Marriage has lost some of its historical functions: women are no longer dependent on their husbands for support, couples can live together and raise children without getting married, and in many Western societies, religion is weakening. Yet people continue to stand up to family and friends and promise to stay together. Literary scholar Deborah Baum suggests that the reason lies not only in law, money, or tradition, but also in the need to turn a private relationship into a meaningful commitment.
But many of these explanations have been greatly weakened in Western societies. Women work and earn their own living, couples live together without getting married, children are born and raised outside of the home.Marriage, and people can have a long-term relationship without asking the state or the religious establishment to approve it.
And yet people continue to get married.
This is the question that concerns Prof. Deborah Baum From the University of Southampton: Not why the marriage rate is falling, but why this ancient institution manages to survive even after some of the practical reasons for its existence have weakened.
Fewer people are married – but marriage hasn't disappeared
The trend in the UK is clear. According to the 2021 census, for the first time since records began, the majority of adults in the UK are unmarried.
At the same time, alternatives that were previously less acceptable have become stronger: living together without marriage, raising children outside of marriage, single-parent families, and more diverse family and couple structures.
That is, marriage is no longer an almost automatic stop on the path between youth and adulthood.
And yet, many people – including secularists, liberals, LGBT people, and even those who have already been divorced in the past – continue to choose them.
When asked why – the answer is not always clear
While working on her book On Marriage Baum asked married people why they decided to get married.
It was precisely people who made a decision with far-reaching consequences who sometimes had difficulty explaining it. The answers ranged from security, children, and stability to tax considerations, social pressure, andLoveOthers mentioned parents, work, residence permits, money, comfort – or simply the desire to throw a big party.
This is perhaps one of the interesting features of modern marriage: people can be critical of the institution, seeing it as a relic of Company Patriarchal, yet choose to enter it.
The choice is not necessarily a contradiction. Social institutions can change their meaning without disappearing.
Another example of this process can be seen in Israel. A study we previously reported on in the article "A personalized wedding" It dealt specifically with Jewish couples who are eligible to marry in the rabbinate but choose to formalize their relationship in another way. In other words, rejecting the religious framework does not necessarily mean rejecting the desire for a ceremony or recognition of theRelationship.
Religion is weakening, but something of it remains.
One of the interesting parts of Baum's argument concernsSecularization.
In Britain, the number of civil marriages surpassed the number of religious ceremonies as early as 1992. Today, a high proportion of young British people do not identify with a religion. Still, Baum argues, it is difficult to completely remove from marriage the symbolic structure that religion has given it for centuries.
Even the language betrays this.
People don't just tell each other they want to continue living together. They make vows. They promise fidelity. They talk about "forever" and living together until death.
The ceremony turns a private decision into something witnessed by other people.
And herein may be found one of the reasons for its survival.
Undertaking before witnesses
A couple can love without getting married. They can share a house, a bank account, and raise children without a ceremony. So, if all these things are possible without marriage, the ceremony itself requires an explanation.
One possibility is that publicity is part of the issue.
A statement made to a spouse only is different from a statement made to a Family, friends, and sometimes even a state or religious community. Marriage transforms a private relationship into a recognized social status.
They don't guarantee that the relationship will last. The mere existence of a divorce is enough to disprove such a promise. But the ceremony says that at some point two people decided to make their intention to stay together a public commitment.
And what remains of the religious idea in a secular world?
Baum uses the anthropologistculture Ernest Becker, author of the book The Denial of DeathBecker dealt with the ways in which humans search for meaning and try to cope with the knowledge that their lives are finite.
In a secular society, Baum suggests, some of the hopes previously attributed to religion may shift to romantic love. Relationships are supposed to provide meaning, shelter, continuity, and a sense that something in our lives will withstand uncertainty.
This does not mean that love has replaced religion, and certainly not that every secular person marries for such a reason. This is a cultural argument, not an experimental finding.
But he explains an interesting paradox: precisely when marriage became less economically and socially necessary, its symbolic meaning may have become more important for those who choose it.
In Israel too, the question is more complex.
In Israel, it is impossible to copy the British discussion one by one. Personal status is tied to religion and state in a very different way here. The way to get married in Israel depends on religious institutions, and there are couples who cannot get married in the country or do not want to do so through the religious establishment.
Therefore, two questions need to be separated: Why do people want To be married, and why they want – or don't want – to go through the institution authorized to perform marriages.
The Israeli study described in"A personalized wedding" This distinction is precisely illustrated: Even couples who choose not to get married in a rabbinate may want to formalize their relationship and hold a ceremony that expresses their values.
The distinction has become even more interesting in the age of artificial intelligence. In the article “When love becomes a subscription: Will a person be able to marry an artificial intelligence?” We addressed the question of what makes a marriage a marriage when one of the parties is not a human being. The discussion illustrates that marriage is not just a declaration of love: it also creates a network of rights, duties, family ties, and legal and social responsibilities.
And perhaps precisely because it is now possible to maintain almost all the components of a relationship without getting married, the choice to do so has become more interesting.
Marriage is no longer the obvious answer to the question of how an adult should live. It has become one option among several.
And those who choose it are not necessarily embracing the institution of marriage as it was a century ago. They may take an ancient institution, shed some of its old roles, and give it a new meaning: Not because you have to get married, but precisely because you no longer have to.
Questions and Answers
Why do people still get married if it's possible to live together without marriage?
There is no single reason. People cite love, stability, children, legal and financial security, family, and tradition. Baum also points to the symbolic function of the ceremony: transforming a private relationship into a public commitment.
Is the marriage rate really declining?
Yes. In the UK, for example, the 2021 census showed for the first time that the majority of adults were unmarried. At the same time, cohabitation and other family structures have become more common and accepted.
Are secular people giving up on marriage?
Not necessarily. Secularization has weakened the necessary connection between marriage and religion, but civil ceremonies and marriages among secular people continue to exist. Baum suggests that some of the symbolic meaning that was once religious has been preserved within the institution of marriage.
Is the situation in Israel similar to Britain?
Not entirely. In Israel, religious institutions play a central legal role in marriage, and therefore the choice of whether and how to marry also involves questions of religion, freedom of choice, and personal status.
More on the subject on the science website
When love becomes a subscription: Will a person be able to marry an artificial intelligence?
About madness, about love – and the cure for both
Yeast chooses mates that increase the success of offspring
Not a prehistoric romance: New study challenges the story of Neanderthal and Sapiens “love”
For the original publication: Opening the original publication
