1. Giddens (1992) The Transformation of Intimacy
Romantic Love Confluent Love/Pure Relationship
Transformation
What caused this change?
What are the consequences of this transformation?
Pure Love Relationship is the dominant cultural form

2. Aspects of the Pure Relationship
Definition (p.58; p.4 Gross & Simmons))
Voluntary
Egalitarian
Communicative
Satisfying

3. Modernization Industrialization
Increasing rationalization in society (de-traditionalization)
Increased expert systems
Increased individualism (key social unit)
Increased pace of change
Globalization: provides alternatives
Self as an “open project” and “reflexive questioning” (Giddens)

4. Modernization and Intimacy
Giddens is the heir of the “genuine ambivalence” about modernity
Self as Project (“everyday social experiments”; “reflexive questioning”)
Romantic Love = 1st phase of modern intimacy
Confluent Love = mid - late 20th century

5. Structural Contradiction and Effects of the Pure Relationship
Pure relationship requires commitment but provides no guarantees. Intimacy is risky. (p.137)
Effects:
 Increased uncertainty, instability, insecurity (negative)
 greater equality, more democratic personal relationships (positive)
New gender dynamics for heterosexuals
Declining status of marriage as a social institution

6. Gross & Simmons (2002) Intimacy as a Double-Edged Phenomenon
Empirical test of Giddens theory on intimacy and sexual relationships
Data from 1995 in the U.S. (MIDUS); adults (25-74); 2000 with partners
Independent variable: pure love relationship

7. 3 Categories of Relationship
Pure Love (for variables see p.8)
Romantic Love
Hybrid
[Measured by:
Intimacy
Attitudes about relationship traditionalism
Behavior of nontraditionalism]

8. Hypotheses on Impacts of Pure Relationships
H1:Heightened feelings of autonomy
H2:Happier with relationships
H3:More egalitarian political views
H4:Higher levels of anxiety
H5:More addiction
H4 and H5
not supported