The Management and Production of Risk in Romantic Relationships: A Postmodern Paradox

Abstract

Expanding on the work of Ulrich Beck and other social theorists, the central thesis of this article is that individuals in contemporary North American society are increasingly motivated by the need to alleviate expanding levels of perceived risks associated with interpersonal love relationships and mate selection. In response to these perceived risks, men and women today are altering their relationship patterns in such a way that the process of relationship formation and assessment has become increasingly rationalized. As a result, a paradox has been created between the rational management of interpersonal risk associated with romance and the production of risk. This article is primarily a theoretical treatment of the issues, augmented with data on the social history of adolescence, courtship, and marriage and a review of the literature on mate selection processes in contemporary society.During the past two decades, a number of seminal works have focused attention on the effects of modernization on interpersonal intimate relationships, especially within the context of marriage and the family.

Cohabitation and marriage in Austria

“…"Individualized marriage" based on romantic love, emotional satisfaction, and self-fulfillment has replaced the companionate marriage where satisfaction was "gained through building a family and playing the roles of spouse and parent" (Cherlin 2004: 852). Today, the entire marital life course should be based on romantic love (Bulcroft et al 2000). The decisions of whether, when, and whom to marry, as well as whether and when to dissolve a union, therefore rest with the individual and the couple as social influences have weakened (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1995).…”

“…This implies that close relationships have become "a private matter and a private risk" (Lewis 2006: 52). As the decision to marry is made by the couple, the responsibility for the success or failure of the marriage is equally ascribed to them, more than in a context where external constraints determine whether a marriage continues (Bulcroft et al 2000). The awareness of risk needs to be understood against the backdrop of living in a society with a "divorce culture" (Whitehead 1997).…”

“…The literature does not indicate whether individualization has led to less commitment and more unstable relationships, or whether relationships continue to be about commitment but have become more fulfilling, self-reflexive, and egalitarian (Bulcroft et al 2000;Lewis 2006;Syltevik 2010). In an ideal typical way, a relationship is characterized by discourse and mutual self-disclosure.…”

“…Such a relationship entails greater individual freedom and personal growth for both partners while requiring the continuous evaluation and negotiation of satisfaction in the relationship. A relationship that only lasts as long as both partners derive a personal benefit from it may increase feelings of uncertainty towards each other, while the partners" opportunity to retain their independence by knowing they can end an unsatisfactory marriage might decrease their perception of risk (Bulcroft et al 2000).…”

La formation du couple racontée en duo

“…À l'époque contemporaine, non seulement le choix du conjoint mais aussi les itinéraires conjugaux ne sont plus balisés par les institutions et s'avèrent incertains et fragiles. D'où le développement de techniques, de rituels et d'investissements personnels considérables pour constituer et soutenir le couple, objet paradoxal parce que foyer de décisions multiples, complexes, et d'émotions intenses, tout en étant dénué de repères et de frontières préétablies (Bulcroft et al, 2000 ;Dupré La Tour, 2000 ;Lemaire, 2002).…”