Introduction
Marriage, once considered a cornerstone of adulthood, has undergone significant shifts in perception among younger generations. Youths today increasingly view marriage as an optional life choice rather than a societal obligation, influenced by evolving cultural norms, economic challenges, and changing priorities (Cherlin, 2010). This will examine the multifaceted reasons behind these shifting attitudes, examining economic, social, psychological and cultural factors. By analyzing trends such as delayed marriage, cohabitation and individualism, this will bring an argument on the changing attitudes of youths towards marriage and reflect on the broader transformations in modern societies.
1. Shift from Tradition to Individualism
The shift from traditional marital norms to individualism marks a defining feature of contemporary youth attitudes toward marriage. Historically, marriage functioned as a societal institution that reinforced community cohesion, religious values and economic stability, often prioritizing collective needs over individual desires (Coontz, 2006). However, modern youths increasingly perceive marriage through the lens of self-actualization, autonomy and personal choice. This transformation aligns with the broader cultural emphasis on individualism, a phenomenon sociologists attribute to the rise of late modernity, where self-expression and life satisfaction are paramount (Beck & Beck-Gernsheim, 2002). Arnett’s (2015) theory of “emerging adulthood” underscores this shift, arguing that individuals aged 18–29 now prioritize self-discovery, education and career development over early marriage. This reflects a departure from viewing marriage as a “rite of passage” to seeing it as one of many lifestyle options.
The decline of traditionalism is further evident in the rejection of rigid societal scripts. Earlier generations often married to conform to expectations tied to religion, family honour, or economic survival. In contrast, today’s youths associate marriage with emotional intimacy and mutual growth rather than obligation (Cherlin, 2010). Marriage is no longer a default marker of adulthood but a deliberate choice contingent on personal readiness and compatibility.
This cultural shift has profound implications. As individualism rises, marriage rates decline, and non-traditional relationships, such as cohabitation and LAT (“living apart together”), gain acceptance (Lesthaeghe, 2014). Youths increasingly resist external pressures to marry, instead valuing relationships that align with their self-defined goals. Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (2002) argue that this reflects a “do-it-yourself biography,” where life paths are self-curated rather than dictated by tradition. While this autonomy empowers individuals, it also introduces challenges, such as isolation or decision paralysis, as societal frameworks for navigating relationships weaken (Putnam, 2000). Nonetheless, the prioritization of individualism underscores a broader societal evolution toward valuing personal agency in defining partnership and success.
2. Economic Instability and Financial Anxiety
Economic instability has emerged as a pivotal factor reshaping youth attitudes toward marriage, with financial barriers such as student debt, precarious employment, and soaring housing costs deterring many from considering matrimony. Contemporary youth, particularly millennials and Generation Z, face unprecedented economic challenges that prioritize financial security over marital commitments. During the COVID-19 pandemic, financial anxieties intensified, with young adults reporting that economic uncertainty influenced their decision to postpone marriage.
These trends reflect a broader societal shift: marriage is increasingly viewed as a “luxury good” accessible only to those who are economically secure (Cherlin, 2010). Policymakers and economists warn that systemic issues, stagnant wages, unaffordable education, and housing crises are restructuring life course trajectories, making marriage a delayed or forgone goal (Greenstone & Looney, 2012). As financial barriers persist, youth are redefining partnership through cohabitation, serial monogamy, or solo living, prioritizing economic resilience over traditional marital frameworks.
3. Delayed Marriage Trends
The rise in the median age of first marriage represents a global demographic shift, reflecting profound changes in societal priorities and life course trajectories. Scholars attribute this delay to interrelated factors, including prolonged educational attainment, career prioritization and a cultural emphasis on personal exploration.
A primary driver is the extension of higher education. This educational expansion delays entry into stable careers, with many youths prioritizing graduate studies or professional certifications to remain competitive. Such educational investments postpone financial independence, a prerequisite that many now associate with marital readiness. Simultaneously, career establishment has become a cornerstone of adulthood. The rise of dual-income households highlights the economic necessity of securing stable employment, as single-earner families struggle to meet the rising costs of living (Greenstone & Looney, 2012).
Cultural shifts toward experiential milestones further explain the delay in marriage. Younger generations increasingly value travel, entrepreneurship, and self-discovery over early family formation. A 2022 survey by the World showed that this “experience economy” reflects a broader rejection of rigid life scripts, with youths embracing flexible, individualized pathways (Arnett, 2015). Cohabitation also plays a role, as 70% of couples now live together before marrying, extending the premarital timeline to assess compatibility (Manning, 2017).
Economic and policy landscapes further reinforce delays. Housing affordability crises, student debt and instability in the gig economy exacerbate financial anxieties, making marriage seem riskier. The consequences of delayed marriage are multifaceted. While later marriages correlate with lower divorce rates , they also contribute to declining fertility, as biological windows for childbirth narrow.
4. Cohabitation as an Alternative
Cohabitation has transitioned from a socially stigmatized arrangement to a mainstream alternative or precursor to marriage, reflecting evolving norms around relationships and commitment. In the United States, approximately 70% of couples now live together before getting married, a significant increase from just 10% in the 1960s (Manning, 2017).
The appeal of cohabitation lies in its flexibility and low barriers to dissolution. Unlike marriage, which requires legal processes for separation, cohabiting couples can part ways with minimal formalities, reducing perceived risks (Cherlin, 2010). Additionally, the rise of the gig economy and precarious work has made young adults wary of long-term financial commitments, favoring arrangements that allow for economic independence (Greenstone & Looney, 2012).
This disparity highlights how economic stability influences relationship trajectories. Legal frameworks further shape cohabitation trends. In nations such as Canada and the Netherlands, cohabiting couples gain rights similar to those of married partners after a specified period, thereby incentivizing non-marital unions (Heuveline & Timberlake, 2004). Despite its popularity, cohabitation does not universally correlate with marital success. Moreover, cohabiting couples with children often face societal stigma and fewer legal safeguards, particularly in conservative regions (Kiernan, 2001). Nevertheless, the trend persists, with youths redefining commitment through the fluidity of cohabitation, reflecting broader cultural shifts toward individualism and autonomy (Lesthaeghe, 2014).
5. Education and Career Prioritization
The prioritization of higher education and professional ambitions has significantly reshaped youth attitudes toward marriage, particularly as career success becomes a central marker of adulthood. In contemporary societies, educational attainment and career advancement increasingly compete with and often supersede marital goals, especially among women. Gerson’s (2011) seminal work highlights how women’s rising educational achievements have narrowed the “marriageability gap,” a term historically used to describe men’s economic superiority as a prerequisite for marriage. This shift reflects broader cultural changes, in which self-reliance and professional identity are increasingly valued over traditional family roles.
The expansion of higher education plays a pivotal role. This educational parity has delayed marriage, as women invest time in pursuing advanced degrees and early career building.
Economic incentives reinforce this prioritization. College graduates earn 67% more than non-graduates over their lifetimes (Carnevale et al., 2021), making career investment a rational choice. However, this focus extends beyond finances. Professional fulfillment is increasingly framed as a component of self-actualization, with youths viewing careers as avenues for personal growth and societal impact (Arnett, 2015). For instance, 54% of Gen Zs and 53% of millennials consider meaningful work very important when evaluating potential employers, reflecting a similar trend. Purpose and meaning matter significantly for both groups, which could be interpreted as them placing meaning over traditional markers like family or marriage when it comes to career goals.
It also reshapes gender dynamics: women who prioritize careers often seek partners who support their ambitions, fostering more egalitarian marriages but reducing the pool of “suitable” matches in traditional contexts (Goldscheider et al., 2015). Meanwhile, men face evolving expectations to share domestic responsibilities, a shift that can strain relationships if unresolved (Pedulla & Thébaud, 2015).
Cultural narratives further amplify this trend. Media and policy discourses increasingly frame education and career as “investments” in a precarious economy, whereas marriage is portrayed as a voluntary, rather than obligatory, life stage (Cherlin, 2010).
6. Changing Gender Roles and Equality
The transformation of gender roles and the pursuit of equality have fundamentally reshaped marital expectations among contemporary youths, who increasingly reject rigid divisions of labour in favor of partnerships grounded in shared responsibilities. Historically, marriage was structured around traditional gender norms, with men as primary breadwinners and women as homemakers. However, evolving cultural attitudes and women’s economic empowerment have shifted these dynamics. Pedulla and Thébaud (2015) emphasize that men’s willingness to participate equitably in domestic labour such as childcare, cooking and cleaning enhances the appeal of marriage for women, fostering relationships built on mutual respect and collaboration. This shift reflects broader societal progress toward gender equality, particularly as women’s educational attainment surpasses that of men in many regions.
Despite these advances, persistent inequalities continue to deter some women from marrying. Even in dual-income households, women disproportionately bear the “second shift” of unpaid domestic work, spending 4.6 hours daily on caregiving and housework compared to men’s 3.1 hours (ILO, 2018). Cultural expectations further complicate this dynamic. In nations like Japan and South Korea, where traditional gender roles remain entrenched, marriage rates have plummeted to record lows as women resist sacrificing career ambitions for domestic obligations (Jones, 2019).
Educational and policy interventions are gradually addressing these disparities. As youths continue to prioritize fairness and reciprocity, marriage is increasingly redefined as a voluntary partnership of equals. Yet, systemic barriers remind us that the path to true equality remains incomplete.
7. Influence of Technology and Social Media
The proliferation of digital platforms and social media has profoundly altered relationship dynamics, reshaping how youths perceive and approach marriage. Online dating apps, such as Tinder and Bumble, have expanded the pool of potential partners, enabling users to connect with individuals beyond their immediate social circles. However, this abundance of choice has fostered a “shopping mentality,” where relationships are approached with a transactional mindset, prioritizing novelty over commitment (Rosenfeld, 2018).
Social media further complicates marital aspirations by amplifying the fear of missing out. Platforms like Instagram and TikTok curate idealized portrayals of relationships, luxurious weddings, romantic vacations, and seemingly perfect partnerships, creating unrealistic benchmarks. Technology on the other hand, has an impacts on communication patterns, altering the dynamics of intimacy. Couples increasingly rely on digital interactions, which lack the nuance of face-to-face communication, leading to misunderstandings. For instance, “phubbing” (phone snubbing) ignoring a partner in favor of a device correlates with lower relationship satisfaction and higher conflict rates (Roberts & David, 2016). Conversely, in individualistic Western cultures, technology-driven relationships prioritize personal choice, often at the expense of long-term stability.
However, the pervasive influence of technology ensures that digital platforms remain central to modern courtship, reshaping marital timelines and expectations. As youths navigate this hyperconnected landscape, marriage is increasingly viewed as a contingent choice rather than an inevitability, reflecting broader shifts toward individualism and self-determination.
8. Legal and Policy Changes
Legal and policy reforms over recent decades have profoundly redefined marital norms, particularly through the recognition of diverse relationships such as same-sex marriage, domestic partnerships, and cohabitation rights. The landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, not only expanded access to marriage but also catalyzed a cultural shift by legitimizing non-traditional unions. By affirming that marriage is a fundamental right “inherent to the liberty of the person” (Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015, p. 10), the decision challenged heteronormative frameworks and underscored the evolving nature of marriage as an institution adaptable to societal change. For instance, a 2023 Gallup poll revealed that 71% of adults aged 18–34 support same-sex marriage, with 45% agreeing that its legalization has made them more open to redefining partnership models (McCarthy, 2023).
Beyond same-sex marriage, policy changes such as no-fault divorce laws, cohabitation rights, and domestic partnership registrations have further diversified relational possibilities. In countries such as Canada and the Netherlands, cohabiting couples gain legal protections similar to those of marriage after one year of living together, thereby reducing the need to formalize relationships (Heuveline & Timberlake, 2004). Similarly, the decriminalization of same-sex relationships in 34 countries since 2000 (ILGA, 2023) has destigmatized diverse unions, fostering global acceptance. These reforms signal to younger generations that commitment need not conform to traditional marital structures to be valid or legally recognized.
Policy shifts also intersect with economic and social welfare systems, influencing marital decisions. Conversely, in the U.S., policies such as the Affordable Care Act (2010) have extended healthcare access to unmarried individuals, reducing one pragmatic incentive for marriage (Kearney & Levine, 2017). Such changes normalize alternatives, with 39% of U.S. youths now viewing cohabitation as equivalent to marriage in terms of commitment (Pew Research Center, 2023).
However, legal recognition of diverse relationships has not eradicated systemic inequities. Same-sex couples still face adoption barriers in some regions, and cohabiting partners lack inheritance rights in jurisdictions without specific protections (Bowman, 2022). These gaps highlight the incomplete nature of legal progress, yet they also fuel youth skepticism toward marriage as a panacea for stability.
Thus, legal and policy reforms have democratized partnership models, reinforcing the idea that marriage is a choice rather than a mandate. This aligns with broader cultural shifts toward individualism and self-determination, as youths increasingly prioritize personal compatibility and flexibility over institutional validation (Cherlin, 2010).
9. Cultural and Religious Diversity
Only 30% of Europeans cite religion as a key reason to marry, down from 65% in 1980. Attitudes toward marriage are deeply shaped by cultural and religious contexts, creating stark contrasts between collectivist and individualist societies. In collectivist cultures, such as those in India, China, and Nigeria, marriage remains a familial and communal obligation rather than an individual choice. For example, 84% of Indian marriages are arranged by families, reflecting the prioritization of social stability, caste compatibility, and economic alliances over personal preference (Allendorf, 2020). The United Nations (2019) notes that in such societies, family pressure and societal stigma against remaining unmarried incentivize youths to marry early, with 72% of women in South Asia marrying before age 25. In contrast, in individualist Western nations such as the U.S. and Sweden, personal autonomy and romantic compatibility often dominate marital decisions.
Religious diversity further complicates these dynamics. In regions where religion profoundly influences civil law, such as Middle Eastern nations, marriage is often inextricably linked to religious doctrine. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, Islamic Sharia law governs marriage contracts, requiring male guardianship for women (Norris & Inglehart, 2011), reflecting a broader decline in institutional religiosity. This trend aligns with the rise of “spiritual but not religious” identities, where youths seek meaning beyond traditional religious frameworks (Fuller, 2001).
However, religious and cultural norms still intersect with modernity in complex ways. In countries like Japan, despite high secularization, traditional Shinto weddings remain popular, blending ritual symbolism with contemporary aesthetics (Borovoy, 2022).
Persistent tensions emerge where cultural or religious values clash with modern ideals. Conversely, backlash against secularism is rising in some regions. For example, Poland’s conservative government has restricted divorce and LGBTQ+ rights to uphold Catholic values (Graff & Korolczuk, 2022). These conflicts highlight the role of marriage as a battleground for broader ideological struggles between tradition and progress.
Thus, cultural and religious diversity ensures that marriage cannot be homogenized. While secularization and individualism dominate in the West, collectivist and religious frameworks endure elsewhere, creating a global tapestry of marital norms. Youths increasingly navigate these complexities, balancing inherited traditions with evolving aspirations for autonomy and equality.
10. Psychological Factors and Fear of Divorce
The psychological impact of witnessing parental divorces and the pervasive fear of marital dissolution have significantly shaped youth attitudes toward marriage, fostering caution and redefining perceptions of commitment. Research by Scott et al. (2013) reveals that 60% of young adults whose parents divorced harbor anxieties about replicating similar outcomes, leading many to delay marriage or forgo it entirely. This phenomenon, termed the “divorce hangover,” stems from the intergenerational transmission of marital instability, where children of divorced parents are statistically more likely to divorce themselves—a risk amplified by 50% compared to those from intact families (Amato & Patterson, 2017).
Amato, Loomis, and Booth's (1995) study explores how parental marital conflict and divorce affect offspring well-being in early adulthood, emphasizing the role of pre-divorce conflict. They found that when parents divorce after high conflict, children tend to fare better than if the parents stayed together in a high-conflict marriage. Conversely, children from low-conflict marriages are often worse off when their parents divorce, highlighting that the emotional environment prior to divorce is a critical factor in determining outcomes for children (Amato, Loomis, & Booth, 1995).
Therapy culture further amplifies these anxieties by framing marriage as a high-stakes emotional commitment requiring meticulous preparation. The proliferation of self-help literature, relationship podcasts, and therapeutic discourse emphasizes “emotional readiness,” encouraging individuals to resolve personal traumas and communication issues before getting married. For example, 68% of couples now attend premarital counseling, a threefold increase since 2000, reflecting the internalization of therapy-driven ideals (APA, 2022). Influential works, such as The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work (Gottman & Silver, 2018), reinforce the notion that marital success requires relentless effort and self-awareness, thereby raising the bar for entry into marriage. Social media influencers and mental health advocates further popularize terms like “toxic relationships” and “emotional labor,” intensifying scrutiny of potential partners’ flaws (Illouz, 2019).
While this focus on preparedness may reduce divorce rates, it also fosters perfectionism, with 41% of youths believing they must achieve an “ideal self” before marrying (Taylor, Funk, & Clark, 2007, as cited in Finkel et al., 2014).
Paradoxically, the fear of divorce coexists with declining divorce rates in many regions, as delayed marriages correlate with greater stability (Kennedy & Ruggles, 2014). However, the cultural narrative of divorce as a pervasive threat persists, partly due to media sensationalism and anecdotal horror stories. This cognitive distortion exacerbates reluctance to commit, particularly among women, who often associate marriage with disproportionate domestic burdens (Gerson, 2011).
Conclusion
Youth attitudes toward marriage have shifted significantly, influenced by economic instability, cultural changes, and evolving personal values. Marriage is no longer seen as an obligatory milestone but a deliberate choice shaped by personal fulfillment, economic security, and career priorities. The rise of individualism, the increasing importance of education and career advancement especially for women has led many young people to delay marriage or embrace alternatives like cohabitation. Economic challenges, such as student debt and housing costs, have further delayed marital commitments, with many viewing marriage as a “luxury” for those financially secure.
Legal and cultural changes, including the legalization of same-sex marriage and the acceptance of diverse relationship models, have expanded the definition of commitment, allowing for more flexibility in partnership choices. Technology and social media also play a role, reshaping how relationships are formed and perceived, though they can create unrealistic expectations.
Despite these shifts, traditional values around marriage still hold strong in some societies, particularly where family and religious norms dictate marriage as a communal obligation. The fear of divorce, heightened by witnessing parental divorces, also contributes to cautious attitudes toward commitment.
References
Amato, P. R., & Patterson, S. (2017). The intergenerational transmission of union instability in early adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79(3), 723–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12384
Amato, P. R., Loomis, L. S., & Booth, A. (1995). Parental Divorce, Marital Conflict, and Offspring Well-being during Early Adulthood. Social Forces, 73(3), 895–915. https://doi.org/10.2307/2580551
Arnett, J. J. (2015). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Barroso, A., Parker, K., & Bennett, J. (2020). As Millennials near 40, they're approaching family life differently than previous generations. Washington DC: Pew Research Center.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. SAGE Publications.
Carnevale, A., Wenzinger, E., & Cheah, B. (2021). The College Payoff More Education Doesn’t Always Mean More Earnings. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. hdl.handle.net/10822/1062946
Cherlin, A. J. (2010). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. Vintage.
Coontz, S. (2006). Marriage, a history: How love conquered marriage. Penguin Books.
Deloitte. (2025). 2025 Gen Z and Millennial Survey: Growth and the pursuit of money, meaning, and well-being. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.
Edwards, W. (1989). Modern Japan through its weddings: Gender, person, and society in ritual portrayal. Stanford University Press.
Finkel, E. J., et al. (2014). The suffocation of marriage: Climbing Mount Maslow without enough oxygen. Psychological Inquiry, 25(1), 1-41.
Fuller, R. C. (2001). Spiritual, but not religious: Understanding unchurched America. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gerson, K. (2011). The unfinished revolution: Coming of age in a new era of gender, work, and family. Oxford University Press.
Goldscheider, F., et al. (2015). The gender revolution: A framework for understanding changing family and demographic behavior. Population and development review, 41(2), 207-239.
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (2018). The seven principles for making marriage work. Hachette UK.
Graff, A., & Korolczuk, E. (2022). Anti-gender politics in the populist moment. Routledge.
Greenstone, M., & Looney, A. (2012). The marriage gap: The impact of economic and technological change on marriage rates. Brookings Institution, February, 3.
Heuveline, P., & Timberlake, J. M. (2004). The role of cohabitation in family formation: The United States in comparative perspective. Journal of marriage and family, 66(5), 1214-1230.
ILGA. (2023). State-sponsored homophobia report. International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association.
Illouz, E. (2019). The end of love: A sociology of negative relations. Oxford University Press.
Jones, G. W. (2019). Ultra-low fertility in East Asia: policy responses and challenges. Asian Population Studies, 15(2), 131-149.
ILO. (2018). Care Work and Care Jobs for the Future of Decent Work. International Labour Organisation (ILO).
Kearney, M. S., & Levine, P. B. (2017). The economics of nonmarital childbearing and the marriage premium for children. Annual Review of Economics, 9(1), 327-352.
Kennedy, S., & Ruggles, S. (2014). Breaking up is hard to count: The rise of divorce in the United States, 1980–2010. Demography, 51(2), 587-598.
Kiernan, K. (2001). The rise of cohabitation and childbearing outside marriage in Western Europe. International journal of law, policy and the family, 15(1), 1-21.
Lesthaeghe, R. (2014). The second demographic transition: A concise overview of its development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(51), 18112-18115. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1420441111
Manning, W. D. (2017). Cohabitation and child well-being. In Family and child well-being after welfare reform (pp. 113-128). Routledge.
McCarthy, J. (2023, June 5). U.S. Same-Sex Marriage Support Holds at 71% High. Gallup News. Retrieved September 30, 2025, from https://news.gallup.com/poll/506636/sex-marriage-support-holds-high.aspx
Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge University Press.
Pedulla, D. S., & Thébaud, S. (2015). Can we finish the revolution? Gender, work-family ideals, and institutional constraint. American sociological review, 80(1), 116-139.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and schuster.
Roberts, J. A., & David, M. E. (2016). My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Computers in human behavior, 54, 134-141.
Rosenfeld, M. J. (2018). Who wants the breakup? Gender and breakup in heterosexual couples. In Social networks and the life course: Integrating the development of human lives and social relational networks (pp. 221-243). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Tobin, B. (2023). The Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships: Emerging Families in Ireland and Beyond. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Zang, E. (2020). When Family Property Becomes Individual Property: Intrahousehold Property Ownership and Women's Well‐Being in China. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(4), 1213-1233.
Post a Comment