Via Ann Douglas @ Flickr.
The federal government launches a $5 million national media campaign this month, promoting “healthy marriage” to 18 to 30 year olds. Now, this article gives the impression that the campaign, which is part of a Bush administration effort at the Administration for Children & Families, will simply encourage unmarried folks to get hitched. It includes a lot of hand-wringing about declining U.S. marriage rates, so the initiative could be perceived as one aimed at convincing people to marry, as though higher levels of marriage were the desired outcome.
But upon further investigation at the Administration for Children & Families website, I learned that campaign’s mission is:
To help couples, who have chosen marriage for themselves, gain greater access to marriage education services, on a voluntary basis, where they can acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage.
So, probably not quite as nefarious as I suspected. The goals, as stated on the website, include:
- Increase the percentage of married couples who are in healthy marriages.
- Increase the percentage of premarital couples who are equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage.
- Increase the percentage of women, men and children in homes that are free of domestic violence.
I am very relieved that the initiative does NOT aim to increase the number of marriages, but the quality of existing and potential marriages. Marriage in and of itself is not good. Happy marriages based on mutual love and respect are good. The site lists a number of the alleged benefits of marriage, separated by gender:
For women:
More satisfying relationship
Emotionally healthier
Wealthier
Less likely to be victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or other violent crimes
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Less likely to contract STD’s
Less likely to remain or end up in poverty
Have better relationships with their children
Physically healthierFor men:
Live longer
Physically healthier
Wealthier
Increase in the stability of employment
Higher wages
Emotionally healthier
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Have better relationships with their children
More satisfying sexual relationship
Less likely to commit violent crimes
Less likely to contract STD’s
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Isn’t that interesting. Many of the alleged benefits are identical, but the lists diverge in a few ways.
First of all, married men live longer than their unmarried counterparts, but marriage does not confer the same life-extending benefit on women. I can only assume that’s because wives tend to their husbands’ health concerns, urging them to visit the doctor and take good care of their bodies, when ordinarily those men would not.
Men’s careers allegedly benefit from their healthy marriages, but the women’s list doesn’t mention anything career or salary related. It does say they are wealthier, but I assume that’s because they benefit from their husbands’ increased earnings. I imagine marriage may instead be a hindrance to women’s career stability.
In any case, I am a bit uncomfortable with simplistic declarations about what one can gain or lose by marrying. I will be extremely disappointed if this campaign is like the idiotic and deceptive “Marriage Works” campaign, in which photos of heterosexual couples in traditional wedding garb were featured on buses and billboards along with one-liners such as “Married people make more money.” You mean if two people get married their household income will be higher than either of their incomes as single people? Doy. Then there’s the simple declaration that “Marriage Works.” Works to do what? Bind two people in a legal contract? True.
Here’s hoping this campaign will be executed in an honest way that’s not heavy-handed or focused simply on getting straight people (natch) to say “I do.”
I’m not a fan of those lists either (though maybe in a healthy marriage, women are encouraged to either have their own source of income or be able to articulate to their husbands why they deserve an “allowance” (for lack of a better term) to spend as they see fit if they’ve agreed to stay home and be caretakers.
I think this program sounds like it’s bound to do more to slow the divorce rate than a “Put Jesus Back In Your Marriage” campaign like perhaps a recent administration would have advocated…
I think it’s children that are a hinderance to women’s career stability, but married women are more likely to have them, so that makes sense. And yes, married women are richer because they share in their husband’s wealth. Which is why divorced women struggle financially in ways that divorced men do not.
I agree with MKP, though, that it sounds more like a reasonable way of trying to slow the divorce rate by educating people rather than being all “Jeebus <3s Marriage!”, which is usually what’s hiding behind pro-marriage programs.
The lists are creepy but sometimes I wonder if some basic relationship-coaching pre-marriage wouldn’t help SO many people. I know so many people in miserable marriages, and I just wonder why the hell didn’t you talk about this stuff before you decided to get hitched? Or see people with absolutely no communication wondering why their marriage isn’t thriving.
I wonder, is it worth it to society to invest in this? Will taxpayers see a return on this investment? Is there a cost to society of divorces/unhappy marriages?
Interesting that men gain a “more satisfying sexual relationship” from marriage, and yet there is no mention of the same benefit for women. Could this be playing on the outdated assumption that women “inherently” don’t need sex as much as men?
@Funnyface: Anytime women and children fall below the poverty line–needing social services, lacking health insurance, etc–it costs us money. Divorce and single parenthood definitely drive women and children into poverty, especially as a high percentage of men do not pay court-ordered child support.
And agreed about basic relationship coaching/reality checking pre-marriage. Our culture promotes the idea of marriage being this happily ever after state without ever talking about the financial and emotional realities and work involved.
@BeckySharper – maybe more endless reruns of 7th Heaven would be the answer….
There’s probably something to that, Virginia. It’s not clear to me how those benefits were identified and ranked.
Also: do not read the comments in the linked article, unless you want a lot of whiny “Marriage will lead to your bitch of an ex-wife stealing all your money!” and “My taxes are funding this?” blather.
“Men’s careers allegedly benefit from their healthy marriages, but the women’s list doesn’t mention anything career or salary related.”
This is really true, and it amazes me.
After I got married, people kept asking when I would start popping out kids. I’m a freelancer, and I could sense that the real question was, “When are you going to stop working and do what you’re meant to be doing: having kids?” I consider myself surrounded by awesome, liberal, educated people, but it astounded me how many people assume what role I will or will not take based on my marital status. It was like marriage = put out to pasture.
My husband? Offered a promotion. His boss said: “I figured, what with you getting married and all, that you were looking for more stability.” Marriage meant that he was serious-minded and looking for something long-term. For me, it was viewed as my escape hatch.
Outdated, indeed.
Marriage does help guys get ahead. I always think of this Alec Baldwin bit from “The Departed”:
“Marriage is an important part of getting ahead. It lets people know you’re not a homo. A married guy seems more stable. People see the ring, they think ‘at least somebody can stand the son of a bitch.’ Ladies see the ring, they know immediately that you must have some cash, and your cock must work.”
@funnyface: Unhappy marriages lead to unhappy kids lead to troubles in school, troubles in future relationships, hours upon hours of therapy, etc. So yeah, unhappy marriages have social costs.
@BeSarcastic: I am absolutely convinced that my husband’s last raise was specifically because I had a baby and quit my job. It wasn’t at a scheduled time, he hadn’t done anything extra-special lately, no one else got one. And his boss is a 70 year old man who had told him when I was still pregnant that my staying home was the best thing for the kids.
@everyone: I am in a happy marriage and I think we would have benefited from premarital counseling – you know a basic “She won’t ever turn into your mother, so stop expecting her to do things just because your mom always did.” and “You know, he really doesn’t read minds. Cut the passive aggressive bullshit that worked with you parents, because he hasn’t known you your entire life and can’t guess what you’re thinking before you do.” We’ve worked it out now, but the first year of cohabitation and subsequent year of marriage was rough.
BeSarcastic, maybe they were less encouraging and more worried their freelancer would disappear! I know other grad students whose advisors basically expect them to drop out now that they have babies, although those advisors don’t WANT that to happen.
DangerMouse, you could be right. As Sarah’s post points out, there’s a whole host of “benefits” — real or imagined — when one gets married. I think, unfairly, it just makes men “look better” on paper to be married and they get rewarded for it. For me, it put me in a gray zone where people are wary and waiting. I’m now an unpredictable factor. So wonderful to be treated differently even though nothing has changed.