Marriage and the Family: SOC 3354

Throughout the semester I have become more aware of how much the structure of society and my family has influences my choices. However, in the end I like to believe that I have the strength to make my own choices even if it goes against the structure I have been exposed to.

I want to get married to my current boyfriend for a multitude of reasons. We have been together for three years and other than love, which is the most important factor in my decision, I know my family’s expectations has played into my choice to get married. My boyfriend and I have lived together for two years and although our parents are okay with it my Mother has mentioned once that she would rather me be married. I think that our societal norms have played in to my decision as well. It is part of the narrative norm that we find our “true love” and get married. This is ingrained in us from a young age, just look at Disney movies. The princess always finds her prince and they get married and ride off into the sunset. I like the idea of traditions and know this has influenced me. As far as agency goes, I personally like the idea of having a life partner that will be there for me through thick and thin. I feel people will work harder to keep their relationship alive if they are married. The economic benefits do not hurt either. I also believe the purpose of marriage is to have a stronger bond and for my future children to have an emotionally and economically stable upbringing.

The person I marry is likely hard-working, committed, and down to earth. These are attributes my Father holds. I have seen how much he has achieved and his level of happiness and that is something I want. My Dad has always stressed that I better choose a man who is hard-working and not afraid to get his hands dirty. This is important to me outside of my families expectations because I want someone who can support me if I need it and keep me grounded emotionally.

I am likely to have the same family structure I came from. I am one of two children and I myself would like to have two children. My brother and I have a good relationship and I want my children to have that. I do not want more than two children because of the difficulties seen with middle children. Middle children tend to have identity issues and feel out of place. I also do not want an only child because I want my children to have someone to grow up with and learn how to work with others.

My family structure unfortunately deteriorated early in my life. My parents divorced when I was seven and my brother was an infant. This divorce has cemented my belief against divorce. My parents divorce caused a lot of issues in my family that me and my brother deal with everyday. I was already against divorce because of the complicated process, societies disapproval, and for my reasons for marriage previously discussed. My boyfriend and I have both have strong feelings against divorce and have agreed that the only reasons we would divorce once married are abuse and infidelity. My beliefs and experiences have decreased my chances for divorce. I decided not to get married until I was 100% sure and was using my heart as well as my head to make the decision to marry.

Love is very important to the stability of my relationships current and future. As we have discussed in class, now that women have the freedom to work and support themselves more pressure is placed on emotional connectedness between marriage partners. Now people do not need a spouse to support them economically or to have children. Therefore, love has become the center of a marriage and it is important to its stability. Hopefully, I will remain satisfied throughout my future marriage by realizing the points in marriage that are likely to produce problems (early child rearing years), communicating, and working through these issues. In my current relationship my boyfriend or I may come home upset, stressed, or frustrated and when it starts to affect our relationship we have become good at taking a step back and stating that it is just outside issues not issues within our relationship. We then give each other support to work through the problems and move on. This is the same tactic I plan to use in marriage.

I have learned a lot from this class. I have come to realize the magnitude of societies influence on us. I enjoyed discussing marital traditions, the birthing process, and child rearing. This has been a great semester and thank you all for making this class enjoyable. Best wishes!

I previously wrote about polyamory in a general sense to explore what it really means to be polyamorous. After today’s class I thought a reflection would be appropriate.

In class we watched a video and discussed the concept Christopher Ryan holds in his book Sex at Dawn. Ryan says that when humans were nomadic there wasn’t a sense of property. Everyone shared everything from food, tools, shelter, to partners. According to Ryan monogamy was not introduced until the concept of property was introduced. This is interesting to me because people get offended when others think of partners, male or female, as property. However, isn’t that essentially what partners are? I have never thought about it in this sense, but property is something you own or possess. Doesn’t a married couple posses the other person? When introducing your partner you say “this is my wife” or “this is my husband” giving a sense of possession. So it sounds reasonable to make the connection between monogamy and property showing that monogamy is a more recent human development.

Ryan is trying to advocate looking at where the human race as developed from before judging right or wrong based on our current societal norms. To discuss whether monogamy is natural considering where humans have evolved from he uses an example of junk food. He states that if we live on a diet of pop tarts and cokes we will get sick. If we are not eating the same things humans used to eat and get the same amount of exercise humans used to get we will develop diseases because it is not how our bodies were meant to function.

My response is that although humans used to be non-monogamous, which was efficient then, it may not be efficient now. Back when humans were nomads or tribal people it was useful to have as many children as possible and to share in child rearing. Since these multiple relationships, sexual and romantic, were confined to a small tribe or group of people sexually transmitted diseases were not likely. However, in today’s advanced society people are more connected and it is easier to spread STD’s. Therefore, Ryan’s idea that if we do not follow how humans used to behave we will develop disease does not really apply to monogamous relationships. The more partners we have the greater chance we have at contracting STD’s and it is not practical. Although of course we could just ask people if the are “clean” before engaging in sexual acts not all people are truthful.

So in sum, I do not fully agree with Ryan’s argument. This is just my opinion using my own logic. Times have changed and so should what is considered natural.

I have been going back through our readings and choosing topics I have not yet written on. So this blog will be about the article “Diamond’s are girls worst friend” by Meghan O’Rourke.

The first point O’Rourke makes against the idea of an engagement ring is that only the woman gets one. I am not against getting my furture fiance an engagement ring. Some guys do not feel the need for one and like to stick to the tradition of a woman wearing one. I do not see a problem with only the woman wearing a ring. Even if a man were to accept a ring it is doubtful that it will be covered in diamonds and will be at a lesser cost than the woman’s ring. This would just give people something else to rant about.

O’Rourke also mentions the TV ad’s aimed at men and convincing them that need to buy more rings for their partner. While I can understand the author’s annoyance with this, it is good advertising. The jewelry stores are only doing what is best for business, and I can’t blame them.

The pricey engagement ring used to be used so that the man can show that the woman’s virginity was worth the price of the ring. O’Rourke says this does not fit in today’s society, and I agree, but the meaning of an engagement ring has changed. Also mentioned is that the engagement ring symbolizes that the woman is promised while the man is still seen as on the market. To me this is ridiculous. If the couple is happy enough in their decision to get married then the man will not welcome any forward behavior from other women nor will he act in a forward manner. The only reason for women to be upset that the man does not have a sign of commitment is because they are insecure.

Rings are beautiful, why wouldn’t a woman want one? Men and woman could both wear rings if they choose. I don’t think this tradition should be analyzed so heavily because not everyone has the same intentions when they choose to wear or give an engagement ring.

It has been mentioned regularly in class that the magic ration is 5:1. Meaning that in a relationship there should be five positive comments for every one negative comment. This is kind of golden rule I have tried to implement in my own relationship. i can say that it is rough, but that it really helps.

Everyone has a tendency to be judgmental and point out the bad in a situation, but by just find one more positive thing to say in a sticky situation makes all the difference.

I read an article over Dr. Gottman’s research over this five to one ration and marital conflict.

“The volatile and conflict-avoiding couples have just as much of a chance of making a go of their marriage as do the validating couples, as long as they maintain the five-to-one ratio. Often couples who begin their marriages by complaining will end up having the most stable relationships. In fact, trying to change the volatile and conflict-avoiding couples to become validating couples probably won’t work,” says Dr. Gottman.

Dr. Gottman says that there are four “horseman” of apocalypse that can end a marriage. Criticism is the first horseman. Criticism is used to place blame, but complaining is used to bring up a specific problem. The second horseman is defensiveness, which criticism is bound to provoke. The partner feels attacked when criticized and responds defensively by insulting or attacking the partner in return. The third horseman is contempt. Contempt is the intent to insult and psychologically abuse. The fourth horseman is stonewalling. This is when all hope has been lost and a partner completely withdraws from communicating. Gottman reports that 85 percent of stonewallers are men and that this may be an evoluntionary survival tactic.

In, sum for marriage to last these four horseman must be avoided and the magic ration of 5:1 should be held. Although every relationship experiences problems and cannot be expected to never criticize, be defense, contempt, or stonewall it is important not to use these tactics regularly.

After today’s brief discussion on polyamory I decide to research it a little bit. I found an interesting article in The Boston Globe

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2010/01/03/loves_new_frontier/

There is a group in Boston, MA called Poly boston. It is a community of people supporting each others choice to be polyamorous. This article gives the view of individuals who are members of Poly Boston. This helped me fully understand what it means to be polyamorous.

I personally chose to be monogamous because of my beliefs and also because I really wouldn’t want the extra stress of spreading myself thin emotionally among many partners.

The article states that polyamory is not all about sex, but about forming lasting relationships. In the words of Gina Ogden “With affairs you get sex. With polyamory you get breakfast”. In one story a married couple is polyamorous and they also have two young children. They explain that the children just have more adults in their lives who care about them and who can do things with them. I do not believe this is a stable way to raise a child. It is different if the children just think you have “friends over”, but if they know that their parents are dating all these other people it seems destructive. However, my beliefs are of course influenced by societies normative practice of monogamy and the idea of a stable nuclear family.

The article also stated that some people have the misconception that polyamorous persons are also homosexual. Apparently most are heterosexual. in the case of a Poly Boston couple, they are married and they have another male partner. All three of them consider themselves life partners, but the males do not engage in sexual acts together. The woman has sex with each man exclusively. This is such an odd thought to me. It almost seems as if the male partner, who is not married, is being used. He says he goes to their house for game night and family night, but that she spends most of her time there with her husband.

Basically this article showed me that for some people this type of partnership can work, but it is not for everyone. As one of the Poly Boston members stated “Polyamory isn’t for everyone, as much as monogamy isn’t for everyone”.

After reading this article and watching the accompanying video I would respond to the class question of “Are we built for monogamy?” with not necessarily. We are also not necessarily built for polyamory. I believe that any type of relation has the chance of working, but that it depends on the people involved, their beliefs, and their commitment to their lifestyle.

I agree with Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser that parents should do all they can to stay together for their children with few exception. The exceptions being abuse, neglect, or change in sexual orientation.

In class we discussed age of the child when the divorce occured and if that would make a difference. Personally, my parents divorced when I was seven and then they decided to get together again when I was 19. Two days ago my Dad called me and told me that him and my Mom were splitting up AGAIN. I can say from experience that the first divorce was easier for me. My parents fought often and there was cheating involved with many other large issues. I was just ready for them to stop fighting. However, as Buttenwieser described her dislike of being moved around from her Dad’s to her Mom’s, I too had the same unstable childhood after the divorce. I hated waiting being stuck in the middle and being shuttled back and forth between my parents.

In dealing with my current situation, I am more upset. I think that because I am old enough to understand all aspects of what is going on, it is taking more of a toll on me. Also my parents do not feel they need to shield me like they did when I was a kid so they tell me every detail and I am stuck in the middle of their fight.

For me this is when I would think parents should stay together. The economy, my brothers early teenage years, and my Dad working in Nigeria makes things rough on my family. This is where I agree with Buttenwieser that there are going to be these tough times that are not full of marital happiness. However, if it is possible parents should try to stick it out and reevaluate the situation after these stressors have passed.

I also agree with Buttenwieser in that I think if a divorce is necessary parents should take initiative to create a happy divorce. A happy divorce would allow flexibility, focus on the children, and put the child’s happiness first. If parents can put on a smile during events in the child’s life where both parents are needed then a divorce may not have dramatic negative effects.

I needed another blog, but we haven’t had any new readings becasue we have been on Thanksgiving break. Therefore, I will discuss the article “Sexist Attitudes and the Wage Gap” by Deirdre van Dyk. This was posted under our readings a while ago but I never blogged on it so here we go.

A study was conducted by two Florida researchers and found that men who held more traditional gender role views earned more than men who had more egalitarian views. The reverse was found to be true for women. Women with more traditional views earned less than women who held more egalitarian views on gender roles. Men with traditional values earned 71% more than women with traditional values, but men with egalitarian values earned only 7% more than the egalitarian women. This is a huge difference.

The researchers stated that this means that the wage gap may not be due to differences in type of jobs, hours worked, or employer attitudes, but to employees gender-role attitudes. They suggest this gap may occur because men with traditional views is the “breadwinner” and feel he has to make more money so he is willing to push for a bigger salary. The men with more egalitarian views may feel that he doesn’t have to work as hard because his wife is helping out too and is less likely to push for more money.

I hold a different view from the researchers due to information I had previously received through my sociology class on race, class, and gender. I think the wage gap, based on gender-roles, may occur because women with more traditional values will have to take off more time from work to take care of her children and employers find that undesirable in an employee and may pay her less in addition to more days out of work. The more egalitarian man may trade off with the wife when children are sick or need something therefore having the same result as stated previously.

After listening to an interview with Dalton Conely over his book, The Pecking Order I came to the realization that my family situation is not unique. I always had it in my head that other families had more equality and that other parents were more nurturing. My family is not picture perfect by any means and the immense difference between my brother and I now make more sense.

Distribution of Resources
Conely states that the distribution of resourses, like slice of a pie, are not always equal. Families who have fewer resources to start out with will have more disparity in the distribution of those resources. Families with a multitude of resources will have less disparity. The number of children in a household also limits the amount of resources that each child receives and parents may ever give more resources to the child they are “banking on”.

I see this unequal divide of resources in my family. I am the oldest of my brother and I. I was an only child the first eight years of my life and then my brother came along. My family was very poor when I was younger so my brother and I did not differ much in the division of resources. However, when I was 12 and my brother was four my Dad went to work in the gulf of Mexico as a welder on an oil rig. Then when I was a senior in high school he went to work in Nigeria as a supervisor of an oil rig and now runs his own consulting business and is still working in Nigeria. My Dad has certainly worked his way up the SES ladder and now has a six figure salary. Now that my family has more resources the majority of them have gone to me and supporting dreams of becoming a psychologist. Most of the extra money is spent on my tuition, private tutoring for graduate school exams, and my living expenses so I can focus on school. My brother still receives his “toys”, four-wheelers, dirt bikes, and video games, but I still receive a larger portion of the pie.

Impact of Family Size
Conely states that family’s having more than two children have more disparity because there are more children to divide resources among.

Since my family consists of only two children there isn’t a lot of disparity. Some disparity is present but it does not seem to cause many issues between my brother and I. We aren’t exactly fighting each other for more resources.

Number of Years Between Children
There are as Conely says differences between how the eldest and youngest child are treated. The youngest is normally the one everyone dotes on while the eldest is less spoiled.

Presently this is not all together true in my family. When my brother was first born he was definitely doted on and spoiled while i was left to do a lot for myself. This was because my brother was born premature and almost didn’t make it so my parents kind of hovered over everything he did and nurtured him extensively. As we got older I became the one who became more spoiled and was doted upon. I was still left to do a lot for myself because I grew up in a rough situation with m parents divorcing when my brother was an infant. I became somewhat of another parent. My parents began to realize how much I had sacrificed to clean up some of their messes and take care of my brother. I always excelled in school and caused little to no problems. As I got older my parents realized this and began spoiling me and allocating more resources to me as a way to show their appreciating and to show they were proud of me.

Gender
Conely talked about girls taking a more nurturing role and acting as co-parent to their younger siblings. this was definitely the case for me. My mother went trough a phase where she was never around and left me and my brother home alone from the time I got out of school until 2 or 3 in the morning. I got used to cooking, cleaning, making sure my brother was bathed and had done his homework. When I got my drivers license I got my brother up every morning went over his homework, got him breakfast, made sure he was ready for school and had lunch money, and then drove him to school. I even starting taking him to meet the teacher days while he was in elementary school. People actually started assuming I was his Mom and he even began to call me Mommy when our mother was not around. This accounts for a lot of our differences. He had me to take care of him, but I had nobody so I became very independent and driven as a result of my role as a co-parent.

Even now that I am out of the house and my brother is 14 he still gets away with a lot more because well he is a guy and can’t run off and get pregnant. That is the excuse my Mom uses “boys will be boys”.

Obesity
I do not remember Conely discussing obesity and this isn’t much of an issue in my family. My Dad and I are fairly average size although I am still trying to lose that freshman 15. My Mom and my brother have petite frames and are very skinny. My brother just hit puberty and is trying to work out for his little girlfriend so he is constantly talking about weight and hitting the gym. On the other hand, I am very self-conscious since I put on a little weight my freshman year. I work out inconsistently and sometimes my family likes to pick on my for being “pudgy”. I guess its just that I am a female and I am supposed to be smaller than my brother. I actually complain about this a lot asking why did I receive my Dad’s build and my brother got my Mom’s build. If it were the other way around my brother would be a little stockier and i would be petite.

The Impact Birth Order
Conely says that birth order doesn’t determine success, but that many other factors are at play. Although resources are divided differently the more children there are it doesn’t always mena the eldest receives more.

I see differences in my brother and I due to factors surrounding our birth order. I was born first and by the time he was born our family environment had changed. I was born into a poorer family environment than he was. However, I also experienced my only child years with my parents married. My brother was born at a time where yes we had more money but our Dad was no as present. So I can see how things would have been different for me if I was the youngest and he was the eldest born into the same situations. Although holding all other things constant I don’t think birth order had much impact. The environment was a more defining feature in our sibling disparities.

Race
Conely discussed how there are disparities within families due to different varying skin tones called pigmentocracy. This mainly pertains to African American families where the lighter skin family members have more opportunities for success. Conely says this internal disparity mimics the world outside of the family.

Well my family is all caucasian so this doesn’t really apply to me. My family members and I are all basically the same skin tone except my cousins. I am 1/8 Asian Indian and you can definitely see it more in my little cousins so sometimes they get called “ragheads” which is very hard to handle. My Aunt has an American Indian heritage adding to their darker skin tone. I am also 1/16 Cherokee but it is still not enough to tell I am both types of Indian. Therefore my little cousins and I have different experiences due to skin tone. My little brother and I look like any other white person so we do not have an disparities within our nuclear family.

Fit Between Genetics and Environment
Conely says that some children may be born with different talents that are genetic and that influences their environment by their parents allocating more resources to them. This can be seen in my family. I inherited my Dad’s intelligence. My Dad has always been extremely smart. I was always did naturally well in school as well. My brother on the other hand inherited my Moms slight lack of intelligence. He struggles in school and has already been held back twice. I have never made an F and he struggles to pass. My parents therefore invest more in my education and even when I get A’s and B’s they respond with good but you could have gotten all A’s. My parents push me to do better while they don’t give my brother much of a push or encouragement, passing is all they ask from him and they don’t expect much else. My parents have told me to my face “you are the hope for this family your brother will never make it to college”. This is sad and I try to take the co-parenting role sometimes by talking to my brother on the phone going through homework problems and encouraging him to do better. I am trying to make up for that disparity that exists due to our parents reinforcing our genetic differences.

After reading “Should Babies Co-Sleep With Their Parents?” by Barbara J. King I am even more convinced that co-sleeping in the same bed is very dangerous for the infant. The doctor’s pronounced that babies should sleep alone in a crib by themselves. This is not advice to be taken lightly after hearing about the 2 month old who died will co-sleeping.

However, there are two types of co-sleeping, one which is bad and one good. They type of co-sleeping that is dangerous occurs when infants sleep in the same bed as their parent. Many mishaps could occur in this situation. The parent could roll over and suffocate their baby, the infant may roll over in a position that makes it difficult for him or her to breathe, or the baby could roll off of the bed and become injured.

The other type of co-sleeping that is less dangerous and maybe even beneficial to the infant is when the infant is sleeping in the same room as the parents, but in their own crib. This way the parent has easy access to their child should something happen and the parents can frequently monitor the infant when he or she is sleeping in the same room. I plan to use this type of co-sleep with my children as my parents did with me and my brother. This keeps the baby safer and late/early feedings and monitoring easier on the parents.

According to the article bed-sharing may be beneficial and help reduce the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). In my opinion though, it is still not without the risk of suffocating the infant and I am still strongly opposed to bed-sharing. Bed-sharing may reduce the risk of SIDS but it is replacing that risk with the risk of suffocation. They say that if a parent is engaged and aware during bed-sharing then it is safe, but the parent will likely be sleeping and thus bed-sharing makes no sense. The logic of these people seem to be flawed if you ask me.

I loved the mother panel in class on Wednesday. I found the the panel’s stories informative and shocking. I was aware of the sequence of events in the birthing process. As most people brought up in class we had to watch a video showing a live birth in high school, which had given me some knowledge of the process. What I did not know was the lack of respect for the Mother’s wishes during the birth.

I was appalled when the panel told us that the doctor will sometimes break your water without telling you. How in the world does a doctor think it is okay to mess around with your body and not tell you what is happening? I also was frustrated upon hearing that the hospital staff will give your baby formula without you knowing. I will be taking the panel’s advice to speak up for myself because my baby will not be fed formula! Breast feeding is very important just after birth and that amazing opportunity should not be tossed away.

I also love the idea of having a doula. I got some information from wikipedia to give a more detailed description of what a doula actually does.

“Labor doulas rely on techniques like massage, aromatherapy, visualization, positive positioning, emotional support, encouragement, and nurturing to help women through labor. Many offer phone and email support as well as prenatal and postpartum visits to ensure the mother is informed and supported. The terms of a labor/birth doula’s responsibilities are decided between the doula and the family. The doula is also an ally for the father or partner, who may have little experience with the labor process and may also find the process anxiety provoking. Often the doula will help the partner find ways to support the laboring woman. Studies have shown that childbirth education can help reduce paternal anxiety [5] and one of the doula’s roles is to educate.[6] A responsible doula supports, encourages, and educates the father or partner in his or her support style rather than replacing them”.

I agree with what one of the Mothers on the panel said, that the doula can help vocalize your wishes to the doctor and nurses. This would seem to take a lot of stress of of the Mother and leave the couple to have a more positive experience. After the birth I would also send the doula to keep an eye on the staff so they do not give the baby formula!!!

I was also unaware of the issues surrounding insurance and the cost of the birth. I will definitely be keeping the panel’s wisdom when the time comes for me to have my own children