I'm usually far too tired to actually read (vs. skim) the newspaper in the evening, but while all of America is anxiously awaiting the results of today's election, this article caught my attention:
Stephanie Coontz wrote an op-ed in today's New York Times, titled "Too Close for Comfort." The piece talks about the decline in close relationships outside of marriage since the early 20th century.
"A study released this year showed just how dependent we’ve become on marriage. Three sociologists at the University of Arizona and Duke University found that from 1985 to 2004 Americans reported a marked decline in the number of people with whom they discussed meaningful matters. People reported fewer close relationships with co-workers, extended family members, neighbors and friends. The only close relationship where more people said they discussed important matters in 2004 than in 1985 was marriage.
In fact, the number of people who depended totally on a spouse for important conversations, with no other person to turn to, almost doubled, to 9.4 percent from 5 percent. Not surprisingly, the number of people saying they didn’t have anyone in whom they confided nearly tripled."
Apparently, from medieval days until the early 19th century, the word 'love' used to refer more often to neighbors, cousins and fellow church member than to spouses. Hmmm, this set me thinking: I hardly know my neighbors even though I've lived here for almost two years, I only have one cousin (ok, that might be exceptional), and I don't go to church. BUT: I can certainly say that I've built a lot more richer connections ever since I stopped focusing on only one person in my life. Yes, I do 'love' many of my co-workers, many of my friends I've gotten closer to lately, and I certainly contemplated further 'options' while reading this paragraph ;-) :
"The Victorian refusal to acknowledge strong sexual desires among respectable men and women gave people a wider outlet for intense emotions, including physical touch, than we see today. Men wrote matter-of-factly about retiring to bed with a male roommate, “and in each other’s arms did friendship sink peacefully to sleep.” Upright Victorian matrons thought nothing of kicking their husbands out of bed when a female friend came to visit. They spent the night kissing, hugging and pouring out their innermost thoughts.
By the early 20th century, though, the sea change in the culture wrought by the industrial economy had loosened social obligations to neighbors and kin, giving rise to the idea that individuals could meet their deepest needs only through romantic love, culminating in marriage. Under the influence of Freudianism, society began to view intense same-sex ties with suspicion and people were urged to reject the emotional claims of friends and relatives who might compete with a spouse for time and affection."
Sometimes I feel like society has become more backward in so many ways. Same sex marriages ? Well, same sex relationships seemed to have been totally normal, and now we have to fight for them getting accepted in our courthouses, until death do them part ... well ... maybe it's not that black and white.
Oh, and did I ever mention that I do like India's Kamasutra temples (and all the philosophy that comes with it), which were, of course, built before the British came and introduced their decorum Britannicum? I think I'm not quite getting my point across, do I? I'll try again in another post, with another photograph from the famous Konark sun temple in Orissa, India ... deal? :-)
Konark, Sun Temple, Orissa - India, 2004
Recent Comments