Civil Society thrives on Marriage

Tory leader David Cameron said that the root of Britain’s social ills is the breakdown of the family unit. The latest report from the Conservative party found that unmarried parents are more likely to separate than married parents. With 50% of unmarried parents splitting up after the child is five. Children of single parent families are most likely to commit crimes and end up abusing drugs and alcohol. Duncan Smith, head of the Tory’s Social Justice Party believes that there is a connection between the “growing underclass” and unmarried couples. He cites family breakdown, reliance on benefits, educational failure, drinking, drugging and debt as some of the outcomes of couples starting families out of wedlock. “Family is the most important institution in Britain and if we are serious about tackling the cause of poverty and social breakdown, then we must look at ways of supporting families and also supporting marriage so that couples are encouraged to get together and stay together.” Mr. Smith said. One can predict that the Tory’s Victorian approach to marriage will be perceived by liberals as a moral crusade, similar to John Major’s “Back to Basics” campaign which criticized single mothers. Feminists in the UK will certainly have a lot to get riled up about if the tax incentives for married couples do materialize. In Singapore, most young single men and women still live with their parents till they get married. Unlike western societies, co-habitation before marriage is viewed with disapproval. The government in Singapore is pro-family and there are tax reliefs and rebates and housing discounts for newly married couples, but none for single-mothers. Singapore is a society that actively promotes marriage and ostracizes common law living. When I try to explain that this is the reality in Singapore, my friends in the UK and US find it ridiculous and somewhat impractical. Most of my classmates, some as young as 19 are living with their boyfriends or girlfriend. A few of them have made this decision to live with their partners even though doing so meant that they would be cut off financially and emotionally by their parents. Their argument is that a man and woman need to spend some time living together before they can know if they will make good spouses. And also that it is more convenient financially. The sad fact is that many of these couples who move in together end up staying together for an average of three years before they go their separate ways. Those to choose cohabitation claim that you need to REALLY know a person before you decide to commit to marriage. That most divorces are a result of people not knowing their partners well enough and therefore realizing after marriage that ‘the goods were bad’. They view living together as a sort of mock “trial marriage”, a rehearsal to help them gauge their level of suitability and decide if marriage is indeed for them. Five years ago, I would have agreed with their naïve leftist approach towards relationships. However, having lived with boyfriends in the past, I am now against cohabitation and would have to agree with those who stand for marriage. Research has shown than “trial marriages” do not work. 40% of cohabiting couples break-up before they make it to marriage and the divorce rate for cohabitants are 50% higher than for non-cohabitants. So it would seem that living together out of wedlock increases your chances of NOT ending up “happily ever after”. When I live with a partner, the main incentive is sex and affection. Neither of us is looking towards starting a family. There are no shared goals except for physical and emotional pleasure and mutual companionship. Without future plans there is no motivation to secure and increase financial assets or talents. There are no career, geographical or biological time frames and both end up in a state of limbo. I tend to get lazy and complacent once I have settled into my ‘love nest’. A ‘live in the moment’ mentality sets in. This is not a bad thing, but it can create a feeling of stagnation after a while. I have noticed this also in my friends who cohabitate. They become restless and because they have taken no vows, they feel that an independent, single lifestyle is still their right. They get resentful when their partner tells them what to do. “What right do you have telling me what to do? You are not my wife/husband!” so it goes. Often, when living with a partner, I feel secure in knowing that I do not have to go out and ‘hunt’ for sex and cuddles. Sex and physical affection is such a basic human need and cohabitation meets that need on a regular basis. However, once I have gotten my fill of physical intimacy, and the live in situation feels too claustrophobic, my greatest comfort comes from the knowledge that I can leave whenever I want to and NOBODY can fault me for me. I am blameless. How grown-up is that? I take all the fun and love that a boyfriend/girlfriend has to offer then leave when I have to actually deal with a flawed human being for the rest of my life. Cohabitation is great if what you want is a place to find fault with another person so you can convince yourself that marriage is indeed too difficult and the single life suits you better. Living together takes the mystery out of marriage, and there is nothing to anticipate anymore. There is also something surreptitious and clandestine about cohabitation. When a man and woman are in love, they should always be proud of that fact and invite the world to witness their joyful union. That is what marriage is about. Marriage is inclusive. The wedding ceremony is an opportunity for the bride’s family and friends and the groom’s family and friends to come together to accept and encourage the couple. It is a celebration of approval and familiarity. The couple no longer enjoys sexual intimacy secretly, in marriage they are in fact asking those closest to them to acknowledge their sexual union because it is wholesome, it is good and they now know…it is their God-given right. Marriage is when lovers come out in the open and make an honest proclamation of their love for each other. Cameron and Smith were right in their conclusion that the causes of social dysfunction is connected with people choosing to live together and start families rather than doing it the traditional way. Traditions are put in place for a reason and when people decide to break social mores, there are often consequences. I would rather grow up with a mother and father who fight constantly than grow up with only a mother or father, which I feel would force me to play the role of the parent or emotional partner to make up for the lack of opposite sex intimacy and support in their life. When I was five, I often put a white crochet tablecloth over my head as a veil pretending I was bride. Perhaps today, women around the world, feel as if they longer have the right to play out that role or dream that dream. We have been conditioned by sitcoms like “Sex and The City” to believe that we are weak if we choose domesticity and children over a high-flying career and Jimmy Choos. We have been conditioned to believe that we can rear children without a good man by our side. We have become deluded enough to believe that within US alone is all we need to give proper love and moral guidance to a child. Without marriage, children are nothing but pets, ego-projects deprived of moral structure and stability. Children who grow up without loving parents, will have little opportunity to observe love in action. It is no surprise then that if the dough does not stick, the cookie will surely crumble. Copyright 2006, Michele Koh