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 andH5 not supported