’d change.” Too often expect “total fulfillment,” “sense of purpose,” “social enhancement,” “financial security,” “psychological completion”—all from this skimpy process of starting a relationship with another human that may have been quite inadequately considered ahead of time.
*Marital therapy usually too late; helps self-growth more than couple growth & repair.
*Own self-development of people in SMs usually in 20s too limited; says 50% of those who have SMs fail who are under 25 in age move back home with parents. Re self-growth link to age, this point doesn’t explain how older people, say in 40s & beyond, also experiencing multiple divorces quite often.
11. Paul offers these antidotes to SMs:
*1. Don’t hurry into marriage or feel stigmatized if you hit 30s unmarried; society needs to heed the point about stigma.
*2. Accept cohabitation; it’s here to stay & often a logical learning process for couples.
*3. Back off marriage police & their beliefs that cohabs living in sin.
*4. Recognize that flexibility in how people choose to live/form marriages is good for society & that no 1 size fits all.
12. On divorce in the future, leading sociological divorce scholar Larry Bumpass says, “ The duration of [the divorce] trend suggests that the roots of current patterns of marital instability are deep, and not just a response to recent changes in other domains such as fertility, sex-role attitudes, female employment, or divorce laws” (p. 175-176 in Paul).