Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is absolutely false. People remained married during the 50s because it was the cultural norm. Divorces and illegitimate children were unacceptable.
You have to understand the history of marriage to fully comprehend why it is declining today.
Marriage throughout history, in almost every culture and time, was a contract between two families. The wife, usually a young teen, brought with her a dowry and handed over all her rights and possessions to her husband.
Even up until the modern times this was normal. A woman didn't bring a dowry but her property became his and she had no rights.
During the early Suffrage Movement while women were trying to get the right to vote, they were also actively seeking the right to retain their property and have some equal rights within marriage.
Natural Law philosophers in England and in the US were defending the inferior status of women so these concepts were reflected in the Laws being passed.
Jump forward to this day and age and we clearly see the very precedent for marriage changing. Marriage is no longer based on the woman losing her rights and men no longer enter marriage gaining more than they entered the marriage with. The contractual agreements have changed, the culture has changed, the expectations have changed. Marriage is now based on love and we all know love is delicate and easily bruised. There is no cultural expectation to remain married, society doesn't shun divorced people like it used to.
And thus marriage has evolved into something transient. I have no doubt it will continue to evolve into something else or maybe one day become extinct.
Society does not crumble because people get divorced nor does it fall apart if people just live together and have a contract written up. Other countries do this, I don't see why the US won't get out of this religious mindset that marriage is the be all and end all.
I agree with your historical description. I just disagree with your conclusion. I don't have too hard a time with divorce or cohabitating if kids aren't involved. But I think the evidence is overwhelming that divorce and out of wedlock child bearing is not healthy for children. And it's not just religious folks saying so.
Men actually benefit from marriage from a health and happiness standpoint than women do.
I've seen aqbsolutely no evidence that this is true. Remember, correlation doesn't equal causation.
Look at it this way. There may be stats that say married men are healthier than single but is this because:
1) marriage made them healthier.
2) women tend to marry healthier men.
3) people living alone are more likely to keel over with nobody to call an ambulence.
Since there is also a correation between increased wealth and better health and it is a well established fact that this is an important determinant as to whether men get married, I'd put my money on this far more nuanced explanation.
The third explanation probably explans extra longivity for older married men - the ones who haven't been divorced or killed by the institution before they reach 65!
So, based on this link, men who are irresponsible, not adult enough to keep up with their own health, get nagged by their wives, or get sex withheld until they comply with requests will benefit from marriage.
Nice, sign me up tomorrow.
If this is the "case" for marriage, I wish they would put GOOD reasons. I'd rather die early and happy than being nagged and sexually punished into living longer. Thankfully I'm not a drunk, a rapist, a woman beater or irresponsible health-wise like a higher percentage of non-married men are "so-called" in this study.
I tend to think marriage is an effect as well as a cause. People who get married & stay married tend to be socially/emotionally smarter than people who don't marry and/or divorce. And being emotionally smart has positve effects on other things like income, health, and wealth.
It sounds to me like you twisted the study so that you're seeing only what you wanna see.
Men who stay single, in general, are not happier than married men. They tend to be prone to depression, etc, especially as they get older.
Sounds fine by me. Might as well give homosexuals a shot, heteros haven't been doing a good job. What's funny is the anti-gay marriage advocates are silent on the perils of divorce for heteros.
Personally, I'd rather see the government out of the marriage business period so people can go to their own church or organization and have a ceremony. For legal stuff, they can create their own civil contracts just like non-married folks and file it in the courthouse.
Good point, government still should get out of it though.
I am an advocate for gay marriage, but I do admit that I don't think the divorce rate will be any lower, especially for men. Sad, but true. It seems to me the anti-gay marriage advocates tend to be more disapproving of divorce than the population at large. On that issue, I agree with them. Where I disagree is with their notion that same sex marriage will ruin the institution. Heterosexuals have been messing up the institution of marriage all own their own, thank you very much.
In general, I agree with you about the government not being in the marriage business, at least at the federal level. I think it should be more at the state level. The main thing is you really do need to have legal agreements when it comes to property, hospital visitation, etc.
People put a lot of emotional baggage on marriage that isn't really there. Those who aren't religious or strongly pro-marriage hear the word "marriage" and they automatically think "religion". Well, yes, it's both a religious institution, as well as a legal one.
Last edited by mysticaltyger; 08-30-2011 at 12:41 PM..
WTF!!! I fail to see how a guy can be in love with another guy.
Um, I'm guessing that's probably because you're not gay. It definitely happens. You'll have to trust me on that one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sKid
And it seems to me like the gay marriage thing is more about money. You know, taxes, health care benefits, owning property, etc. But I guess homosexuals are so much purer. You make them sound like perfect humans.
In many respects, it is about money. When you don't have any money/property, you don't think that stuff is a big deal. When you actually have some, things change rather quickly. It's also about stuff like not being able to visit your partner in the hospital when he/she is sick.
To your point about gays being perfect humans, that's you putting your own spin on things. What I meant to convey is the fact that humans tend to value the thing they can't have. Gays understandt the social and legal importance of marriage acutely, because it's something they can't have. Hetersexuals take the social & legal benefits of marriage for granted, because they've always had it.
Believe me, I am very aware of the fact that gays have their share of imperfections.
I tend to agree with you that in the UK and the US (and maybe Canada, too) we have really lost the idea of making sacrifices. We've become too self centered.
Not true. For young men, making sacrifices will almost guarantee that they stay single. Consider:
You don't party all the time in HS so you are considered dull and boring.
You emphasize getting an education so women are too impatient to wait for you and are not interested because you have no money to spare, nor a car.
You put a lot of effort into building a career and women complain that you don't have time for them.
You save so that you can provide a good home and women consider you to be cheap!
I've known a lot of single educated men in their 30s and 40s who live exemplary lives and wonder what they did wrong!
Perhaps sacrifice improves women's marriage prospects but not that of men.
That is absolutely false. People remained married during the 50s because it was the cultural norm. Divorces and illegitimate children were unacceptable.
followed by a long diatribe comparing marriage 200 years ago to today...
The problem was not that things changed that much between the 50s and today but that the attitudes and expectations of women changed a lot.
Now days, its all about instant gratification for women whereas fifty years ago, parents still had some influence over who she picked.
Therefore, now days, decent men are largely overlooked in this new paradijm. Looks, immediate money and finding a guy who her parents hate (and who therefore impresses her girlfriends) is not only far more important but more likely to sway a young woman's decision to marry.
Sure, not every young woman follows this path but so many do that marriage has become a bad bet and single parent families have become the norm.
The important things that are required for a successful long term marriage have been discounted and ignored for so long that the average young man no longer considered them to be worth his effort.
The problem was not that things changed that much between the 50s and today but that the attitudes and expectations of women changed a lot.
Now days, its all about instant gratification for women whereas fifty years ago, parents still had some influence over who she picked.
Therefore, now days, decent men are largely overlooked in this new paradijm. Looks, immediate money and finding a guy who her parents hate (and who therefore impresses her girlfriends) is not only far more important but more likely to sway a young woman's decision to marry.
Sure, not every young woman follows this path but so many do that marriage has become a bad bet and single parent families have become the norm.
The important things that are required for a successful long term marriage have been discounted and ignored for so long that the average young man no longer considered them to be worth his effort.
The diatribe as you put it was important for context. You cannot look at marriage without considering the historical aspects. And your instant gratification remark is utter tripe.
Just another 'poor men have it so bad' post really.
Yada yada suck it up. Women have rights in a marriage, get used to it.
If you google "suicide rates among divorced men" you will find a study addressing this in one of the first hits. Suicide is highest among divorced men.
Looking at this realistically, it's marriage that causes a high suicide rate in divorced men!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn
The literature tells that single men engage in more risky behavior.
Quite true but that is young single men - at an age when nearly all men are single, anyway. I'll bet that their married peers also have this high risk but it is diluted by all the older married men. Since the number of older single men in that population declines, they have a much lesser effect on the rates therefore making marriage seem to be responsible ranther than age.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's All a Matter of Interpretation!
