The Nation Will Keep Moving, With Or Without You.

For some reason (I think I might have heard John Mayer's "Waiting On The World To Change" on the radio), I've been thinking a lot lately about the "active youth" myth that gets tossed around during most presidential election years. As much as I would like to believe that the 18-24 voting bloc has as much power as pundits say we do, it's just not mathematically plausible.

Here we see how those in the 18-24 age group voted, but in Table 4c of the Census Bureau's 2008 election report, we see that the way this age group voted really doesn't matter that much. Of 25.8 million voters in this youngest voting bloc, only 15 million (53%) are registered. To further clarify this issue, only 44.3% of this demographic even bothered to cast a vote for President of the United States in the 2008 election. Out of 6 voting demographics, the 18-24 group is the third smallest... and it managed to get out the smallest percentage of voters. Again.

It's sad that the people I heard complaining the most during the 8 years of President George W. Bush's administration couldn't manage to get out in greater numbers, especially when you consider that the 2008 election was hyped as the most important of our lifetimes. I lost count of the number of people who became fans of Barack Obama before the election. I wonder how many of them actually made it to the polls?

In any case, the 18-24 voting demographic makes me nervous. Sure, we get more responsible with age, but we're the ones that typically have the newest ideas and the most passion about getting things done. It's too bad that so many of us have fallen into the "things are too difficult to fix" crowd - that robs the nation of some of its brightest minds in their prime. Nothing ever got done working outside of an institution... even the Civil Rights Movement needed laws to get passed before it made real change. So all of you out there crying about how both parties are the same or how one politician or another is a fascist: get a grip and get involved. You're not doing anyone any favors by sitting outside the circle and whining.

I hear you thinking "Stop complaining! The Democrats obliterated the Republicans in the 2008 election! Drop it already!" And you're right - the Democrats did win handily. That still doesn't excuse those who refused to offer an opinion but complain afterwards. The "active youth" myth is just that; a story made up by young adults, for young adults, in order to rationalize a bizarre lack of action in a society that is literally constructed to allow input from everyone. I'll end this post with an excerpt from a great column by David Sedaris about non-voters:

"To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?”
To be undecided in [any] election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked."

The Sad State of Marriage

JUST in case anybody had managed to convince themselves that the institution of marriage wasn't a trampled, tattered shadow of its former self, feel free to read this article by Sandra Tsing Loh. I first read the article on The Atlantic Monthly's website about two weeks ago, but the article has quickly made its rounds on the internet. If you're too tired to read the entire article, know that even the jaded and often spiteful readers of FARK.com couldn't believe how poorly this woman had handled her affairs. Loh's article pretends to be a "coming of middle-age" expose. In reality, her article is a 4100-word farce; an embarassingly public and desperate attempt to rationalize immaturity and irresponsibility. She blames mental exhaustion and a father prone to wrath before finally taking aim the classic target of every guilty lover's frustration: the society that forced her into a monogamous life-long relationship.

Like any good apologist, Loh comes up with several examples of people and books that suggest marriage might not be the best way to maintain stability for modern American couples and their children. It's true that some studies have shown we aren't exactly wired for monogamy, and I think there are many reasonable arguments to be made on how to change the American family to better suit our lifestyles. However, Loh uses all this information for the exclusive purpose of justifying her actions. Even as she admits her "failure as a wife", she claims that an outdated norm is responsible for the misery of her and so many others. Loh is a performance artist, a regular on NPR, a contributor to The Atlantic, and a finalist for the National Magazine award, and yet she cannot find it in herself to "'work on' falling in love" again with her husband. This seems to be an increasingly common form of cowardice, reserved for those who didn't think about their needs, wants, goals, and ambitions before they lept into a long-term commitment of the highest caliber.

Note: I'm regretting not finishing this post in one sitting... the two comments made before I started writing again this morning covered a lot of what was on my mind before I called it a night.

Before anybody starts accusing me of wanting everyone to mimic the Cleaver family from television, it should be noted that I could not care less how people handle their relationships, as long as they do it responsibly. I would have gladly given my approval to Ms. Loh's story if it had described long discussions with her husband about possibly branching out to different people for physical relationships. This kind of responsible planning and exploration might not have alleviated all of the problems that drove Loh and her husband to divorce, but it surely would have made it seem more reasonable. In her article, Loh asks,

"Do you see? Given my staggering working mother’s to-do list, I cannot take on yet another arduous home- and self-improvement project, that of rekindling our romance."

No, Ms. Loh, I don't understand. You entered into a binding emotional contract - the legal aspects of which I will disregard for this article - with a person who, regardless of their feelings now, loved you and wanted to spend the rest of their life with you. The fact that you were too weak or overcome with passion to think clearly about the consequences of marriage does not excuse your infidelity or the impact it will have on your family. And just so we're clear, I feel that way about anyone who cheats on their significant other. If marriage is truly as outdated and misrepresented as Loh claims, then surely she had some hint of this when she got married 20 years ago.

Marriage statistics dating back 20 years are the subject of some of the most common and thorough studies performed in this country. Many people like to cite a number in the range of 50-60% when referencing the divorce rate in the United States, but, as the Census Bureau points out, the actual numbers are far different. In 2004, the average divorce rate for men was 20.7%, with 9.3% divorced at the time of the study. Women had been divorced at a slightly higher rate - 22.9%, with 10.9% divorced at the time of the study. On top of these lower numbers, it turns out that first marriages that end in divorce typically take an average of 8 years to do so. More than 95% of both genders are married by the time they reach the age of 70, so there must be something about marriage that continues to bring people together.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development tracked marriage as well. Between 1970 and 2007, crude marriage rates fell from about 11 people per 1000 getting married per year to about 7 per 1000. People are still getting married, though at a lower rate than before, which implies that Americans are already revaluating what marriage should mean. Where this reformation takes us is unclear, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it will include both a push for equal rights for the LGBT community and a significant shift in the responsibilities of men and women in the home. This could be particularly beneficial to women who are struggling to balance the professional and domestic aspects of their lives.

Do I expect everyone to be perfect? Of course not. I'm in no way suggesting that divorce be made illegal or otherwise more difficult to obtain, and I see a plethora of benefits to changing the expectations of men and women in the household. I freely admit the the point Sandra Tsing Loh is trying (badly) to make is a valid one: marriage isn't necessarily for everyone, and people should do what they feel is best for the stability of their family and relationship. However, the flippant and casual nature with which Sandra Tsing Loh explores this issue offends even the most sincere advocates of changing marriage and family. Take it from me, a man who got (happily) married at 22: to disregard the level of responsibility that any emotional bond requires of both partners seriously detracts from the quality of the relationship and the ability of those involved to be themselves.