The End of Courtship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom317
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tom317

Guest
This is a long article, yet well worth the time:

The End of Courtship

By Leon R. Kass

In the current wars over the state of American culture, few battlegrounds have seen more action than that of “family values”–sex, marriage, and child-rearing. Passions run high about sexual harassment, condom distribution in schools, pornography, abortion, gay marriage, and other efforts to alter the definition of “a family.” Many people are distressed over the record-high rates of divorce, illegitimacy, teenage pregnancy, marital infidelity, and premarital promiscuity. On some issues, there is even an emerging consensus that something is drastically wrong: Though they may differ on what is to be done, people on both the left and the right have come to regard the break-up of marriage as a leading cause of the neglect, indeed, of the psychic and moral maiming, of America’s children. But while various people are talking about tracking down “dead-beat dads” or reestablishing orphanages or doing something to slow the rate of divorce–all remedies for marital failure–very little attention is being paid to what makes for marital success. Still less are we attending to the ways and mores of entering into marriage, that is, to wooing or courtship.

There is, of course, good reason for this neglect. The very terms–“wooing,” “courting,” “suitors”–are archaic; and if the words barely exist, it is because the phenomena have all but disappeared. Today, there are no socially prescribed forms of conduct that help guide young men and women in the direction of matrimony. This is true not just for the lower or under classes.Even–indeed especially–the elite, those who in previous generations would have defined the conventions in these matters, lack a cultural script whose denouement is marriage. To be sure, there are still exceptions, to be found, say, in closed religious communities or among new immigrants from parts of the world that still practice arranged marriage. But for most of America’s middle-- and upper-class youth–the privileged college-educated and graduated–there are no known explicit, or even tacit, social paths directed at marriage. People still get married–though later, less frequently, more hesitantly, and, by and large, less successfully. People still get married in churches and synagogues–though often with ceremonies of their own creation. But, for the great majority, the way to the altar is uncharted territory: It’s every couple on its own bottom, without a compass, often without a goal. Those who reach the altar seem to have stumbled upon it by accident.

ldolphin.org/endcourtship
 
Many people are distressed over the record-high rates of divorce, illegitimacy, teenage pregnancy, marital infidelity, and premarital promiscuity.
How insensitive. Illegitimacy is a personal fault now? Should an illegitimate child be sorry that it exists? Or is having a non-marital child (pre- or extra-) worse than having non-marital sex with the use of contraception? Or should illegitimate children be aborted? Come on. I really hate that kind of approach.
The very terms–“wooing,” “courting,” “suitors”–are archaic;
As is the concept and that’s a good thing. 19th century mating rituals were not good and people who complain about today’s mores (as do I) should know better than pretending otherwise. What we need is equal rights for the man and the woman, not bride-bargaining. We need both virtue and equality. Not virtue and wife shopping, daughter selling and whatnot.
and if the words barely exist, it is because the phenomena have all but disappeared.
And as socially conservative as I am, I don’t weep after most of them.
Today, there are no socially prescribed forms of conduct that help guide young men and women in the direction of matrimony.
People aren’t factory lines. People can live their lives without having a detailed guide how to live every hour.
This is true not just for the lower or under classes.
First illegitimacy as a taint and fault, now social classes. Is that a morality-related article or a snobby rant?
Even–indeed especially–the elite, those who in previous generations would have defined the conventions in these matters, lack a cultural script whose denouement is marriage.
Eeek. That’s awful. The concepts, the pretentious language, the whole vibe of it. Sorry, I’m not going to read further. They call me a snob, but that thing is just too much for me. Sorry.
 
How insensitive. Illegitimacy is a personal fault now? Should an illegitimate child be sorry that it exists? Or is having a non-marital child (pre- or extra-) worse than having non-marital sex with the use of contraception? Or should illegitimate children be aborted? Come on. I really hate that kind of approach.

As is the concept and that’s a good thing. 19th century mating rituals were not good and people who complain about today’s mores (as do I) should know better than pretending otherwise. What we need is equal rights for the man and the woman, not bride-bargaining. We need both virtue and equality. Not virtue and wife shopping, daughter selling and whatnot.

And as socially conservative as I am, I don’t weep after most of them.

People aren’t factory lines. People can live their lives without having a detailed guide how to live every hour.

First illegitimacy as a taint and fault, now social classes. Is that a morality-related article or a snobby rant?

Eeek. That’s awful. The concepts, the pretentious language, the whole vibe of it. Sorry, I’m not going to read further. They call me a snob, but that thing is just too much for me. Sorry.
Okay, thanks for sharing.
 
The article, when taken in its totality, discusses the fall of marriage.
 
Enjoyed the read, well thought out.

How do we instill in young folks that choosing a spouse in a chaste and respectful manner is the most important choice they will ever make? It would take a great cultural re-revolution (going back to the ways down a few generations ago).

It would be very difficult in today’s society to put that respectful cat back in the old courtship bag.

Doesn’t mean we can’t try.
 
Enjoyed the read, well thought out.

How do we instill in young folks that choosing a spouse in a chaste and respectful manner is the most important choice they will ever make? It would take a great cultural re-revolution (going back to the ways down a few generations ago).

It would be very difficult in today’s society to put that respectful cat back in the old courtship bag.

Doesn’t mean we can’t try.
I agree, it will be hard, but I think it starts with the parents. What we put in today will help in the future.
 
I very much enjoyed the article. There no longer seems to be a natural or social path towards marriage, and as marriage is one of the bedrocks of a society, it is an institution that needs our support.

As far as some of the criticisms of the article go, I think perhaps the context of the usage should be better considered.
 
I very much enjoyed the article. There no longer seems to be a natural or social path towards marriage, and as marriage is one of the bedrocks of a society, it is an institution that needs our support.

As far as some of the criticisms of the article go, I think perhaps the context of the usage should be better considered.
I think the situation today is in opposition to marriage, not only does our culture not encourage or create sound paths to marriage, it seems to be leading people away from the sacrament. Not a good thing on any level.
 
I can see why on a secular level, marriage doesn’t seem important anymore. Unlike for previous generations, it seems perfectly acceptable to have children out of wedlock (I was shocked when a coworker of mine was speaking about her friend’s “baby-father”. It’s become so normal for people to have children without any sort of stable or permanent relationship that they even have a term for this type of situation). It’s also acceptable for people to live together out of wedlock (a.k.a. have “common-law marriages”). I was very surprised when I was working in Human Resources for a company and found that a common-law partner of an employee (someone of either gender who has lived with that employee for a year) has the same rights and benefits under Canadian law as does a legally married spouse (as far as benefits, life insurance, etc. are concerned). The only difference is that only a legal spouse has access to the employee’s pension if the the employee passes away.

When faced with this information, I found myself wondering why anyone in this society who isn’t religious would bother with getting married, when they can do everything and have everything a married couple has without being married. Society and the government certainly aren’t pushing people in that direction.
 
I can see why on a secular level, marriage doesn’t seem important anymore. Unlike for previous generations, it seems perfectly acceptable to have children out of wedlock (I was shocked when a coworker of mine was speaking about her friend’s “baby-father”. It’s become so normal for people to have children without any sort of stable or permanent relationship that they even have a term for this type of situation). It’s also acceptable for people to live together out of wedlock (a.k.a. have “common-law marriages”). I was very surprised when I was working in Human Resources for a company and found that a common-law partner of an employee (someone of either gender who has lived with that employee for a year) has the same rights and benefits under Canadian law as does a legally married spouse (as far as benefits, life insurance, etc. are concerned). The only difference is that only a legal spouse has access to the employee’s pension if the the employee passes away.

When faced with this information, I found myself wondering why anyone in this society who isn’t religious would bother with getting married, when they can do everything and have everything a married couple has without being married. Society and the government certainly aren’t pushing people in that direction.
It has gotten so bad that some people are trying to push for a marriage and child bearing stipend in the thousands. People who get and stay married for ten years would receive $25k, and they would get 10k for every child born to the marriage. It will never happen and it is waaaay to expensive, but it does show us how far marriage has fallen.
 
How insensitive. Illegitimacy is a personal fault now? Should an illegitimate child be sorry that it exists? Or is having a non-marital child (pre- or extra-) worse than having non-marital sex with the use of contraception? Or should illegitimate children be aborted? Come on. I really hate that kind of approach.
The article in no way blames children for their being illegitimate. The parents’ irresponsibility is of couse the blame, and the article should not have to make that clear as the majority of readers surely understand this.

The quote read: “Many people are distressed over the record-high rates of divorce, illegitimacy, teenage pregnancy, marital infidelity, and premarital promiscuity.”

I’d say I’m distressed. May people I know are. So, I’d say that statement is okay.
 
How insensitive. Illegitimacy is a personal fault now? Should an illegitimate child be sorry that it exists? Or is having a non-marital child (pre- or extra-) worse than having non-marital sex with the use of contraception? Or should illegitimate children be aborted? Come on. I really hate that kind of approach.

As is the concept and that’s a good thing. 19th century mating rituals were not good and people who complain about today’s mores (as do I) should know better than pretending otherwise. What we need is equal rights for the man and the woman, not bride-bargaining. We need both virtue and equality. Not virtue and wife shopping, daughter selling and whatnot.

And as socially conservative as I am, I don’t weep after most of them.

People aren’t factory lines. People can live their lives without having a detailed guide how to live every hour.

First illegitimacy as a taint and fault, now social classes. Is that a morality-related article or a snobby rant?

Eeek. That’s awful. The concepts, the pretentious language, the whole vibe of it. Sorry, I’m not going to read further. They call me a snob, but that thing is just too much for me. Sorry.
Wow,cranky much? :confused:

Hope you are having a better day…🙂

I agree with a lot of this article. I am in a challenging marriage and I believe I would not be in this boat if I had these “archaic” standards 20 years ago. My Catholic formation came later in life, despite being raised Catholic, and I am now seeing the mistakes I made. I know of several young couples today who have followed these old-fashioned concepts of courtship and wooing, and they have gotten their marriages off to a great start. I wish I had. It is very difficult to try to build a foundation for my marriage and family today that should have been built 16 years ago…I wish I had known then…

imho
 
The article in no way blames children for their being illegitimate. The parents’ irresponsibility is of couse the blame, and the article should not have to make that clear as the majority of readers surely understand this.
The article implies what it does by mentioning illegitimacy in such a way among the clearly culpable things. The fact that most readers will be reasonable enough to understand that legitimacy or lack of it is no personal merit or fault, does not remove the implication from the literal meaning of the sentence.
The quote read: “Many people are distressed over the record-high rates of divorce, illegitimacy, teenage pregnancy, marital infidelity, and premarital promiscuity.”

I’d say I’m distressed. May people I know are. So, I’d say that statement is okay.
The way teenage pregnancy is mentioned may suggest that pregnancy is an added fault to premarital sex. The way illegitimacy is mentioned also suggests that a child resulting from premarital sex somehow makes the crime worse.

I regard such enumerations, as well as the rest of the 1890-ies talk about mating customs (it’s perfectly good that the woman may now choose her husband, it should finally be realised that consent pressured or downright enforced by her fater is invalid, and that bride bargaining is demeaning, and thank God the unwelcome parentally imposed suitors are gone), as well as the class talk, as some kind of condescending snobby rhetoric which shouldn’t gain room in religious or even merely moral discussions. The article criticises a number of wrong things, but it falls into another wrong extreme.
 
The article implies what it does by mentioning illegitimacy in such a way among the clearly culpable things. The fact that most readers will be reasonable enough to understand that legitimacy or lack of it is no personal merit or fault, does not remove the implication from the literal meaning of the sentence.

The way teenage pregnancy is mentioned may suggest that pregnancy is an added fault to premarital sex. The way illegitimacy is mentioned also suggests that a child resulting from premarital sex somehow makes the crime worse.

I regard such enumerations, as well as the rest of the 1890-ies talk about mating customs (it’s perfectly good that the woman may now choose her husband, it should finally be realised that consent pressured or downright enforced by her fater is invalid, and that bride bargaining is demeaning, and thank God the unwelcome parentally imposed suitors are gone), as well as the class talk, as some kind of condescending snobby rhetoric which shouldn’t gain room in religious or even merely moral discussions. The article criticises a number of wrong things, but it falls into another wrong extreme.
So, without bothering to argue your points (too easy to waste my time), are you seriously trying to imply that the state of marriage is wonderful?
 
So, without bothering to argue your points (too easy to waste my time), are you seriously trying to imply that the state of marriage is wonderful?
Seriously, are you just telling me you won’t be wasting time on my post and asking me about something I actually already answered in it (look more carefully)? Same way I can ask you if you really think fathers should pick their sons-in-law and bargain with them, as well as bring suitors home without asking the girl, or suitor contests who’s wealthier or more powerful or more socially prestigious. I only said most of the dead customs the author was longing for were out for a reason (I’ve known bad marriages originated the old way and we all have… while I understand the nostalgy for the known and fear of the new, let’s not pretend it was oh-so-happy back in the time), and that it was a good thing for women to be able to choose husbands instead of having them chosen by fathers. From this you inferred that I love the promiscuity of the current day. What kind of logic is that? It looks like you link woman rights with promiscuity.

By the way, back in the old day, it was considered rude to tell people you were wasting your precious time on them in polite social discussion. You would be expected to regard your interlocutor’s time as at least as precious as your own. If you were to be wasting your time on someone, you just simply wouldn’t be talking.
 
Seriously, are you just telling me you won’t be wasting time on my post and asking me about something I actually already answered in it (look more carefully)? Same way I can ask you if you really think fathers should pick their sons-in-law and bargain with them, as well as bring suitors home without asking the girl, or suitor contests who’s wealthier or more powerful or more socially prestigious. I only said most of the dead customs the author was longing for were out for a reason (I’ve known bad marriages originated the old way and we all have… while I understand the nostalgy for the known and fear of the new, let’s not pretend it was oh-so-happy back in the time), and that it was a good thing for women to be able to choose husbands instead of having them chosen by fathers. From this you inferred that I love the promiscuity of the current day. What kind of logic is that? It looks like you link woman rights with promiscuity.

By the way, back in the old day, it was considered rude to tell people you were wasting your precious time on them in polite social discussion. You would be expected to regard your interlocutor’s time as at least as precious as your own. If you were to be wasting your time on someone, you just simply wouldn’t be talking.
I find it interesting you dodged my question.
 
Wow,cranky much? :confused:

Hope you are having a better day…🙂

I agree with a lot of this article. I am in a challenging marriage and I believe I would not be in this boat if I had these “archaic” standards 20 years ago. My Catholic formation came later in life, despite being raised Catholic, and I am now seeing the mistakes I made. I know of several young couples today who have followed these old-fashioned concepts of courtship and wooing, and they have gotten their marriages off to a great start. I wish I had. It is very difficult to try to build a foundation for my marriage and family today that should have been built 16 years ago…I wish I had known then…

imho
Amen. I also can empathize. I wish I’d been helped to decide who to marry. All my parents told me was, “When you meet the right person you will just know.” Well, I never did just know. I had to make a conscious decision.

I thought he made an interesting point at the end about early marriage. I have thought for a while now that early marriage isn’t so bad as people make it out to be. It seems to be in line with modern feminist thinking: if you marry in your teens then you cheat yourself out of your childhood and don’t give yourself a chance to figure out what you want to do with your life. But wait a minute: isn’t the point of childhood to learn how to be an adult? And why do we (at least the girls) have to figure out what we want to do with our lives? Isn’t it obvious? We want to marry and have children and stay home and parent those children. Obviously the guy may need to do more than just that, and that’s why women traditionally marry men who are older than them, who have obtained the necessary education and so on. The more I think about it, the more it sounds like a bogus lie. Indeed, I’ve done some research, and it seems all the articles I’ve found are written by government agencies, social services and population fund people. Yet, your teen and early twenties years are your most fertile years. Hmm. Maybe God’s design is what we should be following and not modern man’s. In short, I think I’d be perfectly happy if my daughter were to marry in her teens, provided that it was to the right young man and provided that they were properly prepared to take on that responsibility. And in this day and age, we probably have a better shot at helping them reach this potential, which most people reached at that same vivacious age not so long ago, if we homeschool.
 
Today’s youth is actually abandoning dating in favor of the “hook up.” Once you realize what the “hook up” culture is about, dating will seem moral and serious-minded by comparison.
 
Today’s youth is actually abandoning dating in favor of the “hook up.” Once you realize what the “hook up” culture is about, dating will seem moral and serious-minded by comparison.
Oh my gosh…your post is excellent. Perfectly put. Really.

I can’t believe that people think dating is actually synonymous with hooking up. This isn’t just the fault of men, or just the fault of women…BOTH share a part in the decay of courtship. Feminists believing women can do the asking out of men, the pursuing of men…men becoming lazier therefore, and sitting back waiting for the women to pursue them. Look at prime time tv shows…I don’t watch them, but I see the coming attractions, and MANY are geared to married women/men, single women/men, divorced women/men…HOOKING up over and over. Even teens are shown in shows as hooking up. Or maybe the guy buys the woman a nice dinner, and then that night, they’re in bed. As if that is PART of the date, automatically now. I literally fear for my kids, and pray that I’ve instilled in them enough, the desire to remain true to God and themselves, and not settle for the counterfeit version of love that the world presents to us. *
 
I was about to jump in, but this thread is 3 years old? Rise from your grave.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top