Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Helen

Marrigage Rates Continue to Plummet

July 29th, 2013 - 6:00 pm

At Yahoo.com (via MGTOW forum):

The marriage rate in the United States is continuing its decades-long downward slide, with fewer American women than ever getting married and others waiting longer to wed, according to a new report.

The marriage rate has fluctuated in the past, with dips in the 1930s and 1960s, but it has been in steady decline since the 1970s.

Now, researchers report that the marriage rate has dropped to a new low of 31.1, meaning there are about 31 marriages in the U.S. for every 1,000 unmarried women, researchers found. In 1950, that number was 90.2. In 1920, it was 92.3.

Notice that the article says that “fewer American women than ever are getting married while others waiting longer to wed…” No mention of the men but they pop up in the comments to tell the real story. Take a look at the comments from men: they are interesting.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (18)
All Comments   (18)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I see articles like that as a sign of women scrambling as their utopia decays all around them. Many of these women instictively know that men must continue to "just work" in order for their feminist paradise to go on and on.

But the problems is the main reasons a man did "just work" was for his family. But women have destroyed the family either directly or with their complicity. Another problem of theirs is they can offer no other valid reasons for men to "just work" besides having healthy family prospects. All they can do is generate stupid "man up" articles full of shame and ridicule, which do not count as valid reasons.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Marriage is necessary for having and raising of kids. Society should encourage people who want to have kids to get married first.

However, pushing pushing people who don't want to have kids into marriage doesn't make sense at all, as its not really necessary for such people. Whats even worse is this obsession with pushing people who don't want kids into having this. This is just plain stupid.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
In the elections of 52 &56 Eisenhower trounced the Dems and their European Progressive that entered the country from 1880-1920.The [http://1880-1920.The/] Dems realized that the country was too Christian,too white,too heterosexual and too prosperous for their message.Under [http://message.Under/] Johnson they set the stage for the concious remaking of the US into a not too white,not too Christian,not too hetelsexual and certainly not too prosperous.They [http://prosperous.They/] mastered the "divide and conquer tactics of every focused minority in history to destroy the majority culture.Lets [http://culture.Lets/] assume that today we begin to reverse this trend and go 'traditional" ? Three generations at least.If we continue this current path by 2050 we will resemble a middle age fuedal society.
52 weeks ago
52 weeks ago Link To Comment
That first sentence was awkward. I meant to say that I have a wife and eight children with her as well as another child from a previous marriage.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I am a father of eight children with a wife and a son from a previous marriage. I love my wife and children and have never regretted that decision though I have been hammered for it. I have been to court and was convicted of misdemeanor child abuse - reckless endangerment for using corporal punishment even though there was no bleeding, bruising, etc.
It seems that the government is trying to ensure an idyllic childhood for everyone but it is not happening because more boys are joining gangs and getting their corporal punishment that way after which they give corporal and capital punishment to society at large. (Boys need fathers instead.)
I am a father who has felt alone. I have gravitated to books that show the need for a father such "Men on Strike".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I think you mean "plummet", not "plumment".
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Thanks!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Here's another article that seems to think that relationships are one sided in their responsibilities, and fails to acknowledge that women have even the slightest contribution to a relationship's success or failure. At no time does it acknowledge an equal and reciprocal duty to their partner in the relationship, or that they'll deserve to be dumped if they behave as the man is described.

http://www.mydailymoment.com/diet_and_fitness/mindabody/4_reasons_to_dump_him.php
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The comment section, from both men and women, school the author about their lack of perspective.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The risks in marriage far outweigh the benefits. At best, you only have a 50 percent chance of staying married for twenty years. As the song says, "She got the goldmine, and I got the shaft." Be prepared to be financially ruined if you are involved in a divorce. Not only that, you may be paying child support. Why would anyone in his right mind want to put himself into such a situation?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm starting to see more and more of this: Story claims women aren't getting married, no mention of men (other than a weak mention of a lack of "responsible" men), then the "women are empowered to decide not to enslave themselves" statement, and a comment log full of men pointing and laughing.

Oh, and the obligatory bible thumper, who doesn't realize that the sanctimonious bible thumpers have as much blame as the feminists for the system of perverse incentives we have today.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Both the religious right and the liberal left people fail to grasp the concepts of risk management and rational self-interest. I never take advice from those in either of these two groups.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I've been talking about this stuff for years and years now, and it never changes.

It won't change, because most women don't want to give up their power and most men will enable them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I plotted this once, and the steady decline is going to hit zero in roughly the year 2045.
This is going to mean more elderly than children, more poverty (wealth and achievement is associated with marriage) and a major disruption of civilization.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
We'll never hit zero (unfortunately) because of the religious influence in society.

But we will hopefully hit a point where every single man will know that he is consciously making a choice against his self-interest when he marries.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All