Shock, Horror: Nearly Half of America’s Women Are Still Married.
"A gentleman asked me to marry him and I said no. I told him, 'I'm just beginning to fly again, I'm just beginning to be me. Don't take that away.'"
Or, as the New York Times would put it: "51% of Women Are Now Living Without Spouse."
This conclusion was reached "according to a New York Times analysis of census results." That method is widely known in journalistic circles as, "Slow news day on the social change front, better take another look at the census, Scoop."
Following a fresh examination of “the stats,” conclusions are dutifully drawn — “Several factors are driving the statistical shift. At one end of the age spectrum, women are marrying later or living with unmarried partners more often and for longer periods. At the other end, women are living longer as widows and, after a divorce, are more likely than men to delay remarriage, sometimes delighting in their newfound freedom.”
Those are the “main” factors according to the Times. It is in passing that you discover race has something to do with it as well: “Only about 30 percent of black women are living with a spouse, according to the Census Bureau, compared with about 49 percent of Hispanic women, 55 percent of non-Hispanic white women and more than 60 percent of Asian women.”
But that’s only a side show. The real message is that, surprise, marriage ain’t what it used to be:” ‘This is yet another of the inexorable signs that there is no going back to a world where we can assume that marriage is the main institution that organizes people’s lives,’ said Prof. Stephanie Coontz, director of public education for the Council on Contemporary Families.” That’s “Contemporary” Families as opposed to, we guess, “Traditional Families.”
Checking into the Council on Contemporary Families web site, we note that their latest white paper (“Marriage Reduces Social Ties”) says: ” We know that partners in a good marriage are, on average, happier and healthier than single or divorced people. But do happy marriages guarantee a happy and healthy society? Not necessarily.” Marriage. Good for people but bad for society? Go figure. And while you’re at it, be sure to interview those 70 percent of black women living without a spouse.
After the “experts” chime in, some handy exemplars of the trend are interviewed to buttress the conclusions. All subjects interviewed must reveal that they are happier now than they were then. [Note: No men were interviewed or harmed in the making of this article.]
After a few interviews pursue and reveal the point of the NYT article a search for a moral coda is made and printed at the end as the kicker. In this case it is a variation of ye olde ‘If it doesn’t kill me, it makes me stronger’ bromide: “”Once you go through something you think will kill you and it doesn’t,” she said, “every day is like a present.”
We’ll be looking in tomorrow’s edition for the husband’s point of view: “Everyday I wake up and I’m not married to her is like a present.”
I predict the New York Times will give serious consideration to men’s side of the dismal marriage story about the same time as pigs fly.
Don’t expect the Times to admit that men almost always must give away a higher proportion of their wealth, usually lose custody of their children, are typically forced out of their homes and are far more likely to commit suicide after divorce. Or that women file for the overwhelming majority of divorces.
Or that with universal no-fault divorce, there is nothing a man can do to stop this plundering of his life once his wife gets ticked off about Thursday Night Football and starts the process. Over the last decade or so, men have smartened up and decided not to get married in the first place. The common analogy is “load a pistol, hand it to an entitlement minded b****, and make sure it’s pointed right back at me? Uh, no, thanks.”
Women can’t have it all, any more than men can. Marriage only works as a open-handed contract between mature adults. Sadly, the majority of men AND women today don’t even remotely qualify.
Full disclosure: I don’t care enough to read the article, but the census is now data from six years ago. How can this remotely be construed as news?
51% of women are as fat as that chick, too. Coincidence? I think not…
I’m with “askmom”. What kind of a sane man with a job and looks above a “3″ on the 1-10 scale would even THINK about getting married? Seriously, a man in this day in age has to be either: (1) very young and inexperienced; (2) very old, poor, fat, ugly, or a combination of all those traits; (3) literally INSANE, or, finally; (4) so rich he doesn’t have to care–to even consider marriage. There is EXACTLY ZERO upside for a man. It’s like walking up to someone and saying “hey, I’ll give you a penny, if you agree to assuming a 90% chance of contracting bubonic plauge.” Reap what you sow, ladies. Enjoy.
Krike! I was gonna say something but LeStainDePoop put it so well I have nothing else to add.
As one of those fellows askmom alludes to I’ll probably NEVER get married again.
9 years ago I got throat cancer (never smoked cigs). At the time I had a wonderful 2 yo girl. After a horrific treatment regime I began recovering with a 60/40 5 year survival rate, quite a physical, mental and emotional challenge. My second daughter was born a year later. 10 months later I got West Nile(who knows how). 9 weeks of 24/7 migraine followed by a thick mental haze and more emotional turmoil.
For the next 2 years my wifes treatment of me got worse and worse. I wouldn’t give up on my family, my girls deserved a family. She finally left demanding a divorce.
Turns out she was sleeping with her married boss, telling everyone at work I abused her and as I found out later deliberately was provoking me for 2 years trying to get me to leave. Shes Irish and didn’t want her Catholic mother to think she asked for the divorce. She ended up destroying both families with no apparent pangs of conscience.
The point of all this is my story is not unique. Many men my age(50) have related similar stories to me both in person and online. If I were a young man today in the current legal and social climate, where men are derided and devalued on a constant basis there is no way I would consider the legal option of marriage. This has been my advice to many of them. You risk everything and can count on a court system and cultural environment that is totally biased against you. If you must get married have an ironclad prenup…no apologies.
Its not that I believe that ALL women are like my sociopath ex but I just cant take that chance. I’ll stick to dating, being friends and being the best dad I can to my 2 wonderful little girls.
This is so sad. I have been married for 27 years and every year gets better and better. I cannot imagine any way my life would be better without my wife. I don’t know how to account for this “to hell with marriage” view of so many people. I know a lot of men have been burned by their spouses, but so have a lot of wives. I’m just baffled by why this view has become so widespread.
I’d put it down to the triumph of experience over hope.
Comments above are right on.
With all the Fat chicks out there and marriage scars most men are gun shy of getting into another relationship. Most of these women would crawl over broken glass to get married and feel that they are way beyond their Sell By date.
They just will never admit it.
Most of the people who are involved in writing these articles are women or vagined men raised by single women so it will always be slanted towards making women feel good.
so the featured 200+ lb. chick that puts her lipstick on with a paint roller is NOT married? shock & awe
I’m a Pajamas blogger who writes a syndicated column about love, dating, sex, and relationships, and I think marriage, for a lot of people, no longer makes sense.
Here’s a quote from a column I wrote about it:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2005/12/holding_on_for.html
Well, this is interesting. From what I see, hear, and read to some folks marriage is all about me, me, me. If a person wants to stay married, it has to be about repecting the other person as much as respecting one’s own needs. A little personal maturity can reap big dividends.
People are not disposable. In a real marriage, one doesn’t just get tired of someone and decide to throw that person away. And, despite oodles of research designed to show a single parent can raise kids just fine, the facts are that on average(so please don’t sling anecdotes at me) kids from two-parent households do better on just about every measurable scale.
Furthermore, people who get married and stay married live longer (well, the men do anyway) and are wealthier since two really can live cheaper than one and divorce is immensely costly to everyone involved. After a divorce, the man’s standard of living generally rises while the woman & kids (presuming she keeps them) goes down. Of course, the reverse would be true if the wife earns more (which I do, by a lot, in my case).
I come from a religious tradition where marriage is a more than just a piece of paper, and you can’t get married on a whim in Vegas. But you know what, when the chips are down, (or up, for that matter) someone’s going to be there with me, and there’s no amount of money and “freedom” that could compensate for that.
Adair: I totally agree with your premis that generally speaking, kids are better off being raised in two-parent households. But you simply push the question back one level. What kind of sane man could possibly want to have kids? Seriously–how could any man with an I.Q. over ten and/or a bank account under $10 million even think for a split second having kids would be a good idea? What is the upside supposed to be, exactly?
Did you ever stop to think about our value system in this country. First it was Roe verses Wade. See what happened to life in general since then. There is no value on life today. Then it was traditional marriage, and look where this is leading to. Wake up people.
“Where you’re from”, huh? Fantasyland, I presume?
Amy Alkon, are you also “LeStainDePoop” above ?
Hey if I was again young, Non-religious, and had some REAL money to waste, I’d be cycling through the ladies myself, Knowing what A “Love-Rat” I once was. I’d also own a handgun for protection.
But hey, Get Religion, Young or middle age, and want to develop a life worthwhile sharing with your progeny, e.g. then, want good looking kids that are well adjusted, marry a good looking woman, with the values you want the kids to have.
Most people seem to get the sex figured out, married saves a TON of money over single. If you’re tough aggressive and fun to be with as a parent the kids turn out O.K. and are alot of fun, 4 of ‘em all different in & Out of college.
And I’m with Donald Sensing, after 27 years, it is really fun. I hope the lovely and talented Mrs. Econ-Scott dies last in our old age, that way it will save me from dying of a broken heart.
Econ-Scott
PS if it’s just “all about you” and you don’t care about children, YOUR children, you can disregard the above, …. but the courts won’t
From the comments so far on this site I garner many men hate women. No wonder women don’t wish to be married.
Oh, please, Melinda. The battle of the sexes is old as the human race. It has nothing to do with this site.
And for the record I’m happily married for over a decade. But I have read Shakespeare and Euripides.
You Say Melinda, I say Medea …
Melinda, Medea, Melinda, Medea,
Let’s Call the whole thing off ….
“I garner many men hate women”
A wonderful strawman from melinda. Where has anyone said they “hate women” in the comments? Typical feminist claptrap making a non factual statement without addressing the positions taken.
Donald you said “I’m just baffled by why this view has become so widespread.”
When men are treated fairly both legally and culturally perhaps this view can change. To ignore the reality is financial and emotional russian roulette.
Interesting discussion, but Lileks has already exposed the NYTimes faulty methodology (surprise, surprise): they started counting unmarried women at age 15. That’s not even legal.
Progeny seem to be underlying issue here. Those for whom children aren’t essential tend to avoid marriage, and quite possibly are correct. Those for whom children are important, if not essential, generally marry.
Early life seems to be a major factor here. My wife was the only one of four siblings (all sisters) to have children. She was not close to her cousins.
All three of my siblings (brothers) and all but one of our cousins (who was deaf at age five) have at least two children, including the gay and infertile (artificial insemination or adoption for the gay & infertile). We grew up with cousin exchanges every summer from about age six through high school, even across the country, and did summer cousin exchanges with our own children.
Melinda has a point. I for one like women that feel men hate women….
Ive been married for 19 years. This past year has been one of the best of those 19. I cant imagine my life without my wife and daughters and dont care to. Those that are single and or alone are there because they chose to be there. How is that for a “main factor”?
My parents have been married for almost 28 years, and it warms my heart to see their modernized “Honeymooners” schtick on a day-to-day basis. They’ve had their problems and spats, but Dad always comes out with something akin to “Baby, you’re the greatest!” and Mom always makes sure they don’t go to bed angry, which they insist is the secret of their success.
They couldn’t imagine ever being apart, just as I couldn’t imagine not seeing them together, their playful bickering, their numerous camping trips or mom cracking jokes from a lawn chair while Dad and I struggle to make rainbow trout and endangered species.
For some people, marriage doesn’t work. Oh well. Some people don’t like cheesecake either, and I consider them to be sad, unfortunate individuals in that respect.
The flip side of this NYT article is that rouglhy 50% of American men can giggle maniacally as they leave their own toilet seats up.
Yes Virginia, there are such things as love, patience, commitment, and long term happiness. Oh, and if you don’t have kids, I doubt you actually know what love is. I know I didn’t.
This article is yet another in a long line of media and cultural attempts to make Baby Boomers feel better about being miserable, narcissistic losers.
And that chick is a cow….
HerrMorganHolz
Hey she obviously prefers food, no exercise, & baggy clothes …
to men.
Hey Free Country ya know.
So don’t date her.
I think Lileks skinned the NYT on their phony stats and that it took four women to write the schtoopid ahticle.
They probably included widowed women on their statistics which outlive husbands on average by 8 years, which means half of widows outlive their husbands longer.
Why do men die before their wives ?
They want to.
When men are treated fairly both legally and culturally perhaps this view can change
As long as men allow themselves to be treated unfairly both legally and culturally – perhaps they deserve what they get.
Grow a pair and stop acting like metro-sexual wimps and maybe your marriage might be a bit more enjoyable. Making her laugh or buying a giftie out of season go further than hair jell, Blahniks, or a manicure.
There is nothing in the marriage contract that says you have to stop being male. Your responsibility is the safety and wellbeing of your wife and children – deal with it…if it was easy, anyone could do it.
Sure Trainer, its all men’s fault.
Feminism has liberated men more than women. I’m 31, unmarried, and in the prime of my life. I’m in the military, lots of investments, no one else to take care of so I bank all that cash. Two paid off cars, no real debt to speak of. Bliss.
It used to be that to have regular sex, you got married.
The social pressure is (mostly) not there anymore. I can get laid really easy today. Young women are told by their feminist masters that they can “have it all”, a career and a family whenever they want!
So when these career-minded women hit 30 without said family, they are easy as heck to pick up and sleep with. Even younger women in their 20′s have no qualms about getting nasty with a healthy guy in his 30′s.
Why do I want to give all this up? Certainly not to some women around my age who has had more men in her than a truck stop urinal. Some overweight woman? No thanks!
If I ever get married, it will be down the road to a woman not raised in this country.
“Grow a pair and stop acting like metro-sexual ”
Your an arrogant moron. You have no idea what my personal situation was. If your ever in court go ahead and tell the judge that you wont “allow” him to rule against you. Yea, that will work.
However I do agree that men do not stand up for themselves in general and allow themselves to be manipulated by the shaming language that todays feminists use…see melinda’s quote above.
Her problem with me was that I was sick for 3 years, almost died twice and as she told someone, she didn’t want a sickly husband. This is not something I “allowed” to happen…I didn’t order cancer from Sears cause it was on sale you twit.
As far as deal with it, sonny I’ve dealt with more in my life than I ever imagined I’d have to and I haven’t given up yet.
Us-married 34 years. Daughter-also 34 (okay, do the math). It’s been a great life, and I/we look forward to a better future.
That said, of all our friends only one other couple is still with the original spouse. If, heaven forbid, something happened to my wife I would not remarry. The risk/reward ratio simply doesn’t compute well.
My daughter is unmarried, though thrice engaged. Each time she has taken that last, critical look at her intended and one or the other has decided “nah”. She seems to have a great life, and isn’t terribly bothered by the lack of a husband. She told me one time, “None of them have given me the feeling you still give Mom.” I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
LeStain,
Why would men want kids? Love, security, friendship, pride, in no particular order. In fact, its the poor guys who should want the kids as a form of social insurance. Even wealthier people need to remember about the “best laid plans of mice and men….”
My Dad was one of those kid-loving guys and poor (by current standards). I’m a genuine coal-miner’s daughter. My parents could only have three, though they would have had more if they could. My dad doted on us- he was a town legend. It’s a miracle I ever got a date, what brave lads they were..
And, my husband was the one who wanted kid #3, though now I’m glad I agreed!
Plus, not every family ends up on Jerry Springer, you know. Some are like the Duggers. Though 16 kids are a little past my limit.
Razorbacker-
Your daughter obviously has a Dad like my dad. She doesn’t need male approval because she grew up with it. I turned down a few proposals, too, before I met my match (in more ways than one). Good job, Dad.
I read this NYT article with dismay. I have quite a bit of training in this type of survey research, and sadly, the NYT has turned a valid piece of science into a woefully inaccurate, misreported article. Methodological problems abound with this “NYT reinterpretation” of this survey. “Common-law is neither mentioned or defined, but without clarifying this point, the term “married” makes no sense, since it is not clear what happened to “common-law” and “cohabitation” couples. The accompanying table implies that these categories have been combined with “legally married”. Furthermore, the age categories start at age 15, and of course the majority of 15 to 20 year olds are single, so including this age category would exaggerate the “% of women who are not ‘married.’” In addition to including children in a ‘marriage’ study, the interpretation ignores the fact that first marriages are now occurring progressively later in life, and increasing longevity is increasing the time that seniors live as widows and widowers. These trends will inevitably yield a high % of women who are not married, irrespective of divorce statistics. Finally, these data are 6 years old, and the failure to adequately define the socio-demographic in this study makes it impossible to accurately compare it to previous studies. Legitimate scientists would correct egregious flaws like these, or journal editors would refuse to publish their paper.
Beyond this disastrous methodology, I agree that this is an unbalanced political ideology piece rather than valid research reporting, because the data is interpreted almost entirely from a women’s perspective, which of course ignores the men’s perspective, yielding inherently imbalanced and confusing interpretations.
At least, the article does express certain opinions, and other studies do show that divorce is easy and prevalent in North America. Historically, the most remarkable change in marriage is that it is no longer governed by contract law, where it had resided for thousands of years. Marriage vows, promises, and ceremonial statements, such as, “To have and to hold, in sickness and in health, for richer or poorer, until death do us part”, bear little legal weight, are no longer a legal contract, and are unenforceable in law. Marriage and divorce law is generally too unwieldy to remediate most unethical, immoral, or even illegal spousal conduct. Divorce proceedings in North America are rife with deception, fraud, embezzlement, perjury, defamation, and catastrophic financial and emotional outcomes. Children are especially victimized. The philosophy of “marriage for love”, relatively recent in human history, has not provided adequate guidelines about what to do when love breaks down.
Pre-nuptial contracts have begun to replace marriage vows, because they can be written in myriad ways, are enforceable, and are supported by all the power and precedence of thousands of years of contract law, with enforcement processes and procedures clearly understood by most litigation experts. The simplest method to bypass the problems of Las Vegas-style marriages and divorces made on a whim, is for couples to write and sign their own “cohabitation” contract, to replace marriage licences and pre-nuptial agreements. This method is feasible right now by couples of any gender combination or sexual orientation. The contract can specify certain benefits exchanges and obligations, with certain penalties for abrogating parts and/or all of the contract. Specific legal marriage documents would not be used, but a ceremony marking the signing of this cohabitation contract is feasible. If the couple later have conflict over the contract provisions, it could be settled by standard litigation procedures. As in all important contracts, great care is needed for each signatory to commit fully to the process, with a clear understanding of the consequences of abrogating the contract and its provisions. This may seem cold, but it’s actually quite hot. Couples who love and trust each other deeply would sign the contract willingly, because they wrote it, and “to have and to hold” would be legally defined and enforceable. If they cannot negotiate such a contract, they may well not be ready for any type of cohabitation arrangement. It would also force irresponsible signatories to reconsider their negative behaviours in light of tangible legal consequences. This contract method would not replace marriage for everyone, but it would create another legal route to recognize romantic commitment. It would motivate both signatories to stick together through “thick and thin”, since they would know that easy, no-fault, consequence-free divorce or abandonment was not possible. There would be serious and clear legal consequences for signatories who let themselves fall out of love.