valuable asset and was seen to increase, rather than inhibit, job security (Lee 2001: ii-13). According to one sociologist's interpretation of the time—characteristically exaggerated for illustrative purposes—these economic and work-related aspects alone, “created a society in which people's lives were as highly standardized as the sheet steel from which the cars were welded together” (Beck 2000: 68).
These social conditions corresponded to a value system that remained unchallenged in its normative validity until the rising discontent of the 1960s. Open same-sex relationships were extremely risqué and hence rare, and same-sex parenthood (as opposed to guardianship) was unimaginable. The heterosexual nuclear family prevailed as the ideal. It is during this time that early marriage and family formation came to be lived experience for many adults.2 Add to this the opportunities provided by the labor market, and a picture emerges that one commentator draws with clarity:
[O]nce ‘adult’ and employed, one could expect to stay ‘the same’ for the rest of one's life in a range of ways; one's identity was stabilized by sharing the work environment with more or less the same people throughout one's working life; the geographical area one lived in would remain the same since the organization one belonged to had set down firm roots in that area; and, even if one were dissatisfied with one's job, one would not have to seek a position with another organization (in another place with different people) because time and effort would bring the reward of career progression. (Lee 2001: 12–13)
Flexibility—first a buzzword in the New Capitalism (Sennett 1998, 2006) and now a taken for granted imperative in all social relations—was as yet a far-off reality. Becoming adult was a matter of following a life course that resembled a veritable march through the institutions of marriage, parenthood, and work. By today's standards these objective markers of adulthood were relatively fixed, achievable, and supported by an overarching value consensus. There was a high degree of fit between norms and social practice. Sharply delineated structures of opportunity rested on culturally and socially reproduced normative foundations that were, for a time, rarely questioned. With fulltime long-term work within reach for a majority, and with early marriage and family formation so common, what being grown up meant was clear. The fulfillment of the classic markers of adulthood (family, stable relationships, work, and independent living) brought in its wake the social recognition necessary for adult status to become a meaningful achievement. The experience of affluence and stability after the Second World War thus added its share of securities to the vision of standard adulthood, a now crystallized social representation.
Not all was well in the Golden Age, however. For one, growing up as a member of the postwar generation in the West was to live a contradiction. The Cold War meant that the new reality of increased chances for social mobility and relative affluence, and the belief in continuing economic and technological advance, was checked by the knowledge that the possibility of total annihilation was just as real. For example, the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 served as a stark reminder of tragic possibilities.3 The lived contradiction of threat and opportunity underpinned one of the so-called “baby boomer” generation's defining mottos: “We're not here for a long time, we're here for a good time” (Mackay 1997: 62). As we shall see in chapter 4, this attitude marks an ideological transformation in the meaning of youth that was to reverberate decades into the future and that significantly altered the meaning of adulthood.
My schematic equation—economic stability plus an explicitly sanctioned normative consensus equals a stable adult identity—is not intended to be positive nostalgia.4 After all, standard adulthood was highly gendered in an era when the labor market overwhelmingly favored men as breadwinners. It would also be a gross historical misrepresentation were this image to be generalized to include marginalized groups. The kind of stability and predictability of life suggested by this model of adulthood is based primarily upon the experiences of white, heterosexual, middle-class males; on experiences, that is, that were lived in mainstream families and reproduced in mainstream culture, whatever the extant inequalities. The crux of the matter is this: the real differences did not diminish standard adulthood's normative status as the ultimate benchmark for adult maturity. Our contemporary associations of adulthood with stability arose from that generation's experiences and expectations.
Today standard adulthood as a norm remains robust, though it may be increasingly counterfactual for many. It is still associated with the ideals of stable relationships, stable work and income, a family of one's own, and independent living (Furstenberg et al. 2003; 2004). Framed in the language of a specific kind of maturity, standard adulthood promises greater self-understanding and the self-confidence that comes with the accumulation of social competencies. In these terms, settling down is not to be shunned. When the experience of opportunity, possibility, and stability is passed from one generation to the next and is focused in a notion such as adulthood, it stands to reason that this cultural idea should become a powerful ideal.
Classic Markers of Adulthood
The achievement of adult status has to do with “sets of practical accomplishments, and repertoires of behaviour” (Pilcher 1995: 86). This is particularly necessary in modern societies due to the absence of all-encompassing, firmly instituted rites of passage to adulthood. Thus there are various signposts that serve to identify and acknowledge individuals as adults, such as age, independent living, stable relationships, parenthood, stable employment, and the right to vote, to name a few. The descriptors of adulthood discussed below are limited to those objective markers of adulthood that have long standing salience as achievements that are deeply embedded in dynamics of social recognition. As ideal-typical yardsticks for commonsense and social scientific judgments regarding individuals' status, these classic markers are the tangibles of standard adulthood.
Marriage with its ritualistic inauguration is one such instance. It is ingrained in the social imaginary and as such most closely approximates a transition ritual from adolescence to adulthood. Through marriage people enter into a union underwritten by a tacit understanding that responsibility and commitment, central notions in the cultural vocabulary of adulthood, are vital ingredients for its success. The institution of marriage and adult status are linked through the symbolism of the wedding ring. This badge of membership in the world of adults can be a sign of integrity; it can signify a shared fate; it can spell “off limits” as well as “discretion assured.” Above all, it symbolizes an act of commitment, its diminishing chances of survival notwithstanding.5 Marriage evinces the overcoming of reputed youthful self-absorption and hedonism. In everyday life it connotes the achievement of adulthood anchored in commitment and responsibility to someone (spouse) and something (a stable relationship).
As Eisenstadt (1971: 30) maintains, adult status “coincides with the transition period from the family of orientation to that of procreation, as it is through this transition that the definite change of age roles, from receiver to transmitter of cultural tradition, from child to parent, is effected.” The social validation attained through parenthood is palpable in everyday interaction. Outings with children often involve conversations with strangers, previously perhaps a rarity. In the supermarket, at the bus stop, in the park; there always appears to be someone willing to share their experiences, wanting a peek at your baby, encouraging or reprimanding your particular style of child rearing, commenting on the difficulties of work/life balance. To paraphrase a respondent (with sociological training) in my sample who had recently been “catapulted” into twin fatherhood, this is “social integration at its most intimate.” Particularly in the post-Second World War era, adulthood and family life were inextricably bound together in the social imagination. As Furstenberg et al. (2004: 35) put it with reference to the United States: “By the 1950s and 1960s, most Americans viewed family roles and adult responsibilities as nearly synonymous. In that era, most women married before they were 21 and had at least one child before they were 23. For men, having the means to marry and support a family was the defining characteristic of adulthood, while for women, merely getting married and becoming a mother conferred adult status.”
Many of us remember the question “what do you want to be
