In the United States, marriage is often viewed as a symbolic representation of love and a significant step into adulthood. A single lifelong marriage is considered a success. But these are social constructions. Here, we will discuss the socially constructed ideals of marriage, as well as acknowledge that marriage is just one possibility within all romantic and love relationships. Admittedly, marriage holds a high status in the United States. And we will ask you, the reader, to think about the role of marriage in society.

Marriage as a Social Construction

What image comes to mind when you think about marriage? Perhaps you immediately see a couple—a young man and a young woman—in wedding garb, with the man in formal black clothing and the woman in a white dress, Figure 3.11. Weddings are symbolic of the joining of a couple and the families involved. Perhaps you visualized something else—another stage of marriage or another kind of couple or family. The meaning of and ideals about marriage have changed over time and differ among kinship groups and cultures.

Figure 3.11. Weddings signal the start of a marriage and have symbolic importance in the United States, although both weddings and marriages have changed in meaning over time.

The most powerful social constructions of marriage in the United States have been driven by the economy and social change. Briefly summarized, these are the ways that marriage has been viewed by society over time:

• Marriage as an institution, which was the most common among Euro-American settlers from the time of arrival in what became the United States until the mid-20th century. In institutionalized marriage, roles were clearly defined between the man and the woman in the pursuit of economic and familial stability. Producing children was highly valued, as they contributed to the family’s economic stability.
• Companionate marriage emerged as the economy in the United States improved and one spouse (usually the man) worked away from the home. “Separate spheres,” the idea that men and women worked in different worlds (home and the workplace), emerged. While roles were still well defined, the importance of companionship, love, affection, and sex were all added to the expectations of a marital relationship to create the idea of the companionate marriage.
• Individualized marriage evolved with the country’s continued economic growth and the increase in women’s equality and the expansion of gender roles for men, women, and nonbinary people. This led to more flexible and fluid roles in marriages and in parenting. In addition, in individualistic marriages, it is expected that each spouse works toward their own self-actualization, as well as supporting their spouse’s self-actualization. Parenting and work within marriage were more likely to be shared. Both partners are expected to be more expressive and communicative. The role of support and encouragement in helping your spouse to become their best self is added to the growing list of expectations for marriage (Cherlin, 2004).

Socially constructed ideals have taken on additional representation with the increasing usage of social media and the emergence of influencers (entrepreneurs who support themselves via their images, text, and videos on platforms such as Instagram and TikTok). Rather than acknowledging the challenges and imperfections within relationships, social media content by influencers is designed to reinforce idealized concepts and sell products. This contributes to the unrealistic constructions of married life (Perel, 2019).

Who Is Left Out?

Who is left out of this socially constructed idea? Let’s talk about other forms of union formation that may not fit the idealized marriage construction. As discussed earlier, our social identities, especially those that are related to gender and sexuality, are integral to the partnerships we form.

In the United States, as well as other countries, two individuals of the same sex may be legally married, but all over the world, same-sex couples have been creating households and families for centuries, long before any legal recognition. Same-sex marriages are documented, for instance, in the history of Native American groups from the Great Plains. On the Plains, men who preferred to dress and take on the roles of women were allowed to marry other men. It was assumed that if one partner gathered plant food and prepared food, the other partner should have a complementary role, like hunting. Androgynous individuals, males who preferred female roles or dress, and females who took on male roles were not condemned but rather regarded as “two-spirit,” a label that had positive connotations.

Two-spirit people were considered to embody a third gender combining elements of both male and female. The key to the two-spirit gender identity was behavior: what individuals did in their communities (Roscoe, 2005). If a person who was born biologically male felt their identity and chosen lifestyle best matched the social role recognized as female, they could move into a third-gender two-spirit category. Today, Native American groups set their own laws regarding same-sex marriage. Many recognize two-spirit individuals and accept the marriage of a two-spirit person to a person of the same biological sex. Although some nations still do not permit same-sex marriage between tribal members, one of the largest tribal nations, the Cherokee Nation, legalized same-sex marriages in 2016.

Although same-sex marriage was legalized in the United States in 2015, there is still stigma, which is a negative or discriminatory attitude based on a social characteristic or behavior, and controversy attached to same-sex couples who wish to marry (Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015). Among same-sex couples, there is variance in how much of the socially constructed ideals of weddings and marriage they choose to embrace. Some choose to have weddings, symbols, and marriages that fit these ideals, and others reject these symbols while using the legal benefits of marriage.

Polygamy refers to any marriage in which there are multiple partners. It is related to polyamory, relationships in which a person has intimate relationships with more than one person at a time (and is transparent with partners about this). There are two kinds of polygamy: polygyny and polyandry. Polygyny refers to marriages in which there is one husband and multiple wives. In some societies that practice polygyny, the preference is for sororal polygyny, or the marriage of one man to several sisters. In such cases, it is sometimes believed that sisters will get along better as co-wives. Polyandry describes marriages with one wife and multiple husbands. As with polygyny, fraternal polyandry is common and involves the marriage of a woman to a group of brothers.

Polygamy has not been legalized in the United States, nor is there significant discussion about this right. Polygamous families face stigma and discrimination and do not fit into the socially constructed ideal of marriage.

Remember that marriage is one way of building a family or kinship group. As you continue to read this text, we encourage you to think critically about what marriage means to your own family and to society and what role it should play.

Licenses and Attributions for A Word about Marriage

Open Content, Original

“ A Word about Marriage” by Elizabeth B. Pearce. License: CC BY 4.0.

“Activity: How Do Our Ideas about Marriage Reflect Theories?” by Elizabeth B. Pearce. License: CC BY 4.0.

Figure 3.12. “Core Theories Table Excerpt” by Elizabeth B. Pearce. License: CC BY 4.0.

Open Content, Shared Previously

“Same-Sex Marriages” and “Polygamy” excerpted from “Family and Marriage” by Mary Kay Gilliland in Perspectives: An Open Introduction to Cultural Anthropology, 2nd Edition. License: CC BY 4.0. Adaption: small excerpt.

Figure 3.11. Photo by Analise Benevides on Unsplash. License: Unsplash license.

References

Esther Perel Explains Why Wedding Vows Evolved with Society | Annals of Obsession | the New Yorker, 2019

Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848–861. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00058.x

Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015, No. 14-556, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

Roscoe, Will. (1998). Changing Ones: Third and Fourth Genders in Native North America (New York: Palgrave Macmillan)