The Defining Decade The Defining Decade by Meg Jay, revolves around the idea that your adulthood is defined by what you do in your twenties. Meg Jay explains the importance of not laying around, and just waiting for stuff to happen when you are in your twentysomethings. She believes that your twenties is what determines your future, whether that be a healthy relationship, marriage, children, and career. In brief, The Defining Decade is Meg Jay disembodying the voice built by society that made believing that thirties is the new twenties acceptable, which she argues by saying that the twenties is the establishing point to ones future, not their thirties. For instance, Meg Jay’s notion that when someone is told that they have ten years to …show more content…
start their lives, not much is done during that time frame. As children we are constantly told that we have our whole lives ahead of us. When people believe they have their whole lives ahead of them, with no set of a finite time, when will they know its time to start? This is true in the fact that procrastination pushes back a task until the very last minute, but without a set of mid points before reaching the ultimate end point, the moment they realize its time to start the task, they realize that are way over their heads and don’t know where to start. By believing in this whole notion that theres this gap between your twenties and thirties to start your lives, create people to stay fixated on searching for different way to pass the time, which essentially blinds them from finding ways to further their destination in life.
To demonstrate, as teenagers in high school, when we are …show more content…
freshman’s and can’t decide what to do in the future, we are told we have plenty of time. Then we are suppose to have an idea by sophomore year, and a decision junior year. However, that one year before sophomore year could have made a huge difference in the steps taken to lead to the decision, and the opportunities missed because of the belief that there was plenty of time when the craft of that decision could have been practiced more. Evidently, believing that there is so much time between a persons twenties and thirties to start their future, deprives the person from time, and only results in wasted time doing nothing of significance to the persons future. Moreover, Meg Jay also argued that being with someone just to pass time, is not beneficial for your future.
A study shown in the book, “The Millennials: Connecting to America’s largest Generation” by Thom S. Rainer and Jess W. Rainer, show that eighty-six percent of Millennials believe that they will not marry more than once in their lifetime. Due to that fact aforementioned, being with someone for the sake of it, even when there is no future is pointless. Meg Jay says that we are able to pick our families, and when picking your family you have to choose wisely if you plan to have a future with them. This is important to consider, and therefore shouldn’t be treated carelessly. It is also self demeaning when holding a relationship simply for the reason being that the other person chooses you. By keeping this unhealthy relationship, the basic needs to develop a fulfilling healthy self sufficient future are not met. Psychologist, Abraham Maslow, believed in a set of basic needs needed to be fulfilled in order to reach complete self-actualization; one of the basic needs being love and belonging (Simplypsychology.org). Keeping an unhealthy relationship deprives one from reaching their feeling of fulfillment, which will then result in them lowering their standards, and ultimately deny themselves of their right to establish their
future. In conclusion, Meg Jay redefines the idea of when one truly establishes their future. She gives an explanation to a few key different examples that support her argument of the Defining Decade. As some might say its aggravating or unpleasant to hear, that might have been the point. She completely demolishes the notion that “we have our whole lives ahead of us,” created by society. It forces people to do something, and brings up a finite time, and some people do not do well with a time frame. It destroys the procrastination plague that strikes those twentysomethings, who believe they have another decade to start their lives. Evidently, thirty is not the new twenty, and you do not have your whole life to start it.
I Could Never Rescue You: The Rise and Fall of Jamie Wellerstein Narrative – Jamie Wellerstein is the lead male character in Richard LaGravenese’s “The Last Five Years,” a 2014 movie adaptation of the hit broadway musical of the same name. In the movie, Jamie is a Jewish, twenty-something budding writer who dreams of his work getting published. While working hard day and night, he meets Cathy Hyatt, an aspiring actress struggling to find her place in New York’s theater scene, who ends up becoming the love of his life. Months into their relationship, Jamie gets a call from Random House, a publishing company interested in getting one of his novels published. He accepts the offer and makes a better life for him and Cathy by earning a lot more
Even now there are many different types of lifestyles from which people can choose. In this day and age where life doesn’t last forever, the concept of cycle marriage is still in play now with the high divorce rate. Even if it's for 40 more years, people don’t want to stay with the same person. This is our society's version of cycle marriage; it is being played out even now when we are not living with the cure for aging. When it comes down to the idea of marriage and what we want, it is more about who you are as a person and your religious beliefs. In The Immortalists, Aubrey de Grey says: "The cure will lead to the re-evaluation of the value of permanent monogamy." However, this statement does not really make sense because the value of permanent monogamy is a very personal thing. Every person has a different value system that is determined by how they were brought up. Just because in the future we may have the option to live forever doesn't mean that people will be necessarily quick to abandon their moral views on the subject of marriage. There are a lot of people who look forward to the idea of spending the rest of their lives together, no matter the length of time, with the person they love. For these people, just the idea of being able to live forever gives them the option to now be with someone they love for both now and for what might me an
Every 13 seconds, couples in America get divorced (Palacios). What is pushing these couples to get married if half of the marriages fail anyway? Leading into the 21st century, people decide to choose the single life over the married life, and use their energy and time towards rebounding, money, material love, power, freedom, pride, and their career. Superficial love often conquers idealistic love in today’s society due to one’s self-interest persuading them away from love.
Once upon a time marriage was a requirement of society and a value to many women who wanted a stable life. It stand as a commitment to their husband and to God. It remain a way to start a proper family in the eyes the Lord. It was what many mothers and daughters dreamed of. Now that, many generations have passed many people believe marriage is not valued and Divorce rates are higher than ever. Religion has also become optional and there’re many different religions to choose from. Cohabitation has also reigned over society one doesn’t need to wait till marriage. Now you are able to move in with the person you love at any point in life. Marriage had started as a first option to many but it has become the last. There are still reasons why marriage
“what have we learned.” To prevent any kind of confusion, Waldinger divides what he has learned from this study into three lessons. He reinforces the big value of relations with some metaphors: “the experience of loneliness turns out to be toxic.” He wants to convey how threatening the loneliness is. “loneliness kills.” To stop any doubt that his metaphor is exaggerated, he supports it with evidences, facts and detailed surveys: “more than one in five Americans will report that they're lonely,” “The people who were the most satisfied in their relationships at age 50 were the healthiest at age 80.” These surveys and facts mainly support not only his point but also his aim beyond that talk. The power of relationships: “good relationships keep us happier and healthier.” He also illustrates the previous point by reports from the study: “Our most happily partnered men and women reported, in their 80s, that on the days when they had more physical pain, their mood stayed just as happy. But the people who were in unhappy relationships, on the days when they reported more physical pain, it was magnified by more emotional pain.” Additionally, he illustrates how the relationships can keep us healthier: “High-conflict marriages, for example, without much affection, turn out to be very bad for our health, perhaps worse than getting divorced. And living in the midst of good, warm relationships is protective.” Waldinger develops that the relationships do not just protect physical health, they protect brains: “the people who are in relationships where they really feel they can count on the other person in times of need, those people's memories stay sharper longer. And the people in relationships where they feel they really can't count on the other one, those are the people who experience earlier memory
Marriage itself may be less of a family unifying event than a way for two individuals to obtain personal happiness; the climbing divorce rate alone seems to suggest the devaluation of commitment in a relationship. Likewise, the Holmes and Holmes (2002) state “marriage is in effect a continuation of courtship” (p. 19). In my opinion, I would have to agree with the authors on family and marriage, considering the above-stated facts and trends. If we, as a nation, can place the individual so far above our own relatives, are we not creating a future of selfishness?
J. J. Arnett argues his theory about a developmental stage individuals go through of 18-25 year olds as a new concept, (Arnett, 2000, pp. 469). He describes emerging adulthood as being a sustained period of time where this age group, as mentioned previously, explores their roles preceding being an adult. These movements can include events similarly by taking longer than previous years to get married and have children, moving back in with their parents at a point during this age span, exploring self-identities, not feeling like an adult and feelings of self-failure. James E. Cote, who is a previous colleague of Arnett argues the opposite about this concept being an unexperienced developmental stage Arnett calls, “Emerging Adulthood”. Cote states
Emerging Adulthood represents the period of development from late teens through their twenties, mainly focusing on the ages 18-25. This is the period which people start exploring and realizing the capabilities of their lives, which then helps them characterize as adults and no longer teenagers. This topic of psychology is compelling to me because it’s a stage that every adult has lived through, it’s interesting that we have all experienced it differently based on our life circumstances and demographics. It’s interesting to see the changes throughout the years and eventually it will be easier for young people to explore these years as more young adults are going to school nowadays. It teaches me to further understand why emerging adults go through
It is not a new thought that today’s young Americans are facing issues, problems and difficult decisions that past generations never had to question. In a world of technology, media, and a rough economy, many young adults in America are influenced by a tidal wave of opinions and life choices without much relevant advice from older generations. The Generation Y, or Millennial, group are coming of age in a confusing and mixed-message society. One of these messages that bombard young Americans is the choice of premarital cohabitation. Premarital cohabitation, or living together without being married (Jose, O’Leary & Moyer, 2010), has increased significantly in the past couple of decades and is now a “natural” life choice before taking the plunge into marriage. Kennedy and Bumpass (2008) state that, “The increase in cohabitation is well documented,such that nearly two thirds of newlyweds have cohabited prior to their first marriage”(as cited in Harvey, 2011, p. 10), this is a striking contrast compared with statistics of our grandparents, or even parents, generations. It is such an increasing social behavior that people in society consider cohabitation “necessary” before entering into marriage. Even more, young Americans who choose not to cohabitate, for many different reasons, are looked upon as being “old-fashioned”, “naive”, or “unintelligent”. This pressure for young people to cohabitate before marriage is a serious “modern-day” challenge; especially when given research that states, “... most empirical studies find that couples who cohabited prior to marriage experience significantly higher odds of marital dissolution than their counterparts who did not cohabit before marriage”, stated by Jose (2010) and colleagues (as c...
In the book “How I Live Now” by Meg Rossoff, the main character, Daisy, is faced with war, love and tragedy all at once. In Daisy’s battle to stay alive she realizes that love exists and recognizes that Oslo is where she belongs. Already knowing her limitations, Daisy comes to an understanding that eating and not being anorexic is okay. Her determination moves the reader in a way that changes what they think of her. It shows that tragic events can change someone in the simplest ways.
Adulthood has often been associated with independence. It serves as a turning point in life where one has to take responsibility for oneself and no longer being dependent on his or her family. Early adulthood, usually begins from late teens or early twenties and will last until the thirties (Santrock, 2013). Early adulthood revolves around changes and exploration while middle and late adulthood are more of stability. The transition from adolescence and adulthood differs among every individual. The onset of the transition is determined by many factors such as culture, family background, and the personality of the individual. Emerging adulthood (as cited in Santrock, 2014) is the term to describe the transition period from adolescence to adulthood.
The general pattern for people is that when they becoming older they are less able to vary life. Nikolas Westerhoff in his article “Set in Our ways: Why Change is So Hard” described the connection between humans’ brains and behavior during the certain periods of life. The key assumption is that in 20s people are more hazardous and tend to adventures, while after 30s this trend is less expressed. Author gives an example when the young generation can be even over risky and inconsiderate. The article includes the story about 22-year-old Cristopher McCandless, who gave his money for charity and hitchhiked around the USA and died in Alaska because of famine. When 40s – 60s are coming people lose their appetite for novelty due to the natural process, which reveal that old habits express themselves at those ages. The elder generation wants to feel stability continuing do customary things and taking care of their children or grandchildren. Also they are under the society’s pressure, when it is quite inappropriate being infantile or just make crazy travels instead of making a career and having a family. Author mentioned false hope syndrome, which means that people often procrastinate certain thinks that never be finished. That is why Westerhoff suggests doing everything “on a right time in a right place” because then it would be probably late.
Has the value of marriage become obsolete to the up and coming generations? With the decline in respect amongst individuals, increasing divorce rates, a decrease in moral values, infidelity rates, and lack of communication amid people, are we setting our future generations up for marital failure? The generations of today are being shown that marriage is something that they are expected to do rather than what they are meant to treasure. Marriage was once revered as a sacred union between two individuals in which they honored and cherished the vows in which they chose to recite to one another, values our current society may be lacking.
These days people seem to think that marriage is the only way to be committed to someone. That people who gets married will be happier than those who don’t. It seems like they are saying that the normal thing to do if you want to have a family is to get married, and that people who have a family without marriage or those who had a divorce are wrong and/or bad parents. Whether or not someone wants to get married or divorced should be completely up to them, as no one knows their situation better than they do.
In today’s society, a majority of young couples are taking the opposite route when it comes to preparing for marriage. Instead of waiting till their newlyweds to move in together, many couples have decided to move in together. They believe that by living together, the divorce rate is decreased significantly. This idea of living together before marriage baffles a lot of people who are pro and against the idea. Yet, when you think about it for a moment, it does kind of make sense. Compared to previous generations, millennials would rather live together to decide whether marriage is in their future. There have been arguments for and against this idea of couples moving in together.