Posted on

The new normal: births outside marriage — Part 1 of 2

In a New York Times article from Friday, a study the writer cited says a baby’s birth to an unwed mom “used to be called illegitimacy. Now it is the new normal. After steadily rising for five decades, the share of children born to unmarried women has crossed a threshold: more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage.”

The story is well written and worth the read. But what it points out is not so much “study reveals a new relationship trend” as much as “study reveals that what most people think is marriage is still not actually marriage.”

The story says:

“Among mothers of all ages, a majority — 59 percent in 2009 — are married when they have children. But the surge of births outside marriage among younger women — nearly two-thirds of children in the United States are born to mothers under 30 — is both a symbol of the transforming family and a hint of coming generational change.” 

and

“One group still largely resists the trend: college graduates, who overwhelmingly marry before having children. That is turning family structure into a new class divide, with the economic and social rewards of marriage increasingly reserved for people with the most education.”

and

“Liberal analysts argue that shrinking paychecks have thinned the ranks of marriageable men, while conservatives often say that the sexual revolution reduced the incentive to wed and that safety net programs discourage marriage.”

and

“Over the past generation, Lorain lost most of two steel mills, a shipyard and a Ford factory, diminishing the supply of jobs that let blue-collar workers raise middle-class families. More women went to work, making marriage less of a financial necessity for them. Living together became routine, and single motherhood lost the stigma that once sent couples rushing to the altar. Women here often describe marriage as a sign of having arrived rather than a way to get there.“

I understand these points.

Marriage does have economic and social rewards. Most women do find men whose paychecks can pay bills to be more marriageable than men whose paychecks can’t. Many women who work don’t need a husband to pay for her stuff. A stigma once did (and sometimes still does) send couples to the altar with haste and without much thought. But these are just words that distract us from what we really ought to discuss.

The story goes on…

“‘Women used to rely on men, but we don’t need to anymore,’ said Teresa Fragoso, 25, a single mother in Lorain. ‘We support ourselves. We support our kids.’

a) This says marriage is about money. (i.e., “I don’t need a husband because I can support myself and my kid.”)

“Fifty years ago, researchers have found, as many as a third of American marriages were precipitated by a pregnancy, with couples marrying to maintain respectability. Ms. Strader’s mother was among them.”

b) This says marriage is about image. And this still says that when a couple today rushes into marriage because they’ve found out they’re pregnant. (i.e., “We’ll be treated better if it looks like we didn’t get pregnant before we tied the knot.”)

“Even as many Americans withdraw from marriage, researchers say, they expect more from it: emotional fulfillment as opposed merely to practical support. ‘Family life is no longer about playing the social role of father or husband or wife, it’s more about individual satisfaction and self-development,’ said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University.”

c) This says marriage is about self. (i.e., “Marrying this man/woman will complete me!”)

And then, like in the story, people — among them, ones who live like they believe a, b and c are true — say…

“‘I’d like to do it, but I just don’t see it happening right now,’ … ‘Most of my friends say (marriage is) just a piece of paper, and it doesn’t work out anyway.'”

When the goal of a wedding revolves around money, image or self, I don’t blame women or men for a second for not wanting that stuff. I don’t want that stuff, either.

That stuff is a sheet of paper.

That stuff is not marriage.

Marriage is the miracle in which two become one. (Note: It is not 1/2 + 1/2 = 1, but 1 + 1 = 1. A spouse cannot and will not complete you, nor should he or she be expected to.) It is the mutual gift of self, given in love, which is patient and kind, neither boastful nor proud nor rude. It doesn’t demand its own way or act pissed off about and/or keep track of it every time it doesn’t get its way. It stands for justice and truth, it doesn’t give up or lose faith and it sticks around, with hope, regardless of circumstances*.

Marriage helps us “to overcome self-absorption, egoism, pursuit of one’s own pleasure, and to open oneself to the other, to mutual aid and to self-giving,**”

Which is awesome.

So why, then, are few folks our age interested in it? And why do so few married couples reveal this in their relationships? I’m of the opinion that it’s pretty complex.

Check back tomorrow for part 2.

– – – –

To read the New York Times story in full, click here.

*Within reason. If, for instance, you live with an abusive spouse, hope won’t cut it. Your spouse needs help, and you need a safety plan. Click here for more information.

**This quote comes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Posted on

Contraception.

One word describes a recent set of posts about contraception on a blog I frequent called Bad Catholic, written by a guy named Marc Barnes:

Brilliant.
Barnes, who I think might be a genius, is a college kid at Franciscan University of Steubenville and a clearly Catholic Christian whose humor (even if often sarcastic and occasionally irreverent in inexplicably appropriate ways) gets me every time. His recent two posts about contraception explain why the Catholic Church is opposed to it and expose the reality that until relatively recently, so was every Protestant church. Both posts are so very worth the read. 

From part 1:

“The natural end of sex is both unity and procreation. Love and life. Shocking, but true. If this is denied, and it is claimed that sex is solely about making babies, then you’re a jerk in the vein of Henry VII, and a Puritan besides. If, on the other hand, it is claimed that sex is solely about pleasure, one must contend with the shocking fact of what — precisely — leaves a man and enters a woman.

To argue otherwise is to look at a farmer casting seeds upon fertile ground and claim that he is casting the seed for the pure joy of seed-casting. This is not to say there is no joy, even a wild joy, to be found in planting a field. It is simply to note that it would be an insane man who would plant his field by the logic that throwing seeds is fun, and then become shocked and annoyed when his field bore grain in due season. Every part of the action of sex speaks to the creation of new life.”

From part 2:

“Not one, single Protestant denomination before the 1930?s held that the use of artificial contraception was anything but sinful. May I ask, what on earth has changed, besides the fact that we now live in a culture that really, really wants birth control?”

Before you click off my site and on to Barnes’s posts, you should know that because the Catholic Church is opposed to contraception does not mean the church expects couples to have sex so willy-nilly that they wind up like the Duggars. The church does teach that if a couple is sexually active, it should a) be married and b) be open to children (Click here and refer to the third question the priest asks an about-to-be-married couple right before the vows at a Catholic wedding.). But the church is not opposed to family planning. It is not opposed to your own deciding when you will and won’t have kids. It is opposed to your own deciding when you will and won’t be fertile (as well as to rendering a womb unsafe for and/or discarding fertilized eggs [which are a.k.a. super tiny babies]). Sex, according to the Church, is for babies and for bonding, until God says otherwise.

So much more I’d like to say about sex and contraception. In due time. But in the meantime, if you’re wondering how a couple can decide when to and not to have kids without deciding when to and not to be fertile, click on the third and fourth links below for a couple old posts about natural family planning. But first, go read Bad Catholic:

Click here to read Why Contraception Is a Bad Idea #1 — Natural Law in full on Bad Catholic.

Click here to read Why Contraception is a Bad Idea #2 — Scripture Prohibits It in full on Bad Catholic.

For more about natural family planning, click here and here.

Posted on

“Sexual Reconnection” by Dr. Peter Kreeft

Today, while I searched for something to listen to while I worked, I discovered the mother load of free, downloadable lectures. (Yes, I get excited about lectures.)

They’re by Dr. Peter Kreeft, a professor of philosophy at Boston College. Prior to today, I had heard of him, but I hadn’t heard him speak.

One of his talks I heard today is called “Sexual Reconnection.” I’ll admit Kreeft is a little rough around the edges — a little harsh, even — but makes excellent set of points throughout. The lecture’s in two parts on YouTube (press play below!) and free to download, among a bunch of others, here.

The other talk I heard is “How to Win the Culture War” — click here to listen and/or download.

Posted on

Actual song lyrics.

On my drives to and from work and school, I tend to scan Tampa’s radio stations, most of which play the kinds of songs I only started to like when — last year, at my cousin Frankie’s wedding — I realized how fun it is to dance. And almost a year later, I have to get the following of my chest: If I always tell my friends and family not to listen to the lyrics when they’re in my presence while I’m listening to music (and I do), I probably should find some new music. Just sayin’.

Anyway, as I’ve come to this conclusion over recent weeks, I realized how little I actually listen to the lyrics when I’m scanning for songs fun for dancing and/or driving. So, I started paying attention. Here is some of what I found:

1. “Girl, please excuse me if I’m coming too strong / But tonight is the night we can really let go / My girlfriend’s out of town and I’m all alone / your boyfriend’s on vacation and he doesn’t have to know.”
(“I Like It,” by Enrique Iglesias feat. Pitbull)

2. “He ain’t even gotta try to put the mack on / He just gotta give me that look / When he give me that look / Then the panties comin’ off.” (Superbass by Nicki Minaj)

3. Male voice: “Tell me what’s next, alien sex / I’ma disrobe you, then I’ma probe you / See I abducted you / so I tell ya what to do / I tell ya what to do, what to do, what to do.” Female voice: “Kiss me, ki-ki-kiss me / Infect me with your love and fill me with your poison / Take me, ta-ta-take me / Wanna be a victim / Ready for abduction.” (E.T. by Katy Perry, feat. Kanye West)

Know what those are? Actual song lyrics from songs that are actually popular on radio stations to which actual children listen. I don’t know what bothers me more: the songs, or the fact that hardly anybody ever bats an eye about them, like the anonymous commenter who responded last time I blogged about bad music:

“I think u guys are making this more than it has to be. It’s a song with a good dance beat!!!!N no disrespect, but if it is offensive or you don’t care for it just switch to another station. Stop takin things so serious!!! If I took things so serious I would never leave my house, watch television, or listen to music.”

I don’t disagree entirely. Take Enrique’s “I Like It.” It is, in fact, a song with a good dance beat. Just a song. But the anonymous commenter doesn’t realize his or her point proves mine: What has music become when it’s something we’d feel obligated to shun if we analyzed it? What have we become when we know that and choose not to analyze it anyway?

Well, I’ve analyzed. And one fun song with bad words — like “I Like It” — isn’t a very big deal. But it isn’t one song. It is most songs, and they send messages that call relationships dispensable, sex trivial and rape glamorous (Though these are just the aforementioned three. But if you don’t think there are more, turn on your radio.). And when most songs send messages like that, messages like that are normal. It’s just music. Just a song.

But is it?

This reminds me of the time a friend of mine expressed concern when I told her why I choose not to consume caffeine. Why don’t I drink coffee? Well, my body’s response to it is fun, but only until my friends start questioning my sobriety. And when the hyperactivity turns into anxiety, and my resting heart rate reaches 150, and my colleagues want to take me to the hospital (true story), the caffeine becomes completely not worth it.

“Um, that’s not normal,” my friend said. “Most people don’t have that reaction.”

True. But most people are desensitized to it. Immersed in it, if you will. It’s like horror movies. Some of us jump or scream at what we see on screen, and others sit silently with straight faces. How we react depends on how desensitized we are to it, or how immersed in it we’ve been. The more immersed we are, the less it bothers us. And maybe, in our culture, it isn’t normal to strike other people as drunk after you drink coffee. But look at what is normal:

Infidelity.

Sexually transmitted infections.

Sexual violence.

None of us like those things. We should be bothered by those things. But when our songs are about dispensable relationships, casual sex and encounters that sound a lot like rape, our songs are about those things.

Are they still just songs?

Or are they songs we hear so much they’re normal? Songs to which we don’t even react, we’re so desensitized. Songs that teach us to be less and less bothered by things that should never cease to bother us.

Posted on

Human Sexuality

For anyone who stumbles upon this out o’ the blue, you may not know: I love grad school. I mean, I get sad at the end of every semester love it. I force my friends and family to listen to me talk about what I’m learning love it. I really love it.

And the short summer semester I just finished is no exception. One of two classes I took was in human sexuality, taught by Dr. Dae Sheridan, a sex therapist who practices in Tampa. As much as I’ve enjoyed most of my classes, this was by far one of the best. What working at Popeyes Chicken in high school did for me and the word breast, this class did for me and words like vulva. Ain’t no thang! But more than desensitizing us to words we once found awkward to say, the class got us to think, write and talk about topics that are imperative to consider, both as counselors and as humans. Here are the five I liked to discuss the most:

1. Sexually transmitted infections (a.k.a. STIs, f.k.a. STDs): One in two sexually active adults age 25 or older has or has had an STI. One in two. In case you’d like more emphasis, that’s every other. Add to that the one in four teenagers who has an STI. During class, Dr. Dae — my brilliant prof — made a really good point: Think about salmonella for a sec. According to my notes from class, every year, about 20,000 cases of it are reported to the CDC. And what happens when it’s reported? Food is recalled, we throw out all our spinach and it’s all over the news. In other words, WE FREAK OUT. Now, think about HPV — an STI also known as the human papillomavirus. How many new cases are reported to the CDC each year? A couple million. But when have we ever freaked out about that? Something to think about.

2. The origins of sexual orientation: When I was in high school, one of my teachers decided to start a class-wide conversation about the origins of homosexuality. “It’s a choice,” she said. “People choose to be gay.” For awhile, I let her have her say. When I interjected, I simply asked her a question: “So let me ask you,” I said. “When did you choose to be attracted to men?” The point — a point my prof also made in my class this summer — is that we live in a world where a lot of people are really ridiculously concerned about the origins of homosexuality (and for what?). There are brain scan studies, my prof said, to try to find out what makes gay people gay. “But where are the straight people brain scans?” she asked. Something else to think about.

3. Communication: I’ve quoted it before, but I’ll quote it again: “Assumptions are the termites of relationships.” (Courtesy of Henry Winkler [yes, the Fonz!]) This, as we discussed in class, is a truth that is easily applied to every facet of every relationship — even sex! Take the fake orgasm, for example. Let’s say sex is a pain (literally) for a wife, but she fakes it for the sake of her husband’s ego. Her response — which is a lie, as Dr. Dae pointed out in class — makes him think he’s doing it right. So time after time, he’s gonna keep doing it. Something to TALK about.

4. Intersex: In class, we watched a documentary on intersexual people — that is, people who are born with ambiguous genitals or reproductive organs. The film focused on several Americans who are intersexed as well as some in the Dominican Republic. Something that stuck out from the film is the fact that the Americans — whose parents often decided to pick boy or girl upon the child’s birth, permitting a doctor to surgically turn ambiguous genitals into the genitals of the parents’ choice — often end up with long term psychological stress, whereas the ones in the Dominican Republic — where people who are intersexed are accepted as they are — grow up with little or none of that. What does that say about our cultures? To watch the documentary, click here. (And when that video ends, look for parts 2 and 3 along the side.)

5. Abstinence only education v. comprehensive sex ed: As a proponent and practice-er of abstinence before marriage, I enjoyed our discussions about abstinence only education versus comprehensive sex education. I don’t have the statistics in front of me, but it’s clear that abstinence only education doesn’t accomplish what its proponents wish it would. I haven’t seen stats on comprehensive sex ed, and until I do more of my own research, I can’t come to a definitive conclusion. I can, however, say this: learning about what actually goes on in bodies when a couple is getting it on didn’t make me want to forsake my pledge to save sex for marriage. Then again, I’m a 25-year-old and my brain is really close to fully developed, if not entirely fully developed. So I’m not sure if teens — whose brains still have some growing to do — would change their minds after comprehensive sex ed if before they learned a lot about sex, they’d planned to save it.