The End of Courtship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom317
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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
*Interesting article. The truth is though, marriage isn’t decided over what guy woos a woman the best…or wooing at all. (I get the reference though) It’s about shining the light of God on this person, and looking at…does this person believe in God? Does this person believe in marriage, like I do? etc…I think that many Catholics too fall into the divorce trap, because they chose men/women based on secular criteria. Yes, I believe in chemistry, I believe in common personality traits, and things in common…but, as Catholics, you have to think like a Catholic, when picking a potential spouse, not like the rest of the world. That to me, is the bigger piece of the puzzle. If a man is a good Christian, he will WANT to court a woman, the old fashioned way. Courting won’t be even a thought for him, he’ll just naturally wish to do the right and manly thing, to attract a woman that he is interested in. *
 
I don’t mourn the end of 19th century mating customs, though I would celebrate the end of dating. Basically:

“Courtship”:
  • set of retro rules that emulate the 1890-ies and have more to do with Victorian propriety than actual moral rules
  • stiffness and theatricality, coming with pompous vocabulary and a lot of roleplaying
  • huge restrictions on ability to get to know someone
  • overarching paternal supervision obfuscating the sovereignty of a woman’s consent
Dating:
  • absurd idea that it’s acceptable for a man to offer a lady stranger an open-ended encouter along the lines of, “let’s get a dinner and a movie with some holding hands and a bit of kissing if things go right”
  • room for multiple concurrent attachments and even actual romantic relationships because people won’t limit themselves to 1 person
  • and if they do, they basically form a relationship with a stranger anyway
  • kissing on first date… what the?
Excuse me, I need to have a white russian.
 
@ chevalier: A genuine question from my heart: Then what “ing” would you advocate the process by which a man and woman equally discern they have the romance and spiritual fortitude to get and stay married the rest of their lives?

The link did not open for me, as it is three years old, perhaps, but this:
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.
resonated with me. I don’t think many Catholic churches offer support for faithful, chaste dating. A Mormon friend of mine delights us with stories of how obvious her congregation elders are about throwing together members of their community: square dances, picnics, after-worship socials, etc. Most of the attractive God-loving men I’ve seen on Sunday mornings are at my roommates’ undefined evangelical Christian services. They’re nice. They actually come up to us women and TALK to us and welcome us. Yet, when I go into Mass every Sunday and try to switch up the pew I sit in or which Mass I go to to optimize meeting the younger, single crowd, start going to young adult groups, I don’t get approached. And I am a somewhat pretty, definitely approachable young woman who is basically blatant in her devoutness to her faith.

I do think the Church needs better ministry for this population. Maybe we’d have more of the better, stronger marriages if we had Catholic yentas or something to help us singles out. 😛
 
@ chevalier: A genuine question from my heart: Then what “ing” would you advocate the process by which a man and woman equally discern they have the romance and spiritual fortitude to get and stay married the rest of their lives?
Getting to know people.
 
Ah. Accurate, if a bit general. You get to know your boss, your co-workers, your same-gender friends.

I guess I like “seeing.” People could infer from an established cultural connotation that the intended is more than a friend and still works after you’ve know the person for a few months.

I agree with whatevergirl. Hooking up is a huge problem, and
It’s about shining the light of God on this person
is the gold standard for determining a spouse AND, does that person shine with the light of God for me. To borrow a favorite indie musician’s lyric, do we “live to let you shine”?

Whatever -ing that is, that’s what I want to do.
 
I used to like “seeing”, but I have a problem with it because it’s vague. It can be stretched to include certain kinda-relationships that don’t have a future, while they can’t honestly be termed a normal acquaintance. Or uncertain future. Or otherwise very undefined or contradictorily defined nature. The last months have taught me this lesson.
 
Chevalier, I’m sorry if its been recent negative incidents that have changed your perception.

What about wooing? 😛

And btw, I’m glad this topic has been brought alive. Many single people are posting here because they’re discerning family life eventually. But many Catholics I know in the 30+ range (me at 25, I’m their kid sister!) feel like singlehood isn’t talked about, ministered to, or ever thought of by their parishes. Perhaps the “Catholic Living” section should have a dedicated forum for the unattached - either by choice or circumstance.
 
A Mormon friend of mine delights us with stories of how obvious her congregation elders are about throwing together members of their community: square dances, picnics, after-worship socials, etc.
That’s not surprising, since Mormons believe that a person has to get married in order to reach the highest level of heaven, the celestial kingdom. So, a Mormon wouldn’t simply look at matchmaking as helping a person be happy in this life, they would look at it as helping someone reach eternal salvation.

Personally, I’m glad the Catholic Church doesn’t put the add to the pressure on women to find a spouse by telling them that they may not make it to heaven if they don’t! :eek:
 
Chevalier, I’m sorry if its been recent negative incidents that have changed your perception.

What about wooing? 😛

And btw, I’m glad this topic has been brought alive. Many single people are posting here because they’re discerning family life eventually. But many Catholics I know in the 30+ range (me at 25, I’m their kid sister!) feel like singlehood isn’t talked about, ministered to, or ever thought of by their parishes. Perhaps the “Catholic Living” section should have a dedicated forum for the unattached - either by choice or circumstance.
I’ll second that!
 
I don’t mourn the end of 19th century mating customs, though I would celebrate the end of dating. Basically:

“Courtship”:
  • set of retro rules that emulate the 1890-ies and have more to do with Victorian propriety than actual moral rules
  • stiffness and theatricality, coming with pompous vocabulary and a lot of roleplaying
  • huge restrictions on ability to get to know someone
  • overarching paternal supervision obfuscating the sovereignty of a woman’s consent
Dating:
  • absurd idea that it’s acceptable for a man to offer a lady stranger an open-ended encouter along the lines of, “let’s get a dinner and a movie with some holding hands and a bit of kissing if things go right”
  • room for multiple concurrent attachments and even actual romantic relationships because people won’t limit themselves to 1 person
  • and if they do, they basically form a relationship with a stranger anyway
  • kissing on first date… what the?
Excuse me, I need to have a white russian.
LOL! This was funny. Thanks for making me chuckle.
 
Chevalier, I’m sorry if its been recent negative incidents that have changed your perception.
Thank you. :tiphat:
What about wooing? 😛
Gets me friended every time.

(I don’t have the “bad boy” lure and I refuse to play games to put women at my emotional mercy the way it is near-universally done and welcome, but at the same time, opposite to some “nice guy” types, I stop before reaching doormat level and I won’t take everything. The result is as it is.

My perception is that the old ways, so to call them, generally lead a woman to considering you her somewhat special friend, while focusing her attention sooner or later on a guy that barely acknowledges her presence. Competing and working hard for his attention until success–or not–she believes she’s getting a better bargain than going for you, who are already there. Little does she know, but it will take several months or years before life corrects her, which I would spare her if I could.

At the same time, for obvious reasons, being the guy who barely acknowledges her presence is unacceptable because it’s no way to treat a lady, even if she were your professed enemy, much less a positively special person in your life. This is simply not done and there is no room for negotiation here.)
LOL! This was funny. Thanks for making me chuckle.
My pleasure. You joining me for a white russian too?
 
I don’t mourn the end of 19th century mating customs, though I would celebrate the end of dating. Basically:

“Courtship”:
  • set of retro rules that emulate the 1890-ies and have more to do with Victorian propriety than actual moral rules
  • stiffness and theatricality, coming with pompous vocabulary and a lot of roleplaying
  • huge restrictions on ability to get to know someone
  • overarching paternal supervision obfuscating the sovereignty of a woman’s consent
Dating:
  • absurd idea that it’s acceptable for a man to offer a lady stranger an open-ended encouter along the lines of, “let’s get a dinner and a movie with some holding hands and a bit of kissing if things go right”
  • room for multiple concurrent attachments and even actual romantic relationships because people won’t limit themselves to 1 person
  • and if they do, they basically form a relationship with a stranger anyway
  • kissing on first date… what the?
Excuse me, I need to have a white russian.
Pffff… :rotfl:

It’s comments like this that make me wanna write stories contrasting the two. XD
 
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.
Boom. Never a truer word spoken. And everbody does it. Its rare for teens and people in their twenties (in my experience anyway) to not do it. Hooking up is the norm. Even if it doesn’t always lead to sex. Most girls and guys I know, have kissed at least 15 different strangers, slept with a few. And thats conservative.

Dating to most is the big mature adult step. Wow, we’re dating because after hooking up we decided we’d like to have more sex with each other until we get bored then we’ll dump each other.

This is the world I live in as a 20 year old Catholic guy. 😦
 
*It’s not only 20 somethings who are hooking up…trust me. It’s very sad and scary. If nothing else…like if people are say morally bankrupt…don’t they at least consider the dangers of disease? Amazes me, how reckless our society is with their bodies. 😦 *
 
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. *
Most of my male friends think that if they buy a nice dinner for a woman, they deserve sex. :eek: If that was me, they would be covered in a brightly colored cocktail. 😛
 
Pffff… :rotfl:

It’s comments like this that make me wanna write stories contrasting the two. XD
I can write stories suggesting I’m a charming person. Will that change anything? 😛
Most of my male friends think that if they buy a nice dinner for a woman, they deserve sex. :eek: If that was me, they would be covered in a brightly colored cocktail. 😛
Well, that’s very juvenile thinking. What they do deserve, just for the sake of argument and tangential instruction of some of our readers, is a thank you, a bit of polite conversation and some consideration due a person who has shown us some courtesy. It’s impolite to insist on it, but it’s impolite not to offer it, too. Politeness binds both genders. I’m saying this as a nagging old jerk, not as a participant of the dating/whatever-ing scene. I will develop this line of thought below as a bit of an off-topic venture.

Basically, they men we’re talking about are in error (to put it mildly), but also in error is a woman who thinks they owe her for accepting the dinner. From the point of view of a gentleman, yes, it’s an honour and it could be put that way, i.e. that he owes her in some sense for gracing him with her acceptance of his invitation. However, this does not allow the lady herself to think along those lines (a gross violation of humility, that would be). As in any case of gift, a thank you is due (and in fact we often say thank you for things people are obliged to do, e.g. a public servant handing us a form to fill in and taking it back from us, or a waiter who’s doing his job and serving us dinner we have paid for), and not just external manners, but politeness and kindness require the recognition of the fact that someone offered us even a tiny kindness (obviously, we can’t pretend that attraction has no part in it, but still). Therefore, a properly brought up lady, if she accepts a dinner invitation at all, will say thank you, will engage in polite conversation and make some effort in this regard, will to some extent recognise the role of the man as the host of that evening (who pays is the host, basically, to a lesser extent the person who invites but doesn’t cover the whole bill). Certainly a small kindness doesn’t oblige forever, but a person from whom we’ve accepted and used a dinner invitation is not on the same footing as a complete stranger. This obliges us to be a bit more considerate of that person’s feelings and to get out of our way a bit for that person (e.g. make some minimal accommodations, put up with some slight discomfort). Certainly, having been invited to a dinner and having accepted the invitation, for a proper lady, is not a licence to act like she’s the centre of the world, but a (small but still) social obligation to be handled gracefully.

(Much of a lady’s class is shown in how she reacts to being shown kindness and how she herself shows kindness in what ways she can. This is way more illustrative of her class than how many men are ready to show her kindness because that could basically be a result of her attractiveness or social standing or money. Being a lady does not come down to just being there and allowing oneself to be adored. In fact, being a lady might well be more difficult than being a gentleman.)

I’d be more of a proper person to say this if I were 72 and not 27, but some things should be said to save politeness and kindness from extinction, and I can probably fill the shoes for a while for lack of a better person.
 
I’m not naive to think that most think of sex in a sacred way. I know that’s not the case…and having the experience I’ve shared on here recently, it is apparent that the average joe might not consider marriage or sex, to be sacred. If someone has never had a relationship with Christ…or ever been introduced to the concept of sexuality as sacredness, then I can’t blame them. Ignorance is not an excuse, but our culture promotes a ‘‘feel good’’ ‘‘take care of number one’’ kind of mentality…and many feel that sex is for pure pleasure only, and thus make it a hobby. So…I think that to judge people who are like that, is wrong. They just need to be shown something different…and then, they can at least have a fighting chance!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top