Contesting individualization and individualism in marriage in East Asia: Dual-income couples' monetary practices.

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Chieh Hsu
{"title":"Contesting individualization and individualism in marriage in East Asia: Dual-income couples' monetary practices.","authors":"Chieh Hsu","doi":"10.1111/1468-4446.13170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study uncovers Taiwanese dual-earner couples' monetary practices and explores how the marriage institution is conceived of in the context of East Asian familism and the sweeping trend of individualism. Ample cross-national research has investigated household finances and money management among couples over time, yielding mostly Western-oriented insights. It is nevertheless matched with little evidence from East Asian societies that share similar trends of individualization. Drawing from interviews with 22 couples and 3 married individuals (N = 47) in Taiwan, who are at least university-educated, middle-class, and on average in their mid-30s, this paper analyzes couples' monetary practices from a relationship constellation perspective that factors in resources from intergenerational transfer, as well as individual spouses' interpretation of their practices. Individualized management was found to be exceedingly prevalent among Taiwanese couples, unlike couples elsewhere that predominantly adopt pooling. Institutionalized individualization, on the one hand, posed higher hurdles for joint management and pooling. On the other, most interviewees showed an individualistic orientation in their practices, which can be seen as a strategy to anticipate and manage risks-marriage dissolution among others-in a highly uncertain world. Embedding monetary practices in the 'individualization without individualism' debate, this study unveils how the traditional marriage institution is implicitly challenged by not only increasing institutionalized individualization but also an ideational shift towards individualism, often assumed to not have taken root in East Asia. The empirical evidence from Taiwan sheds new light on both resource management in marriage and on how intimate relationships are constrained by institutional and socio-cultural contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":51368,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.13170","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study uncovers Taiwanese dual-earner couples' monetary practices and explores how the marriage institution is conceived of in the context of East Asian familism and the sweeping trend of individualism. Ample cross-national research has investigated household finances and money management among couples over time, yielding mostly Western-oriented insights. It is nevertheless matched with little evidence from East Asian societies that share similar trends of individualization. Drawing from interviews with 22 couples and 3 married individuals (N = 47) in Taiwan, who are at least university-educated, middle-class, and on average in their mid-30s, this paper analyzes couples' monetary practices from a relationship constellation perspective that factors in resources from intergenerational transfer, as well as individual spouses' interpretation of their practices. Individualized management was found to be exceedingly prevalent among Taiwanese couples, unlike couples elsewhere that predominantly adopt pooling. Institutionalized individualization, on the one hand, posed higher hurdles for joint management and pooling. On the other, most interviewees showed an individualistic orientation in their practices, which can be seen as a strategy to anticipate and manage risks-marriage dissolution among others-in a highly uncertain world. Embedding monetary practices in the 'individualization without individualism' debate, this study unveils how the traditional marriage institution is implicitly challenged by not only increasing institutionalized individualization but also an ideational shift towards individualism, often assumed to not have taken root in East Asia. The empirical evidence from Taiwan sheds new light on both resource management in marriage and on how intimate relationships are constrained by institutional and socio-cultural contexts.

东亚婚姻中的个人化和个人主义之争:双职工夫妇的货币实践。
本研究揭示了台湾双职工夫妇的理财实践,并探讨了在东亚家庭主义和个人主义大潮的背景下,如何看待婚姻制度。随着时间的推移,大量跨国研究对夫妻间的家庭财务和金钱管理进行了调查,得出的见解大多以西方为导向。然而,与之相匹配的是,来自东亚社会的证据却很少,而东亚社会也有类似的个人化趋势。本文通过对台湾 22 对夫妇和 3 位已婚人士(N=47)的访谈(这些人至少受过大学教育、属于中产阶级、平均年龄在 30 岁左右),从关系星座的角度分析了夫妇的理财实践,其中考虑到了代际转移的资源以及配偶个人对其实践的解释。研究发现,个人化管理在台湾夫妻中极为普遍,这与其他地方的夫妻主要采取共同管理不同。一方面,制度化的个人化给共同管理和共同财产带来了更大的障碍。另一方面,大多数受访者在实践中表现出个人主义倾向,这可以被视为在高度不确定的世界中预测和管理风险(婚姻解体等)的一种策略。本研究将货币实践纳入 "无个人主义的个人化 "辩论中,揭示了传统婚姻制度如何受到日益制度化的个人化以及向个人主义转变的意识形态的隐性挑战。来自台湾的经验证据为婚姻中的资源管理以及亲密关系如何受到制度和社会文化背景的制约提供了新的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: British Journal of Sociology is published on behalf of the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) is unique in the United Kingdom in its concentration on teaching and research across the full range of the social, political and economic sciences. Founded in 1895 by Beatrice and Sidney Webb, the LSE is one of the largest colleges within the University of London and has an outstanding reputation for academic excellence nationally and internationally. Mission Statement: • To be a leading sociology journal in terms of academic substance, scholarly reputation , with relevance to and impact on the social and democratic questions of our times • To publish papers demonstrating the highest standards of scholarship in sociology from authors worldwide; • To carry papers from across the full range of sociological research and knowledge • To lead debate on key methodological and theoretical questions and controversies in contemporary sociology, for example through the annual lecture special issue • To highlight new areas of sociological research, new developments in sociological theory, and new methodological innovations, for example through timely special sections and special issues • To react quickly to major publishing and/or world events by producing special issues and/or sections • To publish the best work from scholars in new and emerging regions where sociology is developing • To encourage new and aspiring sociologists to submit papers to the journal, and to spotlight their work through the early career prize • To engage with the sociological community – academics as well as students – in the UK and abroad, through social media, and a journal blog.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信