Sex rapport and sexuality dropped the hint on dating. Now comes
time for sex-ridden thoughts and the so-called sexually-charged youth.
The only way forward in sexuality for many means through sex rapport,
but would it be a steady engagement or plain everyday sex?
Among youngsters acquaintanceship and partner choosing follow unequal
cultural patterns. The inhabitants of certain communities, as some
in Asia and Africa, consider love a deterrent to the success of marriage.
To them, life-sharing issues means a lot at stake to be dealt by the
inexperienced youth.
In Japan marriages would be organized by families. Although, with
a hint of interference from the bride and groom. Nonetheless dating
would not exist according to occidental standards, they had the possibility
of refusing to carry out negotiations between families.
In the Far East family stability and the demands of social order
take priority over personal choice. Love is considered an uncontrolled
emotion, capable of causing great damage. Even within certain peoples,
as of India, Myanmar and Singapore, which suffered western influence,
little has changed regarding the old customs of dating and marriage.
In modern western society, theoretically, the individual is entitled
total freedom to choosing a partner. However, since nobody can go
on forever in search for the “soulmate”, innumerous factors arise
that restrict or, somehow, feedback the search-age, ethnicity, social
ranking, type of occupation and even yet location of residence.
Surveys revealed that the vast majority of westernized marriages
take place between people who live in the same city. More precisely,
those born within, at most, roughly 16 km range away from each other.
Hardly ever folks would marry someone from other social class or unequal
cultural level.
By the innumerous researches and studies conducted there may be
established that there are norms that dictate the dating-engagement-marriage
process. Freedom of choice among westerners only hypothetically exists.
The spectrum for probable partners, of whose he/she would choose one
from is, culturally, defined “prior” the decision and choice making.
Why is it so?
The population growth wise of all societies is based on two opposing
powers- the taboo of incest and the ethnocentrism- the tendency to
consider that our customs, moral and values in general are better
than anything else, as of other peoples. The taboo of incest prompts
us to seek for the lifetime partner out of our immediate family environment.
Whenever there is overly praise for values of the social group one
belongs to, or of the groups in function of which the individual establishes
his ideal code of practice, the discrepancies between classes or ethic
groups gain much importance. Hence, color, scholar degree and social
walk, become drawbacks whenever choosing a partner. In every society
these two contradictory tendencies combine themselves in a peculiar
manner. The net result is the existence of a bigger or smaller margin
of freedom for the individuals. Nevertheless, in any given situation,
choice making never strikes entirely by fluke.
So far so much, for the occidental code of practice for marriage,
as well as the “exotic” oriental systems, do not exist by our sheer
whimsical ideas. The excessive evaluation of our own customs may make
us forget that they would appear equally bizarre to elements of other
cultures. The best of it all is that, even with social code, we can
love and being happy.
By Jonatas Dornelles
Anthropologist |
