Gerson Takes a Break From Political Debate to Lament the Sluttiness of 20-Somethings

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 10:41 AM on September 16, 2009.

Michael Gerson was on top of the world a few short years ago -- penning many of the words that the most powerful man on earth would  cruelly mangle before the cameras.

But the conservative project has come tumbling down around him (at least for the moment).There's little he can say about GOP proposals to address the many messes in which we find ourselves because for all intents and purposes there are none ('No!' and "You're a liar!' don't count).

But he's got that prime real estate on the WaPo's opinion page to fill. So what's a good conservative to do? Simple: go back to basics and indulge in some old-fashioned moral scoldery*:

There is a segment of society for whom traditional family values are increasingly irrelevant, and for whom spring-break sexual liberationism is increasingly costly: men and women in their 20s.

This is totally new. And disturbing. Gerson doesn't estimate the costs, though.

This is the period of life in which society's most important social commitments take shape -- commitments that produce stability, happiness and children.

I kind of pity Gerson here. For most of us, this is the period of life in which we make poor decisions, drink way too much, stay out late having a lot of fun and if we're able to, get laid a lot. Oh, and all without being too tired at work the next day!

But the facts of life for 20-somethings are challenging. Puberty -- mainly because of improved health -- comes steadily sooner.

This is so funny -- Gerson says it's because of "improved health." According to a report by the Breast Cancer Fund, it's due to "a combination of factors, including obesity, environmental chemicals, inactivity, premature birth, formula feeding and physical inactivity" -- improved health indeed!

Sexual activity kicks off earlier. But the average age at which people marry has grown later; it is now about 26 for women, 28 for men.

This opens a hormone-filled gap -- a decade and more of likely sexual activity before marriage. And for those in that gap, there is little helpful guidance from the broader culture.

And then you settle down -- perhaps happily or maybe not so much. Or you don't. Which brings me, as an aside, to what Atrios said of this particular offering by Gerson as it relates to newspapers' declining sales: "journalists and editors should have some clue about the business side [of the news industry]... why would anyone pay for that crap?"

Anyway, what I find somewhat entertaining is the persistent myth that earlier generations of young people didn't screw like bunnies. Perhaps they did it more covertly than those who came after the "sexual revolution," yes. Many of us got to go at it in our rooms; maybe they had to do it in parked cars at Make-out Point. And as far as I can tell, that -- like using condoms to fend off STDs -- is an improvement.

Of course, there's a point in here somewhere:

Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, argues that the "courtship narrative" in the past was clear: dating, engagement, marriage, children. This narrative has been disrupted without being replaced, leaving many 20-somethings in a "relational wasteland." The casual sex promoted in advertising and entertainment often leads, in the real world of fragile hearts and STDs, to emotional and physical wreckage.

[...]

In the absence of a courtship narrative, young people have evolved a casual, ad hoc version of their own: cohabitation. From 1960 to 2007, the number of Americans cohabiting increased fourteenfold. For some, it is a test-drive for marriage. For others, it is an easier, low-commitment alternative to marriage. About 40 percent of children will now spend some of their childhood in a cohabiting union.

How is this working out? Not very well. Relationships defined by lower levels of commitment are, not unexpectedly, more likely to break up. Three-quarters of children born to cohabiting parents will see their parents split up by the time they turn 16, compared with about one-third of children born to married parents.

Ah, but here's the rub: marriage does not equal "commitment." Consider this, from Amy Paul's review of The Marriage-Go-Round, by Andrew Cherlin: "a child in the U.S. has a greater chance of seeing his married parents break up than a child of unmarried parents in Sweden."

So, Michael, maybe it's not so much a question of being married as it is a part of being American.

*I know, "scoldery" is not a word. I like it anyway.

Tagged as: culture wars, gerson

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.