Appeal of Serious Relationships?

[GunslingerRoland]

You want a break away for a week, two, three, can you? You don't want to call or text for a week sometimes,

 

Think of how nice it was to sit back and not have to worry about a single thing besides needing a +1 occasionally. If you needed some emotional support, you'd call up a friend. If you got lonely for intimacy you could just meet someone off of an app. Now you have you have to offer another person intimacy even if you don't feel like it!

 

You start to see the worst parts of this person and they see them in you. Arguments. By now, you're so entangled you've started to feel cold comfort being with them.

 

I really can't empathize with people who feel bad they aren't in a relationship. In fact, when I think about my friends who are coupled I feel kind of bad for them, especially if it's really long-term. The only appeal I can see is you want kids raised in nuclear family, you are a dependantish person, you are very sensitive to cultural pressure. Am I missing something?

 

Just reading through this I feel like you either really haven't met the right person or you really aren't ready for a relationship.

 

I don't think those are normal feelings to have in a relationship.

 

This might be the biggest underlying thing to all of your dating issues, you don't really want a relationship anyway.

[Timshel]

To assume that typically a man advances in his career while his wife is taking care of children is... ummm... highly unlikly. Unless she is a stay at home mom and decided on this direction. This would imply they are in the same field, career, position and job. This is not the norm nor average. So im confused where you're getting your resourses.. none that I have seen so far.

 

Not unlikely in the least. I won't post data but will site my own, familial and close friend's marriages.

 

All the women I have been close to have at least an undergraduate degree.

Not all of them chose to have children...however, the women who did were the primary caretakers of the children while their husband's did benefit in their careers.

 

There is a significant benefit to leaving a home every day without concern for a child(ren)....that they are well taken care of by a partner in life. Being able to leave for work without worrying for the well being of your child and not worrying when you need to leave work to pick them up (meaning that a person can work as long/as many hours to advance) is priceless.

 

I don't regret for a second putting my career on a slower path to care for my children.

To say that my then husband did not benefit in his career, as many other men do, is ignorant (without knowledge.)

 

If a relationship is healthy and mutually beneficial, there isn't a reason to be fearful of marriage or a ltr.

 

There won't be many people that a good, solid relationship is possible. I do think that is the *real* problem, too many people have so little patience to only accept compatibility.

 

Wait for them and they will come...

[Chilli]

Personally , l'm still sad my marriage didn't work and l would rather that life any day myself. if it's a good one that is, which l don;t really se or envy very often in all honesty.

But it is hard at times for sure and to this day, even if we did work it out,l'm still not sure how it would've gone with some of the long term things we were having problems with, long term as in growing old together. there was stuff l'm just not sure if we could've over come.

and admittedly ,sometimes l am glad l didn't have to spend the rest of my days coping with them/

 

forgot to add earlier too, of course any sexuality stuff is huge in any relationship , wasn't saying it wasn't all part of it or a beautiful bonus , well with the right person anyway.

l was just saying that hell no , you wouldn't get married just for sex, it'd make no sense and when the honey moons over you'd be down the toilet anyway, needs a lot more than that to survive and especially to be a happy and have a for filling life together.

[Chilli]

Weird , l often think despite 2nd marriage success even worse than first marriage, sometimes l think it'd have a lot more hope. Just gotta make sure it's the right person.

 

yknow, think about it , kids are all done, mortgages and all the financial stresses family go through is hopefully a lot better. although a lot of divorced dads might be starting from scratch again and forking out on the ex so l guess that ones debatable .

but instead of trying to get through that 20year stalemate that ruins a lot of marriage- your done , your starting over with the excitement of someone completely new in every way, everything's new and fresh.

you got your 20yr itch outa the way, you've had some freedom.

Your both older and hopefully a lot smarter and have a bit more common sense and courage to ride out any bumps.

Really, there's a million things in a 2nd marriages favor when you think about it , and then soon you'll both be too old to giva fk anymore anyway and just wanna live. You can go traveling or sit on the damn porch together , who would really care you've mostly had your life anyway .

lots of huge benefits there.

[Andy_K]

Hi. Sorry for the threads. I realize my perception of how relationships often go are not how they all are...Love is a many spendor thing, indeed. But this is just something I've noticed about LTR myself.

 

...

 

The only appeal I can see is you want kids raised in nuclear family, you are a dependantish person, you are very sensitive to cultural pressure. Am I missing something?

 

You're viewing things through the wrong lens. Love is freedom, not chains.

 

If you're giving up your freedom and losing your identity, you're in a relationship with the wrong person. Everyone says the best dating advice is to be yourself... that's not because it works, it's because it doesn't. It's because if you're true to yourself from the start, you won't start down the slippery slope of self-suppression. It's because if you can't be your genuine self around someone, it's best for things to fail straight away rather than getting entangled in the wrong relationship.

 

As for the benefits? Someone to share your favourite experiences with and reminisce with afterwards. Share your dreams and plans for the future with. Someone to help you become a better person. A teammate for when times get tough. All the same reasons it's good to have friends, but magnified many times.

 

And as Christopher McCandless writes in 'Into The Wild'... Happiness is only real when shared.

[Mysterio]

Just from my view. I think getting married late 20's is the best. I think that M/W need to sow their wild oats and not be restless. Anything above 27 or so should work.

[Mysterio]

I think for me getting serious in a relationship. I am going to have to meet a woman that really gets me. We really gel more than anything. For I really feel that I have not had that great match.

[bluefeather]

Am I missing something?

 

Yes, you are.

[Sweetfish]

Not unlikely in the least. I won't post data but will site my own, familial and close friend's marriages.

 

All the women I have been close to have at least an undergraduate degree.

Not all of them chose to have children...however, the women who did were the primary caretakers of the children while their husband's did benefit in their careers.

 

There is a significant benefit to leaving a home every day without concern for a child(ren)....that they are well taken care of by a partner in life. Being able to leave for work without worrying for the well being of your child and not worrying when you need to leave work to pick them up (meaning that a person can work as long/as many hours to advance) is priceless.

I don't regret for a second putting my career on a slower path to care for my children.

To say that my then husband did not benefit in his career, as many other men do, is ignorant (without knowledge.)

 

If a relationship is healthy and mutually beneficial, there isn't a reason to be fearful of marriage or a ltr.

 

There won't be many people that a good, solid relationship is possible. I do think that is the *real* problem, too many people have so little patience to only accept compatibility.

 

Wait for them and they will come...

 

 

I think what is priceless and beneficial is someone who is willing to work for possibly years while a woman (wife) is at her most vulnerable state in her life.. where often after pregnancy it is statistically and logically known that women work less hours after bearing children. While this is not true for all women..it is for most women.

 

To pawn off that a man's career is more beneficial to him than being with his child(ren) can be considered an ignorant claim. Also, of the 3 billion men on this earth most are not career men. Most are low or middle class workers... the ones that build roads, take out the garage, fix and maintain things.. I don't know many men that once their wife is pregnant they are excited to climb the corporate ladder or pine how they will not get that bonus or position because a son or daughter is on the way.

 

I find is hard to follow your reasoning.

[Timshel]

I think what is priceless and beneficial is someone who is willing to work for possibly years while a woman (wife) is at her most vulnerable state in her life.. where often after pregnancy it is statistically and logically known that women work less hours after bearing children. While this is not true for all women..it is for most women.

 

To pawn off that a man's career is more beneficial to him than being with his child(ren) can be considered an ignorant claim. Also, of the 3 billion men on this earth most are not career men. Most are low or middle class workers... the ones that build roads, take out the garage, fix and maintain things.. I don't know many men that once their wife is pregnant they are excited to climb the corporate ladder or pine how they will not get that bonus or position because a son or daughter is on the way.

 

I find is hard to follow your reasoning.

 

As I do yours. Are you suggesting that most men want to be at home bottle feeding and changing diapers as opposed to building their careers, that most men would rather the wife do so?

[Sweetfish]

As I do yours. Are you suggesting that most men want to be at home bottle feeding and changing diapers as opposed to building their careers, that most men would rather the wife do so?

 

 

Again.. this is a clear assumption and slight projecting. There are many men who want to be around their child. They want to see their child walk and talk for the first time and they want to be home with their wife and kid. You stating the idea that the typical man simply enjoys his job and working 40-60 hours a week is absurd. Most Americans ( Men and Women) poll that they are actually unhappy with their jobs. They work because they have to and not because they want to.

 

Assuming a man has a job where he is climbing the ladder or even capable of climbing the ladder in his company benefits the family and not him. Yes more often men work harder and longer hours because typical working western man will out put more work for his family...not for himself.

 

To simply believe every man is a white collar worker and is hard at work taking steps to advance his career is again an assumption. Some are and many are not..

 

The current median household income is 50,000 to 60,000 in the USA. That means the average American is making 25-40k a year before taxes, social security and health care rape. So please explain how the typical western man is benefiting, when his wife can no longer work and a huge source of income has been clipped from the household, compound with the new debt created by a child(ren). It can actually can be a struggle to both man and woman. If anything its a mutual sacrifice.

 

The number one cause of divorce is money.

 

So what your projecting (your points) fall on a small amount of people when in reality most westerner are living paycheck to paycheck the average working man is actually a laborer and men enrollment in college (career minded jobs) are dropping drastically every year.

 

So yes, I am trying to find this benefit for man when typically, in nature when the female is at a disadvantage (bearing children) he will in turn produce resources for the female and child.

 

its easy... praise a man for his work and he will do almost anything for you and his family. ( I will go as far as die for his family) If you don't have that man its because most often you have an appeal for F---Bois.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Sweetfish

[Timshel]

I'm still not getting your pov Sweetfish. Here's why: In a long term serious relationship, marriage or not, the man and woman are a team.

They are not adversaries trying to one up or dissect responsibilities in the care of the children they have created. Rather, many couples make financial decisions regarding the care and cost of children, planned or not together and with the overall well being of the family in mind.

 

Admittedly, the environment that I was raised and have remained in.. follow these social guidelines. I am aware that not every person, in fact many, do not have a luxury of financial teamwork as a committed couple.

 

That said, most of the men I have encountered at work and in my personal life are more than happy to leave the wife with the majority of childcare; even though the wife is also working.

 

The OP of this thread is appeal of serious relationships. You assert (I think) that a serious relationship isn't a financial risk that you, as a man, are willing to take.

I assert that the risk is equal for a woman. In that if a woman should choose to be a primary caretaker of kids, there is not a way that her career (money making ability) won't take a hit.

 

There isn't a way to have children and not pay, whether nanny, daycare or stay at home someone. The effort is for family, home, love, commitment.

 

Your ability to dissociate between what you get as opposed to what is for a common good says to me that you know yourself well enough to say....not for me.

[Sweetfish]

I'm still not getting your pov Sweetfish. Here's why: In a long term serious relationship, marriage or not, the man and woman are a team.

They are not adversaries trying to one up or dissect responsibilities in the care of the children they have created. Rather, many couples make financial decisions regarding the care and cost of children, planned or not together and with the overall well being of the family in mind.

 

Admittedly, the environment that I was raised and have remained in.. follow these social guidelines. I am aware that not every person, in fact many, do not have a luxury of financial teamwork as a committed couple.

 

That said, most of the men I have encountered at work and in my personal life are more than happy to leave the wife with the majority of childcare; even though the wife is also working.

 

The OP of this thread is appeal of serious relationships. You assert (I think) that a serious relationship isn't a financial risk that you, as a man, are willing to take.

I assert that the risk is equal for a woman. In that if a woman should choose to be a primary caretaker of kids, there is not a way that her career (money making ability) won't take a hit.

 

There isn't a way to have children and not pay, whether nanny, daycare or stay at home someone. The effort is for family, home, love, commitment.

 

Your ability to dissociate between what you get as opposed to what is for a common good says to me that you know yourself well enough to say....not for me.

 

Wife and husband are not adversities. The problem is the increasing divorce rate were 75-80% are initialized by women predominantly western women and marriage on average not lasting past or more than 10 years. When 75% of the working wealth is made by men and 75% of the consumption is women your ideal sense of equality cannot hold true and does not hold true.. Men have zero say in reproductive rights.. if she wants a baby she can simply stop taking birth control and I 've personally seen this happen to many men and now he will be responsible for 18-23 years of a child he may not wanted because he has no reproductive rights over his own child. My state has life-time alimony. Men get on average 25% custody over the child. My friends narcissist ex-wife allows him to see his son every 4 months and the courts do nothing. There are over 110+ government subs to help single mothers and zero to help single fathers. In my company's sector there are millions in credits, grants, and opportunities only for women. So even if, assuming both man and women were in the same field working the same position.. even if she went on leave she has more benefits and doors to propel her faster than a man to equalize the amount of women in many fields as of today.

 

Please tell me the appeal for a man to be in a long term relationship? I'm not being a prick... under my ethnic background I have the highest rate of being divorced at a 70-80% rate, my child taken away at 75-85% and fathered by another man, and paying out child support and alimony which is selective and not mandatory. I also have a 401k and IRA since 18 and other investments which becomes 50% hers when you get a marriage contract or even reside i the same dwelling for x amount of years. I am just curious this advantage men have in long term relationship where the numbers are stacked against him. Its not a fear... its just stupid to play in a system when you have a 20% chance of coming out alive and with children who can be raised in a nuclear family.

 

Your career narrative does not hold true for the average American. Men typically prefer status career,money, or position... yes, but on average women do not. So to claim that often woman are taking a hit in her career is really not a valid sense of equality as men and women value things differently.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Sweetfish

[Timshel]

So the statistics you throw out are who you are? This is you. Qualitative research and what is happening with your ethnicity is your destiny?

 

Come on dude, this is life. Some people believe that if you don't learn the first time you'll keep coming back, lol. Sounds like purgatory to others.

You are at no one's mercy but your own.

 

Cookies, Love and everything that love is/is what I value most. In a romantic relationship, I would rather be single than not be able to bust my fiance's chops and us laugh about it.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Timshel

[Sweetfish]

So the statistics you throw out are who you are? This is you. Qualitative research and what is happening with your ethnicity is your destiny?

 

Come on dude, this is life. Some people believe that if you don't learn the first time you'll keep coming back, lol. Sounds like purgatory to others.

You are at no one's mercy but your own.

 

Cookies, Love and everything that love is/is what I value most. In a romantic relationship, I would rather be single than not be able to bust my fiance's chops and us laugh about it.

 

 

Typical to avoid the question..maybe because you don't have an answer

 

No.. I am far from the statistics..

[lana-banana]

The focus on statistics feels misplaced to me. 67% of second marriages fail, 55% of single women have genital herpes by 45, 100% of relationships end one way or another. But life and love is about more than that. Based on my age, ethnicity, education, income and background---and compared to my husband---there is a 19% chance we will divorce. (Divorces overall in the United States are down from their peak in the early '90s, and are sharply down among certain groups.) If you told me there was a 19% chance that something I did would be totally devastating to my life, I probably wouldn't do it. But, again, there's more to life than that.

 

Are you perfect? I'm not. I'm high-strung, neurotic and anxious on my best days. I can be frustrating. But my husband loves and supports me and wants to be with me even when I'm not a lot of fun to be around. He's happy to sit at my side and crack jokes when I have stomach flu. He doesn't judge when I wear sweatpants and haven't brushed my hair. He loves me fully and unconditionally through all things, and I do the same for him.

 

Real love is someone who has your back no matter what, going along with your ideas even when they disagree, supporting each other with little things ("can you pick me up from the DMV?") and big ("I want to start a new career..."). It means adoring someone with all your heart even when you want to shove them out a window. It means honesty, loyalty and trust. It means ample sacrifice and patience, but it also means the freedom to be your true self in front of someone, which can be a pretty scary thought. But the benefits far outweigh the price.

Edited October 22, 2017 by lana-banana

[Sweetfish]

The focus on statistics feels misplaced to me. 67% of second marriages fail, 55% of single women have genital herpes by 45, 100% of relationships end one way or another. But life and love is about more than that. Based on my age, ethnicity, education, income and background---and compared to my husband---there is a 19% chance we will divorce.

 

Unless your Asian, Indian, or Amish in the U.S. yes you will you see a low divorce rate. These are strongly influenced by culture and beliefs. The Amish have virtually a non existence divorce rate, but at the same time how many people are Amish and there are only 5.6 percent Asians in the USA population. So limited options also self control divorce in a way.

 

Also, not sure where you get 100% of relationship fail, but that could be sarcasm at best right.

 

(Divorces overall in the United States are down from their peak in the early '90s, and are sharply down among certain groups.) If you told me there was a 19% chance that something I did would be totally devastating to my life, I probably wouldn't do it. But, again, there's more to life than that.

 

Wrong.

 

Divorce rate is going up and has been going up.

Marriages has also been going down drastically

 

In the 1960 the population was 180 million with 40 million marriages on average. That surge in divorces and bounce back was the result of the introduction of no-fault marriage.

 

The population has nearly doubled and only seen a 20 million increase in marriages. This includes the influx of foreigners into the united states from other countries. Which more often stay married together..

 

The reason divorce appears to be going down is the adverse effect of people increasing not marrying and the distortion of data on those marriages and divorces with that data.

 

The failure in looking at the divorce statics is that they actually omit over 6 states in the calculation, but include the marriages in almost every state.

More than welcome to link you to that official data. California alone contains 40 million people and is omitted for divorce statistics. That is a huge chunk of the population.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/national_marriage_divorce_rates_00-15.pdf

 

You can clearly see the decrease of marriage.

 

And ironically you can see that the U.S population magically drops in the same year when calculating divorce.

 

The average US marriage is now 8 years and New York is a little longer because New York still has fault-based divorce pushing the average marriage to 12 years.

 

The reality is there is more to life than marriage and many women try to get men to commit and yet 3/4 of women are the one who files for divorce because many men and women think getting married and having kids is the end game and re-eventuate their position years later.

 

I understand they are crude assessments, but the typical out-weighs minority.

 

Are you perfect? I'm not. I'm high-strung, neurotic and anxious on my best days. I can be frustrating. But my husband loves and supports me and wants to be with me even when I'm not a lot of fun to be around. He's happy to sit at my side and crack jokes when I have stomach flu. He doesn't judge when I wear sweatpants and haven't brushed my hair. He loves me fully and unconditionally through all things, and I do the same for him.

 

Look, I am not concluding anyone is perfect. I'm not concluding marriage is bad or good. What I am concluding is many people do not look at the pros and cons of marriage and the marriage for men is becoming a raw deal more and more. The issue was, what is the appeal of a long term relationship? What I asked before is to prove the advantage a man has today in a long term relationship? The argument was pretty much "oh don't put a price on love and team this and team that" without stating an advantage. Now I understand their are older women who may not understand that today's generation is slightly different so they lack experience in what is transpiring in today's culture.

 

 

Women typically don't have to worry about divorce rape, alimony, they have 100% reproductive rights and even if the child is not his, he is forced to pay child support for 18-23 years. They typically don't have to worry that the husband will take the kids because the one sided divorce courts which I personally know a judge who told me they do it to protect their jobs and not being voted out by female voters.

 

Men leave marriages 1/4 of the time oppose to 3/4 which are women. That mean their is a problem and only in a welfare state do you see divorce like this.. Once the government becomes big daddy this is when divorce skyrockets.

 

 

Real love is someone who has your back no matter what, going along with your ideas even when they disagree, supporting each other with little things ("can you pick me up from the DMV?") and big ("I want to start a new career..."). It means adoring someone with all your heart even when you want to shove them out a window. It means honesty, loyalty and trust. It means ample sacrifice and patience, but it also means the freedom to be your true self in front of someone, which can be a pretty scary thought. But the benefits far outweigh the price.

 

I am trying to find the appeal or advantage of getting married and the odds are not stack against you because you are a woman so you can live free-spirited. A woman can have a baby and drop if off at a fire station if she decided to and be relived of not being a mother (at any moment she can relieve her responsibilities with no government backlash) . A man who does not want to be a father (even non biological) is forced to pay and if he doesn't pay goes to jail. Getting you heart broken and paying life-time alimony are two different animals. Paying 1500-2000 a month for 23 years and trying to live on your own and saying single mothers have it hard is absurd.

 

Now let me ask to flip the script. What happen if your husband was sometimes not fun to be around, high strung, neurotic and anxious on his best days. How loyal would you be? You don't have to answer that.. its just a legit question you can answer to your self.

 

I'm pretty clear on what I believe is love.. but with discussions here before with women.. many do not believe in unconditional love with a man and often confuse maternal love and unconditional love. Very few men on LS base love on a laundry list of conditions and neither do I. Many women today are dating 30- 40 guys before they are age 30 carrying a laundry list and wondering why they cannot pair bond or find the guy. The typical guy is not dating over 30-40 women. A small fraction of men are actively pumping and dumping. However, don't let love define your happiness or sadness. You are free to be your true self with or without someone. Again, I pointed this out before in the infidelity forum and OW/OM forum is over whelming riddle with cheating wives and side chicks and the break-up threads are predominantly generated by males. On every OLD platform 80% of men are consider below average by women. So yeah Im pointing out an obvious problem proven with numbers because dogma will drown out reality.. its the only way to show reality and still people believe the dogma. The juice is not worth the squeeze ... "Tinder" and sexual liberated women have allowed men to live a single life with ample room to crave their sexual desire.

 

Maybe only some people have the ability of the black-backed jackal. Once they bond they do not separate until one dies;)

[staggerlee71]

very pragmatic view Sweetfish. I agree with much of what you say.

 

Love? its an action not a feeling, in the long run.

 

The reason people divorce is expectations are not met. One has a picture in their head(expectation) of what will happen, and it doesn't. daily(build resentment), monthly(lack of communication), yearly(conditional).

 

Those who succeed, willing value understanding their SO perspective and act accordingly to maintain equilibrium. And the other does the same.

 

very rare and difficult because you need depth and reflection to execute growth.

 

BTW, Cant really see the benefit in marriage

[lana-banana]

Divorces are down and continue to go down; that's not a subject for debate. Fluctuations on individual levels will always occur. (I'm not Asian, Indian or Amish, by the way.) If more people are choosing to delay or not to marry, how does that make the effective decrease in the divorce rate less real? I think it's a great thing that more people have the power to choose what's right for them. It means people don't need to be married to be successful and it means the people who do choose to marry are taking it more seriously. That's wonderful for everyone involved.

 

You can find statistics to support just about anything you want. If you're coming from a place where you believe women are somehow uniquely likely to end relationships and ruin lives, nothing anyone here says will change that. You will not convince me that a record number of women initiating divorces is a bad thing, considering the rate of domestic violence and abuse.

 

If two people are strongly committed to their relationship and share the same goals, they stand a good chance. If not, they don't. We should all have the courage to find our own best decision.

[No_Go]

Divorces are down and continue to go down; .

 

I'm very curious: does this statistics include common-law marriages and cohabitations? Is this for the US only?

I assume (and will be happy to run the numbers) that the divorce/separation rate is about the same or higher if you include these, but just appears lower because the common law now is becoming almost the norm for young non-religious people.

[No_Go]

As I do yours. Are you suggesting that most men want to be at home bottle feeding and changing diapers as opposed to building their careers, that most men would rather the wife do so?

 

I see men staying home more and more often. I guess it is because people are marrying late (30+) and the initial career-burn is over.

 

3 of my very close friends have their husbands taking care full time of their homes and children. All 3 guys have graduate degrees and were successful on their own but preferred to stay home and let their wives develop their careers.

[Sweetfish]

Divorces are down and continue to go down; that's not a subject for debate. .

 

This is whats called "flew right over your head"

 

Divorce rates for several states are not included in the overall divorce rate but the marriage rates are included for every state.

 

You can clearly see (clear cut) to give the illusion of a decreasing divorce rate states were omitted

 

 

2015, 2014, and 2014 California, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, and Minnesota were excluded from the data.

 

California has a 60% divorce rate with 205,522 divorces in 2015 adding this would easily project an increasing divorces in the last 3 years.

 

This cannot be disputed.

 

800,909 divorces were record 2015 now lets add California 205,522 divorce which was excluded.

 

1,006,431 divorces that is an increasing divorce rate.

 

Your more than welcome to believe what you think is right.. but you cannot simply look at a number or whats feed to you and think its true.

 

Btw. Marriage and divorce rates includes from age new born to 16 and 50 and up, its a very crude way to calculate true marriage rates as a 14 doesn't really get married.

 

If the average marriage is 8 years.. Not 30...not 40.. but 8 years... how can their even be anything close to a 50% divorce rate.. Thats because its a snap shot of everyone at one frame of time...

 

Just because your in that snap shot of a non-divorce person.. doesn't mean you will not be in a divorce. Again its a crude way of calculating divorce as a new group of people will get married to give the illusion of 50% failure rate.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Sweetfish

[lana-banana]

I'm very curious: does this statistics include common-law marriages and cohabitations? Is this for the US only?

I assume (and will be happy to run the numbers) that the divorce/separation rate is about the same or higher if you include these, but just appears lower because the common law now is becoming almost the norm for young non-religious people.

 

These statistics are for the US and don't include cohabitation. While more people are choosing to cohabit these days, many are still going on to marry---just later in life (around 30 as opposed to 25). Common-law marriages have been eliminated in many states and are not that typical. Even nonreligious people like me are still choosing to marry.

 

Statistics on divorce are indeed hard to come by and have a lot of room for variation. You are right to point out that the rise in cohabiting has changed a lot. Why bother counting divorces when unmarried people who spent seventeen years together split up? Isn't that effectively the same?

 

One increasing problem in the US is that while marriages are more successful, they are happening more often among high earners and the well-educated. Younger people with significant debt are opting to postpone marriage because they don't feel established enough. That's not good. But when incomes and education goes up, so do marriages, and the marriages last longer. There is a risk that marriage could become a convention popular just among upper-income people; sociologists aren't sure what to do about it.

 

Another interesting statistic is that a single man's likelihood of marrying falls off a cliff at around 36. I suppose some men are set in their ways by then.

[Sweetfish]

These statistics are for the US and don't include cohabitation. While more people are choosing to cohabit these days, many are still going on to marry---just later in life (around 30 as opposed to 25). Common-law marriages have been eliminated in many states and are not that typical. Even nonreligious people like me are still choosing to marry.

 

Statistics on divorce are indeed hard to come by and have a lot of room for variation. You are right to point out that the rise in cohabiting has changed a lot. Why bother counting divorces when unmarried people who spent seventeen years together split up? Isn't that effectively the same?

 

One increasing problem in the US is that while marriages are more successful, they are happening more often among high earners and the well-educated. Younger people with significant debt are opting to postpone marriage because they don't feel established enough. That's not good. But when incomes and education goes up, so do marriages, and the marriages last longer. There is a risk that marriage could become a convention popular just among upper-income people; sociologists aren't sure what to do about it.

 

 

This is exactly what I mean.

 

The USA is in the top 10 most divorcing countries in the world. Ranking at #5. Its actually harder for a woman to get married if she pursues a degree and career as she could project her self into her 30's which makes it harder for her to acquire a successful, educated, and high earner man. Smarter women actually will have a harder time finding a man. I am not disputing higher income earners have longer marriages.. but its subjective as its noted that high positions and degrees actually increase the divorce rates as well. Ex: doctors.

 

Another interesting statistic is that a single man's likelihood of marrying falls off a cliff at around 36. I suppose some men are set in their ways by then.

exactly, if a woman is pursuing her career and degree she is edging her self into the age were men are increasing deciding not to get married. This is partly why marriage is dramatically dropping.

[lana-banana]

That is literally the opposite of what is happening (well-educated and higher-earning people are MORE likely to be married, not less) but you seem more interested in blaming it on women pursuing careers and degrees, so whatever. Again, women who have good careers are more likely to be married than not.

 

Single men who have never married after age 36 are unlikely to marry, but this doesn't hold true for women. Women don't have a cliff point like that; they keep finding partners, whether through previously married, widowed or younger men.

 

I am not sure why you are so deadset against marriage as an institution. If it's not for you, it's not for you, but that hardly makes it a failure. I think it's fantastic that marriage isn't necessary for societal success anymore and people can have whatever sort of arrangement suits them.

 

Divorce isn't a social ill, it's just a fact of life. Statistics are only part of the story. Saudi Arabia has a relatively low divorce rate, but are we going to use them as a model?