 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|
Like most of the thirty-seven million young Americans who are choosing to postpone marriage for their thirties and beyond, Watters belonged to a tight-knit group of friends that were, as he wrote, ?struggling to do something creative and support each other as they lived life between the families they grew up in and the families they might someday start for themselves.? Did they have extra free time on their hands? Certainly. Did they embrace hedonism? At times, like it was their best friend. But to Watters, these groups had value far beyond the guarantee that someone would be around to pass the hallucinogenic; that value suggested the urban tribe could even revitalize marriage.
Is the urban tribe a new phenomenon, or have you simply given a name to something that's been around for generations? It's not new in the sense that this is an organic, natural thing that human beings do. In previous generations, people who lived in a city outside of a [traditional] family would form groups like this. It's exactly what you see in gay and lesbian cultures over the last century. In fact, the people who write about gay and lesbian culture have thought a lot more about the meaning of friendship and groups of friends than heterosexuals have. How has the relative importance of friendship groups changed in recent years? The difference with our generation is twofold. One is that many more people are living their lives outside of a family — particularly many more women. The second, and most important, distinction is that we're doing this much longer than any other generation. The difference between a group of friends that will exist for three years after college, and one that exists for thirteen years after college, is dramatic. With every additional year that you live within a social group, that group has a tendency to become more distinct. The roles people take within that group become more defined. The rituals become more ritualized and more meaningful, and the more likely the group is to continue into another year.
I'm a good example of why the answer to that question is probably ?No?. Most of my tribe years were pre-internet. I know it seems crazy to imagine that, but this thing happened in my life long before those [friend] connections were facilitated by e-mail. However, there's a potential for larger communities to be created from these smaller, individual groups because of this technology. Do you ever look at Friendster? I do, and if Friendster had come into my worldview before I finished the book, I certainly would have written about it. The site is an exact visual representation of what you're writing about. You must feel gratified. Absolutely. I immediately sent an advance copy of my book to [Friendster founder] Jonathan Abrams, and he was gratified that I was identifying [on paper] the phenomenon he was creating through the internet. Abrams has literally illustrated one of the points I make in the book about the importance of the weak ties ? the friends of the friends you haven't met just yet — in our lives. It's the weak ties that make us feel connected to the city we live in. It's the friend of a friend who is going to pass along a job tip that will eventually make its way back to you and change your life next year. I think understanding how your group connects to other people, how it can help this larger community, is important to be conscious of. Friendster was created as a civilization-building game and as a dating site. What do you think about this instant conflation of potential sex partner and tribe? You can make the case that Friendster — and urban tribes in general — are not the best way to meet the person of your dreams. You're fundamentally bringing your friends into the selection process. You're allowing them to be more influential than they might otherwise be. And you don't necessarily want to enter a relationship with a whole lot of information flowing from your friends to the new potential partner. Which leads us to my favorite part of the book, ?Queen Bees and Cockblockers.? The Queen Bee is a woman in the group who wants to have all the flirtatious energy directed toward her. It seems to be a common thing. But like I say in the book, this is not simply a negative role. If you're a single guy and you don't have a date one night, the Queen Bee is likely to give you this fantastic flirtatious attention that's going to make your evening great — even if it doesn't lead to sexual activity. But if you're bringing a new woman to the group, you can generally count on the Queen Bee to say something along the lines of, ?Well, she's not good enough for you.? Meaning, "I want to remain the central person people flirt with." And who's the Cockblocker? I love that word. He's the guy who tends to throw himself at any potential new romantic partner that comes into the group's orbit. He does so regardless of whether or not he actually has a shot at becoming involved with that person. And it tends to get in the way of other guys in the group, who might like to take a longer path in getting to know this person. It's interesting that even though there's a familial quality to most tribes, sexual tension seems to be a prevailing theme. I did notice a latent sexual energy among most urban tribes. There's a lot of touching; people go skinny-dipping together; they give each other massages. They go on road trips and sleep in the same hotel bed. On paper, this is all platonic, but if you look at it emotionally you see there's an ambient sexual charge. All these people are young; all these people are the same age. There's going to be sexual energy there regardless of whether the people in the tribe actually act on it or not. And I think that may actually grow over the years if you stay single and are without a romantic partner for a significant amount of time. It makes you wonder if in ten or twenty years the urban tribe will have transformed into the urban polyamorous tribe. This may be the seed of something that will be the next generation's new thing. That they'll make less of a distinction between friendships and people they have sexual lives with. It would be fascinating if it was.
Sex and romance is a primary topic of conversation among tribe members. I'm curious how forthcoming people were with you. People were extremely forthcoming. I had a survey up [on my website], asking people to email me information about their group. I got more than a thousand responses. People told me everything about their tribes, including very intimate information about the sexual lives within the groups; whether they dated within the groups, fooled around or didn't fool around. I didn't even ask them for the dirt. They simply offered it up. What was the most surprising group position on inter-tribal dating or fooling around? There was a wide spectrum. There were groups where dating was not tolerated. In other groups, fooling around was not only tolerated, it was one of the reasons the group existed! People tended to end up with each other at the end of the night. All the groups you surveyed were unique in terms of size and makeup, but did any patterns emerge in terms of romance? No real pattern said the average urban tribe is one thing or another. But in the groups where people aren't allowed to date, I think that inevitably someone breaks the rule. Hopefully, one of the unwritten rules of those groups is, if you're going to date make sure you're serious about it. Make sure this is worth the risk to the group. You're going to put us in this situation where we're potentially going to have to choose sides if things go badly. Make sure it's not just a one-night stand. Make sure it has the potential to go the distance. It's interesting that you say ?go the distance.? It surprised me that marriage was something that most of the people you talked to not only wanted, but also held in very high regard. That is definitely true. I think the vast majority of them are interested in children and long-term loves, and many — I think most — are interested in marriage. I'm very much like my generation in that way. We're hard realists. We've gone through a number of relationships and know that they're difficult, that they change over time, so we're cautious about marriage but not about love. You could even make the case that we're more romantic about marriage, that there's a higher marriage ideal than in previous generations. We don't simply want to find a spouse who can fulfill his or her role as a husband or a wife; we're looking for someone who we're deeply connected to. And even though tribes often hinder new romantic pursuits outside the group, you suggest that a person's tribe can ultimately help them have a better, more successful marriage or life partner? I fundamentally believe so, but for a reason that's not particularly obvious. I think tribes are really good at helping you become your best self. That typically makes you more valuable in anything you do in life. Whether professionally or romantically, it makes you a more solid person. In my case, it made me into the person [my wife] Rebecca was interested in marrying. I was a person in and of myself, and I was confident in and of myself, and I think the best way to enter a partnership is not by looking for someone to ?complete me.? I think that makes a marriage much more likely to succeed. Do you consider yourself an advocate of marriage? Just because my particular story ended with me getting married doesn't mean I'm encouraging people to get married. In fact, the fundamental text of the book is: look for the value in your single years and your single relationships. Don't let culture tell you that you're any less of a person because you're in a ?holding pattern.? There's a value in the urban tribe that goes beyond not being lonely. It's valuable to my career and to my sense of self. That is the message of the book. How do you envision the future of marriage? Marriage has been stripped of its meaning in terms of a bridge to adulthood, a way to establish your financial life, and the only way you end up having children. When you strip marriage of those meanings, you're encouraging more people not to choose it. And I imagine that's what's going to happen. Are fewer people getting married now? Yes. Our generation has delayed it the longest, so we may be forging new ground. But does that mean that, in the end, there will be fewer marriages? Probably, when all is said and done. But how big that percentage is, is kind of an open question. In your two years of research, what was strangest group you encountered? One person e-mailed me saying, 'm an urban tribe of one.? And I kindly tried to e-mail him back and say, ?You know, I'm glad you're happy, but if I'm going to be the arbiter of what's an urban tribe and what isn't, I want this definition to be inclusive but not so inclusive as to narrow it down to one." n°
?2003 hooksexup.com.
|
|
|||||||
wo years ago, Ethan Watters proffered one of the politest "fuck you's" to conservative commentators in recent memory. It took the form of a New York Times article that coined the term "urban tribes." Then single and in his late twenties, Watters wrote the piece partially to refute the assumptions of marriage "experts" and right-wing pundits that his was a lifestyle fueled by solipsism and self-indulgence.
| featured personal | ||||||||||||||||||||
| partner links | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| sponsored links | ||||||||||||||||||||
| EDUN LIVE Ethical tees. 10% off with code AFRICA Advertisers, click here to get listed! |
||||||||||||||||||||
, featuring curious yet marvelous infusions of cucumber and rose petal.
