Free Friends Forum 37: The History of Marriage--From Coercive Collectives To Autonomous Individuals
Climbing Mount Maslow as Self-Actualizing Partners
Join us to discuss the history of marriage in two books that I propose meaningfully explicate and explore the historical evolution of Marriage from Coercive Collectives to Autonomous Individuals achieving Consummate (Passionate, Intimate, Committed) Self-Actualizing Partnerships.
MARRIAGE, A HISTORY: FROM OBEDIENCE TO INTIMACY, OR HOW LOVE CONQUERED MARRIAGE by Stephanie Coontz, 2005
THE SECRET HISTORY OF MARRIAGE. Decode DC, April 18, 2015 3:17
THE ALL-OR-NOTHING MARRIAGE: HOW THE BEST MARRIAGES WORK by Eli J. Finkel, 2017
THE HISTORY OF MARRIAGE. Logan Ury, Sept 20, 2017. 3:30
JOIN OUR FREE FRIENDS FORUM FOR A SPIRITED DISCUSSION
Saturday, March 29, 9PM (for South Pacific & Asia);
Sunday, March 30, 9AM (for U.S., S. America, Europe) —Note: New Zealand time
Jack Carney is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/8245320024
Meeting ID: 824 532 0024
Passcode: 772388
New Zealand Time Converter
https://dateful.com/convert/new-zealand
Personal World Clock tinyurl.com/bdef97z7
VANN JOHNSON FT YANNI -- LOVE IS ALL. robert kiss, July 28, 2017. 5:18
MARRIAGE, A HISTORY: FROM OBEDIENCE TO INTIMACY, OR HOW LOVE CONQUERED MARRIAGE by Stephanie Coontz, 2005
STEPHANIE COONTZ. Proper Polymath—23 Videos
MARRIAGE, A HISTORY BY STEPHANIE COONTZ: 7 MINUTE SUMMARY. SnapTale Audiobook Summaries. Oct 23, 2023. 7:06.
00:00 Introduction
⌚ 01:08 The Historical Purpose of Marriage
⌚ 01:49 The Historical and Economic Foundations of Marriage
⌚ 02:18 Love and Personal Liberty
⌚ 03:12 Love and Sex in Victorian Marriage
⌚ 03:50 The Myth of the 1950s Marriage Ideal
⌚ 04:34 The Rise and Fall of Love-Based Marriage
⌚ 05:12 Evolving Marriage
⌚ 06:01 Final Recap
STEPHANIE COONTZ: ON MARRIAGE PopTech, Jan 5, 2011. 19:10
What makes an ideal marriage? Stephanie Coontz, a professor of history and family studies and author of "Marriage, A History: How Love Conquered Marriage," says that marrying for love is a radical idea. Ironically, as marriage is becoming a more emotionally satisfying relationship, it is also becoming less stable as an institution.
From MARRIAGE, A HISTORY: FROM OBEDIENCE TO INTIMACY, OR HOW LOVE CONQUERED MARRIAGE by Stephanie Coontz, 2005
“Almost everywhere people worry that marriage is in crisis. But I was intrigued to discover that people’s sense of what “the marriage crisis” involves differs drastically from place to place.
“Reviewing the historical trends behind these various concerns, I BEGAN TO SEE SOME COMMON THEMES UNDER ALL THESE BEWILDERING DIFFERENCES. EVERYWHERE MARRIAGE IS BECOMING MORE OPTIONAL AND MORE FRAGILE. Everywhere the once-predictable link between marriage and child rearing is fraying. And everywhere relations between men and women are undergoing rapid and at times traumatic transformation. IN FACT, I REALIZED, THE RELATIONS BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN HAVE CHANGED MORE IN THE PAST THIRTY YEARS THAN THEY DID IN THE PREVIOUS THREE THOUSAND, AND I BEGAN TO SUSPECT THAT A SIMILAR TRANSFORMATION WAS OCCURRING IN THE ROLE OF MARRIAGE.
“As I continued my research, however, I became convinced that the 1950s Ozzie and Harriet family was not just a postwar aberration. Instead it was the culmination of a new marriage system that had been evolving for more than 150 years. I NOW THINK THAT THERE WAS A BASIC CONTINUITY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARRIAGE IDEALS AND BEHAVIORS FROM THE LATE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY THROUGH THE 1950S AND 1960S. IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, PEOPLE BEGAN TO ADOPT THE RADICAL NEW IDEA THAT LOVE SHOULD BE THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL REASON FOR MARRIAGE AND THAT YOUNG PEOPLE SHOULD BE FREE TO CHOOSE THEIR MARRIAGE PARTNERS ON THE BASIS OF LOVE. The sentimentalization of the love-based marriage in the nineteenth century and its sexualization in the twentieth each represented a logical step in the evolution of this new approach to marriage.
“UNTIL THE LATE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, MOST SOCIETIES AROUND THE WORLD SAW MARRIAGE AS FAR TOO VITAL AN ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL INSTITUTION TO BE LEFT ENTIRELY TO THE FREE CHOICE OF THE TWO INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED, ESPECIALLY IF THEY WERE GOING TO BASE THEIR DECISION ON SOMETHING AS UNREASONING AND TRANSITORY AS LOVE. The more I learned about the ancient history of marriage, the more I realized what a gigantic marital revolution had occurred in Western Europe and North America during the Enlightenment.
“This led me to another surprising finding: From the moment of its inception, this revolutionary new marriage system already showed signs of the instability that was to plague it at the end of the twentieth century. AS SOON AS THE IDEA THAT LOVE SHOULD BE THE CENTRAL REASON FOR MARRIAGE, AND COMPANIONSHIP ITS BASIC GOAL, WAS FIRST RAISED, OBSERVERS OF THE DAY WARNED THAT THE SAME VALUES THAT INCREASED PEOPLE’S SATISFACTION WITH MARRIAGE AS A RELATIONSHIP HAD AN INHERENT TENDENCY TO UNDERMINE THE STABILITY OF MARRIAGE AS AN INSTITUTION. THE VERY FEATURES THAT PROMISED TO MAKE MARRIAGE SUCH A UNIQUE AND TREASURED PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP OPENED THE WAY FOR IT TO BECOME AN OPTIONAL AND FRAGILE ONE.
“The skeptics were right to worry about the dangers of the love match. Its arrival in the late eighteenth century coincided with an explosion of challenges to all the traditional ways of organizing social and personal life. For the next 150 years, societies struggled to strike the right balance between the goal of finding happiness in marriage and the preservation of limits that would keep people from leaving a marriage that didn’t fulfill their expectations for love. THE HISTORY OF THE LOVE-BASED MARRIAGE FROM THE LATE EIGHTEENTH TO THE MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY IS ONE OF SUCCESSIVE CRISES, as people surged past the barriers that prevented them from achieving marital fulfillment and then pulled back, or were pushed back, when the institution of marriage seemed to be in jeopardy.
“To understand why the love-based marriage system was so unstable and how we ended up where we are today, we have to recognize that for most of history, marriage was not primarily about the individual needs and desires of a man and woman and the children they produced. Marriage had as much to do with getting good in-laws and increasing one’s family labor force as it did with finding a lifetime companion and raising a beloved child.
“THE SYSTEM OF MARRYING FOR POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ADVANCEMENT WAS PRACTICALLY UNIVERSAL ACROSS THE GLOBE FOR MANY MILLENNIA. But the heritage of Rome and Greece interacted with the evolution of the Christian church to create a unique version of political marriage in medieval Europe. As early as the sixteenth century the distinctive power struggles among parents, children, ruling authorities, and the church combined with changes in the economy to create more possibilities for marital companionship in Europe than in most other regions of the world.
“But only in the seventeenth century did a series of political, economic, and cultural changes in Europe begin to erode the older functions of marriage, encouraging individuals to choose their mates on the basis of personal affection and allowing couples to challenge the right of outsiders to intrude upon their lives. And NOT UNTIL THE LATE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, AND THEN ONLY IN WESTERN EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA, DID THE NOTION OF FREE CHOICE AND MARRIAGE FOR LOVE TRIUMPH AS A CULTURAL IDEAL.
“In the nineteenth century, most Europeans and Americans came to accept a new view of husbands as providers and of wives as nurturing home-bodies. Only in the mid-twentieth century, however, could a majority of families in Western Europe and North America actually survive on the earnings of a single breadwinner. The 1950s family, then, was not so new a development as we used to think. Rather, it was the culmination of a package of ideals about personal life and male-female relations that emerged at the end of the eighteenth century and gradually became the norm across Western Europe and North America. These ideals gave people unprecedented opportunities to get more personal satisfaction from their marriages, but they also raised questions that posed a fundamental challenge to traditional ways of ordering society.
“If marriage was about love and lifelong intimacy, why would people marry at all if they couldn’t find true love? What would hold a marriage together if love and intimacy disappeared? How could household order be maintained if marriages were based on affection rather than on male authority?
“There was a crisis over these questions in the 1790s, and another in the 1890s, and yet another in the 1920s. Then, in the 1950s, everything seemed to calm down. More people than ever before embraced the ideals of love and marital companionship without following them to the dangerous conclusion that loveless marriages ought to end in divorce or that true marital partnerships should be grounded in the equality of men and women.
“Still, even as people became convinced they had at last created the perfect balance between individual desires and social stability, and even as virtually all of North America and Western Europe finally embraced this marital model, it was on the verge of collapse. When people remarked on the stability of marriage in the 1950s and early 1960s, they were actually standing in the eye of a hurricane.
“For years, historians and public-policy makers have debated why lifelong marriage and male breadwinner families began to unravel in the 1970s. The real question, I now believe, is not why things fell apart in the 1970s but why they didn’t fall apart in the 1790s, or in the next crisis of the 1890s, or in the turmoil of the 1920s, when practically every contemporary observer worried that marriage was “on the rocks.” And the answer is not that people were better partners in the past or better able to balance the search for individual self-fulfillment and the need for stability. The reason is that for the most part they could not yet afford to act on their aspirations for love and personal fulfilment.
“This book explains why the revolutionary implications of the love match took so long to play out and why, just when it seemed unassailable, the love-based, male breadwinner marriage began to crumble. The final chapters describe “the perfect storm” that swept over marriage and family life in the last three decades of the twentieth century and how it forever altered the role that marriage plays in society and in our daily lives.” P.17-24
“But couples today do have to work to keep their marriages healthy and mutually fulfilling. The fact that individuals can now lead productive lives outside marriage means that partners need to be more “intentional” than in the past about finding reasons and rituals to help them stay together. A marriage that survives and thrives in today’s climate of choice is likely to be far more satisfying, fair, and effective for the partners and their children than in the past. However, couples have to think carefully about what it takes to build, deepen, and sustain commitments that are now almost completely voluntary. Modern marriages cannot just glide down the well-worn paths of the past.
“Like it or not, today we are all pioneers, picking our way through uncharted and unstable territory. The old rules are no longer reliable guides to work out modern gender roles and build a secure foundation for marriage. Wherever it is that people want to end up in their family relations today, even if they are totally committed to creating a so-called traditional marriage, they have to get there by a different route from the past. P.328
“The big problem doesn’t lie in differences between what men and women want out of life and love. The big problem is how hard it is to achieve equal relationships in a society whose work policies, school schedules, and social programs were constructed on the assumption that male breadwinner families would always be the norm. Tensions between men and women today stem less from different aspirations than from the difficulties they face translating their ideals into practice.
“Over the past century, marriage has steadily become more fair, more fulfilling, and more effective in fostering the well-being of both adults and children than ever before in history. It has also become more optional and more fragile. The historical record suggests that these two seemingly contradictory changes are inextricably intertwined. Even more than love and marriage, fulfilling and fragile seem to “go together like a horse and carriage.”
“Today we are experiencing a historical revolution every bit as wrenching, far-reaching, and irreversible as the Industrial Revolution. Like that huge historic turning point, the revolution in marriage has transformed how people organize their work and interpersonal commitments, use their leisure time, understand their sexuality, and take care of children and the elderly. It has liberated some people from restrictive, inherited roles in society. But it has stripped others of traditional support systems and rules of behavior without establishing new ones.
“Today married people in Western Europe and North America are generally happier, healthier, and better protected against economic setbacks and psychological depression than people in any other living arrangement.1 Some of these benefits of marriage are due to what sociologists call selection effects. That is, people who are already good-natured, healthy, socially skilled, and emotionally stable are more likely to get married and stay married than individuals with fewer of these qualities. Similarly, individuals who can make a good impression in job interviews and can manage their finances and time successfully are more likely to have stable marriages than men and women without such skills.
“But I believe marriage itself adds something extra, over and above its selection effects. It remains the highest expression of commitment in our culture and comes packaged with exacting expectations about responsibility, fidelity, and intimacy. Married couples may no longer have a clear set of rules about which partner should do what in their marriage. But they do have a clear set of rules about what each partner should not do. And society has a clear set of rules for how everyone else should and should not relate to each partner. These commonly held expectations and codes of conduct foster the predictability and security that make daily living easier.
“What is true for individual marriages is also true for society. As a result of centuries of social change, most people in the Western world have a choice about whether or not to enter marriage and, if they do marry, whether or not to stay in it for the rest of their lives. The structure of our economy and the values of our culture also encourage or even force people to make much more individualistic decisions than in the past. Today, as never before, decisions about marriage and family life rest with the individuals involved, not with society as a whole.
We can certainly create more healthy marriages than we currently do, and we can save more marriages that are in trouble. But just as we cannot organize modern political alliances through kinship ties or put the farmers’ and skilled craftsmen’s households back as the centerpiece of the modern economy, we can never reinstate marriage as the primary source of commitment and caregiving in the modern world. For better or worse, we must adjust our personal expectations and social support systems to this new reality.” P.348-360
THE ALL-OR-NOTHING MARRIAGE: HOW THE BEST MARRIAGES WORK by Eli J. Finkel, 2017
WHEN DID MARRIAGE BECOME ABOUT LOVE? PBS Origins, Feb 28, 2018. 8:32
WHY MARRIAGE SEEMS HARDER NOW THAN EVER BEFORE. Insider Tech, Nov 25, 2017. 2:17 Eli J. Finkel, a professor at Northwestern University and the author of "The All-or-Nothing Marriage
THE ALL-OR-NOTHING MARRIAGE BY ELI J. FINKEL: 10 MINUTE SUMMARY. SnapTale Audiobook Summaries. Nov 8, 2023. 10:51
00:00 Introduction
⌚ 01:05 The Evolution of Marriage
⌚ 01:57 Personal Fulfillment in Marriage
⌚ 02:37 Modern Marriage Expectations
⌚ 03:13 The Importance of Real Compatibility
⌚ 05:03 Overcoming Jealousy in Relationships
⌚ 06:12 Making Time for a Healthy Relationship
⌚ 07:06 Maintaining Personal Identity in Romantic Relationships
⌚ 07:42 The Pros And Cons Of Non-Monogamy
⌚ 09:52 Final Recap
MODERN MARITAL DYNAMICS: 'THE ALL-OR-NOTHING MARRIAGE' BY ELI J. FINKEL | Literature Podcast| Ep 17, Oct 24, 2023. 7:33
3:03 “We encounter the intriguing concept of the Mount Maslow Marriage, Finkel gets inspiration from psychologist Abraham Maslow's famed Hierarchy of Needs. Finkel extends this concept to marital aspirations. Traditional marriages focused on the foundational needs of security, shelter, and sustenance; however, modern unions, particularly in Western cultures ,now aspire towards the pinnacle of Maslow's pyramid, Self-Actualization. What does Self-Actualization mean in the context of marriage? is the idea that your partner not only supports your basic needs but also aids in your personal growth helping you become the best version of yourself.”
THE MARRIAGE HACK: ELI FINKEL at TEDxUChicago, June 5, 2013. 18:25
REACHING THE SUMMIT: THE CHALLENGES & POSSIBILITIES OF MODERN LOVE WITH DR. ELI FINKEL. Alexandra Solomon, March 27, 2024. 49:37
Dr. Eli Finkel, a social psychology professor at Northwestern University, joins Dr. Alexandra for an in-depth discussion about the state of marriage and long-term partnership today, in an ever-changing and ever-complicated world. They also discuss Eli's book, The All-Or-Nothing Marriage, and answer a listener question together about a new relationship.
SOLOMON: 11:22 “basically mapping the history of the institution of
marriage onto Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs…”
FINKEL: “I’m delighted with the question…” “achieving a connection at the top of Maslow's Hierarchy is about as good as it gets”. END 17:28
FINKEL: 26:50 “the metaphor that I used in the book and I I continue to like is what if we think of Maslow's Hierarchy not as a pyramid but as a mountain… “we gingerly start putting foot over foot again toward the summit…come back to base camp and repeat” END 27:50
EPISODE 2 – ELI FINKEL. WTJU Charlottesville, March 6, 2024. 1:12:49
16:54 FINKEL “... the reason why we should be able to achieve a better marriage than ever before is basically Maslow…”
THE SUFFOCATION OF MARRIAGE: CLIMBING MOUNT MASLOW WITHOUT ENOUGH OXYGEN Psychological Inquiry, Eli J. Finkel, Chin Ming Hui, Kathleen L. Carswell and Grace M. Larson, 2014
This article distills insights from historical, sociological, and psychological perspectives on marriage to develop the suffocation model of marriage in America. According to this model, contemporary Americans are asking their marriage to help them fulfill different sets of goals than in the past. Whereas they ask their marriage to help them fulfill their physiological and safety needs much less than in the past, they ask it to help them fulfill their esteem and self-actualization needs much more than in the past. Asking the marriage to help them fulfill the latter, higher level needs typically requires sufficient investment of time and psychological resources to ensure that the two spouses develop a deep bond and profound insight into each other’s essential qualities. Although some spouses are investing sufficient resources—and reaping the marital and psychological benefits of doing so—most are not. Indeed, they are, on average, investing less than in the past. As a result, mean levels of marital quality and personal well-being are declining over time. According to the suffocation model, spouses who are struggling with an imbalance between what they are asking from their marriage and what they are investing in it have several promising options for corrective action: intervening to optimize their available resources, increasing their investment of resources in the marriage, and asking less of the marriage in terms of facilitating the fulfillment of spouses’ higher needs. Discussion explores the implications of the suffocation model for understanding dating and courtship, sociodemographic variation, and marriage beyond American’s borders. Key words: goals, Maslow’s hierarchy, needs, oxygen deprivation, reoxygenation, self-regulation, social support.
chrome-extension://blillmbchncajnhkjfdnincfndboieik/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/eli-finkel/documents/2014_FinkelHuiCarswellLarson_PsychInquiry-Copy.pdf
THE ALL-OR-NOTHING MARRIAGE: HOW THE BEST MARRIAGES WORK by Eli J. Finkel, 2017
“The historical changes in American marriage—from the pragmatic to the love- based to the self-expressive eras—exhibit striking parallels to the psychologist Abraham Maslow’s famous hierarchy of needs.
“When my students and I wrote the Psychological Inquiry Target Article, we struggled to find a compelling metaphor for the temporal changes in American marriage. The breakthrough came when we reconceptualized Maslow’s hierarchy not in the form of a triangle, but in the form of a major mountain, which we dubbed “Mount Maslow.”
“As with any large mountain, the air gets thinner, and the oxygen sparser, at higher altitudes. As marriage in America has become increasingly oriented toward higher rather than lower altitudes on Mount Maslow, it has required greater oxygenation—greater nurturance regarding each other’s emotional and psychological needs. If spouses expect their marriage to help them fulfill such needs but are unwilling or unable to invest the time and psychological energy (the “oxygen”) required at that altitude, the marriage is at risk for suffocation— for lethargy, conflict, and perhaps divorce.
“Our emphasis on achieving self-discovery and personal growth through our marriage is aspirational. We prize movement of our actual self (our current self) toward our authentic self (our truest self). The authentic self, sometimes called the “ideal self,” encompasses the constellation of traits, skills, and other characteristics that form the core of our identity—and that we hope to cultivate over time.
“Relative to Americans who are unmarried, those who are married are much less involved with friends and other relatives. Married people are far less likely than never-married people to see their parents, siblings, neighbors, and friends regularly; previously married people are intermediate.
“It wasn’t always this way. The chart below depicts changes in how much alone time (time without their spouse) married Americans spend with friends and other relatives on weekends. In 1975, Americans averaged about 2.0 hours per weekend day of alone time with friends or relatives, an estimate that was similar for couples with and without children. In 2003, just one generation later, this number had plummeted to about 1.2 hours per weekend day, a decline that was especially stark among couples with children.
“Given this social withdrawal, successful pursuit of our authentic-self goals depends on our spouse much more today than in the past.
“In a cruel cultural twist, just as we have increasingly looked to our marriage to help us fulfill higher-level needs, we have decreasingly invested the time and energy required for the marriage to meet these expectations. According to one major study, the amount of time that childless Americans spent alone with their spouse declined from thirty-five to twenty-six hours per week from 1975 to 2003, with much of this decline resulting from an increase in hours spent at work. The decline for Americans with children at home was from thirteen to nine hours per week, with much of it resulting from an increase in time-intensive parenting.
“These trends—the increased emphasis on fulfilling higher-level needs through marriage, the winnowing of our intimate social networks, and the reduced alone time with our spouse—have produced two major consequences, one negative and one positive. THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROPORTION OF SPOUSES WHOSE MARRIAGES FALL SHORT OF EXPECTATIONS HAS GROWN. The proportion of marriages that are “very happy,” rather than “pretty happy” or “not too happy,” is in decline.
“THE POSITIVE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE BENEFITS OF HAVING A MARRIAGE THAT MEETS OUR EXPECTATIONS HAVE GROWN. As Maslow noted, relative to meeting lower needs, meeting higher needs yields “more profound happiness, serenity, and richness of the inner life.” This idea extends to the interpersonal case—relative to having a spouse help us fulfill our lower, more basic needs, having a spouse help us fulfill our higher, more emotional and psychological needs yields more profound marital happiness, serenity in the relationship, and richness of our life together.
“AS MARRIAGE HAS BECOME BOTH MORE FRAGILE AND MORE IMPORTANT, ITS QUALITY— THE EXTENT TO WHICH WE EXPERIENCE IT AS FULFILLING—HAS BECOME AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT PREDICTOR OF OUR OVERALL HAPPINESS WITH LIFE. The extent to which marital quality is an important predictor of life happiness was almost twice as strong in the 2000s as it was circa 1980.
“Marriage, in short, has tilted toward an all-or-nothing state. As its primary functions have ascended Maslow’s hierarchy, and as we’ve spent less time with our spouse, it’s become more difficult for our marriage to live up to our expectations, which means that more of us wind up feeling disappointed. At the same time, as the nature of our marital expectations has changed, the benefits of fulfilling those expectations are larger than ever. Consequently, even as the average marriage is getting worse, the best marriages are getting better.
“Toward a New Marital Paradigm
“A recurring theme in the scholarship on marriage is that the massive changes in the institution over the past fifty years or so have left Americans unmoored.
“In Marriage, a History (2005), the historian Stephanie Coontz observed that ‘today we are entering uncharted territory, and there is still no definitive guide to the new marital landscape.’
“I think we are, at long last, witnessing the beginning of the end of this turbulent period. A new marital paradigm has emerged, one in which spouses enjoy prolonged periods at the summit and flexibly adapt their expectations when temporary circumstances place the summit out of reach. This new paradigm holds great promise not only for putting the institution of marriage on more solid footing, but also for making it more fulfilling for the spouses involved. As more of us learn how to live successfully within this paradigm, we can potentially usher in the most successful period of marital well-being that the world has ever seen.” P.21 36
I ASKED SCHOLAR GTP THE FOLLOWING:
https://chatgpt.com/g/g-kZ0eYXlJe-scholar-gpt/c/67e29017-3c98-8000-a2f6-a656025480bd
I propose the historical evolution of marriage (Stephanie Coontz, Nathaniel Branden, Elie Finkel) mirrors the historical evolution of collectivist authority to individualist autonomy (from Statism to Voluntaryism) both of which find their origin in the historical evolution of childrearing modes (Lloyd deMause). Please give me as many references as possible in an outline form to write a detailed essay on this.
SCHOLAR GPT
Your proposed argument is an intriguing interdisciplinary synthesis, linking the historical evolution of marriage, political authority, and childrearing practices. Below is a structured outline along with references to help you build a comprehensive essay.
Outline with References for Essay:
Thesis:
The historical evolution of marriage from collectivist institutions to individualist partnerships mirrors the transformation of political structures from statism to voluntaryism, both of which originate in the historical evolution of childrearing practices.
I. Introduction
Overview of the historical progression of marriage.
Parallel transformation in political thought: from state-controlled authority to voluntaryism.
The role of childrearing practices in shaping societal structures (Lloyd deMause).
Thesis statement
II. The Historical Evolution of Marriage (Stephanie Coontz, Elie Finkel, Nathaniel Branden)
A. Marriage as a Collectivist Institution (Arranged, Economic, Religious, and Political Marriage)
Stephanie Coontz (2005). Marriage, A History: How Love Conquered Marriage – Examines how marriage was historically a tool for economic and political alliances.
Jack Goody (1983). The Development of the Family and Marriage in Europe – Marriage as an institution shaped by inheritance laws.
Claude Lévi-Strauss (1949). The Elementary Structures of Kinship – The function of marriage in primitive societies as an exchange mechanism.
B. Marriage Shifts Toward Individual Autonomy (Romantic & Companionate Marriage, Love-Based Unions)
Elie Finkel (2017). The All-or-Nothing Marriage – The transition of marriage from a survival mechanism to a personal fulfillment institution.
Nathaniel Branden (1983). The Psychology of Romantic Love – Psychological foundations of individual choice in marriage.
Anthony Giddens (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy – Rise of the "pure relationship" where love and emotional fulfillment replace economic necessity.
C. Modern Trends: Marriage and Voluntarism
David Popenoe (1996). Life Without Father – The decline of marriage as a state-regulated institution.
Zygmunt Bauman (2003). Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds – The shift from rigid marital structures to fluid, voluntary relationships.
Andrew Cherlin (2004). The Deinstitutionalization of Marriage – Trends in marriage reflecting individualist autonomy over collectivist duty.
III. The Historical Evolution of Political Authority: From Statism to Voluntaryism
A. The Early State: Collectivist Governance & Centralized Authority
Franz Oppenheimer (1908). The State – The origins of the state in conquest and hierarchy.
Robert Carneiro (1970). "A Theory of the Origin of the State" (Science, Vol. 169, pp. 733-738) – The state emerges as a response to conflict over resources.
James C. Scott (2009). The Art of Not Being Governed – Examines stateless societies and resistance to collectivist authority.
B. The Transition to Individualist Political Autonomy
Murray Rothbard (1973). For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto – A critique of state power and a defense of voluntaryism.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe (2001). Democracy: The God That Failed – The decline of monarchy and rise of democratic states, and their collectivist pitfalls.
David Friedman (1973). The Machinery of Freedom – A case for private governance and voluntaryism.
C. Parallel Between State Evolution & Marriage Evolution
Pierre Clastres (1974). Society Against the State – Stateless societies function on voluntary relationships rather than coercion.
F. A. Hayek (1960). The Constitution of Liberty – Individual freedom requires institutions that respect voluntary interactions rather than centralized control.
Michael Huemer (2013). The Problem of Political Authority – The moral illegitimacy of state coercion compared to voluntary association.
IV. The Historical Evolution of Childrearing (Lloyd deMause’s Psychohistorical Theory)
A. Childrearing as a Determinant of Cultural Evolution
Lloyd deMause (1982). Foundations of Psychohistory – Different childrearing modes shape social structures.
Lloyd deMause (2002). The Emotional Life of Nations – The evolution of parenting from abusive to nurturing correlates with societal shifts.
Philippe Ariès (1962). Centuries of Childhood – Historical changes in childrearing practices reflect societal development.
B. From Authoritarian Childrearing to Individualist Parenting
Alice Miller (1980). For Your Own Good – Authoritarian parenting produces obedience, mirroring collectivist governance.
Peter Gray (2013). Free to Learn – Modern, voluntaryist approaches to childrearing.
John Bowlby (1988). A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development – The role of secure attachment in fostering autonomy.
C. Implications for Marriage & Political Authority
Steven Pinker (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature – Declining violence linked to shifts in parenting and governance.
Jonathan Haidt (2012). The Righteous Mind – Childhood moral development affects political ideology.
Peter Gray (2011). "The Decline of Play and the Rise of Psychopathology" (American Journal of Play) – Less authoritarian parenting correlates with individualistic, voluntary societies.
V. Conclusion
Restating the Thesis: The historical shift from collectivist marriage to voluntary unions mirrors the political shift from statism to voluntaryism. Both find their origins in the evolution of childrearing, as parental methods shape the fundamental psychology of social structures.
Future Implications: If trends continue, we might see further decentralization in both marriage and governance, with voluntary, non-coercive relationships becoming the norm.
This outline provides a structured argument with strong scholarly references from multiple disciplines (history, psychology, political philosophy, and sociology). Would you like more sources or a refinement of any particular section?
I ASKED SCHOLAR GTP THE FOLLOWING:
https://chatgpt.com/g/g-kZ0eYXlJe-scholar-gpt/c/67e29159-8e64-8000-8aa0-b0c30a1db09c
I propose the historical evolution of marriage (Stephanie Coontz, Nathaniel Branden, Elie Finkel) from collectivist control to individual autonomy has its origin in the historical evolution of childrearing modes from Infanticidal Mode to Helping Mode (Lloyd deMause). Please give me as many references as possible in an outline form to write a detailed essay on this.
SCHOLAR GPT
Your proposed thesis traces the historical evolution of marriage from collective control to individual autonomy and connects it to shifts in childrearing practices, drawing on scholars such as Stephanie Coontz, Nathaniel Branden, Eli Finkel, and Lloyd deMause. Below is a structured outline with key references to help you develop a detailed essay.
Outline: The Evolution of Marriage and Childrearing Modes
Introduction
Briefly introduce the historical trajectory of marriage.
Discuss how childrearing practices have transformed over time.
Present the thesis: The shift from collectivist control to individual autonomy in marriage originates from the evolution of childrearing from the Infanticidal Mode to the Helping Mode (Lloyd deMause).
I. The Historical Evolution of Marriage
A. Traditional Collectivist Control Over Marriage
Marriage as an Economic and Political Institution
Coontz, S. (2005). Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage. Viking Press.
Explores marriage as a tool for economic security and political alliance.
Stone, L. (1977). The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800. Harper & Row.
Discusses arranged marriages as economic contracts.
Religious and Cultural Reinforcement of Marital Norms
Macfarlane, A. (1986). Marriage and Love in England: Modes of Reproduction 1300-1840. Blackwell.
Examines Christian and societal roles in regulating marriage.
B. The Emergence of Love-Based Marriage & Individual Autonomy
The Rise of Companionate Marriage
Shorter, E. (1975). The Making of the Modern Family. Basic Books.
Love-based unions began emerging during the Enlightenment.
Marriage in the Modern Era: Personal Fulfillment & Autonomy
Finkel, E. J. (2017). The All-or-Nothing Marriage: How the Best Marriages Work. Dutton.
Explores marriage’s transformation into a self-actualization tool.
Branden, N. (1988). The Psychology of Romantic Love: Romantic Love in an Anti-Romantic Age. Bantam.
Highlights individual self-esteem and autonomy as central to modern relationships.
II. The Historical Evolution of Childrearing Modes (Lloyd deMause)
A. The Infanticidal Mode (Antiquity to Early Societies)
Infanticide as a Cultural Norm
deMause, L. (1974). The History of Childhood: The Untold Story of Child Abuse. Harper & Row.
Defines the Infanticidal Mode, in which child sacrifice, exposure, and neglect were common.
Aries, P. (1960). Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. Vintage.
Highlights medieval attitudes toward childhood as a disposable phase.
B. The Abandoning & Ambivalent Modes (Medieval to Early Modern)
Swaddling and Psychological Distance from Children
Pollock, L. (1983). Forgotten Children: Parent-Child Relations from 1500 to 1900. Cambridge University Press.
Explains how parents emotionally distanced themselves from infants due to high mortality.
deMause, L. (1982). Foundations of Psychohistory. Creative Roots.
Argues that parents gradually began forming emotional bonds with children but still exhibited ambivalence.
C. The Intrusive & Socialization Modes (17th–19th Century)
Discipline & Moral Training as Primary Goals
Stone, L. (1977). The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800. Harper & Row.
Describes strict socialization practices aimed at obedience.
Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Pantheon Books.
Analyzes the broader societal shift towards controlling behavior, influencing childrearing.
D. The Helping Mode (20th Century–Present)
Emphasis on Nurturing and Individual Growth
deMause, L. (2002). The Emotional Life of Nations. Karnac Books.
Defines the Helping Mode, where childrearing prioritizes psychological well-being and self-actualization.
Miller, A. (1983). For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child-Rearing and the Roots of Violence. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Links improved childrearing to greater autonomy in adulthood.
III. Linking Childrearing Evolution to Marriage Evolution
A. Emotional Bonds in Childrearing Shape Relationship Expectations
Parental Emotional Involvement and Romantic Expectations
Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. Basic Books.
Argues that early secure attachment fosters autonomy in romantic relationships.
Coontz, S. (2016). Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage. Viking Press.
Examines how childhood emotional experiences translate into marriage ideals.
B. Decline of Collectivist Control Over Marriage Due to Changing Parental Roles
Individualization of Marriage Due to More Emotionally Supportive Upbringing
Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Stanford University Press.
Explores how autonomy in childhood supports self-actualizing relationships.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995). The Normal Chaos of Love. Polity Press.
Discusses how modern autonomy in personal life reshapes marriage.
C. The Rise of Self-Fulfillment in Modern Relationships
Self-Actualization in Marriage as a Reflection of Child-Centered Parenting
Finkel, E. J. (2017). The All-or-Nothing Marriage: How the Best Marriages Work. Dutton.
Examines the increasing role of emotional needs in sustaining marriages.
Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled—and More Miserable Than Ever Before. Free Press.
Discusses how autonomy-focused upbringing leads to higher individual expectations in relationships.
Conclusion
Summarize how the evolution of childrearing from deMause’s Infanticidal to Helping Mode parallels the shift in marriage from collectivist control to individual autonomy.
Highlight how historical trends support the claim that as childhood experiences became more nurturing and autonomy-focused, expectations for personal fulfillment in marriage increased.
Future directions: How modern parenting and evolving marriage norms may continue influencing each other.