1. Summary:
Chapter
8 discusses the positive and negative aspects of dating as well as the various
ways people select a
mate. It begins by discussing how sociologists describe the dating process as a
marriage market in which a person chooses their mate after evaluating the
assets and liabilities of available partners. It examines functions that dating
fulfills both manifest (ones with intended purposes) and latent (ones with unplanned
purposes). Manifest functions of
dating include: indications of maturing; enjoyment and recreation; it can also
be a valuable source of companionship as it provides a sense of comfort during
hard times; it is a way of building rapport with another person; and lastly, it
is a process that enables one to search for a marital partner in societies
where marriage isn’t arranged. Additionally, some latent functions of dating considered in this chapter include:
socialization through dating; dating someone can often enhance ones standing in
a social group and boost ones ego; it is commonly used for sexual experimentation
and sexual desire grows as relationships grow; and it can provide economic
resources.
The
next section of the chapter explores different forms of dating and how dating
has changed over the years. Contemporary dating is less formal than traditional
dating. Traditional dating often appears in cultural rites of passage,
such as bat/bar mitzvahs and quinceañaras. Going steady is considered part of
traditional dating, characterized by couples only seeing each other exclusively;
“going with” is a variation of going steady for adolescents. On the other hand, contemporary
dating is more casual and includes hanging out, getting together, and
“hooking up.” A variation of “hooking up” is “Friends with benefits” (FWB) which is a form of recreation in which friends have
a sexual relationship but do not consider themselves to be in an exclusive
relationship. Furthermore, there are traditional-contemporary
combinations that incorporate both traditional and contemporary dating
forms. It is becoming increasingly acceptable for women to invite men to
traditional dating events, such as proms or homecoming parties, and dinner
dates; in addition, men are not always obligated to pay for the entire date as
couples are beginning to split the costs and share dating expenses. Dating
later in life, either after divorce or being widowed can be both therapeutic
and intimidating; it can provide comfort when one is still grieving over a
spouse’s death or separation as well as bitterness and guilt may cause dating
to be disconcerting.
The
chapter goes on to examine the different ways people meet dating partners. Personal
classified advertisements in magazines and newspapers are often used by
people to promote themselves through limited self-descriptions, which often exaggerate
their attributes to fulfill the expectations of the opposite sex. Mail order
brides include the advertisement of international women, commonly from disadvantaged
regions, who American men seek to marry. Unfortunately many internet brides are
more interested in entering the U.S. than in becoming a good wife and often
leave the marriage soon after obtaining legal permanent resident status. Professional matchmakers arrange dates
between singles who are hoping to find a mate. This
is often very expensive and does not usually get the result most people hope
for. Speed dating takes place when a large group of people are given a limited
period of time to meet potential mates face-to-face and decide if they share
any mutual interests and care to start a relationship.
Because of the time constraint, people often base their opinions on
external appearance and overlook potential mates because they tend to disregard
compatible traits like common values and lifestyles. The last method discussed
is cyber dating which is characterized by people communicating with each
other and finding romance over the Internet. Internet romances are often
deceptive because many people do not give honest information about themselves,
which can result in detrimental consequences, both physically and mentally.
There
are many different theories about the ways people go about choosing their
mates. Filter theory claims that people narrow their pool of potential
partners by selecting people they see on a regular basis who share similar
traits. Homogamy and heterogamy are two
filtering tools discussed with this theory; Homogamy encompasses
dating/marrying someone with similar social characteristic such as: propinquity (geographic closeness), physical appearance, ethnicity and race (interdating has
increased, but there still remains controversy within societies), religion (interfaith marriages are often
forbidden by many sects as it is believed to weaken one’s faith), age, social
class, as well as values and
personality (couples with personality differences can lead to bitterness
and conflict, but similar personalities can often enhance relationships with
similar emotional responses). While homogamy narrows peoples’ pool of eligible
partners, heterogamy expands peoples’ pool of eligible partners. Heterogamy
encompasses dating/marrying someone with different social characteristics than
one’s own; this takes into consideration same-sex
relationships (dating is not limited to opposite-sex partners, as more and
more countries begin to accept gay marriages), social class relationships (mate selection can move people up
[hypergamy] or down [hypogamy] the social ladder), interfaith relationships (common in the U.S today), as well as interracial and interethnic relationships (interracial
dating has increased, but marriages remain uncommon). Social exchange theory
presents that people weigh the costs and rewards to determine if the
relationship is worth starting or continuing; if the rewards are greater than
the costs, people will begin/continue a relationship. Equity theory asserts
that relationships are often happier and stable when both partners perceive
them as equals; however, once a relationship enters a stage of long-term
commitment, people tolerate inequality.
Chapter 8 analyzes forms
of dating in other countries. In many countries dating is not like the open courtship
system in the U.S. Instead marriages are often arranged and restricted to
members with similar social characteristics, such as culture, religion, age,
social class, or race. Dowries are
very important in many societies; women with large dowries often have the
advantage of attracting better suitors while brides who cannot meet dowry
expectations often face many negative consequences. This is an example of how a
person’s social class/wealth plays a large role in finding a mate. In many
societies, heterogamy is used as a way of escaping poverty by marrying people
outside their societal group. Mate selection is commonly homogamous in numerous
societies, which often helps establish strong and continuing family ties yet
increases the chances of passing down genetic diseases. Arranged marriages are
common in societies with strong community and family support systems as well as
those where men dominate and have the power to force women to marry against
their will to preserve family and culture. Mate
selection methods are changing in many traditional societies. China and India
have a abundance of single men and a shortage of single women which has lead to
the implementation of some Western-style mate selection methods in China and
dedicating many sites for the purpose of arranging marriages in India. Because women
are becoming increasingly more self-sufficient and postponing marriage in Japan
and South Korea, many companies have set up matrimony brokerage firms to act as
matchmakers for men seeking a spouse.
The chapter ends with a
discussion about the negative sides of dating. Power and control increase as a
relationship becomes serious and many power differences arise between men and
women which often cause problems. In addition, physical and sexual aggression is
more commonly seen as acts by men to control or frighten another. Dating
violence is rarely a one-time event and many gays, out of fear of expanding
homophobia, refrain from reporting it. Women are more susceptible than men to
both acquaintance rape (rapist is known/familiar) and date rape
(unwanted/forced sexual intercourse by a date). There are many factors examined
that contribute to prevalence of date violence and date rape; these include: growing
up in a family with family violence increases one’s likelihood of being
both an abuser and a victim during dating; those that thrive over distinct gender
roles such as men who see themselves as in charge and women as submissive
are more likely to engage in dating violence; peer pressure & secrecy
can cause many to become violent as well as to remain in abusive relationships;
alcohol & other drugs lowers inhibitions against violence and
reduces a woman’s ability to resist a sexual assault. Dating violence and rape
have detrimental consequences that affect every aspect of the victim’s life. Violence and rape can be eliminated on 3 levels:
at an individual level (increase in reporting assaults causing a decrease in
the number of incidents), at an organizational level (prosecution of sexual
violence would decrease it), and at a societal level (change the attitudes and
beliefs toward gender dating roles and violence). Break ups are prevalent in
each and every society; they may be very painful, but they are also healthy in
many ways. Breaking up allows one to filter out unsuitable prospective mates
and find a more suitable mate. There are both individual/micro-level and
structural/macro-level reasons for breaking up. Women are generally more
distressed than males over mates who cheat. The chapter concludes by
identifying that even though more choices involving mate selection exist, many
people are making the decision to remain single longer.
2. What was
interesting/what did you learn:
I
thought the section about harmful dating relationships was very interesting and
put things into perspective regarding events that have happened in my friends’
past relationships. Throughout my life, I have watched so many people struggle
with controlling behaviors as well as allowing peer pressure to influence them to
engage in risky behavior just to fit in. One prime example of how control
increases as relationships progress as well as how peer pressure can lead one
to create an unhealthy relationship and disregard any possible consequences
that might stem from such actions is one that recently occurred between my best
friend and her boyfriend. My friend was dating a guy for over two years and put
all her trust into him, but he eventually gained so much control of her over
those two years that she became blinded of what really was occurring in the
relationship. He would insist that she needed to pay for everything and that
she should save her money on important things such as dates with him; he manipulated
every move she made (who she hung out with/talked with, where she could go, and
what she could do, etc.). It doesn’t seem like a healthy relationship to me.
But, she kept these details all a secret; like the chapter suggests about how most
people remain silent about abusive relationships. It wasn’t until she found out
her bank account was wiped clean by him stealing her bankcard and withdrawing
100s of dollars a day that she realized she needed to end this abusive
relationship. His actions and behavior may be justified by the fact that he was
undergoing a significant amount of peer pressure to remain in charge of the
relationship to obtain money for the purchase of drugs in order to remain
friends with his so called “friends.” Watching incidents like this is just
heartbreaking and very scary; my friend might not have gotten physically
abused, but emotional abuse is often just as painful as physical is. She was
lucky it ended when it did and didn’t undergo anymore harm than she did, but
with her secrecy of how manipulative he was she prolonged something that could
have been prevented before it got as far as it did. So after reading this
section and the solutions to abuse, I definitely agree with the chapters
statement that violence/abuse needs to be handled on 3 levels: individual level
(reporting assaults), organizational level (prosecution of violence), and
societal level (changing attitudes and beliefs about gender dating roles and
violence).
3. Discussion
Point:
I found the section in this chapter about
traditional-contemporary combinations, the changes in gender roles involved in
dating today intriguing. It points out that it is common today for couples to share
dating expenses instead of following the traditional custom where the male date
was obligated to pay for everything. I have never been on a date where the guy
didn’t pay for it all, but I do believe that men no longer feel obligated to
carry out this specific gender role involved in traditional dating. This traditional
dating practice seems to have developed out of the long-established gender role
beliefs in which men were considered the breadwinners and women were the
nurturers. But as traditional gender roles diminish in today’s families, it
seems to make sense that specific gender roles diminish in dating and become
increasingly more egalitarian.
In my opinion, I don’t think
there is anything wrong with partners splitting the bill, especially when a new
relationship is just starting. And I definitely don’t think there is anything
wrong with females initiating dates. In fact, I think gender roles in dates
need to become more egalitarian; this way the control is out of the hands of
men and perhaps could prevent relationships from developing into unhealthy
ones. Do you think dates should involve more equal roles, with couples
splitting the expenses and both be given opportunities to initiate dates? Or do
you think men should be held accountable to initiate dates and pay for
everything, thus carry out the traditional dating form?
No comments:
Post a Comment