Now millennials are killing...the divorce rate

[lana-banana]

Well done, comrades! Our latest vanquished foe is the divorce industry! Read here.

 

Seriously though, there's a lot to take from this. Let's start with the good news. It's great that people no longer see marriage as a prerequisite to social success. Fewer people are getting into marriages they aren't passionate about. Those who do are waiting until they feel more established and not marrying unless they truly want to. Those who do marry are generally educated, on a sound career path, and financially stable, and marriage to a partner who shares those traits solidifies it. Meanwhile, single people feel far less pressure about their choice to stay single. All of that is awesome.

 

On the other hand, it's terrible that marriage is becoming a symptom of income inequality. The biggest losers are those who want to marry but feel they can't afford it (and we aren't talking about weddings, but the long-term cost of tying yourself to someone with significant liabilities and debt, especially if you have debt yourself). There are major health and financial benefits to happy marriages, especially for men.

 

Millennials are more socially liberal than Boomers and Gen X, but they're also extraordinarily risk-averse. They were teens or young adults during 9/11 and the Iraq war and they were just entering the job market during the 2008 recession. They're terrified of messing up their lives, so it's no wonder they take social institutions like marriage seriously. One wonders how Gen Z (1996ish to today) will feel about marriage.

 

I also did not expect the part about cohabitation relationships becoming less stable, even when children are involved. Some Googling seems to confirm this. Anybody want to guess?

[Rockett]

I think that's really cool. Millennials (and younger) have a different take on marriage and relationships than our parents' generation. Another factor may be that most women can no longer (and many are no longer willing to) rely on a husband for their financial security. Marrying older makes sense, as does that being a more reasoned decision based on finding a suitable mate. That being said, many of my friends married great people in their 20s, so I'm not sure that's as big of a reason. Makes sense though that if there's less pressure to marry at all, fewer people are going to feel pressured into a relationship that can't work in the long run.

[Mardelis]

The biggest losers are those who want to marry but feel they can't afford it (and we aren't talking about weddings, but the long-term cost of tying yourself to someone with significant liabilities and debt, especially if you have debt yourself).

 

 

What does this even mean? People can't afford to tie themselves to someone with significant liabilities and debt and that makes them losers? Who the heck would WANT to do that? The monied partner is most often the loser when the parties divorce because they have to give half of what they've earned and obtained to a nonworking spouse who often had more liabilities and debt than money in the bank account when they first met.

 

 

 

There are major health and financial benefits to happy marriages, especially for men.

 

 

This part is sometimes true but at the same time, misleading and incomplete.

 

 

 

Numerous studies have shown that married couples enjoy greater health. Assuming that's true, it only applies to happy marriages and that's only about half of them, probably even less, because although the divorce rate is exceeding 50% there are many people who stay married even though they are not happy. An unhappy marriage will cause more stress and more health problems than being single.

 

 

 

Finally, most or all of the financial benefits of marriage can be accomplished with a legal domestic partnership which is available in most places nowadays.

[PRW]

One wonders how Gen Z (1996ish to today) will feel about marriage.

 

 

Word on the street is that the Gen Z are the most conservative generation since the parents of the baby boomers (1950's). Conservatism tends to bode well for marriage.

[Els]

Makes a lot of sense. The Australian divorce rate shows a similar trend, and similar factors are cited.

 

 

 

I don't think the divorce rate in and of itself is a perfect indicator, but IMO, marrying young (as previous generations tended to do) is a HUGE risk. A few worked out very well, but the majority of the couples I know who married in their mid 20s or earlier are not working out so well (some divorced and some are staying together "for the kids", but none of that changes the fact that the marriage is unhappy). People learn and grow so much in their 20s - it's a big risk to make a supposedly-lifelong commitment when you're only at the beginning of that growth phase. You never know if you'll grow apart or together, and you tend to be a very different person at 30 than at 18.

 

 

 

So it makes sense that there was a huge spike in divorce rates among couples born in the 50s to 70s, where you were still expected to marry young, but people actually had higher expectations of marriage than the previous generations did - it wasn't just a means to financial security and procreation anymore. Bad combination.

 

 

Personally, I'm really glad that we waited to live life a bit first, and I'd advise anyone else to do the same.

[lana-banana]

What does this even mean? People can't afford to tie themselves to someone with significant liabilities and debt and that makes them losers? Who the heck would WANT to do that? The monied partner is most often the loser when the parties divorce because they have to give half of what they've earned and obtained to a nonworking spouse who often had more liabilities and debt than money in the bank account when they first met.

 

I think you misunderstood what I meant by "loser". I didn't mean it in an insulting or denigrating way at all; I meant that people who want to marry but can't are losing out the most. Individuals with a lot of debt may still be very much in love and desire marriage, but not be able to. I think that's awful.

[Mardelis]

I think you misunderstood what I meant by "loser". I didn't mean it in an insulting or denigrating way at all; I meant that people who want to marry but can't are losing out the most. Individuals with a lot of debt may still be very much in love and desire marriage, but not be able to. I think that's awful.

 

 

No, I understand what you meant, you were talking about the ones with the least money losing out- but what happens is when and if those nonmonied people marry those that have money, assets or at least a good paying job- and things don't work out which happens more than half the time- the loser is the one who had the money, the assets and worked hard- and now they have to give a whole bunch of it to the one who had nothing when they met.

[Mr. Lucky]

This part is sometimes true but at the same time, misleading and incomplete.

 

 

 

Numerous studies have shown that married couples enjoy greater health. Assuming that's true, it only applies to happy marriages and that's only about half of them, probably even less, because although the divorce rate is exceeding 50% there are many people who stay married even though they are not happy. An unhappy marriage will cause more stress and more health problems than being single.

 

Happy or not, married men fare better than their single counterparts:

 

The researchers analyzed the data from some 90 previous studies, which included about 500 million people, and compared the risk of mortality for singles from those studies — defined as those who never married — to that of a married group, excluding those who are divorced or widowed.

 

The researchers found the risk of death was 32 percent higher across a lifetime for single men compared to married men. In real numbers, “under the worse-case scenario,” single men could die about eight to 17 years earlier than their married male friends", says the study, citing that nearly all of the data was gleaned from studies conducted in the last 60 years.

 

Married women also reaped a significant though lesser benefit...

 

Mr. Lucky

[thefooloftheyear]

Happy or not, married men fare better than their single counterparts:

 

The researchers analyzed the data from some 90 previous studies, which included about 500 million people, and compared the risk of mortality for singles from those studies — defined as those who never married — to that of a married group, excluding those who are divorced or widowed.

 

The researchers found the risk of death was 32 percent higher across a lifetime for single men compared to married men. In real numbers, “under the worse-case scenario,” single men could die about eight to 17 years earlier than their married male friends", says the study, citing that nearly all of the data was gleaned from studies conducted in the last 60 years.

 

Married women also reaped a significant though lesser benefit...

 

Mr. Lucky

 

 

Why do men die before women???

 

Because they want to...

 

TFY

[lana-banana]

No, I understand what you meant, you were talking about the ones with the least money losing out- but what happens is when and if those nonmonied people marry those that have money, assets or at least a good paying job- and things don't work out which happens more than half the time- the loser is the one who had the money, the assets and worked hard- and now they have to give a whole bunch of it to the one who had nothing when they met.

 

Interestingly, this is happening less and less often. Marriages between someone who has a lot of money and someone who doesn't are falling out of favor. People are pairing off by class, which is further concentrating wealth and resources in the same hands, rather than bringing people up or down. This is part of why marriage is fostering inequality. The New York Times did a good article on this a while back.

[amaysngrace]

This is great news!

My son and his girl are getting married in May!

 

They are college sweethearts, did the LDR for a bit and hated it, but have been living together for two years now!

 

A lot of their friends are getting married next year too.

[Happy Lemming]

The researchers found the risk of death was 32 percent higher across a lifetime for single men compared to married men. In real numbers, “under the worse-case scenario,” single men could die about eight to 17 years earlier than their married male friends", says the study, citing that nearly all of the data was gleaned from studies conducted in the last 60 years.

 

Deal... no problem, I will gladly die 8 to 17 years earlier and never marry. At least I would have had an enjoyable life.

 

Personally, I've never married and never will... I can say I am much happier than my married friends and acquaintances. The married men I know are MISERABLE!! If someone I'm dating (or in a relationship with) starts to stress me or give me grief, one quick phone call and they are GONE!! I didn't have to hire any attorney and I didn't lose half of my assets. Their replacement is only a few drinks away at my local pub.

 

I am one happy rodent!!

[pepperbird]

{snip} Millennials are more socially liberal than Boomers and Gen X, but they're also extraordinarily risk-averse. They were teens or young adults during 9/11 and the Iraq war and they were just entering the job market during the 2008 recession. They're terrified of messing up their lives, so it's no wonder they take social institutions like marriage seriously. One wonders how Gen Z (1996ish to today) will feel about marriage.

 

I also did not expect the part about cohabitation relationships becoming less stable, even when children are involved. Some Googling seems to confirm this. Anybody want to guess?

 

 

 

 

All I can say i that if the millennials my two oldest go to uni. with are any indication, millenials are completely unprepared to face "real life". I am glad they are waiting to get married.

Edited September 26, 2018 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Mardelis]

Happy or not, married men fare better than their single counterparts

Mr. Lucky

 

 

It could very well be that the happily married couples enjoy such a healthier and longer life that the shorter and unhappy lives of the miserable married people aren't enough to offset the positives.

 

 

 

A better study would separate out those who consider themselves happily married vs those that are miserable and compare THOSE statistics.

 

 

 

From a logical point of few, a miserable marriage is going to produce a lot of stress and unhealthy behaviors (alcohol, drug abuse, poor eating habits, etc) and that stress is going to increase health risks.

[Woggle]

Marriage was already killed before millenials came of age. Also barely anybody is getting married at all Which I admit is better than high divorce rate.

[Shining One]

Interestingly, this is happening less and less often. Marriages between someone who has a lot of money and someone who doesn't are falling out of favor. People are pairing off by class, which is further concentrating wealth and resources in the same hands, rather than bringing people up or down.

Perhaps, in time, divorce laws will change sufficiently for this to no longer be a concern. I know I'd be more inclined towards marriage with a weaker financial partner if I knew with absolute certainty I wouldn't lose in case of divorce. I'm all for elevating a partner during the course of a relationship. I have no interest in doing so after it ends.

[PRW]

Interestingly, this is happening less and less often. Marriages between someone who has a lot of money and someone who doesn't are falling out of favor. People are pairing off by class, which is further concentrating wealth and resources in the same hands, rather than bringing people up or down. This is part of why marriage is fostering inequality. The New York Times did a good article on this a while back.

There is no new trend. It is the same old thing that has always been going on. Marrying across classes have never been the standard or even very common. But now I guess we have to subject marriage to Egalitarian Marxism too.

[amaysngrace]

Why anyone would stay in a miserable marriage is beyond me. Either mend it or end it but stay miserable by choice?

 

Pass.

[lana-banana]

There is no new trend. It is the same old thing that has always been going on. Marrying across classes have never been the standard or even very common. But now I guess we have to subject marriage to Egalitarian Marxism too.

 

You're correct that it's never been common, but it's even less common now than it was just a few decades ago. Not sure what Marxism has to do with that.

[PRW]

You're correct that it's never been common, but it's even less common now than it was just a few decades ago. Not sure what Marxism has to do with that.

 

 

Egalitarian Marxism

It is specific. It can be googled. Your mention of "income inequality" is where it ties in. To Capitalism income is not expected to be equal, to Marxism it is expected to be equal and then forced by the government to be equal if it is not. It is the concept of trying to force equal outcomes rather than focus on equal opportunity. The outcome is forced by attacking the side with the higher outcome. Equalizing at the lowest common denominator. Usually seen in pitting the poor against the rich, then attacking the rich to become the poor's "hero",...virtue signalling. Robin Hood. The biggest real life example in history was "The Holodomor" of the Soviet Union.

[PRW]

it's even less common now than it was just a few decades ago.

 

It is because of the sexual revolution of the 1960-1970's. Morals were removed and boundaries were removed (like pre-marital sex). The Sexual Marketplace was effectively deregulated. When you deregulate an "industry" then the ones who are more skilled at it acquire the most of it, while the less skilled acquire less of it. The stats show that 20% of males get 80% of the sex/women because they are more skilled at it and have the sex appeal the women want. So obviously if you do the math 80% of the men miss out and end up with only the remaining 20% of women until later on when the other women that lose out on the top 20% of the men, give up,...settle for men from the 80% group.

 

There is a companion stat that matches this and says that 80% (or maybe higher) of women surveyed estimate that 80% of men are below average in attractiveness.

[basil67]

Why anyone would stay in a miserable marriage is beyond me. Either mend it or end it but stay miserable by choice?

 

Pass.

 

Which brings me to a question I frequently ponder when I read posts here: Why get married in the first place if leaving when you're miserable is an option?

 

I've BTDT. Knowing how easy it is to make and break vows, the whole marriage thing seems pointless to me.

[basil67]

All I can say i that if the millennials my two oldest go to uni. with are any indication, millenials are completely unprepared to face "real life". I am glad they are waiting to get married.

 

Millennials are the generation who came of age around the year 2000. Those born between 1980 and 1995. If they are still at uni now, then I would imagine they are doing post grad studies and functioning at a reasonably high level.

 

Of course, the very youngest Millenials are on the edge of Gen Z which gives a different perspective again.

[Mr. Lucky]

It could very well be that the happily married couples enjoy such a healthier and longer life that the shorter and unhappy lives of the miserable married people aren't enough to offset the positives.

 

It's more about the statistical benefits of living with another human being than it is about how happy you are. Single seniors have measurably lower levels of nutrition, social engagement and safety from a number of risks...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Chilli]

The benefits to men stuff is a crock of shyt.

He's tied down and can't go out to play anymore, well he's not suppose too.

Every penny he earns goes into the family or the misses.

Every move he makes or wants to make he'll have to account or explain.

He's stuck with stoking the same fireplace forever, that will probably just put on weight and let herself go as soon as she's comfortable, well unless they divorce or he wants to screw around.

And if they divorce he'll probably lose most of what he worked for and have to pay her for years to come even if she's the one that went and screwed around .

And the list goes on and on and on.

 

l know all that sounds terrible and believe it or not l'd like to get married again l'm not really as negative as all that sounds about marriage myself but the thing is , that all that stuff and much more is often the real reality for men.

 

So when l hear this bs about how great it is for men well , yaknow, l mean wtf .