Is marriage as an institution Dying in the US?

[something better]

I think the divorce rate for first marriages now stands at 43%. 70% of those divorces are initiated by women.

Does anyone else feel that the institution of marriage is slowly dying? I just don’t see it as being economically viable for most men you have too much at risk and at stake when it fails.

As others have eloquently stated, enter, enter, never enter into a financial agreement, where one party is financially rewarded for breaking it. That to me sums up the current state of marriage laws in the US.

 

[Sinnbad11]

It's becoming less and less common, many people my age choose to date or be engaged perpetually, in a devoted relationship that is.

The divorce rate has been steadily decreasing, since about the mid 90's. Those who choose to get married nowadays are less likely to split than their parents.

I don't believe that it is dying, I think like all things in society it will ebb and flow with how many people choose to pursue it as a life goal, at the moment I suggest that it is "out of fashion" so to speak anyway.

 

[Toothpick]

Maybe it is but it’s just the natural progression of things as the new generation takes over. There are two cultures at play in the US. The Boomers and the…well everyone else basically. As the Boomers see their old ways dying off they think “what’s wrong with the world today! No one values anything anymore!“. Well, I don’t think that’s the case. The values of the people have just changed.

Marriage, buying a home, never quitting a job, a college education. All these things are “the old ways”. The way the old generation did it. The new generation just doesn’t put any faith or value in these things anymore. Instead they value other things. And those things the old generation never even thought of or had to deal with or cared about.

So as statistics are updated to say “divorce rates are at all time highs” the generation of the past sees that as “marriage is dying”. Well no…people today are just not willing to put up with infidelity. “Back in the day” it was just accepted. Well not anymore. No one gets married at 18 today and stays married for 40 years. If they get married at 18 today then the chances of divorce are significantly higher just because people grow up and realize…meh, this person sucks. Whereas back in the day it was “meh, this person sucks..but I did say till death do us part, and Betty next door won‘t invite me over for dinner parties anymore if I’m divorced”. Divorce had a stigma associated with it back then. “Ewwww they got divorced!”. Now days “Who got divorced? OH, so Betty is single now eh??”, it’s just accepted more so more people do it.

 

[something better]

Until the divorce laws and child support laws are changed. I don’t think marriage is he fair proposition to most men I think that’s really what is driving the lower rates of marriage.

How many men do not know a friend uncle father Etc, who went through a divorce and lost everything including custody of his kids. It’s hard to witness that and think marriage is a good proposition.

Because when it doesn’t work out, she’s going to get the house and the car and she’s going to use your child support payments to pay for both of them. And you’re going to be living in a rundown apartment struggling to pay rent and child support and I’ve seen that happen to so many men over the years.

 

[Legion]

Where I live, if you are in a de facto relationship for a certain amount of time the law sees you as essentially being married. So whether you went to the church, signed a marriage certificate, or just lived together for long enough, it all amounts to the same thing if it goes wrong.


Option B is to join NO MA'AM, and live alone forever.

NO MA'AM

NO MA'AM (National Organization of Men Against Amazonian Masterhood) is an anti-feminist group founded by Al Bundy in response to Women's Bowling Night replacing the Men's, and the nudie bar being turned into a Women's Coffee House. The organization was established with the intention of...

marriedwithchildren.fandom.com

 

[something better]

Where I live, if you are in a de facto relationship for a certain amount of time the law sees you as essentially being married. So whether you went to the church, signed a marriage certificate, or just lived together for long enough, it all amounts to the same thing if it goes wrong.


Option B is to join NO MA'AM, and live alone forever.

NO MA'AM

NO MA'AM (National Organization of Men Against Amazonian Masterhood) is an anti-feminist group founded by Al Bundy in response to Women's Bowling Night replacing the Men's, and the nudie bar being turned into a Women's Coffee House. The organization was established with the intention of...

marriedwithchildren.fandom.com

True it’s not enough anymore to not get married, you also can’t allow them to move in with you.

 

[Legion]

True it’s not enough anymore to not get married, you also can’t allow them to move in with you.

 

[Manye]

When my first marriage ended, and I realised I had been well and truly taken to the cleaners, the mediator told me not to worry as men usually recover financially within 5 years of a divorce settlement. 5 years! Usually! It’s been 10 years now and I am still feeling the financial ripples. Not worth it!

 

[FarmerTan]

I have been blessed in life. I lovingly call my wife "the War Department" because she's tougher than nails and I would not be alive today, or for the past 30 years at least, without her.

But if she leaves this planet before I do I will not risk another marriage. The game is rigged.

 

[FarmerTan]

I have been blessed in life. I lovingly call my wife "the War Department" because she's tougher than nails and I would not be alive today, or for the past 30 years at least, without her.

But if she leaves this planet before I do I will not risk another marriage. The game is rigged.

That is a shtoopid post, kinda.

I wrote that in such a way that leaves the Father in heaven no room to werk.

Let's just say: if HE wants an ugly old cantankerous man to be happy twice, HE will have to set up the date with destiny, because I will most DEFINITELY not be looking.

And I don't put it past Him! He got a young ugly cantankerous man a beautiful wife, and no doubt he could again.

But my present wife broke our "prenup" about talking to me when I'm reading, and our lawyers have been mediating on that subject since the honeymoon! So I will be holding out for a stronger contract next time doggone!

 

[Buster]

I remember an old saying, it’s probably not acceptable for this forum though?

 

[Chango]

Marriage is the number one cause of divorce.

 

[FarmerTan]

I remember an old saying, it’s probably not acceptable for this forum though?

My dad always told me to tell my wife when we were dating: "you make me a good living and I'll make you a good husband."

Smart ol' fart was he!

 

[hairless wonder]

Until the divorce laws and child support laws are changed. I don’t think marriage is he fair proposition to most men I think that’s really what is driving the lower rates of marriage.

How many men do not know a friend uncle father Etc, who went through a divorce and lost everything including custody of his kids. It’s hard to witness that and think marriage is a good proposition.

Because when it doesn’t work out, she’s going to get the house and the car and she’s going to use your child support payments to pay for both of them. And you’re going to be living in a rundown apartment struggling to pay rent and child support and I’ve seen that happen to so many men over the years.

I'm not sure of the jurisdiction where your uncles, brothers, friends, etc. divorced, but (at least in the US) it's highly likely they lost so much in their divorces due in no small part to gender-based pay disparity. Even today, women make only a fraction of every dollar their male counterparts make (the pay disparity was much greater ten, twenty, thirty, forty, and fifty years ago); as a result when they divorce their husbands, more women tend to receive alimony than men. There are also examples when men received alimony (along with primary custody and child support) because their wives made more than they (e.g., Brittany Spears and Kevin Federline).

In short, if you don't like that men are having to pay so much for alimony and child support, then you may want to fight back against pay inequality.

As to the increasing divorce rate, I'm not so sure that's necessarily a bad thing. Secularly*, marriage is a contract between two people. When the contract no longer benefits the parties involved, why should they have to remain bound to one another? I heard of a proposal where marriage should be a contract that the parties opt to renew or terminate annually. Frankly, this makes a lot of sense.

*Of course, from a religious perspective, marriage is more than that. However, religion has no business where the government is concerned. In other words, any reason why marriages should be recognized by the government must be entirely free from religious beliefs. Otherwise, whose religious beliefs are to be recognized and whose religious beliefs are to be violated?

 

[something better]

I'm not sure of the jurisdiction where your uncles, brothers, friends, etc. divorced, but (at least in the US) it's highly likely they lost so much in their divorces due in no small part to gender-based pay disparity. Even today, women make only a fraction of every dollar their male counterparts make (the pay disparity was much greater ten, twenty, thirty, forty, and fifty years ago); as a result when they divorce their husbands, more women tend to receive alimony than men. There are also examples when men received alimony (along with primary custody and child support) because their wives made more than they (e.g., Brittany Spears and Kevin Federline).

In short, if you don't like that men are having to pay so much for alimony and child support, then you may want to fight back against pay inequality.

As to the increasing divorce rate, I'm not so sure that's necessarily a bad thing. Secularly*, marriage is a contract between two people. When the contract no longer benefits the parties involved, why should they have to remain bound to one another? I heard of a proposal where marriage should be a contract that the parties opt to renew or terminate annually. Frankly, this makes a lot of sense.

*Of course, from a religious perspective, marriage is more than that. However, religion has no business where the government is concerned. In other words, any reason why marriages should be recognized by the government must be entirely free from religious beliefs. Otherwise, whose religious beliefs are to be recognized and whose religious beliefs are to be violated?

The gender pay gap has been proven false over and over. Men are more likely to change jobs for higher pay, to move for higher pay, to work more hours for higher pay, etc. There is plenty of information on the subject. People who ignore it, or just been willfully ignorant.

In addition to those studies, plenty of studies have shown that boys need their father more than their mother. However, the default divorce ruling is custody to the mother, regardless of the gender of the child. Again, evidence of a bias in the court system against men.

Plenty of studies have shown that a man and a woman can commit an identical crime but the woman will get 2/3 the sentence the man will get. There is a bias against men and against fathers in the Family Court system.

 

[silverlifter]

The gender pay gap has been proven false over and over.

The gender gap in pay has remained relatively stable in the United States over the past 20 years or so. In 2022, women earned an average of 82% of what men earned, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of median hourly earnings of both full- and part-time workers. These results are similar to where the pay gap stood in 2002, when women earned 80% as much as men.

Source: Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/03/01/gender-pay-gap-facts/#:~:text=The%20gender%20gap%20in%20pay,-%20and%20part-time%20workers.

The reasons for this phenomena are explained here: What is the gender pay gap and is it real?: The complete guide to how women are paid less than men and why it can’t be explained away - https://www.epi.org/publication/what-is-the-gender-pay-gap-and-is-it-real/

The wikipedia page also has extensive references: Gender pay gap - Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap#Causes

 

[hairless wonder]

The gender pay gap has been proven false over and over. Men are more likely to change jobs for higher pay, to move for higher pay, to work more hours for higher pay, etc. There is plenty of information on the subject. People who ignore it, or just been willfully ignorant.

In addition to those studies, plenty of studies have shown that boys need their father more than their mother. However, the default divorce ruling is custody to the mother, regardless of the gender of the child. Again, evidence of a bias in the court system against men.

Plenty of studies have shown that a man and a woman can commit an identical crime but the woman will get 2/3 the sentence the man will get. There is a bias against men and against fathers in the Family Court system.

You may want to take a look at Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/03/01/gender-pay-gap-facts/ for more information on the gender pay disparity issue.

As for the studies you referenced, please provide links to them so we're on the same page. Personally, I'' not aware of any studies supporting your arguments (but that can very much be due to my own ignorance of the issues).

Finally, while there is likely a gender bias concerning child custody in many jurisdictions, I've never really seen the data nor any studies on that matter, either. I will say that my understanding is the courts will decide custody based on what it determines to be in the best interest of the children. Given that American social norms are and have historically heavily focused on child-rearing being the responsibility of the mother, it stands to reason there's some gender bias there. The solution to that is obvious, we need to stop demanding that women be the primary caregivers for children. In other words, society must start to demand men pull their weight as parents beyond just "bringing home the bacon;" including recognizing stay-at-home-dads as an equal and viable alternative to the "traditional" stay-at-home-mom. Once parenting is seen as being -gender-specific, it's highly likely that child custody will be less skewed in favor of women.

As for your final point, I'm afraid I don't follow how criminal law has any bearing on family law (even assuming arguendo that your statement is factually correct).

 

[Kentos]

According to the US Department of Labor blog the “largest identifiable cause for gender wage gap are differences in the occupations and industries where women and men are most likely to work…”. https://blog.dol.gov/2023/03/14/5-fast-facts-the-gender-wage-gap#:~:text=Women's%20labor%20is%20undervalued.,Education.

Globally the pay gap is at 77%, the smallest is in Iceland at 90%. The US stands at 82%

Gentleman, if this thread devolves into ad hominems, political posturing etc. it will be closed.

 

[Bobovata]

Look, all I am saying is:

 

[JCarr]

I'm thinking of another Tom Waits tune...

Just kidding...I'm greatly blessed in my marriage. She's my better half without question.