Dictionary definitions of marriage usually begin with something like ”the legal union of a man and a woman in order to live together and often to have children.” Even in such a simple and limited definition, some key elements and some potential complexities are highlighted. First, we are dealing with a definition referring to legal criteria. However, since legal definitions differ, we can reasonably expect practices and under standings of marriage to differ. This dictionary definition is consequently a highly ethnocentric one, shaped by the cultural and historical conditions under which it is produced. Next, marriage is a way of identifying some particular kinds of ties between two, or sometimes more, people such that marriage is always something more than the characteristics of the individuals who compose it. There is also a suggestion of functionality; marriage exists in order to achieve something else.
Marriage is important to the individuals concerned, the others to whom they are connected, and to the society within which the marriage is recognized. Marriage will not necessarily be important in the same way across different societies or to the different individuals within these societies. Recognizing this qualification, the list here outlines some of the key ways in which sociologists have described the importance of marriage:
- Marriage is seen as a key element within a wider set of family relationships. It establishes links between different families and over different generations.
- Marriage is seen as a key element in the life course. It is seen as an important transition in the lives of individuals and of those to whom they are connected.
- Marriage is seen as a key element in the social ordering of gender and sexuality. This is the most widespread understanding of marriage (one man, one woman) and reaffirms distinctions between men and women and the dominant importance of heterosexuality.
- Marriage is seen as a key element in the wider social structure. This is because the parties involved in a marriage are not just gendered and sexualized individuals but have class, ethnic, religious, and other differently based identities.
- Marriage is important as an element in the mobilization of patterns of care and social support.
- Marriage is important in the formation of personal and social identity.
These are in addition to the key function which links marriage and parenthood and which sees marriage in terms of the production, legitimizing, and social placement of children.
Research into marriage may be classified under two headings: the comparative and historical, and the study of its internal dynamics. The first considers how marriage differs between different societies or different historical periods and how it has changed over time. Earlier comparative research into marriage explored different marriage systems and the ways in which these were linked to wider aspects of social structure such as the division of societies into classes or castes, or the distribution of property. The emphasis was often a strongly functional one considering the part that a particular marriage system (polygyny, polyandry, arranged, and so on) played within the wider social structure. Comparative research might also be linked to a wider theory of social evolution, speculating on the ways in which marriage patterns and the wider social order together change over time.
More recently, interests have become more theoretically focused. Goode’s now classic study explored the ways in which, and the extent to which, family patterns throughout the world were converging into a single ”conjugal” family model, one which focused on the unit created through marriage. This account, although influential at the time, suffered from being too closely tied to a functional mode of analysis and from smoothing over complexities and divergences. Other analyses have explored differences between premodern, modern, and postmodern patterns of marriage and family living, as well as the long term decline of ”patriarchalism” within family relationships (Cheal 1991; Castells 1997). These more recent accounts have been aware of differences in the pace of change between different parts of the globe and, increasingly, the possibilities of resistance to the forces of globalization. Thus, the reassertion of what might be described as ”traditional” patterns of marriage might be seen as important in the construction of religious, ethnic, or national identities in the face of globalization and westernization.
More narrowly, attempts have been made to analyze changes in marriage in Britain, the United States, and other anglophone societies together with much of Western and Northern Europe. Sometimes this might be expressed simply as a ”decline” of marriage, as increasing numbers of people do not go through a formal marriage ceremony, have children outside wed lock, or divorce. Further, with the partial recognition of cohabiting and non heterosexual partnerships, the privileged status of heterosexual marriage seems to be less secure.
Notions of the decline of marriage may be countered by showing that marriage continues to be an important, if frequently delayed, transition in the life course and pointing to the increasing demands for the recognition of gay and lesbian marriages. The issue here is one of change rather than decline, with researchers often accounting for these changes in terms of a broad historical process of ”individualization.” The emphasis here is on the ways in which individuals are increasingly called upon to shape their own relational biographies with little reference to the expectations of others or previously established patterns of behavior. This may sometimes be seen as the extension of democratic ideals into intimate relationships.
Yet another formulation is in terms of a long term shift in marriage from institution to relationship. Marriage may be seen as moving from a social context where it was clearly embedded in a wider network of familial and kinship ties and obligations and where it constituted the major legitimate adult identity. As marriage becomes more of a relationship, there is greater emphasis on individual choice and the needs and satisfactions of the participants. Choice here includes the possibility of choosing not to get married.
There are difficulties with this formulation which, as with other accounts, glosses over diversities in experiences and trends over time. A wholly ”relationship marriage” would seem to be an oxymoron and it is probably better to think of different ”mixes” of relational and institutional elements at different points of time and between individual marriages. Thus it can be argued that the very idea of ”relationship” has itself developed some institutional features in that marital partners may be expected to share intimacies, enjoy sex, and monitor and evaluate the development of their marriages and, indeed, other less formally recognized relationships.
Turning to the more ”internal” aspects of marriage, we can look at gender divisions and questions of identity. It is widely believed that marriages have become more equal in terms of gender; the very idea of a relationship suggests some degree of mutuality and equality between the partners. At the same time, there has been a considerable body of research exploring gendered inequalities and differences within marriage. These include unequal participation in household and parental tasks; differences in the management of money within the home; and differences in patterns of paid employment and leisure activities outside the home. The sources of these persisting differences include men’s and women’s differential labor market participation and earning power; the persistence of deeply held assumptions about the nature of men and women; and inequalities in power within the household, including physical power and the potential for violence. Some have argued that we should consider the different balances between ”love” and ”power” within marriage. There is a strong expectation that modern marriage should be based on love, but this expectation coexists with these continuing inequalities within this relationship (Dallos & Dallos 1997).
Evidence of change is uneven although generally pointing toward a greater degree of sharing. There has been an increasing acceptance of the idea of equality in marriage on the part of both men and women. Actual practices may fall behind ideals, although there is evidence of greater sharing, especially in childcare. Men and women still tend to do different kinds of tasks within the household and women are still more likely to take overall responsibility for parental or domestic planning. There is considerable variation, however, depending on factors such as patterns of paid employment, education, ethnicity, and social class. Despite some clear shifts, gender remains an important division within the institutionalized relationship of marriage.
In terms of identity, it is still the case that marriage represents an important life course transition and remains a significant adult relationship. Partly for this reason, marriage can still provide an important source of stability and security in an individual’s life. Further, it can be a basis for identity and a key element in the development of a relational self. However, this self also exists in a world shaped by the changing labor market, globalization, individualization, and changes in the gender order. Sometimes, therefore, there may be a tension between the apparent stability provided by marriage and the possibilities within a marriage for shaping identity and personal development, especially where different gendered expectations develop within marriage.
Sociological research continues to find marriage an important social institution and a major area where the gender order, and changes within it, are manifested. While it has been affected by forces such as globalization and individualization, it has not been overwhelmed by these processes. Nevertheless, within western societies at least, it is increasingly clear that the boundaries between marriage and other adult intimate relationships have become blurred. The exclusively heterosexual character of marriage is being challenged and the distinction between marriage and cohabitation has become more blurred in terms of law and actual practices.
It is likely that future research will explore the whole spectrum of intimate relationships and the position of marriage within it. It may serve as a reminder of the limits of individualization through exploring the multiple inter dependences that can develop over a life course. With an aging population, the significance of these relationships in later life will receive increasing attention. It is also hoped that there will be more systematic comparative research in order to provide a more rigorous exploration of the notions of globalization and individualization.
- Beck, U. & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995) The Normal Chaos of Love. Polity Press, Cambridge.
- Castells, M. (1997) The Power of Identity. 2 of The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Blackwell, Oxford.
- Cheal, D. (1991) Family and the State of Theory. Harvester Wheatsheaf, London.
- Dallos, S. & Dallos, R. (1997) Couples, Sex, and Power: The Politics of Desire. Open University Press, Buckingham.
- Goode, W. J. (1970) World Revolution and Family Patterns. Free Press, New York.
- Jamieson, L. (1998) Polity Press, Cambridge.
- Therborn, G. (2004) Between Sex and Power: Family in the World, 1900 2000. Routledge, London.