Analysis Of The Transformation Of Marriage

According to Stephanie coontz Chapter 17"How the Transformation of Marriage is Changing our lives", in an attempt to point out the change gender role in marriage and cohabitation in the society in the 21st century, it is actually does by strengthening gender roles, rather than destroy them in just the opposite. Although she correctly pointed out that a successful marriage in today's world has greatly changed, there have to consider many factors in the 1950s, she is still perhaps the subconscious mind, insist on some patriarchal stereotypes. She is not completely able to break free of the socialization that every mind goes through while growing up. In this paper, I will try to analysis the assumption of stereotypes gender and and biases present in the study through the analysis of the language used and suggest how a more holistic idea and the marriage is more comprehensive idea is to better the status of men and women in society.

Coontz’s obviously feminist articles, trying to set up how women and men, belong to different categories of social, think about marriage. She points out the fact that with the development of society and the new government regulations, women are giving more power now, enjoy a place where they can be benefit to their own personal choices and make more correct decision. However, in all of the article assumes that the men are more provolege than women. Talking about marriage, women as the center breadwinner of a family is never considered to be a viable option.It is assumed that men should always be employed in a married relationship or otherwise remain single. Employed is mandatory for men entering into the marriage relationship while this is not always for women. This assu...

... middle of paper ...

...at their partner will receive a good education, equality and more understanding. She also assumes such a couple will less likely enter divorce is “higher income women have more leverage in marriage than in the past and are more likely to have husbands whom at least in principle support gender equality” (291). But, the lines such as explained with words like “likely”, “at least”, and “hopefully” suggest that it is not always in the case.

To conclude this paper, Coontz’s idea of femininity and marriage is explained with traditional ideas of gender role. She attempts to negtative the “time-tested rules” for happiness marriage but does not provide a feasible meaning to the institution of marriage. The best she does is ending her article by the line “Even more than love and marriage, fulfilling and fragile seem to “go together like horse and carriage”(301).