Abstract
The vast body of literature that highlights the increasing fragility of marriage fails to explore the effect of this fragility on the meanings people attach to marriage. During the last twenty-five to thirty years the instrumental and normative reasons for marriage—legal protection, societal support and enforcement, the social rejection of alternatives to marriage—have largely disappeared in the Netherlands. This study focuses on how young adults, raised after the most dramatic changes in marital practices took place, talk about the meanings of marriage in the context of building intimate relationships. In-depth interviews with fifteen heterosexual young adults (aged twenty-one to thirty) who were in a committed relationship showed that they talked about marriage in four different ways. They (1) minimized the meaning of marriage, (2) talked about the idea of marriage to ascertain commitment, (3) defined marriage as the ideal relationship, and/or (4) saw marriage as a jinx. Contradictions between these modes of talk revealed feelings of ambivalence and anxiety associated with a desire for commitment. The emotionally charged meanings associated with marriage anchored marriage in interviewees' imaginations, enabling the institution to retain its hold even though social pressures to marry are limited and legal substitutes to marriage exist.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Bakker, E. (1996). Alle vormen van relatie moeten toegankelijk zijn voor iedereen (All forms of relationships should be accessible to everybody). De Volkskrant.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995). The normal chaos of Love. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Berger, P., & Kellner, H. (1985 [1964]). Marriage and the constitution of reality: An exercise in the microsociology of knowledge. In G. Handel (Ed.), Psychosocial interior of the family, third ed. (pp. 3-20). New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
Briggs, J. L. (1991). Mazes of meaning: The exploration of individuality in culture and of culture through individual constructs. In B. Boyer & R. Boyer (Eds.), The psychoanalytic study of society, vol. 16 (pp. 111-153). Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS). (1997). Statistisch jaarboek 1997. Voorburg: Heerlen.
De Jong, A., & de Graaf, A. (1999). De huwelijksconjunctuur: Grotere pluriformiteit in de levenslopen van jongeren (Marriage trends: Greater multiformity in the life courses of young adults). Index: Special Bevolking, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 6-7.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Giesen, D. (1999). Juridische arrangementen. In M. Kalmijn, W. Bernasco, & J. Weesie (Eds.), Huwelijks-en samenwoonrelaties in Nederland: De organisatie van afhankelijkheid (pp. 55-80). Assen, the Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
Hackstaff, K. B. (1994). Divorce culture: A breach in gender relations. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California at Berkeley.
Harmsen, C., & Latten, J. (1998). Snelle start partner-registratie (Quick start to partnership-registration). Index, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, October 26-27.
Hochschild, A. R. (1998). The sociology of emotion as a way of seeing. In G. Bendelow & S. J. Williams (Eds.), Emotions in social life: Critical themes and contemporary issues (pp. 3-15). London: Routledge.
Hooghiemstra, E. (1997). Demografische ontwikkelingen (Demographic developments). In M. Niphuis-Nell, Sociale atlas van de vrouw deel 4: Veranderingen in de primaire leefsfeer (The social atlas of women part 4: Changes in the primary life sphere) (pp.17-51). Rijswijk: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
Keilman, N. (1987). Recent trends in family and household composition in Europe. European Journal of Population, 3, 297-325.
Liefbroer, A. C. (1991). The choice between a married or unmarried first union by young adults. European Journal of Population, 7, 273-298.
Ramsø y, N. R. (1994). Non-marital cohabitation and change in norms: The case of Norway. Acta Sociologica, 37, 23-37.
Scott, M. B., & Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33, 46-62.
Sociaal Cultureel Plan Bureau (SCP). (1994). Sociaal en Cultureel Rapport 1994. Rijswijk.
Sociaal Cultureel Plan Bureau (SCP). (1996). Sociaal en Cultureel Rapport 1996. Rijswijk.
Van Praag, C. S., & Niphuis-Nell, M. (1997). Het gezinsrapport (Rapport on the family). Rijswijk: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
Wouters, C. (1987). Developments in the behavioural codes between the sexes: The formalization of informalization in the Netherlands, 1930-85. Theory, Culture and Society, 4, 405-427.
Wouters, C. (1990). Formalisering en informalisering: Twee fasen in civilisatieprocessen (Formalization and informalization: Two phases in civilizing processes). In C. Wouters, Van minnen en sterven (Of loving and dying). Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Bert Bakker.
Zwaan, T. (1993). Recente transities in huwelijk, gezin en levenscyclus (Recent transitions in marriage, nuclear family and life cycle). In T. Zwaan (Ed.), Familie, huwelijk en gezin in West-Europa (Family, marriage and nuclear family in Western Europe) (pp.241-264). Amsterdam/Heerlen: Boom/Open Universiteit.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Korteweg, A.C. It Won't Change a Thing: The Meanings of Marriage in the Netherlands. Qualitative Sociology 24, 507–525 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012245230783
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012245230783