Intercultural marriages: An intrareligious perspective

Internatu,nalJournalo! Intemultural Relations. Vol 9. pp 427-4t4. 19X5 Printed in the USA All rights reserved

0147-1767 85 $3 00 + DO ('opt. right ¢ 1986 Pergamon Press I.td

INTERCULTURAL MARRIAGES: AN INTRARELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE

M O R R I S A. GRA HA M and J U D I T H M O E A I Brigham Young Universi O, Hawaii Campus LA NETTE S. S H I Z U R U East- West Center Institute o f Culture and Communication A B S T R A CT. This study examines 108 intercultural and 62 intracuhuraL intrareligious marriages in Hawaii in terms of inferred causality or internal and external variables affecting the satisfaction of the relationship. Personal questionnaires were conducted privately by an intercuhurall.v trained interviewer with each marriage partner. Intercultural couples reported significantly more external problems (intercultural experiences attributed to extended family members, relatives, friends and community), greater assimilation pressures on the female towards accepting the husband's cuhure and greater negative responses toward intercultural marriage per se than intracuhural couples. Responses were in concurrence with the idea that for an intercultural intrareligiow marriage to succeed it demands considerable more sacrifice, patience, and commit,~ent.

Intercultural marriages are characterized by unique problems (Stuart & Abt, 1973), such as disapproval by families, friends, and their communities. These problems manifest themselves as rejection, discrimination, and sometimes even violence. These external problems produce instability in intercultural marriages (Carter & Glick, 1976) when the partners are of different cultural traditions. Partners of intercultural marriages also have greater differences in personality, communication, and social perception than partners of intracultural marriages (Tseng, McDermott, & Maretzki, 1977: Samovar, 1978). A common assumption made is that the fewer similarities between the partners' values, perceptions and communication strategies, the less stable the marriage. Stable marriages are characterized by agreement in the definitions regarding the relationship and the expected behavior of the marriage partners. An intercultural couple who have fewer similarities and have more Requests for reprints should be addressed to Morris A. Graham. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences. Brigham Young University, Hawaii Campus. l.aie. HI 96762.

427

428

M.A. Graham, ,I. Moeai, and L.S. Shizuru

differing relationship expectations would probably experience more negativity and difficulties in their marriage. Markoff (1977) has examined some common problems characteristic of intercultural marriages. Major areas of difficulty were found to be communication, value differences and coping with external disapproval. Although external factors have been shown to affect intercultural couples, a stronger mutual attraction in the early stages of intercultural relationship has also been known to occur. Driscoll, Davis, and Lipetz (1972) and Rubin (1973) found that U.S. student couples experiencing parental disapproval reported more intense feelings of love, and attraction called the "Romeo and ,luliet effect." This attraction, however, fades over time and parental interference becomes associated with an increased criticalness, frequency of bothersome behavior, and decreased trust between the couple. This attraction also inhibits the development of the understanding and acceptance that is necessary for longer lasting and more stable relationships. External interference in an intercultural marriage from parents, relatives, employers, or the community may, therefore, initially elicit more cohesion in the early stages of the intercultural relationship. "l'he same interference may later precipitate increased criticalness and lower trust. External and internal variables in interethnic (intercultural) marriages were recently examined by Fontaine and Dorch (1980) with Anglos, Blacks and Chicanos in Kansas City, Missouri, Specifically, they found that interethnic (intercultural) marriages reported: (1) more external problems than intraethnic couples, (2) more severe problems with their community, and (3) more severe problems with friends or family members. No differences were found, however, regarding the types of internal family problems; the interethnic (intercultural) couples reported more satisfaction with their family life. External problems evidenced by the interethnic (intercultural) couples were less participation in their community organizations and less of an identification with the neighborhood, lnterethnic (intercultural) couples seemed to attribute their problems to external sources. In the same study, intercountry marriages, however, reported no more several external problems than intracountry couples. They did report more problems associated with too little time together as a family and as a result were less satisfied with their family life. Apparently, dynamics operating in interethnic (intercultural marriages differ from intercountry marriages: intercountry marriage partners make more attributions for their problems internally and fewer externally. Differences in this study between partners who share the same country of origin do not include the problems of disapproval and discrimination that differences in skin color incur. Interestingly, Fontaine and Dorch (1980) did not find that intrareligious couples reported any more internal or external problems than in two-religion couples. Differences in satisfaction with the family relationship were also not found. The only meaningful difference obtained between interreligious and

Intercultural Marrtages

429

intrareligious couples was that the former reported being less religious and they and their children attended church less often. Are intercultural couples more prone to marriage difficulty because of external factors? Little understanding about the dynamics of this issue is available at present (Talmon, 1982). Carter and Glick (1976) reported that the percentage of intercultural (Anglo-Black) couples married in the 1950's that remained married in 1970 was about 50% compared to a higher percentage for intracultural couples (all Black couples: 78%; or all Anglo couples: 90%). Examination of the intercultural factor without the intervening factor of religious participation could shed light on the effect cultural differences has on intercultural marriages. Research regarding the problems and benefits of interethnic (intercultural) marriages could benefit by focusing on larger samples of intrareligious/intercountry couples. Locke ( 195 I) had found that the differences in religion were just as frequent for happily married as for divorced groups. The critical variable within the interreligious marriages appeared to be devoutness (Heiss, 1960). Religious affiliation appears to be less significant than the strength of the individual's belief. Religion, however, can be an important part of an individual's philosophy of life. For example, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of l,atter-Day Saints (Mormons) reflected the church's influence on the marriage relationship; "We were considering getting married but when he said he wasn't prepared to go to the temple, to pay a full tithing, be an active priesthood holder, fast and pray about our future . . . . that was our last date together." Faith in a c o m m o n religion can act as a mutual bond for an intercultural couple, an examination of intercultural marriages of strong religious affiliation would provide a controlled context to investigate what external factors do deter or contribute to the quality of an intercultural marriage, The multicultural, c o m m o n religious, insular setting of Laie, Hawaii, where individuals representative of many other ethnic and cultural backgrounds, including Caucasian, Black, and Hispanic, offers a unique opportunity to identify the perceived impact of cultural differences on intercultural married couples who share a c o m m o n religion. METHODS

Subjects Data was collected over a one year period from a large, random survey of Caucasian ( N = 56), S a m o a n ( N = 21), Hawaiian ( N = 37), Tonga ( N = 8), New Zealander (N = I 0), Filipino ( N = 8), Chinese (N = 7) and Japanese ( N = 6) married individuals from Laie, Kahuku and Hauula, Ohau, Hawaii. The sample included 170 intrareligious married couples (members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) of whom 108 were categorized as intercultural or interethnic in origin. Nationalities of the husbands in the intercultural

430

M.A. Graham. J. Moeai. and I,.S. Shizuru

or intercountry couples were: Caucasian American (N = 39), New Zealand (N = II ), S a m o a n (N = 37), Tongan (N = 22), Hawaiian (N = 34), Chinese ( N = 4), Filipino ( N = 4), and Japanese ( N = 3). The range of years married for the intercultural couples was from 6 months to 38 years. The mean number of years married is I I years.

Procedure

Interviews were conducted privately by a skilled interculturally trained interviewer with one partner of an intercultural couple. Guided by a semistructured questionnaire, the interview addressed: ( I ) length of marriage, (2) where did the couple meet, (3) nationality of husband, (4) nationality of wife, (5) most positive experiences of intercultural marriage, (6) negative effects, (7) wife's acceptance of husband's culture, (8) husband's cultural expectation of wife before marriage, (9) advice to someone considering an intercultural marriage, and (10) what is the intercultural marriage's effect on the children. Focus was placed on family benefits and problems with three items especially concerning the benefits and problems, such as extended family, relatives, friends, and community. The responses comparing the intercultural and intracultural couples provided data on relationship and marital problems and the effect these differences have on the perception of the married relationship. Special attention was paid to the origin of the problems, whether they were attributed to internal or external factors.

Results a n d Discussion

Intercultural couples reported significantly more external problems (intercultural stresses attributed to extended family members, relatives, friends and community) than intracultural couples (x 2 = 9.26, p .009). They seemed equally satisfied with their marriages as intracultural couples, but reported significantly more problems from external factors, e.g., the expectations or demands of extended family members of the husband. Wives experiencing difficulty accepting the husband's culture was significantly greater (x 2 = 13.26, p .001) for intercultural than intracultural couples. Apparently, wives have more pressure to assimilate culturally to their husband's culture and make greater adjustments. Intercultural couples, more than intracultural couples, seem especially prone to conflict from external forces when asked a question relating to the acceptance of their husband's culture. Open ended interview responses examined reflected various types of marital difficulties found in inter- and intracultural couples. Marital difficulties fell into the following categories as described by the content of the individuals" comments:

Intert'ultural Marriages

I) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 1 I) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21)

431

customs cultural conflicts communication difference in lifestyle food friends dispositional family children financial time roles habits prejudice value differences personal conflict moving misunderstandings language other no difficulties

Intercultural couples reported more negative responses toward their marriages; 63.47% of the intercultural couples reported negative responses as opposed to 36.53% of the intracultural couples. These responses confirm the idea that an intercultural marriage may demand a substantial amount of tolerance, patience and commitment. The intercultural wife usually perceives herself as having to give considerably in comparison to her husband. Problems for the intercultural couples emphasized intrusion or evaluation by the extended family (family), differences in customs such as gift giving (customs) and their spouses not speaking the same language (language). Interviews also indicated that when two languages are spoken in an intercultural marriage, the wife retains the dominant influence over the child and the child will learn the mother's tongue more fluently. However, if the wife speaks the husband's language as well as her own, this is not the case. If two languages are spoken in the home, the child is observed to be slower in language acquisition and comprehension. Wives reported that if the child is forced to decide his cultural identity, he will most likely follow the mother. For example, in one case where a Samoan mother was married to a Tongan father, the child was asked, "What are you?" The reply, "1 am a Samoan." Further analysis of the intercultural couples revealed strong extended family patterns for all cultural groups among the "sharing" cultures of the South Pacific (Polynesian). Interpersonal commitments of the extended family sometimes became economically demanding on young mixed couples

432

M.A. Graham..I. Moeai. and L.S. Shizuru

living outside the country of origin (e.g., Samoans). The marital clash between the so called "keeping" values of American nuclear family and the "sharing" of the extended Polynesian (Samoan) families was evident in this study. American-caucasian wives married to Samoans (75v~ of the sample), for example, reported their extended family in-laws as their most critical pressure on their marriage. Other problems reported for intercultural couples were customs and language problems. In contrast, the intracultural group indicated marital difficulties as negative aspects of the marriage in the categories of: I) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)

habits children disposition personal conflict friends financial

lntracultural couples stated difficulties dealing with problems such as not being able to deal with the messy behavior of their husband (habits), not be able to adjust to being parents (children), their husbands having a shy personality (dispositional), their not being able to conform to another style of living (personal conflict), their husbands spending too much time with friends (friends), or just financial pressures (finances). Chi square analyses were also performed. Significant differences were found between the intra- and intercultural couples in the following categories: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

customs friends family children habits personal conflict language

X- = X: = X" = X" = X" = X2 = X-" =

4.409 6.445 6.145 6.064 4.341 5.197 3.965

p p p p p p p

--- < .0357 = < .0111 = <.0132 :- < .0138 = ,< .0372 = < .0229 = < .0465

Intracultural couples were found to attribute more of their marital difficulties to external factors. Specifically, these factors would likely to be interference problems with extended family members, different cultural customs and problems due to language differences. On the other hand, intracultural couples are likely to attribute their problem to factors such as individual living habits, children, time with friends or handling financial problems. Intra- and intercultural couples describe different types of marital problems in their respective relationships. The intercultural couple seems to have an added difficulty because of the cultural difference between the marriage partners. External cultural factors such as differences in the definitions of

hlter('ultural Marriages

433

family, customs, or language problems are reported to be negative factors. Although the couples in the sample shared the same religious faith, this factor did not seem to completely ameliorate the differences in the type and quality of marital problems. Ultimately the religious factor may explain the longevity of the marriages (average length of time married = 11 years) despite the cultural factor augmenting the numerous problems already faced by the intercultural married couples.

REFERENCES C A R T E R , H., & GLICK, P.C. (1976). Marriage and divorce: A social and economic study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. D R I S C O L L , R., DAVIS, K.E., & I.IPETZ, M.E. (1972). Parental interference and romantic love: The Romeo and Juliet effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, I - I 0. F O N T A I N E, G., & D O R C H , E. (1980). Problems and benefits of close intercultural relationships. International Journal of lntercuhural Relations, 4, 329-337. HEISS, J.S. (1960). Premarital characteristics of the religiously intermarried in an urban area. American Sociological Review, 25, 47-55. LOCKE, H.J. ( 1951 ). Predicting ad/ustrnent in marriage: A comparison qf a divorced and a happilr married group. New York: Henry Holt. M A R K O F F , R. (1977). Intercultural marriage: Problem areas. In Tseng, W. McDermott, J. F.. & Maretzki, T.W. (Eds.), Ad/ustment in intercuhuralmarriage. Honoluly: University of Hawaii Press. RU BIN. Z. (I 973). Liking andloving: An invitation to so('ialpsy('hology. New York: Holt, Rinehard, and Winston. S A M OVA R, L.A. (1978). Intercultural ('ommuni('ation research: Some myths, some questions. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Intercultural Education, Training, and Research, Phoenix, Arizona. S T U A R T , I. R. & ABT, E. L. (1973). Interracialmarriage: Expe('tations and realities. New York: Grossman. T A I , M O N , M. (1982). Divorce in cross-cultural perspective: family structure and individual adjustment. Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, (3-b). TSENG, W., M C D E R M O T T , J.F. & M A R E T Z K I , T.W. (Eds.). (1977). Adjustment in intercultural marriage. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

ABSTRACT TRANSLATIONS Cette etude examine 170 mariages contractes ~ Hawaii, tous au sein d'une meme religion-f08 interculturels, et 62 i n t r a c u l t u r e l s - e t les approche en termes de causalite inferr6e ou bien de variables (internes ou externes) affectant la relation du couple.

Des entretiens priv~s

ont et6 conduit par un specialiste i n t e r c u l t u r e l .

Avec chacun des

434

M, A. Graham, J. Moeai, and I.. S. Shizuru

~poux. Les couples interculturels se sont reveles nettement plus affect~s par des probl~mes externes, attribues aux membres des bellefamilles, a la parentee, aux amis e t a la communaute; les femmes sont nettement plus sous pression concernant l'acceptation et donc l ' assimilation de la culture du mari; enfin, i l ressort davantage de r6sponses n6gatives ~ l'egard du mariage interculturel en l u i m~mequ'a l'~gard du mariage interaculturel.

Ces entretiens mirent

en r e l i e f l'id~e qu'un mariage interculturel demandebeaucoupplus de sacrifices, de patience et d'engagementque dans un mariage intraculturel, m~mecontract~

Este

estudio

examina

intraculturales internas duieron

108 m a t r i m o n i e s

~ intrareligiosos

6 externas

que afectan

cuestlonarios

un e n t r e v l s t a d o r

adiestrado mostraron

interculturales

atrihuidas

tambi@u

influencia

del

reacciones

negativas

que a q u e l l o s respuestas

bastan

te

la re]aci6n

esposo

problemas

a los

familiares,

respecto

estuvieron

mas sacrificJo,

per m a t r i m o n i e s de a c u e r d o

paciencia

yon

terminos

con cada

de v a r i a b l e s Se conc6nyuque

externos

(experiencias

amistades

6 a la

para

y un mayor

interculturales

la idea de que

(~ i n t e r - r e l i g i o s o .

para

aceptar

n~mero per

intracu]tura|es,

y resoluci6n

per

Los m a t r i m o n i e s

]a esposa

a su cuttura

matrimonies

intercultural

en

y 62 m a t r i m o n i e s

matrimonial.

interculturalmente.

mayorer

hacia

en

privadamente

rmlyor a s l m i ] a c i 6 n

mostrador

e n un m a t r i m o n i o

Interculturales

en Hawaii

personaies

interculttlra]es

communldad),

au sein d'une m~mereligion,

la

de

si mlsmo,

l,as

se requiere

que

haya

~xtto