Grace (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} celestialblendr) wrote,@ 2008-01-30 14:16:00 |
|
Really, I'm helping!
Found this on the back page of a Boston Globe supplement about "things you can do to help the planet" that was in the burn pile the other day.
This woman has a fabulous tongue-in-cheek style, and mostly addresses the way we respond to news that we really want to believe and the rationalizations we make around that, in this case the assertion put forward is that unmarried folk do more to strengthen communities because they have more open social networks.
Single Rules - Why the unmarried are the real do-gooders of the world
By Alison Lobron
November 18, 2007
Every now and then, I hear some news that pleases me so much, I don't care whether it's true. For example, red wine is good for us. Chocolate is, too. And now this: According to two Massachusetts sociologists, being single is better for the world than being married.
It's not just that singles conserve plastic bubble wrap and cardboard boxes by never registering for wedding gifts. It's that we're more community-oriented. While couples, especially childless ones, often focus on their marriage to the exclusion of other social ties, singles spread their energy over a broader sphere. Singles are more likely to help out friends and family. We are also more politically active and more helpful to our elderly parents than our married siblings. The study's authors conclude that while marriage may indeed offer important supports to the two people involved, it may not be the societal bedrock we've long imagined it to be.
My initial reaction was the sort of perverse delight that comes from finding a semi-scientific rationale for one's least admirable feelings. Lately, I've felt grumpy each time I get a wedding invitation, partly because of the anticipated expenses, but mostly because I know I'll have to smile like the third runner-up to Miss America each time someone assures me it will be my turn next. Until I read the study, I was ashamed of these feelings and considered myself a wretched, envious beast. Now, thanks to the study, the grumpiness seems justified.
While marriage has become more inwardly focused in recent years, weddings haven't followed suit. If anything, it seems more is asked of guests than ever before, like multiple gift-giving occasions and destination travel. Yet if the study can be believed, marriage no longer benefits guests personally by broadening our social circle or strengthening community ties, as it did for us once upon a time. When we give the cake platter or the cheese knife, it's no longer on the understanding that we'll be invited over to use it.
My second reaction to the study was one of joyful liberation. I've realized that by staying single, I am automatically making important contributions to the community that offset my beastliness. You know, offsetting, whereby you do something terrible to the environment, like fly around the world in a private jet, and then offset it by planting a sapling in a local park?
The way I see it is, being single is the ultimate offset. I'm contributing to society just by not being married, so I've excused myself from all the suggestions mentioned elsewhere in this issue.
Last month I kept forgetting to wash out the coffee mug I keep at work, so I had to rely on styrofoam. I started to feel guilty, but then I remembered that I'm single and decided I had nothing to worry about. The next weekend, my mother had the flu, and I checked in on her every day. So who can blame me for taking a long, hot bubble bath after bringing her dinner? Let the married folks conserve water!
Perhaps you're thinking my analogies are all wrong, and that I'm comparing locally grown apples to Florida oranges. You're thinking you know community-oriented singles, but you also know ones who sit around drinking coffee from styrofoam cups. You're thinking it's ridiculous to suggest that singleness automatically makes anyone an upstanding member of the community. You're right. But perhaps it's no more ridiculous than the common assertion that marriage is automatically beneficial to the community. Marriage is no doubt beneficial by some measures and less so by others. Some couples will use it to strengthen community and family ties - I'm lucky to know a lot of that variety - while others will withdraw into themselves.
In other words, when it comes to one's impact on the community and the world, marital status probably matters much less than personality and inclination. That's a conclusion that may negate the study, and that's OK by me - as long as nobody negates the good news about red wine and chocolate.
Alison Lobron lives in Cambridge. Send comments to coupling@globe.com.
(Original panel paper - Marriage Reduces Social Ties Discussion Paper for Council on Contemporary Families--1/2/2007)
Found this on the back page of a Boston Globe supplement about "things you can do to help the planet" that was in the burn pile the other day.
This woman has a fabulous tongue-in-cheek style, and mostly addresses the way we respond to news that we really want to believe and the rationalizations we make around that, in this case the assertion put forward is that unmarried folk do more to strengthen communities because they have more open social networks.
Single Rules - Why the unmarried are the real do-gooders of the world
By Alison Lobron
November 18, 2007
Every now and then, I hear some news that pleases me so much, I don't care whether it's true. For example, red wine is good for us. Chocolate is, too. And now this: According to two Massachusetts sociologists, being single is better for the world than being married.
It's not just that singles conserve plastic bubble wrap and cardboard boxes by never registering for wedding gifts. It's that we're more community-oriented. While couples, especially childless ones, often focus on their marriage to the exclusion of other social ties, singles spread their energy over a broader sphere. Singles are more likely to help out friends and family. We are also more politically active and more helpful to our elderly parents than our married siblings. The study's authors conclude that while marriage may indeed offer important supports to the two people involved, it may not be the societal bedrock we've long imagined it to be.
My initial reaction was the sort of perverse delight that comes from finding a semi-scientific rationale for one's least admirable feelings. Lately, I've felt grumpy each time I get a wedding invitation, partly because of the anticipated expenses, but mostly because I know I'll have to smile like the third runner-up to Miss America each time someone assures me it will be my turn next. Until I read the study, I was ashamed of these feelings and considered myself a wretched, envious beast. Now, thanks to the study, the grumpiness seems justified.
While marriage has become more inwardly focused in recent years, weddings haven't followed suit. If anything, it seems more is asked of guests than ever before, like multiple gift-giving occasions and destination travel. Yet if the study can be believed, marriage no longer benefits guests personally by broadening our social circle or strengthening community ties, as it did for us once upon a time. When we give the cake platter or the cheese knife, it's no longer on the understanding that we'll be invited over to use it.
My second reaction to the study was one of joyful liberation. I've realized that by staying single, I am automatically making important contributions to the community that offset my beastliness. You know, offsetting, whereby you do something terrible to the environment, like fly around the world in a private jet, and then offset it by planting a sapling in a local park?
The way I see it is, being single is the ultimate offset. I'm contributing to society just by not being married, so I've excused myself from all the suggestions mentioned elsewhere in this issue.
Last month I kept forgetting to wash out the coffee mug I keep at work, so I had to rely on styrofoam. I started to feel guilty, but then I remembered that I'm single and decided I had nothing to worry about. The next weekend, my mother had the flu, and I checked in on her every day. So who can blame me for taking a long, hot bubble bath after bringing her dinner? Let the married folks conserve water!
Perhaps you're thinking my analogies are all wrong, and that I'm comparing locally grown apples to Florida oranges. You're thinking you know community-oriented singles, but you also know ones who sit around drinking coffee from styrofoam cups. You're thinking it's ridiculous to suggest that singleness automatically makes anyone an upstanding member of the community. You're right. But perhaps it's no more ridiculous than the common assertion that marriage is automatically beneficial to the community. Marriage is no doubt beneficial by some measures and less so by others. Some couples will use it to strengthen community and family ties - I'm lucky to know a lot of that variety - while others will withdraw into themselves.
In other words, when it comes to one's impact on the community and the world, marital status probably matters much less than personality and inclination. That's a conclusion that may negate the study, and that's OK by me - as long as nobody negates the good news about red wine and chocolate.
Alison Lobron lives in Cambridge. Send comments to coupling@globe.com.
(Original panel paper - Marriage Reduces Social Ties Discussion Paper for Council on Contemporary Families--1/2/2007)
