INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS
(Theories of Attraction & Mate Selection)
Unit 3 – Chapter 7
(Continued)
Courtship
• In societies that permit free-choice mate
selection, courtship allows individuals to win
the affection of those to whom they are
attracted
• In courtship rituals in all societies, men display
their resources to show they have the
potential to be good providers and women
display the qualities that make them sexually
desirable and nurturing
Courtship
• In Canada, courtship is a term from the past
that no longer applies to relationships in the
21st century
• Courtship rituals in North America have
evolved over the last two centuries and have
varied according to social class
Courtship
• In early Canada, young, middle-class women
might invite men to call on them when they
were “at home”
• A young man would leave his calling card if
the young woman was not seeing visitors, in
the hope that he would be invited back
• Families would make discreet inquiries about
the social and economic suitability of the
callers
Courtship
• A young woman, with her mother as
chaperone, might receive several visitors who
would understand that they were expected to
compete for her affection
• Later, as a sign that she had
made her choice, the young
woman might be left alone
with one man
Courtship
• The young couple would be tucked into bed
with a “bundling board” between them so
that they could have private conversations
without sexual contact
• However, it was reported that
during the 1700s, about one third
of brides were pregnant on their
wedding day
20th Century Courtship
• In Canada, during the 20th century, courtship
evolved into the informal social invention of
dating
• Early in the century, young people met at
church or community events and went out
together to socials in groups
• By the 1920s, men began to take
the initiative by asking women
out and by organizing and paying
for the activity
20th Century Courtship
• Since women could accept or reject the
invitations, the choice of activity and the
amount of money spent indicated to them the
social and economic resources the men had to
offer
• In the 1930s, “going steady”
meant a couple had an exclusive
relationship but were not
necessarily discussing marriage
20th Century Courtship
• As a result of the consumer society and the
growing affluence of young people in the
1950s and 1960s, couples were able to spend
money on entertaining recreational activities
and dating became an opportunity to spend
time together for pleasure and romance
• Teenagers began dating
earlier and it became a
common recreation during
later adolescences
20th Century Courtship
• By the 1950s the Western ideal was that
dating would lead to falling love and becoming
a couple
• There was less awareness that it was a process
of choosing a suitable marriage partner
21st Century Courtship
• Many young couples no longer date in the
formalized way of their parents’ generation
• The use of expressions such as “hooking up”
or “seeing someone” to describe a
relationship suggests a more casual approach
to forming a couple relationship
• Some couples consider cohabitation to be part
of the mate-selection process, while
others feel that cohabitation is an
alternative to marriage
21st Century Courtship
• There appears to have been a shift from
competing to win someone’s affection to
being selective about what the other has to
offer for the type of relationship desired
• Many individuals who are ready to marry find
that their field of eligible partners that have
not already been rejected may be quite
limited
21st Century Courtship
• It is becoming more common for individuals to
initiate some kind of arrangement and enlist
the help of others to find potential partners
for them
Ex. Matchmakers & online dating
21st Century Courtship
21st Century Courtship
21st Century Courtship
Speed Dating
1. Write down 10 questions you would ask
someone on the first date.
2. You will have about 5 minutes for each “date”
3. When the lights dim, rate how compatible
you think you are with your date.
1=not compatible, 10=very compatible
4. Move onto your next “date”
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• The preference for free-choice marriage in
North America suggests that dating
experience leads to greater marital success
• Bernard Murstein’s Market Experience
Perspective suggested that dating was
effective because it enabled individuals to
learn to relate to another person and to judge
character so that they would be able to
determine personal qualities they desired in a
marriage partner
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• Bernard Murstein explained the relationships
among dating, social homogamy
and social exchange as a multistep
process
• He used the analogy of sifting to suggest that
individuals pass their dates through a series of
“filters” to screen out unacceptable marriage
partners and to select those who are similar to
themselves
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• As the relationship becomes more serious and
the individuals get to know each other, the
filters become finer until only one person
passes through it for readiness to marry
Murstein’s Filter Theory
Field of Eligibles
Propinquity Filter
Attraction Filter
Homogamy Filter
Compatiblity Filter
Trial Filter
Decision
Filter
Marriage
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• Martin King Whyte tested the hypothesis that
dating experiences lead to successful
marriages by conducting extensive
interviews about dating with couples
in Detroit
• The results of his study found no correlation
between dating experience, length of dating,
engagement, degree of premarital sexual
activity and marital success
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• Whyte argues against Murstein’s Market
Experience Perspective by explaining that
mate selection is not like buying a car, since
you cannot “test drive” various partners at the
same time
• If you decide on one you tried before, they
might have moved on to someone else and
not be available
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• In free-choice mate selection as it is practiced
through dating, you have to decide “yes” or
“no” to one person at a time
• The fact that marriages are slightly less
successful with more dating experience could
also suggest that it increases an individual’s
expectations and makes it more difficult for
the person to make a choice or to feel
satisfied in a relationship
Mate Selection & Marital Success
• Dating is not an indicator of marital success,
but love is
• The 2nd conclusion of Whyte’s Detroit study is
that being in love when you marry is the best
indicator of marital success
Stages of Marriage
• Although early marriages usually live up to
people’s expectations at first, many couples
become disappointed because marriage gets
more difficult during the first 5 years
• There are 3 predictable stages of a marriage
Stages of Marriage
1) Relationships are romantic, warm and
respectful, focusing on exploration, sexual
attraction and the idealization of the partner.
Individuals build self-esteem as they try to
develop the relationship that suits their life
structure.
2) Conflict arises as individuals become more
demanding to meet their own needs. This
results in instability in the relationship and
requires both partners to change their
behaviours. Individuals feel let down
because the relationship is less rewarding.
Stages of Marriage
• The key to surviving Stage 2 is to recognize
that being honest about one’s own needs
develops intimacy within the relationship and
enables the partners to develop reciprocal
roles to meet the needs of each other and of
the relationship
• Discussing with one’s partner how to solve
problems reflects mutual interdependence
and a commitment to the relationship
Stages of Marriage
3) Couples compromise and negotiate a
relationship that meets their needs as well as
possible. The relationship becomes more
realistic, mature and stable.
• Relationships were much improved if they
were able to achieve Stage 3
Stages of Marriage
• At each stage, individuals are transformed as
they respond to their partner and adjust to
the more flexible roles they play in the
maturing relationship
• Commitment to the relationship, essential
for adjusting the relationship, is less evident
in cohabitation
Arranged Marriages
• In the past and in many societies today, the
selection of a mate or life partner, was
considered too important to be left to young
and inexperienced individuals
• In collectivist societies, marriage is seen as an
alliance between families because the children
of that union are the grand children of both
families
Arranged Marriages
• When families place a higher value on family
and culture than on individual need in
collectivist societies, and expect close family
interaction, the choice of a spouse who will fit
into the family is important
• Some societies that believe divorce is harmful
to children, parents and the extended family
prefer arranged marriages, since they remove
the complications of romantic love, sexual
attraction and recreational dating from mate
selection
Arranged Marriages
• Some religions teach that parents have a
sacred duty to ensure that their sons and
daughters have a good marriage
• Since most parents wish their sons and
daughters to have happy and lasting marriages
and to pass on their cultural heritage
to their children, social homogamy is
the basis of mate selection in arranged
marriages
Arranged Marriages
• In cultures where arranged marriage is the
custom, parents are expected to ensure that
their sons and daughters approve of the
partner who has been selected for them
• Arranged marriage should not be confused
with forced marriage, where young men and
women – or children – are forced into
marriage against their will, it is customary now
for the individuals to have an opportunity to
get to know each other before the marriage
takes place
Arranged Marriages
• Perhaps arranged marriages are more durable
because the parents made wiser choices of
partners
• On the other hand, individuals might make a
stronger commitment to marriage when it is a
formal arrangement between families and in
the community
Arranged Marriages
• Although it is not clear why the divorce rate is
lower in arranged marriages, couples who
have similar backgrounds are more likely to
manage their shared resources efficiently and
with less conflict, and to raise children more
easily according to their cultural expectations
• The expectation that love will develop
after marriage seems to be the reality
for couples in arranged marriages
Intermarriage
• Intermarriage or heterogamy means
marriage between partners who are
from different social, racial, religious,
ethnic or cultural backgrounds
• Opposite of homogamy
• Intermarriage is more common in Canada’s
urban communities
• There are no restrictions on intermarriage in
Canada
Intermarriage/Heterogamy
• The more successful a society becomes at
raising children to be “colour blind” and in an
environment where diversity and
multiculturalism are the norm, the more likely
it is that young people will meet, be attracted
to and fall in love with someone from a
different background
• The differences, if there are any, between
individuals of different races, religions, or
ethnic backgrounds exist in their personal
family lives
Interracial Couples
• Interracial marriages are the most
visible form of intermarriage
• Canadian couples in interracial unions are more
likely to be cohabiting rather than married
• Interracial couples adjust to marriage as well as
any couple does
• The major challenge of interracial marriage is
raising a biracial child, because it requires that
the couple must first reflect on the role that
race plays in determining their own identities
Interfaith Couples
• Faith, unlike race, is a chosen attribute, as it is
possible to convert to another faith
• Partners in interfaith relationships may have a
similar economic and educational background,
but their family and cultural experiences
might have been quite different
Interfaith Couples
• Couples who respect each other and are
willing to compromise can find ways to share
their lives
• However, individuals from different faith
backgrounds have to choose whether to
compromise some of their beliefs and customs
or to accept their spouse’s beliefs and customs
as well as their own
Interfaith Couples
• The couple must also decide what faith
identity to provide for their children
• Interfaith marriages are more likely to succeed
if at least one partner does not practice their
religion or is willing to convert
Interethnic Couples
• Marriage between individuals of different
ethnic backgrounds is perhaps the most
complex form of heterogamy
• Ethnicity can be a complex mixture of national
and racial heritage, religion and culture
• In Canada, where many people are
“hyphenated Canadians” or have 2 cultures,
self-identification as a member of an ethnic
group suggests that an individual adheres to
the specific value system, family structure and
role expectations that are associated with that
ethnic group
Interethnic Couples
• The major variations among ethnic groups
involve gender roles within marriage and in
the workplace, the independence and
responsibilities of children and the
relationship between the conjugal and
extended family
• Each of these affects how a couple will
negotiate their relationship at each stage
1.
2.
3.
4.
Divide up into 5 groups.
Choose an article.
Read the article with your group.
In your groups come up with a question that
will generate discussion.
5. Be prepared to share your article with the
rest of the class.
Unit 3 Test – Material Covered
1. Chapter 6 Board Notes
2. The Origins of Marriage photocopied package
3. Marriages, Intimate Relationships & Society
(Unit 3 – Chapter 6) Power Point
4. Intimate Relationships (Theories of Attraction
& Mate Selection) Unit 3 - Chapter 7 Power
Point
5. Intimate Relationships (Theories of Attraction
& Mate Selection) Unit 3 - Chapter 7
(Continued) Power Point
Unit 3 Test – Format
Section A:
10 Multiple Choice
Section B:
5 Short Answer Questions