The point of that ramble is that I read this interesting article in the Post last week: Say Yes. What Are You Waiting For? It's basically a case for marriage, and interestingly, a case for getting married young. By "young" I think he means "in your 20s," though he indicates that social researchers call "young" "in your teens" when it comes to marriage, or at least the "young" as in "predictor of divorce." It's also a case for (or at least a brief examination of the old-as-time phenomenon of) younger women marrying older men. I don't think the author is especially saying anything new, but it stood out to me because it was more conservative than anything I normally read in the Post. Here are some excerpts.
Marriage will be there for men when they're ready. And most do get there. Eventually. But according to social psychologists Roy Baumeister and Kathleen Vohs, women's "market value" declines steadily as they age, while men's tends to rise in step with their growing resources (that is, money and maturation). ... Meanwhile, women's fertility is more or less fixed, yet they largely suppress it during their 20s -- their most fertile years -- only to have to beg, pray, borrow and pay to reclaim it in their 30s and 40s....Of course, there's at least one good statistical reason to urge people to wait on the wedding. Getting married at a young age remains the No. 1 predictor of divorce. So why on earth would I want to promote such a disastrous idea?
...Good social science pays attention to gender differences. Most young women are mature enough to handle marriage. According to data from the government's National Survey of Family Growth, women who marry at 18 have a better shot at making a marriage work than men who marry at 21. There is wisdom in having an age gap between spouses. For women, age is (unfortunately) a debit, decreasing fertility. For men, age can be a credit, increasing their access to resources and improving their maturity, thus making them more attractive to women. We may all dislike this scenario, but we can't will it away.
...The age at which a person marries never actually causes a divorce. Rather, a young age at marriage can be an indicator of an underlying immaturity and impatience with marital challenges -- the kind that many of us eventually figure out how to avoid or to solve without parting. Unfortunately, well-educated people resist this, convinced that there actually is a recipe for guaranteed marital success that goes something like this: Add a postgraduate education to a college degree, toss in a visible amount of career success and a healthy helping of wealth, let simmer in a pan of sexual variety for several years, allow to cool and settle, then serve. Presto: a marriage with math on its side.
Too bad real life isn't like that. Marriage actually works best as a formative institution, not an institution you enter once you think you're fully formed. We learn marriage, just as we learn language, and to the teachable, some lessons just come easier earlier in life.
Kind of strong words there at the end!
I know that my blog readers come from a variety of backgrounds in terms of ideology, experience, religion, and marital status. What's your take on this? What does or doesn't make marriage a success?
I believe he's right - you can "learn" marriage - more easily when you are still somewhat "unformed" - I have certainly learned a lot in the last 41+ years with your dad - and it was fun - and useful - to learn together - gives us even more to share.
ReplyDeleteCertainly interesting words to hear in this day and age.
I would be interested in reader response from the Post readers.
I think more important then age is picking the right person and being the right person for marriage. Of course, I am not married so this probably doesn't mean a whole lot.
ReplyDeleteHundreds of Post reader comments are posted here. From a brief scan it looks like most commenters are none too happy with the article.
ReplyDeleteI try not to get sucked into the vortex of newspaper article comments! But it can be interesting anyway.
Personally I don't agree with everything that Mark Regnerus posits. Rather than simply an argument for marrying young (which is what the author intends), what I find more universally relevant is a defense of marrying young: in other words, what I would say is, If you are young, and you and the love of your life both want to get married, don't worry about what you're missing out on by marrying. If you want to be married, a good marriage to the right person for you will not hold you back from anything that you truly want to accomplish in life. I wonder if in 50 years I'll look back and think it wouldn't have mattered much whether I got married at 20 or at 30, if it were the latter I just would have missed out on 10 extra years. (assuming Matt would have waited the 10 years in the first place...and also assuming that we could still have had Theo and Ida 10 years later...so...maybe there goes that theory.)
Obviously, as a rule, I wouldn't say jump into marriage just because the opportunity is there. Do it if it truly feels right. Even then there's no 100% guarantee. But the point I really took away from the article was that the stigma of marrying young is somewhat unfair. 20-year-old brides probably aren't throwing their future away by taking on the ol' ball and chain (though maybe some are if they chose an oppressive partner).
(by having had Theo and Ida I mean specifically them as people; I'm not making any reference to fertility or to "dusty old uteruses," as one commenter put it.)
ReplyDeletehmmm...I just did the math. I hope I have more than 50 years left on earth. I mean as long as I'm healthy.
ReplyDeleteDone commenting on my own post.
women's "market value" declines steadily as they age
ReplyDeletesad for me
Seriously though I thought this was a very interesting take on marriage and a new argument for marrying young.
Side note: I interviewed someone named Ida today and thought at ya'll.
As a woman who also married at age 20, I agree. I often tell people that one of the best things that happened for David and myself was figuring out our preferences together. Since we were both young we didn't really have specific ways of cooking, bill paying, laundry, eating out, etc, etc. It was one less thing to argue about.
ReplyDeleteAnd being married and in college was pretty much the best thing ever.
What is considered successful when it comes to marriage, anyway? Not killing your spouse in his sleep? Or making it until death do us....
ReplyDeleteIf it's the former than I'm very successful, so far. You might want to check in later, though.
If it's that latter, I'm still working, so I don't call that success.
Good article.
What an interesting article! Very surprising for the Post.
ReplyDeleteI think that length of courtship is important, and while I think age is a factor in readiness, I have always thought that the "age" of the relationship matters more than the ages of the people involved.
But I do think that age of the individuals matters, too. I do think that you can be too young or too immature, just as I think you can be too old to be in ideal marital condition. I would tend to think that post-college is perfect, since people learn so much about who they are during college, and who they are and waht they are really looking for during that time when they are on their own, so to speak.
Further, I sometimes worry that a lot of women (maybe particularly in our religious culture?) look for a husband in a state of semi-panic, afraid to be alone or afraid to have to actually fend for themselves or both. I don't mean to sound insulting; I suspect this is true largely because I experienced a measure of both fears.
So long as people are truly in love and are marrying for the right reasons, and not out of the fears I mentioned, and know themselves well enough to know what they need in a mate, I think they ahve a great shot. I wonder if being at either end of the age scale increases the likelihood that you are motivated by some variation of the fears I mentioned or plagued by either immaturity or ultra independence/self-centerdness.
Way too long a comment, but too long to edit either!
Also I just read your comment Eliza and I think it is really insightful. One more thing: I didnt mean to sound like the pOst doesnt produce interesting articles, just that this one was an unusual position for that paper.
ReplyDeleteBeing of the breed of well-educated people who actually thinks I can make a marriage work if I start it past 30 (and hello, there are so many kids out there who need good homes - fertile or not, I'll have kids!), I can't help but take a little bit of offense at that last part. I do agree, to an extent, that it's easier to learn to share a life when you're younger, but marriage takes all different forms, and people have all different things that they expect out of it. Never having been married, but currently in a long-term relationship, I think that alignment of certain values - whether you want kids, whether you want to live in the city or the country, how much time it's ok to spend apart at a stretch, certain standards for housekeeping, etc - really determines the success of a long-term relationship. And, of course, a realization that your habits might have to change if you choose to live with someone who doesn't share them.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I see how happy you guys are,and that's all the argument I need for marrying young if it seems right.
But the partner I met at age 25 and the satisfaction I'm getting from pursuing a career in medicine is all the argument I need for marrying later.
Maybe it wasn't there and I just read it between the lines, but it sounds like the authors suggest not only marrying young but to marry an older man. (Whew - glad I passed this test, you too.) I would agree that a man's credibility only increases with age. It's interesting that the authors suggest a woman's credibility only decreases with age. I think if society, as a whole, applied this practice then women would be aware of their dillema and do something about it.
ReplyDeleteEric always thought he would marry a woman his age - one who was done with school, had a career and who could help out financially. He had no idea that he would actually marry a younger woman - one who did finish school, worked and I believe helped pay for law school (second to those loans).
If you remember, I married younger than even you, and the first years were harder for everyone else. I agree with your sister..because neither of us had established much Eric and I established things together. I alwasy told those who questioned my marriage at such a young age, "It's not for everyone, but it was right for us." I still think that today.
Sure, if you marry young you trade in careless college days for a more mature lifestyle, but there are other things you get in return. My life would be very different had I not married a man 6.5 years older than myself at age 18. There I said it...I am happy with my life and wouldn't trade it for anything.