Introduction
In the contemporary U.S., an individual’s choices about dating, sex, cohabitation, marriage, and the division of household responsibilities are often seen as some of the most intimate and personal decisions a person can make in their lifetime. While these decisions do involve personal values, beliefs, and emotions, there is a wider social context to consider as well. This includes the prevailing attitudes and norms of one’s family, peer group, community, and society as a whole.
On an individual level, the choices that one makes about their partner and family life are deeply personal. They are based on individual values, desires, and preferences. For instance, some people may feel strongly that they want to marry and have children, while others may prefer to remain single and focus on their careers. Similarly, some may prefer to date casually, while others may be looking for a long-term, committed relationship. It is important to note that these decisions are not always strictly a matter of personal preference. They can also be shaped by external factors, such as religious beliefs, family expectations, and cultural norms.
At the same time, the choices that people make about their partner and family life are deeply influenced by the prevailing attitudes and norms of their family, peer group, community, and society. For example, in some communities, it may be more socially acceptable to date casually or remain single, while in others, marriage and family may be seen as the ultimate goal. Similarly, some communities may be more accepting of alternative family arrangements, such as same-sex couples or unmarried cohabiting couples, while others may be more traditional in their views. These external influences can have a profound effect on an individual’s decisions about their partner and family life.
In addition to external influences, there are also economic pressures that can shape an individual’s choices about their partner and family life. For example, individuals may have to consider their financial resources and whether or not they have the means to support a family. Similarly, in certain communities, there may be economic incentives for marriage or for a particular type of family arrangement.
Ultimately, an individual’s choices about their partner and family life are a complex mix of personal preferences, external influences, and economic considerations. While they are often seen as some of the most intimate and personal decisions one can make in a lifetime, they are not always strictly a matter of individual choice. Rather, they reflect the broader social context in which one lives. While individuals have the right to make their own choices, it is important to acknowledge that these are influenced by a variety of factors.
Ways in Which Our Individual “Choices” Are Constrained by Social, Economic, Legal, Cultural, And Structural Factors
Individuals’ choices of partners and related decisions about dating, sex, cohabitation, marriage, and the division of household responsibilities are some of the most intimate, personal decisions that one can make in a lifetime. While it may appear that these decisions are made independently, they are, in fact, heavily shaped by social, economic, legal, cultural, and structural factors. These external forces can limit the degree to which an individual can choose to pursue a partner or even determine the likelihood of being able to find “the one”.
Social Factors
When considering the role of social factors in influencing decisions about relationships, it is important to consider the effects of class. Stephanie Coontz’s article “Two Birds with One Nest” discusses the subject of class in regards to marriage and family. She points out that “the most privileged have enjoyed advantages in finding and keeping partners and in creating a stable marriage and family” (Coontz, p. 539). This means that those from more privileged classes have more access to resources and social networks that can lead to successful relationships, while those from less privileged classes may face a lack of access to resources for forming and maintaining relationships. Coontz also points out that economic security is a major factor in the decision to marry, as marriage is an important factor in the allocation of resources. Therefore, those with more economic security are more likely to marry, while those with less economic security are more likely to stay single or cohabitate. This can limit an individual’s choices in terms of their partner and decision to marry. In addition to class, other social factors such as gender, race, and sexuality can also influence decisions about relationships. For example, societal expectations of what roles men and women should play in a relationship can lead to women being less likely to be financially independent, which can limit their choices in terms of partners and decisions to marry. Race-based discrimination can also limit the types of partners individuals can choose from, as well as their access to resources and social networks that can help them form and maintain relationships. Similarly, LGBTQ+ individuals can face discrimination in the form of fewer legal protections and limited access to resources, making it more difficult for them to form and maintain relationships. Briefly, it is important to consider the role of social factors when deciding relationships. Class, gender, race, and sexuality can all have an influence on an individual’s choices and access to resources that can help them form and maintain successful relationships. Understanding these social factors can help us create more equitable societies that provide individuals with the support they need to create and maintain successful relationships.
Legal factors
Legal factors can also constrain individual choices. In Grestel’s “The Family”, she discusses how the legal system can limit the choices of individuals in terms of their family relationships, noting that “the law can sometimes limit the choices of individuals in terms of their marital and familial relationships” (Grestel 35). For example, in some countries, individuals may not be able to choose to marry someone of the same sex due to laws prohibiting such a marriage. Also, the article “What Do Women and Men Want?” by Kathleen Gerson discusses the role of legal and cultural factors in shaping gender roles and expectations for relationships. Gerson points out that “laws, policies, and practices have shaped the gender division of labor in the home, limiting women’s options and constraining their opportunities to shape their lives” (Gerson, p. 541). This means that women, in particular, may have fewer options and opportunities when it comes to choosing a partner and making decisions about relationships, as there is often a social expectation that women’s roles are more domestic and focused on caregiving. This can limit the degree to which an individual can choose to pursue a partner, as well as limit the types of partners that may be available.
Cultural Factors
Cultural factors include societal expectations, norms, and beliefs that shape an individual’s choices. These norms and beliefs can be based on religious and cultural traditions, family dynamics, and social class. Additionally, cultural factors can influence an individual’s perception of gender roles and their own identity. For example, within a culture where the traditional gender roles are rigidly upheld, an individual may feel limited in terms of their choices and the roles they can take on in the family. Additionally, cultural stereotypes can create expectations for certain behaviors, leading individuals to feel confined by the expectations of their culture. By understanding the cultural context in which individuals make choices, it is possible to gain a better understanding of how their decisions are shaped and influenced. In Coontz’s “Two Birds with One Nest”, she discusses how cultural norms and expectations can limit the choices of individuals in terms of their roles in the family, noting that “cultural norms often dictate that men should be the breadwinners and women should be the homemakers” (Coontz 42). Similarly, in Gerson’s “What Do Women and Men Want?”, she discusses how cultural norms and expectations can limit the choices of women, noting that “society’s expectations for women’s behavior and roles can lead to a feeling of confinement and lack of freedom” (Gerson 65).
Structural factors
Structural factors such as gender norms, economic inequality, and lack of access to resources can have a profound effect on an individual’s choice of partner. Gender norms can limit a person’s ability to choose a partner of the opposite sex, as well as the types of relationships they can have with that partner. Economic inequality can also limit individuals’ choices, as those with fewer resources may be unable to access potential partners that are of higher social status. Finally, a lack of access to resources such as education, healthcare, and social services can limit the opportunities for individuals to meet and form relationships with potential partners. All of these structural factors, and more, can influence individuals’ choices of partner, and can ultimately shape the type and quality of relationships they form. In connection to course materials, in her article “Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women?” Laura Armstrong discusses the role of structural factors in influencing the decision to engage in casual sex. Armstrong argues that structural factors such as gender norms, economic inequality, and the lack of access to resources for young people can limit the choices available to them when it comes to choosing a partner and engaging in casual sex (Armstrong, p. 544). This can lead to a situation where young people have fewer options available to them and may be more likely to engage in casual sex as a means of finding intimacy and connection.
Economic factors
Economic factors can have a significant impact on individual choices. In Armstrong’s “Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women?” she argues that economic inequality can lead to young women feeling compelled to engage in hooking-up activities in order to gain access to the resources they need. Similarly, Grazian’s “The Girl Hunt: Urban Nightlife and Performance of Masculinity” examines how economic inequality can limit young women’s choices regarding their social lives. He argues that due to the unequal economic power dynamics between men and women in the club scene, women often feel that they have to engage in certain behaviors to gain access to the needed resources. This can be incredibly limiting for young women, as it restricts their ability to make choices based on their own desires and values. It is important to recognize the impact that economic factors can have on individuals’ ability to make choices and to work to create a more equitable society in which all individuals have the same access to resources.
Overall, it is clear that external forces such as social, economic, legal, cultural, and structural factors play an important role in shaping individuals’ choices of partners and related decisions. These external forces can limit the degree to which an individual can choose to pursue a partner, or even determine the likelihood of being able to find “the one”. As Christine Grestel’s article “Family” discusses, “the family is a product of both individual choice and social norms” (Grestel, p. 547). This means that while individuals may have some degree of choice when choosing a partner and making relationships, these choices are still shaped by external forces. Therefore, it is important to consider the ways in which these external forces influence our understanding of “falling in love” or “finding the one”.
How does the influence of these external forces shape your understanding of “falling in love” or “finding the one”?
The concept of “falling in love” or “finding the one” is deeply intertwined with our social, economic, legal, cultural, and structural factors. These factors shape our understanding of love and relationships by influencing which people we meet, whom we are attracted to, and the ways in which we navigate our romantic relationships. In particular, these factors can limit our choices and shape our expectations of love and relationships in ways that may not be in our best interest. For instance, social factors such as family, friends, and community can limit our choices when it comes to “falling in love” or “finding the one.” Our families and friends may pressure us to choose a partner that aligns with their values or expectations or maybe judgmental of our choices. Our communities can also limit our choices by creating an atmosphere of homogeneity and conformity, where only certain types of relationships are acceptable. This can lead to feelings of isolation and a lack of belonging for those who are not able to confirm.
Further, economic factors also influence our choices when it comes to love and relationships. For instance, people who come from lower socio-economic backgrounds may struggle to find partners who are perceived as “high-status” or “successful” due to the fact that they may not be able to provide the same level of financial stability or material comfort. This can lead to feelings of inadequacy and a sense that they are not “good enough” for their partner. Also, legal factors can also shape our understanding of love and relationships. For instance, the law can determine who is allowed to marry and can create barriers to marriage for certain groups of people, such as same-sex couples. This can lead to feelings of exclusion and a sense that their relationships are not seen as “legitimate” or “worthy” of legal recognition.
Besides, cultural factors also play a significant role in shaping our understanding of love and relationships. Culture can create norms and expectations about who is “allowed” to be in a relationship, and what types of relationships are seen as “acceptable” or “normal.” This can lead to feelings of shame and exclusion for those who do not fit within these norms. Finally, structural factors can influence our understanding of love and relationships. Structural factors such as gender roles, race, and class can create power dynamics in relationships that limit our choices and can lead to feelings of powerlessness or a lack of agency. For instance, women may be expected to take on a more “submissive” role in a relationship, while men may be expected to take on a more “dominant” role. This can lead to feelings of unfairness and a sense that one’s choices are being limited by societal expectations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, In the contemporary United States, an individual’s choice of partner may seem like a personal decision, but it is in fact heavily influenced by social and structural forces. The economic and legal systems of the U.S. shape our experiences of dating, sex, cohabitation, marriage, and the division of household responsibilities, while cultural influences determine what is considered “normal” or “ideal” in terms of relationships. Furthermore, societal expectations and structures often limit the kinds of partners that are available to individuals, as they can only choose from the pool of people they have access. Ultimately, individual “choice” is not as free as it appears to be, and our experiences of falling in love or finding the one are heavily shaped by the external forces that exist in the world. Our social, economic, legal, cultural, and structural factors shape our understanding of “falling in love” or “finding the one” by limiting our choices and shaping our expectations of love and relationships in ways that may not be in our best interest. It is important to be aware of these factors and to recognize their influence on our understanding of love and relationships in order to create relationships that are healthy and equitable.
References
“Armstrong: Is Hooking up Bad for Young Women? | 2010 | Michigan …” 2023. Accessed January 14. https://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/abs/9062.
Coontz. n.d. “‘Two Birds with One Nest.’”
Gerson, Kathleen. 2007. “What Do Women and Men Want?” The American Prospect. February 20. https://prospect.org/special-report/women-men-want/.
Grazian, D. (2007) The Girl Hunt: Urban Nightlife and the Performance of Masculinity as Collective Activity. Symbolic Interaction, 30, 221-243.
Grestel. n.d. ” Family” http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/si.2007.30.2.221
write