‘Tis an interesting question and the subject of a new book by Stephanie Coontz, a historian specializing in marriage and families. There isn’t a definitive answer but Coontz contends that we are demanding more collaboration in modern marriage, choosing spouses later and more carefully. And, when we don’t get what we want, people are not afraid to call it “quits.”

In an interview on one of Philadelphia’s public radio stations, Coontz also reminds us that marriage has been evolving and we tend to trap views from history and make them aspirations. Marriage before the 18th century was pretty much an economic partnership where both spouses worked and domestic jobs could be as arduous and dangerous as traditional male employment. Marriage for “love” was an innovation of the 1^st Great Awakening of the 1730s.

The wealth created by the industrial revolution united with home improvements like central heat and cheap domestic labor to create the role today labeled “traditional marriage.” That started in the 1820s and was accelerated in the 1920s by electricity and all the convenience that washers, dryers, refrigerators and vacuum cleaners brought. Then the 1970s introduced us to a world where women were now educated, career motivated and unwilling to quietly accept subservience to male physical and financial authority. That battle is still ongoing and some would argue that children are the losers in that war.

There are no definitive answers but Professor Coontz’ interview is worth a listen if only to realize that nothing in life is static or assured. Her interview is here:

For Better and Worse: what history can teach us about modern day marriage – WHYY

Share the section