Monday, April 18, 2011
as much as i loathe the fact that our local stations are making big news of it, such consistent coverage of the royal wedding has led me to question exactly how our culture defines courtship. Everyone keeps referring to the period of time prior to the prince's and kate middleton's nuptials as a "courtship".
Isn't courtship the act or period of seeking the love of another with the intent to marry? Should it still count as courtship if the people have been in a relationship for the past 8 years (with cohabitation comprising 5 of those years)?
It's kinda weird to see a word like "courtship" being used to describe the very recent (past 20-30 years or so?) cultural phenomenon of what i think is best described as probationary marriage.
I call it probationary marriage because it looks JUST LIKE marriage, but it lacks the accountability that marriage brings along with it (kinda).
Maybe it is the case that marriage is seen as less and less relevant in our culture. Maybe it is because we have all seen how terribly marriage can end. Maybe we place high value on variety and fail to see how such a thing can be achieved when we will be waking up next to the same person every day for the rest of our days. Maybe the emphasis that our culture places on education, career and achievement has relegated marriage to 4th place.
That fact (4th place marriage) plays itself out weekly in the lives of my peers. Not many of my peers (outside of church) are married and not many of them live their lives as though they would like to be married (though they may verbally express a desire to do so).
let's face it: casual romantic encounters will not lead to the kind of relationships that lead to marriage.
but now i'm off topic.