orichalcum

This is not, in fact, a post about same-sex marriage. However, the train of thought was sparked in my mind by this hypothetical argument by Belle Waring, which basically suggests that SSM might be bad because it's a major social change of a fundamental institution in the same way that no-fault divorce was. She argues that while no-fault divorce seemed like a good idea at the time (getting couples out of miserable, abusive situations), it's ruined the lives of millions of kids, and that society shouldn't be focusing on the emotional well-being of the parents, who got themselves into the mess in the first place, but rather on the welfare of the kids, who are better off in a two-parent household in nearly all circumstances where their parents are gritting their teeth and dealing. N.B. - I am not trying to criticize or insult anyone's particular family choices or beliefs here; this is a huge complex social issue which I'm trying to think about and wrap my head around, and where I'd appreciate a variety of different perspectives.


So I find this a provocative argument. I don't know any child of divorced parents where that didn't have a profound, and generally mildly traumatic effect on their upbringing and childhood. I'm less familiar, admittedly, with kids from families who stayed together unhappily out of prejudice against divorce, although there's a compelling argument that my own parents stayed together during certain rough times mostly because of me, my brother, and a committment to taking the "in sickness and in health" part of the vows seriously.

But to me the interesting question that this argument raises is whether the societal problem in America is with divorce - or with marriage? Since we know that certain types of marriages have a quite high lifetime success rate (both partners being well-educated, older age at first marriage, etc...), should we really be saying that it's awful that people are getting divorced so casually, or that they're getting married without due forethought? My mom, for instance, got married her junior year of college partially because she wanted to live off-campus with her boyfriend; my dad (in a different first marriage) got married at 21 because he didn't want to lose touch with his college friends and thought that marrying one of them was a surefire way to keep her around. (Me, I prefer LJ and email...) These were both pretty ridiculous reasons and, as it turns out, very poor foundations for successful marriages. (N.B. Obviously, lots of people can get married very young and live happily ever after!)

When my parents got married again [to each other] at 32, it was after not only love but a careful process in which they committed to making their relationship and family take precedence over their individual career goals and established grounds for compromise, as well as living together for several years and ironing out some of the rough edges. Yes, there were problems in the long run, but also a lot of happiness in the 26 years they were given together.

In general, I'm pretty opposed to things that we know have serious negative impacts on kids. Would our generation, roughly speaking, be much more well adjusted if fewer of us had grown up in split homes? Maybe. But maybe what we should be doing for the future is placing a high value and respect on the institution of marriage [in my mind, irrespective of gender], and discouraging people from entering that institution casually. The corollary, of course, would be discouraging children outside of marriage or at least in unstable relationships, since that seems to create its own set of problems, but I'm less certain of how to do that without reinforcing a social stigma which primarily effects young women.

OTOH, the problem with the above approach seems to be what many friends in their late 30s are currently experiencing, which is that, having carefully waited and married for the right reasons, and then taken the time to make sure the marriage is stable before having kids, they're now having serious fertility issues. That one, I don't have a solution for.

Feel free to disagree, as always.