Lesson 6: Transitions in Marriage

"The best family stuff happens Intentionally"

The most important thing from this week is that through all four levels of commitment, everything is intentional. While dating (a wide variety of activities with a wide variety of people), courting (exclusively dating), engagement and marriage, every decision is made with a clear purpose. When we commit we are making a promise, an attachment and a dedication to another person. Moving from one level to another REQUIRES and intentional step over. We don't date (or court, or be married to) until we're tired of the other person. We commit because we've made a very clear choice. We want to become further involved intimacy (NOT JUST PHYSICAL), affection, values, and experiences. We want to further our satisfaction, security/resources (emotional, physical, spiritual). 

Once we've decided to commit to marriage, we're introduced to many more decisions. The where, when, how and how much include both parties. So many couples are focused on how nice the venue, dress, and food are that they forget the whole point of the day; the sealing ordinance (for LDS couples) or actual union of the couple. The point of getting married isn't to have the most elegant bouquet, creative gift bags or most respected people in attendance. That's not even the point of the wedding (see the difference?)! The point of the wedding reception is for the families and community to validate and celebrate the couple, not for the couple to validate themselves. I want a wedding reception that honors and celebrates the sealing ordinance my husband and I have just covenanted to keep. I want my friends and family to be there in support, not to shower me with gifts and a fancy cake. I want a celebration honoring the fact that my husband and I have decided that regardless of our private contracts (assumptions) and role expectations we're committed to negotiating those personal contracts and clarify our expectations to make our now covenant relationship work. 

Lesson 5: Preparing for Marriage

This week was super applicable to my life because I'm in the "Preparing for Marriage" stage of life (aka dating and courtship). Being a student at BYU-Idaho sometimes feels like speed dating on steroids. In almost every class, church meeting, and social event there's mention of dating and marriage. Even at stake conference (lingo explained here) today it was explain that we should be going on dates at least once a week (um, who has time for that?) and that in order to go on dates we need to talk to the opposite gender (whhaaaaaat? who knew it was that simple!? If only...) 

Anyway, in class we discussed the purposes of dating, what filters are involved when choosing someone to marry (aka physicality, values, hobbies, temperament, location...), and most importantly: 

WHAT IS LOVE? 

According to the Greeks there are 4 types of love: 

     1. Storge (like between parent and child)

     2. Philia (warm and close, like between friends)

     3. Eros (romantic and physical, like between lovers)

     4. Agape (independent of feelings, acting on well-being of another, selfless). 

There's also the Triangular Theory: 

     1. Non love (lacks all 3)

     2. Liking (intimacy w/o passion and commitment)

     3. Infatuation (passion w/o intimacy and commitment)

     4. Empty (commitment w/o passion and intimacy)

     5. Romantic (intimacy and passion w/o commitment)

     6. Companionate (intimacy and commitment w/o passion)

     7. Fatuous (passion and commitment w/o intimacy)

     8. **Consummate (all 3)**

Something SUPER interesting was the discussion of LDS dating culture and how we can get confused when selecting a spouse. This included "Misattribution of Arousal." This concept is attributing the wrong emotion to physical arousal. Example: like when you have butterflies, pounding heart, increased blood pressure, shaking hands, and attribute it to love. This is also often seen when going the temple to pray about marrying someone. When we go to the temple we usually feel at peace because of how the environment is set up and who's house it is. But we have to be careful with what the conversation looks like. Instead of asking "Should I marry this person" and feeling at peace about it (because we're in the temple), ask more for confirmation and guidance. ("help me to continue to know this relationship is good.")

This idea goes along with another point made by my stake president this weekend. The basic idea is that we have to act in faith (which is based on TRUTH, not beliefs). God isn't going to make the decision for you. If both parties are willing to commit their relationship to each other and to God, then sure! Go for it! I think the only reason why God would give a "no" answer is if there are still things that need to be worked out, or more conversations that need to be had before a serious decision is made. PLEASE act and don't be acted upon. Don't depend on God to make all of your decisions for you (aka don't be commanded in all things). 

Bruce Chadwick gave a talk at BYU, also inviting us to act, titled "Hanging out, Hooking up and Celestial Marriage. He gave some important points and then expanded on them. He the main points he made were to:
1. "Throw out the glass slipper" (there is no "the one" SO STOP IT!)
2. "Don't wait for others to carry your glass slipper" (be proactive)
3. Exercise faith and have courage in dating and marriage (there will be somethings you DON'T know)
4. "Keep physical intimacy appropriate" (inappropriate contact tends to REALLY confuse things.)

Final Thoughts: Dating isn't about finding "the one." It's about finding out what works for you and who you really want to progress with. It's about loving and trusting God enough to use your agency in choosing and acting. It's about knowing what love actually is and deciding if you can give that to someone else for the rest of forever. 

Lesson 4: Gender and Family Life

Are men and women different? Television shows, music, advertisements, stores and wage earnings would have us believe they're more different than same. However, we're more alike than not. We have similar needs (survival, self-esteem, intimacy, growth, control, achievement, and recreation). We each experience feelings, what to give and receive support in personal trials and want to belong. So why this battle of the sexes for who's better and what roles we need to fulfill? 

Because we ARE different. We express feelings differently, and experience different types of emotion. Our attention spans, aspirations, diseases and addictions, life expectancy and structure of the brain all differ between each gender. 

Confused yet? We all are. This is part of where the feminist movement came up. They wanted to make women a valuable part of society; not for the way they held their napkins, softly agreed with their men or looked, but because they actually have something to contribute. This movement however got out of hand when it argued that women were better. Isn't this what they were fighting? That not one gender is of more value than the other? Two words: messed up. 

While I love how women were at the center of the fight for equality (I mean, we are now able to vote, own land, work outside the house, and keep our children after a divorce), I hate how it's now gotten to where our men are belittled. 

We also talked about Same-Sex Attraction (SSA) and it's root and effect on gender roles and the family. In an article we read for class, "Homosexuality: Innate and Immutable? What Science can and cannot say" by A. Dean Byrd, it was discussed that studies done to show that SSA is genetic were biased and didn't have a large enough sample size (aka it wasn't representative of the population). What really irked me is that Lisa Diamond was quoted as saying "It may well be that for now, the safest way to advocate for lesbian/gay/bisexual rights is to keep propagating a deterministic model; sexual minorities are born that way and can never be otherwise. If this is an easier route to acceptance (which may in fact be the case), is it really so bad that it is inaccurate?"

WHAT?!?!

I'm not terribly concerned with the causes of SSA (for the sake of this post). What I'm concerned about is the "facts" behind it. Especially with the previous quote by Ms. Diamond. If we accept inaccurate information, no matter what the subject, doesn't' that make us liars? I would rather struggle with the truth than to be coddled by a lie. If you want me to accept something, tell me the truth and let me work it out for myself. I worked in collections for two years (not exactly important but...) and in one of our team meetings it was brought up that we needed to "not raise our voice, but improve our argument." This connotates intelligent research and not bending the results in order to fit some agenda. If you want me to rally behind SSA/Marriage, give me the benefits to society, give me the results that it's healthy and it works. DON'T LIE TO ME! 

I'm a firm believer that marriage is between a man and a women, not just because of my religious beliefs (which you can read more about here), but because I've read the research (some of which is shown here) academia has provided. I'm not homophobic or hate those that are different, just because our beliefs don't match up. I believe in love and kindness and finding a common ground. I believe in finding the value in others and developing their strengths and dreams because they're HUMAN BEINGS. 

I'm forever being propelled by an advertisement done by Airbnb, that show's regardless of race, religion, ability, experience or status, mankind has IMMENSE value.

("Is man kind? Are we good? Go see. Look thru their windows so you can understand their views. Sit at their tables so you can share their tastes.  Sleep in their beds so you may know their dreams. Go see, and find out just how kind  the hes and shes of this man kind are.")

Lesson 3: Social Class & Cultural Diversity

While we talked about social classes (People Like Us: Social Class in America) and diversity within and among cultures, the most interesting part was the discussion on boundaries. Boundaries are interesting because different cultures (family, race, ethnicity, religion) have different boundaries, both with outside cultures (the whole) and within the culture itself (the individual).

Some cultures have diffuse or open boundaries. This is like having fence posts set up but nothing connecting them. Anyone, anything, can come in and out whenever and as much as they want.

Others have rigid or closed boundaries; like a cement brick wall. Nothing comes in; nothing goes out.

The last is a clear boundary. Like an idyllic picket-fence, it's inviting but also sets up a feeling of "you're welcome, but on my terms."

This discussion of boundaries involved what aspects of family culture do we want to project forward? Basically, what do I value enough to have a part of my future home. It got me thinking about my family and the diffuse and rigid boundaries are set up. I think because there wasn't a clear boundary to start off with, the fence became either more rigid or diffuse depending on the experience. Diffuse boundaries allowed abuse, manipulation, and back-biting, which led to a need to protect self (thus the rigid boundaries). I want to project forward clear boundaries, as they promote healthy relationships (open to communication and negotiation).

ALSO!!! We did this "Hair Band" activity, where each dot below is represented by 3 different people's fingers. As the blue dot moves away, the pink and orange dots move closer together. Can you get the connection between boundaries, families, and relationships?

Lesson 2: Understanding Family Dynamics & Theories

We recently discussed theories (attempts to explain phenomena) of why families function the way they do. These include Systems, Exchange, Symbolic Interaction, and Conflict theories.

Systems Theory
Argument that the "whole is more than sums." Everything is intertwined with little influence from the outside and that individual problems come from a problem in the system.

Exchange Theory
Argument of "you owe me one." The costs are lower than the rewards because of rational assessment of the situation.

Symbolic Interaction
Argument of the importance of the interaction of experiences and the symbols involved. One tricky part is that symbols (eg. words or actions) have different meanings to different people. With this theory it's important to think "where do my symbols come from? What about my friends/family/peers?"

Conflict Theory
Argument that not everyone is satisfied because of inequality/conflict/changes. The goal is to get one's own needs, interests and goals met. The interesting thing about this theory is that conflict isn't bad; it's just a difference in will, experience or opinion.

So what? Why should we care about theories, especially in regards to families and relationships? Because theories are an attempt to explain, we can reference them when problems arise or when we want to change an aspect of our relationships with others. If we're consistently arguing with others it could be the result of an unequal meeting of desires, different interpretations of conversations or actions, or because we feel entitled to something. Once we realize there's more going in, we can reevaluate the situation and decide if we want to build and maintain our relationship, or move on.

Lesson 1: Societal Trends and the Family

This week we talked about myths and trends regarding the family. I found it interesting the myths that opposites attract, we marry for love, happy couples don't fight, a good sex life means a good marriage and that 50% of marriages end in divorce. These were dispelled as myths because of studies conducted and trends observed in these studies. Our teacher then posed a question: which trends are significant and WHY? The significant trends, like premarital sex and cohabitation, can influence other trends like cohabitation and putting off children.

My personal belief is that cohabitation isn't beneficial to healthy relationships but I wanted more information, so I went to Facebook (yes, still biased, but it expanded things a little). I got opinions from it's a practice for marriage to it's a practice for divorce. But overall the consensus was that it breaks down relationships because of a lack of commitment.  Why is this? It's because at any time either partner could leave. There's no commitment of a shared household, just the feeling of VERY intimate roommates. However I can understand why it's popular: the basic need for intimacy (love, affection, caring, deep attachment) coupled with the fear of rejection.

In class we talked about types of loneliness: social (a need for interpersonal interaction) and emotional (need for intimate relationships). The consequences of loneliness are physical and emotional health problems, increased stress, negative emotions (and more). The way to combat this is not through cohabitation, but rather in a married relationship. While marriage doesn't fix or eliminate problems, it creates a better environment.

"Happily ever after does not mean with never a difference nor disagreement."

My brother and his wife, Holly, on their wedding day, then a year later, after being sealed in the Logan, Utah LDS Temple. " I love being married. I wouldn't want it any other way." -Stuart Sogla