The Future of Marriage and Relationships
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 чер 2024
- With its traditional roots and the demand for lifelong commitment, marriage seems almost like an antithesis to a modern society that highly values individuality and freedom. This video examines whether marriage (at least in its current form) has a future, and how relationships in general will change in the decades to come.
Sources - Books:
* Giddens, Anthony (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age
* Giddens, Anthony (1993). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies
* Hart-Brinson, Peter (2018). The Gay Marriage Generation: How the LGBTQ Movement Transformed American Culture
* Illouz, Eva (2018). Unloving: A Sociology of Negative Relations
* Peuckert, Rüdiger (2012). Familienformen im sozialen Wandel
* Schmidt, Gunter; Matthiesen, Silja; Dekker, Arne; Starke, Kurt (2006). Spätmoderne Beziehungswelten. Report über Partnerschaft und Sexualität in drei Generationen
* Stacey, Judith (1996). In the Name of the Family: Rethinking Family Values in the Postmodern Age
Sources - Studies:
* Feinberg, Jessica (2012). Exposing the Traditional Marriage Agenda. In: Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy, Volume 7, Issue 2
* Gallacher, David; Gallacher, John (2011). Are relationships good for your health? In: BMJ, 342:d404
* Green, Stephen (2000). Is the Future Better than the Past? An Empirical Comparison of Marital Quality Among Short-Term, Intermediate-Term, and Long-Term Couples
* Karimi, Reza; Bakhtiyari, Maryam; Arani, Abbas Masjedi (2019). Protective factors of marital stability in long-term marriage globally: a systematic review. In: Epidemiology and Health, Volume 41, Article ID: e2019023
* Ungar, Nadine et al. (2021). Joint Goals in Older Couples: Associations With Goal Progress, Allostatic Load, and Relationship Satisfaction. In: Frontiers in Psychology, Volume 12, Article 623037
Sources - Articles:
* BBC (2012). Ten key moments in the history of marriage. www.bbc.com/news/magazine-173...
* Positive Psychology (2021). Marriage Psychology and Therapy : The Science of Successful Relationships. positivepsychology.com/marria...
* Psychology Today (2013). 3 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Marry for Love Alone. www.psychologytoday.com/intl/...
* Stuttgarter Zeitung (2012). Die Liebe und ihr Preis. www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/in...
* The Washington Post (2016). The secret to a long-lasting marriage. www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...
* Zeit (2021). Warum heiraten? www.zeit.de/2021/31/heiraten-...
Sources - Videos:
* Glamour (2017). Divorce Lawyers Give Relationship Advice | Glamour. • Divorce Lawyers Give R...
* poptech (2011). Stephanie Coontz: On Marriage. • Stephanie Coontz: On M...
* TED (2012). What you don’t know about marriage | Jenna McCarthy. • What you don't know ab...
* TED-Ed (2014). The history of marriage - Alex Gendler. • The history of marriag...
* The Gottman Institute (2018). Making Marriage Work | Dr. John Gottman. • Making Marriage Work |...
* The School of Life (2016). Why Bother With Marriage? • Why Bother With Marriage?
Pictures and video footage taken from unsplash.com and pixabay.com.
Music taken from the UA-cam Audio Library:
“Feels” by Patrick Patrikios
“Mysteries” by Dan Lebowitz
“Six Seasons” by Unicorn Heads
“Eternal Garden” by Dan Henig
Created with Adobe Audition, Adobe Premiere Pro, and Adobe After Effects.
Chapters:
00:00 A Most Paradoxical Endeavor
00:40 An Ever-Changing Concept
02:54 Should I Marry?
04:48 The Future of Relationships
Not that there is much to be seen, but I do have a Twitter account: / vallisyt
Video No. 3
The moment I saw you put sources in your DK video, I subscribed. Thank you for making such high-quality content and analysis! No matter when your next video will be done, I'll be there to watch it, and it is likely that many of your viewers feel the same, so keep up the great work!
Thank you, Yordan, that means a lot to me! Also, thanks for appreciating the sources, I feel like this is an undervalued aspect of journalism in general and educational UA-cam videos in particular :)
Very well put together, straight to hitting all the points without needless fluff. Food for thought indeed. Will look out for the next one!
Thank you, Tony! I try to write my scripts as dense as possible, both as a challenge for myself to focus on what is most important and out of respect for the time of my audience. I know that I would want to watch video essays that avoid needless fluff, so naturally I try to do the same for my own videos :)
I just found your channel through that Dunning-Kruger video and found you just uploaded a video a few minutes ago. You’re really underrated and you earned a new sub
Hey Joshou, good to have you on board! It seems that you have found my channel just at the right time :D However, I don't manage to upload more than once a month, so I hope you'll stick around until then :)
I've got to be honest, the idea of making Marriage a legally binding thing was always weird to me. I always understood it as a mutually agreed-upon, voluntary lifelong commitment between two people.
Having some higher power can be quite important, as a marriage will put you under intense pressure and having someone or something to be held will help. You are less likely to leave if leaving puts you in a worse position.
Previously, this was done through religion and community, but as our society has moved away from those, people have tried to legalize morality, and thus we get wedding contracts.
The more recent failures of marriage I believe have more to do with feminism pushing women to be men, and the weakening of the contract with things like child support and alimony. Why not leave when you get gifts and prizes for doing so?
@@TheStarMachine2000 you're like 2 steps away from calling Women "Earthen Vessels" ... Just making sure you're aware.
The flaw in your approach is that those who have something to lose will simply produce the paperwork necessary to separate their assets and agree beforehand that those items are known and will remain under sole ownership and/or management of the originator. There is something to be said about the courts tendency to provide the Mother with more inherent value for raising children, but we have seen exceptional strides towards equity in that aspect.
@@Sugar3Glider First of all, I am no fanatic. Second, I was referring to religion in previous times, and the government in more recent times. Unfortunately, divorce proceedings tend to favor those who make less, and most often that is women. There is a reason that the vast majority of child support and alimony go to women. Furthermore, what equity? I do not understand what you mean by this. Are you trying to say that women are paying men more often, that more money is being spent evenly, or that the compensation is more equal to work? Or something else entirely. In my ignorance, I have only heard equity to mean equality of outcome, so I am not sure what your intentions are
@@Sugar3Glider I am also not sure what you mean by "Earthen Vessel" either, but truly is just my ignorance
@@TheStarMachine2000 you're cool, my dude.
Steven Crowder is currently dealing with a lot of backlash because of his recent divorce and the very controlling nature that was revealed as a result. If you'd like a more in-depth discussion on the topic, that would be a good "current event" to look into.
The Earthen Vessels are a reference to the concept of Women as property, that they're created of Man and are thus not equal thereto, and that their purpose on earth is to birth the offspring of Man. It's due to the reference for a higher power. Conceptually, hopefully, we have as a society moved past the dominance and segregation of (wo)man, and as such understand that each individual has their own agency.
Then, we simply need to look at it like erosion. Sometimes a river will split apart, and after it does it may join back together, but if it doesn't then that's a fork. There's nothing inherently wrong with separation. The only limiting factor to divorce being beneficial for both parties boils down to the issues with dividing material possession and financial assets.
In the right society we may not have to worry about that, as the basic necessities are provided for all. This has been proven time and time again to be the most effective way to help people. Those means being provided would eliminate the need for alimony, child support, etc.
Considering we have Capitalism instead, you have to protect your assets with a prenuptial agreement. This is something that celebrities are often using, but it's beneficial for everyone as a means to maintain the concept of separate but equal.
The reference to equity is as you believed, that the courts are becoming more fair & balanced when reviewing divorce cases. This isn't to say that it will be that way in every case, but that the trend is heading in the right direction. There are a lot more resources for men to utilize for finding representation as well, it's not perfect but it's getting better.
Otherwise, the Earthen Vessels comment is in reference to the general feel of your post. Unless I am mistaken, it appears that you believe that a marriage should be maintained even if one party wants to exit. This used to be a religious concept, as you noted, but the trend towards "Traditionalism" is just a push to restrict the rights of people so that they can be utilized as property. I don't know if that's your belief, but given the benefit of the doubt I would say that you are concerned more with the ramifications of separation; which we have methods to address such issues, but obviously could do better.
insane quality from such a small channel, happy to say i was here, before you hopefully blows up
Thank you, William! :)
Same bro
I hope to forever see a future between your channel and my subscription list
Now that is an elegant way to phrase a compliment :D
Good video bro! I'm glad to see you touched on this topic, it's recently become much more prevalent to talk about relationships and I'm glad you put in your 2 cents!
Thank you, Bob! :) Why do you think that the topic has recently become more prevalent?
I am almost 2 years late to the party, but thank you for producing the 3 great videos on your channel.
Thank you for watching all three of them, I really appreciate it! :)
I'm so happy this channel was recommended to me since the content is really high quality and thought evoking. I hope we'll se more from you in the future!
Thank you Timestatic! I think about new videos everyday, hopefully there will be new output soon :)
@@VallisYT Ya man! These are fantastic videos! Looking forward to more!
Thank you for you work, this video was amazing
Great video! Your channel has so much potential i predict your channel will blow up eventually
Thank you, Jason! :)
Do not worry, it’s not clear which videos will become popular, but I know for sure if you continue, everything will work out!
Thank you, Nivaro! It's true, the algorithm gods of UA-cam work in mysterious ways, all I can and thus will do is to faithfully upload videos and see what happens :D
Your video is very attractive, creative, vibrant, colorful and interesting! thanks for sharing! Learn from you! I wish you good luck every day!
If you keep going like this I can see you comeing far with youtube :) I happy to a part of the
journey. I wish you the best of luck.
Thank you, Christian, it's good to have you on board :)
Woah, your work on this channel is incredible.
Thank you! :)
Great video!
Interesting, your first video has 400x the views as this video
But they are both really good!
Are you going to make new videos?
Thank you Boas! The algorithm works in mysterious ways, and apparently it chose my first video. I think about new videos everyday, hopefully there will be new output soon :)
Just discovered your videos and I absolutely adore your content!!
Aww, thank you, Crépe! :)
@@VallisYT you're so sweet!!
Such a great channel, love it
Thank you! :)
Great videos! Waiting for a new content, don't give up!
As always, incredible video. Marriage carry a lot of cultural stuff with it, like family planification (growing childs, basically) and contractual obligations. As you say, today exists alternative and legal forms of contractual relationship that fits better with modern society. In my country there is something called "civil union", for example.
I have a question, thou. In past centuries, marriage have little relation with love. But, maybe the concept of love itself was different in the past? Or the conception on love, maybe? What do you think about this matter?
Thank you, Ignacio! You are correct, the conception of love has changed significantly during the past centuries. The primal feelings of (sexual) desire and affection have probably always been a part of human nature, but the way we interpreted and acted on these feelings has changed. As far as I understand it, the notion of romantic love (together with all the related social expectations and ideals) is fairly new and emerged only in the last two or three hundred years. Maybe it would be better not to use the term "love" for all the various emotions that are today associated with it. I have heard that the Ancient Greeks for example had several words for it, one each for affection, desire, friendship, and unconditional love. It is interesting to consider whether our relationship to love would be different if our language wouldn't invite us to think about it as one unified thing, but as different emotions with varying implications.
@@VallisYT In fact, ancient greeks have about 4 or 5 words to denominate different kinds of love, like the philial love or the sexual one. Very interesting way of approach to the subject. I think is worthing investigate about the conception of love in cultural media (literature, more specifically) to have a more wide view on that. We can make some key questions, like what kind of expectations live around the love in other cultures, or what is socially accepted or "wrong", and so on.
About the "romantic love"... don't really agree with that definition. I understand why the use of "romantic", but in fact, with a little more deep analysis, we can see few common points among the so called "romantic love" and the Romanticism like a whole. Historically, the reception of Werther (the novel by Goethe) by the youth at the beginning of XIX had a lot of the rsponsability of that perception, in my opinion. I wonder why and how exactly the Romanticism ended like that, uh...
Anyway, thanks for the insight, I really appreciate your thoughts.
High-quality content, thanks ! I'm grateful that you're quoting sources. May I suggest you to add Emma Goldman to your readings ? She wrote some articles (I don't know in which book you'll find in considering the fact that I read it in French) about marriage, in which she criticizes it. She argues that marriage sustains the establish order.
Hey, thank you so much for you comment! I am not familiar with Emma Goldman and her work, so thank you for the recommendation, I will look her up :)
Putting your happiness in hands of another is the biggest mistake one can do 🙏
Great work
Thank you! :)
Wow! I came into this video with a pretty solid idea about marriage and wondering what you could bring to support the thumbnail's claim. You brought some very solid points and explained them very well, and you've even changed my view in less than 7 minutes. That's probably the first time in my LIFE that such a thing happened!
Hey Luke, I deeply appreciate your comments on all my videos, and especially this one means the world to me, thank you a lot! I also take your comments as a kind reminder to make videos again - I am not a full-time creator, as of now I am not even a part-time creator because I haven't had (or have not taken) the time to make any videos in the past year, but I promise to do so in the near future. Thanks again for your comments, they have made my day! :)
I'm not a super traditional guy. I even tried polyamory for a few years.
In my opinion the current purpose of marriage is to raise children. Or rather divorce is to protect children.
What I mean is, who gets custody of the children gets messier without the legal contract of marriage.
I'd rather the government stay out of marriage, and our divorce laws are flawed, but I think it still has value.
I also think despite high divorce rates and cheaters, marriage does create more of a psychological commitment to stick around to raise the children. Children do better with two parents. Yes, if the marriage is completely toxic, a split is more healthy. However, minor things that might make you break up when dating, are more likely to be resolved when the difficulty and risks from divorce are involved.
It may not be romantic, but like in the past when marriage was a business contract, I think the contract of saying "hey even if we don't love each other as much, let's TRY to wait to split up until the kids can handle it" is probably a good thing.
I'm trying to be nuanced here. People marry people they realize they completely hate and can't even respect. People get pregnant on accident. Nothings perfect. Still, it's good people continue to associate having kids as something you do after marriage. The goal of marriage is a lifelong commitment. If that idea helps it last long enough for a kid to hit 18, that's fantastic.
its actually pretty common wisdom nowadays that children tend to be happier under divorced parents then those who ought to be divorced, but choose not to for the kids. it makes sense, to me at least. having one parent might make things harder, especially in the financial department, but it sounds a lot better to me than living under two people who are too distracted by their resentment for each other to properly take care of me.
(i should clarify, im aware you addressed that in your comment, im just saying that the marriage wouldnt have to be "completely toxic" for it to have a negative impact on development. the happier my parents are, the happier i am, and i think divorce cases outside of the extreme factor into that.)
I have the same idea to start a essay yt channel, I feel like its definetly possible with enough heart. You're swiss too, right? I may hit you up after my kanti, if thats alright!
Close enough, I'm German :D Sure, hit me up! There is an email address in the About section of my channel, or just contact me here :)
What happened to all the other videos? :((
If you don't want them on this channel, please upload them somewhere else, I thought they were really valuable!
bump
please video essay daddy, I miss them
If you are considering marriage:
Please,
get a pre-nup!
Agreed! It might seem unromantic or threatening to consider the eventuality of a divorce while the love is still young and functional, yet I think in a good relationship one should be able to discuss such matters with the partner.
This video draws no conclusions and seems based only upon the most superficial observations with little understanding of the human institution of marriage other than historical points. My comment is insufficient to fully address this video's short-comings but I will offer these small observations:
1. It is a mistake to judge the institution of marriage by its short-term gains, failure rates, cultural differences, perceptions by young people, popular notions, modern music, various contractual obligations, etc. This is like handing a very complicated tool to a novice and not expect that they will hurt themselves or ruin the project. The marriage relationship requires training, skills practice and mentoring from a wise experienced elder/parent/grandparent who has been long-married successfully.
2. Here is an analogy if you have the patience: Think of marriage from the perspective of a wine maker. It's true that eating grapes right off the vine and drinking grape juice is enjoyable. But they must be consumed quickly before they spoil. But the true capacity of the grapes is shown from making wine. To make wine requires time, experience, the right tools, and lots of patience. But wine can be far more enjoyable than mere juice, it more highly prized and valuable -- some bottles commanding prices of hundreds of dollars. And wine can be kept for years and decades. In fact, properly bottled and stored, it only gets better with age.
The point is that the true valuable, satisfying, and sustaining -- real -- aspects of marriage only come with time, maturity and experience. And the proper training from an experienced winemaker. But since many people enter into marriage knowing only the superficial childlike juice, they are disappointed and discouraged when the juice spoils so quickly, and they move on to the next glass. Drinking glass after glass never knowing that there is another way. There are very few experienced and wise parents available to teach this to their children because the parents are divorced themselves (knowing only juice themselves), and modern culture teaches that divorce is just a learning experience and that marriage is outdated. Marriage is embracing your humanity in a very basic way. But, like many other aspects of our modern culture, we work against our better interest. It is not human contracts and legalities that successfully bind a couple together. It is "the-two-shall-become-one" that reveals the true nature of marriage.
One final analogy would be eating an apple. For thousands of years, man understood how to plant an apple and grow an apple tree. Man knew how to pick and eat an apple. He knew that it satisfied his hunger and was enjoyable. That was it. Now, modern science has learned some aspects of nutrition and digestion. But don't make the mistake of thinking that we fully understand the workings of nutrition and digestion even though we can describe some of the process. It remains a mystery as to how the apple becomes part of us. The same is true with marriage. We may understand some of the more visible and obvious aspects. But that is all.
What happened? Why don't you make more videos?
Wait modern society has social values?
What about children?
Really disappointed this video didn't cover marriage's effects on children.
Children! The only thing marriage is about today is raising children together, something compeletely missed in this video.
Same sex couples probably uphold the other pillars of traditional marriage more so than opposite sex couples.
Why do you think so?
watching this as a queer-ass queer gal who long threw away all sense of tradition and normalcy in my relationships, im just thinking "yup, i know this one" the whole time lol
Rip channel
Well, I haven't given up on it, so I hope the RIP is only temporarily :D
@@VallisYT fosho. Want advice? I think I know why you aren’t getting many views
@@poopeyinmymouth You mean advice beyond just to upload videos? Sure, hit me up :)
@@VallisYT make minecraft gameplay videos 💀⛏
@@RenderingUser 💀
This is off topic, but due to your apparent thoroughness when applying critical thinking and high rate of engagement with video comments, I figure it's worth presenting to you.
I noticed when referring to a hypothetical individual, you used "he or she." While it seems to match the formal tone of your content and is labeled by many as "grammatically correct" due to some arbitrary rules, it's universally better to replace "he or she" with "they." They, them, their, and theirs pronouns have been used in the English language to refer to a singular person of unknown gender for centuries (source below), so those who label it as "grammatically incorrect" have no grounds for doing so. The use of "he or she" on the other hand, has two glaring problems. The first is that it is inefficient, adding unnecessary syllables and letters to a sentence that could easily be shortened. The second and far more important problem is that it's exclusive. There are people who do not fit into a strict binary understanding of gender and are not referred to as "he" or as "she." When you refer to someone as "he or she" in an attempt to include all possible people, you actually fail to do so by leaving out non-binary people. Attempting to include gender minorities by adding them to the list of pronouns (i.e., saying "he or she or they or ey or...") would just make the sentence RIDICULOUSLY inefficient, so you might as well just use the neutral singular "they."
History of singular they: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#:~:text=The%20singular%20they%20has%20been%20used%20in%20everyday,century%2C%20it%20has%20gained%20currency%20in%20official%20contexts.
Hey, thank you so much for your comment! English isn't my first language, and this video is two years old, so at the time I probably wasn't aware of the singular they. Somewhere between then and now, however, I became aware of it, and by now I appreciate its simplicity and really enjoy using it! Thank you for your thoughtful comment, your explanation, and your non-confrontational tone, I really appreciate it! :)
@@VallisYT You're very welcome! And your thoughtful and respectful response has probably made my day with its contrast to the hostility people frequently display in response to being informed about queerness.
⚰️?
What do you mean?
First
Congrats