Marriage incentives (Atlantic Monthly cover article)

[Portia]

Link: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... dies/8654/

I read this in print form and it really got me thinking about incentives to marry and class structures in my life and observations of those around me through high school, at BYU, and beyond.

The high school I went to was universally posh and proper: it combined East Coast ideals of wisdom and tree-line quads with Utah earnestness. Basically none of us were sexually active--too busy studying for APs, too many negative social consequences if you got pregnant (not one girl did in my four years there)--and basically all of us have the luxury to marry whom and when we please. Like a Wodehousian farce, the parents are all well-off enough to pick up the pieces should we break up with a fiance, decide to become a musician, etc. There are strange consequences of such dynamics, especially for the token middle-class student such as myself, but the complete lack of sexual pressure (and bullying, and slufferism) was a very happy consequence of that atmosphere.

Basically every one of my close friends from BYU is married, and happily so. Maybe half had kids right away. The so-called marriage crisis never seemed to really be a reality to me, but my crowd tended to be of the vastly ambitious and curious, yet culturally conservative type who is in high demand at that school. A marriageable man was often a near-penniless junior in college, but since the costs of setting up a household are virtually nil, that is little barrier. There seemed to always be a ready supply of polo-shirt and dark-framed glasses-wearing math & science majors (or pre-law, the other vanguard of my semi-liberal, smart, often prep-school-educated BYU crowd) who wrote for the Board or sang in musicals or went to your ward to set up a nerd romance with.

By not putting out, I think Mormon women have devised an ingenious solution for keeping marriage ages low and commitment levels high. It becomes almost trivial to say that the same LDS crowd that is more sexually permissive is the one a lot less likely to marry in the temple, go on missions, and all these other signs of "marriageability" in BYU-land. Just as our wealthy parents would have murdered us if we got pregnant at my prep school, BYU & its culture seems to act in loco parentis (to steal a phrase from Ms. Blokin) to ensure that guys are married off at 23 to 21-year-old women. To the guys, apart from religious concerns, does the knowledge that you will face an unwelcome virginity spur your decision to get married, give it a greater urgency? I have probably made it overabundantly clear that I am no fan of the denial of women's sexuality, but I also have an economic mind, and if this method gets women what they ultimately want (commitment, babies, sex) at a fairly low cost to self (is waiting til 21 to lose your virginity really that unbearable to most women? probably not), then denying BYU undergrad men the fawning harems and NSA blowjobs their secular counterparts get is probably smart on many levels and not just the religious. Even the fooling around and NCMO that goes on in the more lenient circles is a far, far cry from what is indeed the norm at pretty much any other college. And yes, of course some BYU students have sex, but the vast majority of those are in serious relationships anyway, so it's not "hooking up" at all.

When I moved to the West Coast, I somewhat uncomfortably straddled two different worlds: the yuppie and the bohemian. My job was in an art museum, and every single one of my coworkers was single, some sort of aspiring "creative class" hipster who spent all their money on beer. (I was never once invited, whether because of my suburban squareness or state of provenance, I'm not sure . . . ) They were rather crass and non-deferential to their families and general social mores. The one girl I got along very well with, truly gorgeous--thin, Roman nose, long, straight hair--had studied anthropology in California, and we both missed the gregariousness and grooming of the sun belt. It was absurd that someone as smart and attractive as her was single. Social capital was clearly different in this brave new world that had such PBR-swilling people in it. (not to belabor the point, but these people went to bars every single night. there were world-class symphonies, ballets, art galleries, and parks literally across the block!)

My boyfriend, a Muppie (mormon yuppie) whose high school and college experiences closely paralleled mine, worked at the kind of tech-heavy, high-paying job that sprouts up in the area like MLMs and door-to-door sales do in Utah. His coworkers were this insanely brainy, well-dressed, and fun cadre of people in their late twenties. And guess what? Uniformly married. Uniformly starting families. The only exception was us two and the European guy. If they drank, it was wine, jacuzzi-side, with their spouses (of course with so many pregnant women plenty didn't drink). They were a lot more likely to go to the sports, arts events, and restaurants with which we were surrounded. They took pride in their work and mostly lived in the suburbs (my coworkers instantly thought I was some kind of arrogant soccer mom just by stating my city. I thought they were grungy hipsters from theirs, so I guess it was mutual). They even got along with their parents!

So, I think all this Gen X b.s. about finding yourself and dumping perfectly good relationships has come back to bite them, while so-called Gen Y are getting married and settling down . . . but apparently only the upper-class, math-majoring, suburban types. Whether it's religious pressure, peer pressure, or the simple economic bargaining that we all do (a stay-at-home mom and a professional dad have a very rational, mutual beneficial relationship in eastside suburbs everywhere), I think people will keep getting married. And that people who delay sex (til exclusive dating, at the very least) just seem to be better off professionally and emotionally, quite frankly, and it's troubling to me that there is such a class-based difference, but there is. The prep school kids who had everything seem to get everything, including earlier marriage. My story comes full circle because I now teach at that school: and I have no doubt that these kids have the education and resources to be steered towards the kinds of socially advantageous matches so common in 19th century British literature. "A truth universally acknowledged," indeed.

[Whistler]

hmmm. The article was tl;dr for me. Who is gen X and Y?

I'm not sure if there is such a class-based distinction with premarital sex. I went to a school similar to yours, and my friends didn't have boyfriends, but I knew other girls who did and had... reputations. Merely living in the neighborhood by the school was an indication of their parents' wealth, but that didn't stop them necessarily. Also, I'm not sure if everyone needs a significant other to achieve their complete life satisfaction.

[Portia]

Gen X was generally born about 1961 through 1979 or so. Gen Y or "Millennials" are the cohort born from about 1980 through 1993 or so.

I was also somewhat clueless, admittedly: for instance, I'm pretty sure there was more drug and alocohol use than I thought there was, but not among my crowd.

I wonder what the direction of causality is: if people who are happy anyway find life partners or vice versa.