英语口语高级训练(lesson17)b
|
4. Dating Pattens in the USA In the traditional dating pattern in the United States,much of the responsibility for a date falls to the young man. In this pattern, the young man must first call fhe girl he wishes to date on the telephone. Usually, this call is made quite early in a week. Most girls iwtraditional dating relationships expect to get a telephone call from a young man by Wednesday. Most dating occurs on weekends. Many young ,people do not have to get up early for school or work on Saturday and Sunday mornings, so Friday nights and Saturday nights are popular nights for dates. The young man must ask the girl for the date, and suggest some things that they might.do together. It is usually up to the young man to pay for all of the evening's activities. There are many things to do on dates. Many young people enjoy going to sports events, such as football and baseball games. These games may occur at a high school, college, or in a large sports arena in a city. A very popular place for young people to go on dates is the movies. Almost everyone enjoys a good movie, and almost every town has at least one movie theater. Young people may also enjoy going to a night club or coffee house. Here, they may listen to music and dance, and perhaps meet some of their friends. These are a few of the things young people do on dates in the United States. In some parts of the United States, traditional dating relationships begin when young people are in high school. In other places, young people do not go out in couples until they are in college, or in their early twenties. Some young men would rather go out with just one girl all of the time. Every Saturday night, a young man will go out with the same girl. Many girls enjoy this kind of relationship also. It gives both the boy and the girl a chance to get to know one another quite well. Sometimes, this may lead to marriage. Other young people enjoy dating different individuals. One week they may go out with one person, the next week with another. They get to know many people this way, and may not wish to have a serious relationship with just one person. Many young people in the United States, especially college students, do not go out on either of these traditional dates. Instead, they go out on group dates. In this kind of dating pattern, small groups of young people go out together. All of the people in the group are usually friends, but some of the people in the group may not know each other. No one young man is with any particular girl. They are all together as part of the group. This is very different from the traditional date. A group date differs from a traditional date in several ways. First, there are no special relationships in the group. No particular girl and boy are together all the time. Second, the group date may occur on a weekend, but it may not be planned in advance. A group of young people may decide on Saturday afternoon that they want to spend Saturday evening together. They may all decide to go to a movies or to some other event. On a group date, no one is paired with anyone else. As a result, every person pays for his or her own expenses. This means that the girls must pay for themselves. They must pay their own admission for the movies, for a cup of coffee, or for anything else that costs money during the date. Many young people find the group date to be a great deal of fun. The young men on a group date are under no pressure. They do not have to be with any particular girl during the evening. They do not have to pay for anyone but themselves. They do not have to be especially polite or formal during the date. Everyone can relax and have a good time. Group dates may lead to serious relationships for some members of the group. Maybe a girl and boy on a group date find that t6ey have a lot in common and enjoy being together. They may spend more time together, with the group, and with each other. But usually, everyone on a group date is just interested in a good time. No one worries about a serious relationship. The group date may be good for very young people. They may not know what kind of person they like. They may like to spend their time with many different people. But it also does not give young people a chance to have a serious relationsh：p. A serious relationship can help a young person in many ways. A person may learn what is good and what is bad about a serious relationship. Usually, in dating, young people find out what kind of person they would like to marry. If a young person always goes on group dates, there is no chance to find out. As we can see, group dates have their good points and their drawbacks. The group date is very different from the traditional date, don't you think？ Young people in the United States today enjoy both of these types of relationships. Traditional dating relationships give young people a chance to get to know one another quite well. Group dates give young people a chance to get to know many other young people and to have a more relaxed evening. Both kinds of dates have their good points. The group date is a.relatively new idea among young people. It.seems to be popular for the reasons described here. 5. Courtship Customs Did you know that most British couples first meet at a dance？ that in some parts of Africa. men pay for their wives with cows？ that in Germany you can advertise for a partner on television？ that in Britain girls can propose in Leap Year （ 1976, I980 and every fourth year following）？ that in the USA boys and girls start dating very young, as young as 12？ 6. Marriage ： East and West“I believe,” said Dr. Samuel Johnson in the eighteenfh century, “that marriages would in general be as happy, and often more so, if they were all made by the Lord Chancel'lor, upon a due consideration of the characters and circumstances, without the partners having any choice in the matter.”We are bound to acknowledge, after a careful study of the methods of mate selection in the East and West, that the great Dr. Johnson was probably perfectly right. From one extreme to the other, four patterns of mate selection may be distinguished. 1. Selection by the parents - the young people themselves not consulted. This is the traditional method employed in the East. When the choice is carefully and wisely made, it is usually a good one.But it is open to the grave errors caused by ignorance and exploitation. 2. Selection by the parents, but the young People consulted . This is an improvement on the first method, provided the young people are allowed to make the final decision. In some communities, though they are formally consulted, they are expected to accept the choice made for them, and have no real freedom to express their minds. 3. Selection by the young people, but parental approvdl necessary. This pattern exhibits at least two forms. The strictest is the one in which no action may be taken by the young people until they bave been given parental permissiop to proceed. A good example is the early American Quaker father in the eighteenth century, who was approached by a neighbour's son John asking his permission to court his daughter Sarah. Unless John was approved by Sazah's father in the first place, no further step could be taken. But even if her father approved of John, Sarah still had the right to refuse him. The other variation is where Sarah could encourage John's attentions without seeking her father's permission； but if she and John became serious, her father's approval was essential before marriage could take place. If he used his veto, she had to give up John-or elope！ 4. Selection by the young people - the parents not consulted. This is the method which is becoming widespread in the West today. The couple may be living away from home, and unable to consult their parents. But even when the parents are formally consulted, all too often their agreement is a mere formality. They know that, even if they raise objections, the marriage is likely to take place anyway. Which of these methods is most desirable？ We would reject the first. Even if it is efficient, we believe it denies to young people a freedom that should be theirs by right. This is the position being widely adopted in the East today. We would also reject the last. Young people should not be dominated by their parents in this matter. But neither should their parents be left entirely out of the picture. The experience of parents can often correct and restrain the headstrong and distorted choices of inexperienced youth. The kind of freedom young people in the West today are demanding is unreasonable, and undesirable in their own best interests. The desirable ideal, we believe, is a cooperative selection by young people and parents together. This may not always be easily achieved.But it is worth the effort that may be needed. It creates unity in ihe family. It balances out the intense feelings of youth against the detached judgement of more mature experience. It offers, we believe, the best basis for successful marriages - especially if backed by scientific knowledge accumulated by study and research. At the present time, the East.is moving steadily towards the ideal of cooperation between parents and young people. But the West is moving further away from it, as young people increasingly ignore their parents' opinions. However, there is some compensation in the fact that the results of study：and research concerning the criteria of good mate selection are being made available increasingly to Western youth. 7. Marry - for What？ I'm afraid it is in the nature of an agony aunt's job that she is more concerned with failures than with triumphs. Nevertheless, these past years, I've also noticed something of the pattern that leads to success in married life. I've seen, for instance, that making a marriage work begins long before making a marriage. It begins with a girl who thinks less about marriage than girls have traditionally done, and more about herself in relationship to work and to her community. The very first trick to a happy marriage is to become a person of independence and pride who does not imagine a husband is necessary to make her magically complete. Whenever I get a letter from a woman who says she “cannot live without” the man who is breaking her' heart, I am compelled to tell her that successful partnerships are not between those who cannot live without each other, but bet.ween those who can live with each other. There is no room even in daydreams for the stupid idea that there is on earth only one mate intended for another. To my surprise I have found this antique misconception is still alive and it creates a lazy superstition that has caused more than one marriage to fail. How can anyone who believes her union was “meant to be”, not equally believe it was “not meant to be” at the first sign of trouble？ Whether or not a marriage was “meant to be” is beside the point； it is and therefore it requires patience and protection. Passion is great outside marriage, but not so hot inside it. So why do we marry？ For love？ Oh yes. Friendship？ Certainly. Children？ Why not？ Money？ Dodgy. Fun？ Never. For most young people-and a lot of older ones-marriage is the first adult commitment, and if it is to succeed it must be undertaken in an adult way. It isn't a bad idea for engaged couples to write out the sort of contract any other working partnership would demand, specifying how many children they want to have and when, where they will live, how they will divide household duties, which in-laws might become liabilities and what to do about th.em, how much money will be coming in, as well as precisely how it will go out. I don't pretend any couple would abide by such a contract, but simply in drawing it up they would find out a great deal about each other's unromantic expectations, for these-not sex or fidelity or love -are tlne real marriage wreckers. It is alarming, for instance, how many women race into a lifelong contract with a man whose income and earning power they do not know. Do they still expect Daddy to find out for them？ Of course, there is only one way to treat any problem inside marriage, sexual or otherwise, and it is the way to treat all the other problems： talk to each other. But how many times has a woman written to me——a complete stranger-of a deep misery that she could not tell her husband, or that she failed even to catch his attention？ There must arrive an egly momcni between every husband and wife-maybe it's a quarrel or a disappoinrment or a hurt-and if that moment drops without discussion and sinks into brooding or resentment, then it will be the seed that comes in the end to bear bitter fruit. Admittedly, it is largely women who write to me and I do see marriage from a woman's point of view. But in this freezing of communication, I think it is often men who are the culprits. Men must talk about their feelings and men must respect the validity of women's feelings, or their marriages become just a way of getting their shirts ironed. “ When agony aunts like me talk about ”working at a marriage“, listening is what we mean. Listening is hard work, especially when it is to something we would rather not hear. There is no such thing as a marriage of convenience. Marriage is a cumbersome, inconvenient alliance, but it. is the only way we have of making families and therefore anyone who undertakes it has a responsibility to it. Part of the wife's responsibility is never, never to expect more from ”us“ Chan she expects from herself. |
