Chapter 2 Exercises: A Brief History of Courtship

Discussion Questions

1. The "Natural" Trap

The chapter argues that what any society calls "natural" about courtship reflects its particular arrangements of power, economics, and ideology. Think about a courtship norm that you have experienced, observed, or grown up with that is often described as simply "natural" — something people do without thinking about it as a social convention.

  • What is the norm?
  • Who does it benefit? Who does it cost?
  • Can you find any historical or cross-cultural evidence that this norm is not universal?
  • Does knowing the norm is historically contingent change how you think about it? Why or why not?

Come prepared to discuss with specific examples rather than generalities. The most productive discussions happen when people are specific rather than abstract.

2. The Arranged/Love Binary

The chapter challenges the popular Western assumption that courtship systems fall into two neat categories: "arranged marriage" (described as backward, coercive, pre-modern) and "love marriage" (described as natural, free, modern). Drawing on the case of South Asian diaspora communities, the Japanese omiai tradition, and your own knowledge:

  • Is the arranged/love binary a useful analytical tool, or does it distort more than it clarifies?
  • If the binary is inadequate, what better framework might we use to describe the spectrum of partner-selection practices?
  • Jordan argues in the chapter that there is "no correct way" — only power relations and negotiations. Do you agree? Are there some elements of courtship systems you would defend as better or worse on principled grounds?

3. Technology and Courtship Change

The chapter traces a pattern: new technologies consistently disrupt courtship norms and are consistently greeted with both excitement and alarm. The automobile, the telephone, the internet, and the smartphone all follow this pattern.

  • What current technological development do you think is in the process of transforming courtship right now? (Consider AI companions, virtual reality, social media beyond dating apps, etc.)
  • Based on the historical pattern, what kinds of responses — positive and negative — would you predict from different groups?
  • The chapter asks: what have we gained and what have we lost from the digital transition in courtship? Apply this same question to the technology you identified.

Comparative Activity: An Interview Across Generations

Purpose: To collect primary historical data about how courtship norms have changed within living memory, and to practice the skill of using individual testimony as a window into social history.

Instructions:

Identify an older adult in your life — a grandparent, great-aunt or great-uncle, neighbor, family friend, or community elder — who is willing to speak with you about how they met their partner (or, if unmarried, about their experience of dating or courtship). This person does not need to be blood family, and the conversation need not be about a successful marriage. People who dated in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, or even 1980s and 1990s lived through significant transformations.

Suggested interview questions (adapt as appropriate to your context):

  1. How did you typically meet new people you were romantically interested in? What were the normal channels?
  2. What were the conventions around asking someone out, or being asked? Who typically initiated?
  3. Were there things that were clearly "not done" — behaviors considered inappropriate or that would damage someone's reputation?
  4. Did your family play any role in your dating life or in choosing a partner? What kind of role?
  5. Did your experience of courtship differ because of your background — your race, religion, economic situation, or where you lived?
  6. What do you think the young people of your time understood about courtship that you think today's young people might be missing? And what do you think today's young people have that you didn't?

Written Component (400–500 words):

After your interview, write a brief reflection that does the following: - Summarizes two or three specific things you learned that you didn't expect - Connects what you heard to at least one concept or historical period from the chapter - Reflects honestly on the limits of single-interview evidence: what can one person's account tell you, and what does it leave out?

Written Reflection: My Courtship Background

Purpose: To apply sociological self-analysis to your own experience, recognizing that the most intimate aspects of our lives are also social phenomena.

Instructions:

In 500–700 words, reflect on the following:

Every person grows up embedded in specific cultural, religious, familial, and community contexts that shape their expectations about courtship — how it should proceed, what it means, what the goal is, who the eligible partners are. These contexts are not destiny, but they are not nothing either.

Address the following in your reflection:

  1. What scripts did you inherit? What did you learn, explicitly or implicitly, about how romantic relationships are supposed to begin and develop? From family? From religious community? From media? From peers?

  2. How do these scripts intersect with your identity? How have your gender, sexuality, race, class background, or other aspects of your identity shaped what scripts were available to you, or what was expected of you?

  3. Where have you followed the script and where have you departed from it? Were departures conscious or unconscious? What happened when you departed?

  4. What in this chapter changed how you see your own inherited courtship scripts? You don't need to have had a dramatic revelation; honest, modest insight is equally valuable.

A note on disclosure: This reflection is about sociological self-analysis, not personal confession. You are not required to share information about your own relationships that you are not comfortable sharing. You can write about the scripts you grew up with without disclosing your personal romantic history. Focus on the social and cultural context, not the private details.

Exercises for Chapter 3 will ask you to evaluate empirical research designs — we'll be working with real studies, assessing their methods and their claims. Come to class prepared to be productively skeptical.