It seems that Generation Y has mistakenly taken its inspiration for matrimony
from the short-lived marriages of Hollywood celebrities. Although many of
them are in happy relationships now, their early attempts at marriage were
famed for their brevity. Take Angelina Jolie and Billy Bob Thornton – they
managed two years. Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries lasted three. Renée
Zellweger and Kenny Chesney quit after six months. Till death do us part has
been rewritten for the millennial generation: you either like it or leg it.
The young and in love now want to beta-test their marriage in much the same
way as software is put through a last stage of testing before release. In
the spirit of all things digital, marriage is seen as an iterative
experience, where you learn what you can, adapt, then nimbly move on.
According to a new US survey reported in Time magazine, 43 per cent of
millennials – those aged 18 to 34 – said they would support a marriage model
that involved a two-year trial, at which point the union could be either
formalised (like a decree nisi but in reverse) or dissolved, with no divorce
required.
The survey showed that 36 per cent fancied a “real-estate” marriage, where
licences would be handed out for five-, 10- or 30-year terms, like
mortgages. And 21 per cent liked the idea of a “presidential” model, where
marriage would last four years – automatically renewable to eight – after
which you get to vote for a new spouse.
What’s clear about marriage à la mode millénaire is that young people want to
stress-test their relationships in a real-time setting, without committing
to them forever, and without prejudice or financial punishment. They see
marriage – that old-fashioned contract – as a product to be worked with and
improved upon, often through the prism of the online experience.
Think of it this way: millennials love a start-up, but if the plan doesn’t
work, there’s no shame in starting again from scratch.
Jessica Bennett, contributing editor for Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In foundation,
puts it well when she explains, light-heartedly, how she beta-tested her
relationship. “It began with a platform migration (a cross-country move) and
a bandwidth challenge (cohabitation in a 450 sq ft apartment),” she
writes.
“There was a false start (botched marriage proposal). Then, an emergency
de-glitching (couples therapy). We tried to take the product public before
we were ready (I wrote about our relationship). And then, finally, we
abandoned launch. There were simply too many bugs.”
So far, so modern. But is this attitude to marriage really new – or simply a
way to have your wedding cake and eat it? Because, while many 18-30s may
want to dump the divorce lawyers and arguments over who keeps the cat,
they’re not so keen on missing out on the Big Day.
Hence the #hashtagwedding, which allows strangers to view your nuptials via
Twitter; the wedding selfie (Cheryl Cole showed off her sparkler from new
husband Jean-Bernard Fernandez-Versini via Instagram); the sponsored
nuptials; and the viral wedding, as experienced by James and Sarah Walk from
Ohio, whose pics from Iceland sent the world’s affianced into a frenzy last
week.
Perhaps surprisingly, divorce lawyer Ayesha Vardag is not impressed with the
idea of couples planning to marry and divorce over and over. “The idea that
anyone would knowingly wed without any permanent intentions trivialises
marriage,” she says. “Marriage is a special thing. Of course, one shouldn’t
rush into it either. A two‑year trial period is sensible. But, unless
you have specific religious concerns, what’s wrong with cohabiting [instead
of tying the knot]? If you want paperwork, you can have a basic cohabiting
agreement drawn up, throw a big party and get a glamorous dress to wear to
celebrate.”
Diana Parkinson, a Harley Street relationship counsellor, finds the idea of
beta-testing marriages “terrifying”. She says: “We are moving away from
humanity towards being automatons. We’re losing the ability to relate to
each other. This is an idea about short-term contracts, when what we are all
really looking for is long-term security and comfort.
“There would be no time for a relationship to grow or evolve – not living in
the present; just terror and a focus on the ending. Where would the room for
love be?”
She’s right – can you imagine the pressure of being in a relationship with an
automatic sell-by date? You’d have to be 100 per cent perfect during testing
in case you got the boot. Not even the odd gripe about dirty socks or an
overbearing mother-in-law. I doubt this is quite what Generation Y has in
mind.
The figures don’t back up the theory of the marital test bed, either. The
latest data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show an increase
in nuptials in 2012, with 262,240 taking place, up 5.3 per cent from 2011.
But most are first marriages, with only 15 per cent (38,320) remarriages for
both parties, and 19 per cent remarriages for one partner. Meanwhile,
despite a small rise of 0.5 per cent between 2011 and 2012, divorce is still
down from its mid-Nineties peak. Interestingly, almost 50 per cent occur in
the first 10 years of marriage, with most between the fourth and eighth
wedding anniversaries. Not exactly the efficient two years that modern young
things might plan for.
So is there anything in this beta test for bliss – or is the millennials’
model doomed to fail? Parkinson says test-driving a relationship may appeal
because it reduces the risk of individuals making the same mistake over and
over. “So many of us don’t see what we have really got until it is too late.
We are in a throwaway society. And I think this idea of beta-testing one
spouse after another is indicative of that.”
But, she adds, that doesn’t make short-term love a blueprint for wedded bliss:
“Marriage should be different; it should be about warmth and empathy.
Where’s the talk of love, of children?”
Vardag agrees. “Marriage is a choice with financial, legal and property
implications, but with real spiritual and relationship dimensions, too.
While it is important that there is an escape route in divorce, when you get
married you should be intending it to be permanent. The essence is
commitment – the permanence is fundamental to the promise.”
Perhaps the best advice for our young brides-and-grooms-to-be comes from
screen legend Paul Newman – famously married for 50 years to Joanne Woodward
– who said: “We are very, very different people and yet somehow we fed off
those varied differences and, instead of separating us, it has made the
whole bond a lot stronger.”
There you have it: beta-testing for life which can benefit the whole marriage.
Not just one picky half of it.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.
(via Telegraph)