Why Men Marry: A Deep Dive into Social, Cultural, and Psychological Factors

Thursday, August 29, 2024.

Why do men marry? To answer this question, I’ll discuss related themes like love, commitment, societal expectations, and cultural variations, with a special focus on how attachment theory intersects with cultural influences.

Marriage, a timeless institution, has been the cornerstone of societies for centuries.

While the reasons men marry can vary widely, understanding the underlying motivations requires a deep dive into social, cultural, and psychological factors.

The Role of Love and Commitment

At the heart of why men marry is love, often seen as the most potent motivator. Research shows that love and commitment are consistently ranked as top reasons for marriage across cultures (Karney, 2010).

Men often marry because they feel a deep emotional connection with their partner, which they believe is best solidified through marriage. The commitment that marriage symbolizes can be seen as a way to ensure stability and long-term partnership.

However, love alone doesn’t tell the whole story. Men may also marry because they perceive marriage as a crucial step in adult life, a rite of passage that marks maturity. This is particularly evident in societies where marriage is strongly linked to social status and adulthood (Arnett, 2000).

Societal Expectations and Cultural Differences

Societal expectations play a significant role in why men marry. In many cultures, there’s a strong expectation for men to marry by a certain age, which can create pressure.

In Western societies, this expectation is often tied to ideas of romantic love and nuclear family structures, while in other cultures, such as in parts of Asia and Africa, marriage may be more closely linked to family obligations and economic stability (Thornton & Philipov, 2009).

Cultural norms dictate not only when and whom men should marry but also why. For example, in collectivist cultures, marriage might be seen as a duty to one's family or community, rather than a personal choice based solely on love. In contrast, in more individualistic cultures, men may feel freer to marry for love, personal fulfillment, or companionship (Kagitcibasi, 2005).

In countries like India, arranged marriages remain common, and men often marry to fulfill family expectations or to strengthen familial alliances.

In contrast, in the United States, the emphasis on individual choice and romantic love means that men might marry later, after pursuing personal or professional goals (Allendorf & Pandian, 2016).

Attachment Theory and Cultural Strain

Attachment theory offers profound insights into why men marry, particularly in how cultural factors strain or support attachment.

According to Bowlby (1982), attachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to another across time and space. When men form secure attachments in childhood, they are more likely to seek out and commit to a marital relationship in adulthood.

However, cultural differences can strain attachment bonds. In cultures where emotional expression is discouraged, men may struggle to form secure attachments, which can complicate their motivations for marriage.

For instance, in societies where stoicism and emotional restraint are valued, men might marry out of a sense of duty rather than emotional connection (Schmitt et al., 2004).

On the other hand, in cultures that encourage open emotional expression and connection, men are more likely to marry for reasons aligned with attachment needs—such as love, intimacy, and companionship. These men might view marriage as a safe haven, a place where their attachment needs can be fully met.

Marriage as a Social Contract

Marriage is also a social contract, an agreement that comes with specific roles and responsibilities. In many cultures, men marry to fulfill societal roles—such as the provider, protector, or leader of the household. This social contract is heavily influenced by cultural norms and economic factors (Cherlin, 2004).

For example, in societies with traditional gender roles, men might marry to assert their status as the head of the family. In contrast, in societies with more egalitarian views, men might marry with the expectation of sharing roles and responsibilities with their partner.

Evolutionary Psychology and the Question: Why Do Men Marry?

To delve deeper into the question of why men marry, we must consider the insights provided by evolutionary psychology.

This field offers a unique perspective by exploring how our evolutionary past shapes contemporary behaviors, including marriage. According to evolutionary psychologists, marriage can be understood as an adaptive behavior that has evolved to solve specific problems related to survival and reproduction.

The Evolutionary Basis of Marriage

From an evolutionary standpoint, marriage serves several key functions. Firstly, it creates a stable environment for raising offspring. Human children are born highly dependent and require long-term care, which is most effectively provided by two parents.

By forming a long-term bond, men and women can pool resources, provide better protection for their offspring, and ensure that their genes are successfully passed on to the next generation (Buss, 2005).

Men, in particular, face the challenge of ensuring paternity certainty—knowing that the offspring they are investing resources in are genetically their own.

Marriage, as an institution, offers a social contract that reduces the likelihood of infidelity, thereby increasing paternity certainty. This reduces the risk of investing resources in offspring that are not biologically theirs, which would be a significant evolutionary disadvantage (Buss & Schmitt, 1993).

Mate Selection and the Role of Marriage

Evolutionary psychology also explains marriage as a mechanism for securing and maintaining access to a mate.

Men have evolved preferences for certain traits in women that signal fertility, such as youth and physical attractiveness, which are indicators of reproductive potential (Buss, 1989). By marrying, men can ensure long-term access to a mate who possesses these desirable traits, increasing their chances of reproductive success.

On the other hand, women have evolved to seek out mates who can provide resources, protection, and stability—traits that enhance the survival chances of their offspring.

Marriage offers women the security that their partner will remain committed and continue to provide these necessary resources over time (Trivers, 1972). This mutual exchange of resources for reproductive potential forms the basis of many marriages from an evolutionary perspective.

Competition and the Male Desire for Marriage

In many societies, competition among men for access to mates is intense.

Marriage can be seen as a way to secure a mate in a competitive environment.

Evolutionary psychology suggests that men are driven to compete for mates because of the limited number of women who meet their reproductive criteria. Once a desirable mate is secured through marriage, the competition ends, allowing the man to focus his energy on providing for and protecting his family (Pinker, 1997).

This competitive aspect is also reflected in the status that marriage can confer.

In many cultures, being married is associated with higher social status, which can increase a man’s attractiveness to others and enhance his overall standing within the community. From an evolutionary perspective, higher status can lead to better access to resources, further enhancing a man's reproductive success.

Why do Men Marry? Evolutionary Pressures and Cultural Variability

While evolutionary psychology provides a framework for understanding the universal aspects of why men marry, it also recognizes that cultural variability plays a significant role in shaping these behaviors.

Different environments exert different selective pressures, leading to variations in marriage practices across cultures.

For instance, in environments where resources are scarce, men may marry multiple wives (polygyny) to maximize their reproductive success by spreading their resources among several women. In contrast, in environments where resources are more evenly distributed, monogamous marriages are more common because they allow for equal investment in each offspring (Murdock, 1967).

Attachment, Evolution, and Cultural Influences

Attachment theory, when viewed through an evolutionary lens, suggests that secure attachment bonds have evolved because they increase the survival chances of offspring.

In cultures where secure attachment is promoted, men may be more inclined to marry out of a desire to create a stable environment for their children, thereby ensuring their survival and the continuation of their genetic lineage.

However, in cultures where attachment bonds are weaker or less emphasized, the motivations for marriage may be more closely tied to social, economic, or reproductive pressures (Hrdy, 1999).

Evolutionary psychology provides a robust framework for understanding why men marry, rooted in the fundamental human needs for survival, reproduction, and the continuation of one’s genetic lineage.

Marriage is seen not just as a social construct but as an adaptive behavior that has evolved to solve specific problems faced by our ancestors. These evolutionary pressures continue to shape modern marriage, although they are influenced and modified by cultural norms and societal expectations.

By integrating evolutionary psychology with social and cultural factors, we gain a deeper understanding of the complex motivations behind why men marry—a question that touches on the very core of human nature.

Final thoughts

Why men marry is a complex question with no single answer. It’s a decision influenced by love, societal expectations, cultural norms, and psychological factors.

While love and commitment are central, they are deeply intertwined with the cultural context in which a man lives. Whether driven by emotional connection, societal pressure, or cultural duty, the reasons men marry are as varied as the men themselves.

By understanding these factors through the lens of social science, we gain a deeper appreciation for the diverse motivations behind marriage.

This knowledge not only enriches our understanding of human relationships but also helps us navigate the complexities of modern marriage in a culturally sensitive way.

Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.

REFERENCES:

Allendorf, K., & Pandian, R. K. (2016). The Decline of Arranged Marriage? Marital Change and Continuity in India. Population and Development Review, 42(3), 435-464. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2016.00142.x

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging Adulthood: A Theory of Development from the Late Teens through the Twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992

Buss, D. M. (2005). The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. John Wiley & Sons.

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual Strategies Theory: An Evolutionary Perspective on Human Mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204-232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204

Hrdy, S. B. (1999). Mother Nature: Maternal Instincts and How They Shape the Human Species. Pantheon Books.

Murdock, G. P. (1967). Ethnographic Atlas. University of Pittsburgh Press.

Pinker, S. (1997). How the Mind Works. W.W. Norton & Company.

Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental Investment and Sexual Selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871-1971 (pp. 136-179). Aldine Publishing Company.

Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The Deinstitutionalization of American Marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848-861. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00058.x

Kagitcibasi, C. (2005). Autonomy and Relatedness in Cultural Context: Implications for Self and Family. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(4), 403-422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022105275959

Karney, B. R. (2010). Sociological Perspectives on Marital Commitment: Toward an Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4), 828-845. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00733.x

Schmitt, D. P., et al. (2004). Patterns and Universals of Adult Romantic Attachment Across 62 Cultural Regions: Are Models of Self and Other Pancultural Constructs? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(4), 367-402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104266105

Thornton, A., & Philipov, D. (2009). Sweeping Changes in Marriage, Cohabitation, and Childbearing in Central and Eastern Europe: New Insights from the Developmental Idealism Framework. European Journal of Population, 25(2), 123-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-009-9181-2