Why People Need to Get Married and Have Families, According to a Sociologist

Sandy Millar/Unsplash

Brad Wilcox, professor of sociology and the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, recently wrote the book “Get Married: Why Americans Should Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization.” In an era where divorces are up and marriages are down, Mr. Wilcox’s book is a countercultural work. The author, who is also a professor, husband, and father, sat down for a discussion about his new book and why marriage is the best decision you can make.

American Essence: It seems marriage is often portrayed as a feat of strength rather than a chance for fulfillment. Do you think one of the problems is that we label marriage and parenthood as a difficulty with some benefits instead of a benefit with some difficulties? How do we change the view of marriage to make it as appealing as it is in your book?

Mr. Wilcox: The point of the book in part is underlining that marriage is a good thing and family is a good thing, and that more Americans should embrace them. But also recognize that they are super hard to do.

I think right now, especially when it comes to having kids, people often see all the negative pieces to being a parent. They see how it is going to disrupt their sleep or make it hard for them to go out to a nice restaurant or travel to the beach or mountains. But they don’t appreciate the way in which babies are cute and the incredible expressions of love, affection, and devotion that kids can convey to their parents. I’ve got twins, for instance, and one of them, every night—my 14-year-old daughter—will come and find me wherever I am in the house and give me a kiss on the forehead or a hug. Here I am, mid-life, and that is an incredibly meaningful part of my day. Had I not made the effort in my 20s to date and pursue their mother, that probably would not have happened.

They’re twins, so when they were little, they were extraordinarily hard just to take care of. We had adopted a bunch of kids, so it was total bedlam. I was completely stressed out, as it was during the recession. So for me and my wife, it was not a happy moment for our marriage or our lives in general back in 2009. But we persevered, and now we have the fruits of that, which are two lovely daughters who are doing extraordinarily well, are affectionate, thoughtful, and engaging on so many different levels. I’m not sure that people know that part of the whole parenthood piece enough today.

To become a good parent requires much sacrifice, but it also comes with great rewards. StefaNikolic/Getty Images

I wish we could think of marriage and family as we do of being a great basketball player, or gymnast, or fill-in-the-blank. People know it can be hard to train to be a good athlete, but there is something so joyful in learning how to excel in a sport. No one is surprised that to be particularly good at a sport requires a lot of sacrifice. It’s the same thing for marriage. To be a decent spouse, a great spouse especially, and a decent or great parent, requires some measure of sacrifice. The more you put into it, the more you get out of it.

The love and devotion that children express can bring much joy and fulfillment to parents' lives. Caia Image/Getty Images

AE: You note in your book that marriage among working-class Americans, which makes up the majority of Americans, is in a free fall. Why is that?

Mr. Wilcox: There are a number of factors in play. It is worth noting that religious attendance has fallen [more] among the working class, which are Americans without a degree, than it has for college-educated Americans. Another factor that is hugely important is that we have seen declines in male work, primarily among males without degrees. We know that full-time work is a big predictor for getting married in the first place and staying married in the second place. The erosion of stable, full-time work among the working class is a big factor.

There has been a broader array of cultural shifts away from marriage. When American mores around sex, marriage, and family shifted in the ’60s and ’70s, everyone was affected, but I think the working class and poor Americans were especially affected by the normative changes. Also, [this is] partly because of our laws and policies. The shift to no-fault divorce is a factor that has undercut people’s faith in the reliability of marriage. I’m not saying that we should go back to the 1950s’ model of marriage law, but the way we handle divorce has undercut a lot of people’s, especially men’s, faith in marriage.

Social mores about marriage and family have changed drastically since the 1960s. Burke/Triolo Productions/Getty Images

I think many of our policies and programs have made us less likely to look at marriage as an important financial foundation. Instead, we look toward the government as the primary or backup source of financial support.

It is also true that if you enter and treat marriage in a cavalier or self-centered way, then you are most likely to fail at marriage, in terms of both divorce and being reasonably happy. Marriage is most likely to flourish when each spouse is trying to be generous toward the other.

AE: You mention the “Me” decade of the ’70s and how pop culture influenced a selfish revolution. How does pop culture influence the individual? And do you think we give it enough credit or too much credit for the influence it has on society as a whole?

Mr. Wilcox: Pop culture both leads and follows shifts in the larger society. I grew up in the ’70s. Marlo Thomas recorded “Free to Be… You and Me.” One of the songs the album had was “The Sun and the Moon,” which said, “I think I’d rather be the sun that shines so bold and bright, than be the moon that only glows with someone else’s light.” Here you have a pretty crystalline articulation of a much more me-centered way of approaching life and relationships. It’s part and parcel for why we saw marriage rates fall and divorce rates surge in the 1970s.

There were books in the ’70s, too. Books like “The Courage to Divorce” that basically gave people a reason or a license to divorce, and put a premium on their individual desires and projects rather than on their spouse and their family.

The messages are formative and shape people’s ideals, preferences, and expectations. So, for example, the soul-mate myth articulated in novels, movies, and songs is this idea that love and marriage are about having an intense emotional connection with someone, and if somehow that connection becomes attenuated or fraught or difficult or challenging, then maybe you really aren’t in love and maybe you shouldn’t stay married to this person. It gave people a false portrait of what to expect, and those expectations were more likely to be dashed.

In my book, I talk about how a family-first marriage is about romance, but it’s also about recognizing that marriage is a source of financial security, a source of social solidarity, a way to be with and for your kin, and is especially for the welfare of any children that you have.

Marriage requires that both parties put family first before themselves. fizkes/Shutterstock

AE: Changes to the institution of marriage during the modern era can be compared to how the institution of government began to change with 18th- and 19th-century independence movements around the world. Much like how world governments have struggled with handling societal independence movements, 20th-century changes in the family have resulted in individual independence movements where men and women still struggle with what is the ultimate social contract of marriage. Has this revolution of mutual independence created a deterrent to marriage?

Mr. Wilcox: In many ways, yes. In one way, people are independent-minded, which makes them less inclined to date with an eye to marriage. Once they are married, they are less likely to enter with the full spirit of communion. One concrete example of that is we are seeing more people keeping separate checking accounts, which is more of a me-first approach to money rather than a we-first approach. What people don’t realize is that marriage is one of those institutions where going all in and embracing its communitarian character is really the root to success for most people. When it comes to joint accounts, for instance, it’s couples who have joint accounts who are more likely to be happily and stably married.

I think a problem in America today is that we don’t recognize that dependence is a fundamental feature of the human condition. If you put too much of a premium on your own independence and not on your dependence, in a healthy way, then you’re liable to wind up in a place where there is a lot of resentments and recriminations, and not enough sense of solidarity.

AE: Why does faith seem to be central to a successful marriage?

Mr. Wilcox: Liberals are happier when they’re married, and secular Americans are happier when they are married. So it’s not like marriage is only for religious people or conservatives. But it is also true that religious Americans are more likely to be happily married―they’re more likely to be married in the first place―more likely to be stably married, and they have more sex than secular couples nowadays, which is a new thing. Striking, really.

For random reasons, religious couples are doing comparatively well on the marriage front today, and that’s because of at least three things I call “norms, networks, and no-mos”: These couples are more likely to hear about the norms of fidelity and forgiveness, which tend to foster stronger marriages and help couples navigate the challenges of married life more successfully; they are more likely to be embedded in social networks that value marriage and family; and “no-mos” is the sense that there is a spiritual force superintending your life that is helpful in making sense of the suffering and sacrifices that are required in marriage and family.

Americans with faith are more likely to be happily married. Larisa Stefanuyk/iStock/Getty Images

AE: To those who think they are doing themselves a great service by not getting married, how do you convince them otherwise?

Mr. Wilcox: One of the points that [social influencer] Andrew Tate makes is that he thinks men are more likely to thrive financially if they don’t get married. Of course, if they get a divorce, then that can tank their finances, at least in the short term. That’s a legitimate risk to acknowledge. But for men and women who are stably married, there is no question that they are in a much better spot.

Married men are about 50 percent less likely to be poor compared to their unmarried peers, controlling for factors like education and race. Women are about 80 percent less likely.

When men and women are in their 50s, they have about 10 times the assets as their never-married peers. Married people act more prudently with their money. They are less likely to waste it on things that have no return. They are more likely to buy a house together and sit on that asset. Married guys work harder and more strategically, and they are less likely to be fired. They also make more money than their single peers.

AE: Discuss how marriage and parenthood ensure a legacy for posterity.

Mr. Wilcox: This is a classic idea that is embedded in most civilizations. This recognition that what matters is not just the present moment, but living for the future and for a future.

By leaving a legacy for future generations, we feel that life is given deeper meaning. Likoper/Shutterstock

People who have children, then grandchildren, have a more profound sense that the future matters for them, their kids, and grandkids. I see my father-in-law telling my kids stories all the time, like his stories in Vietnam, growing up in the Bronx, stories about my wife—their mother—that really shape their sense of the world, and [these stories] allow him to recognize at some deep level that his legacy will live on once he is no longer physically living. That’s important and meaningful for him and others in his position who are getting close to their last chapter of life.

This article was originally published in American Essence magazine.