“Marriage: What's in it for men?�

[Burris]

LAF has linked to an article by Suzanne Venker of at Renew America.

 

Venker asks, “Marriage: What's in it for men?â€

 

Now this is a topic close to my heart, because my husband and I have an excellent marriage and so I would highly recommend the institution to anyone, anywhere – with the proviso that the potential newlyweds must be compatible, humane, and committed to the union.

 

When the LAF-pack offers advice on marriage, however, it's coming from a crowd where most of the unseen masses – i.e., the Dominionst rubes who aren't among the royalty – have a divorce rate similar to that of secular people.

 

That said, Venker is a willing tool, eager to engage in the leaps of logic necessary to turn every social ill into being the fault of equal rights for women.

 

Such leaps are, of course, quite dizzying and so it's only proper that the dizziest folks of all – the editrices at LAF – should link to Venker's article as proof sexual equality will be the death of marriage in general and manhood in particular.

 

The sky is falling yet again, and Venker is here to tell us why.

 

Venker discovered a recent Pew Research study that showed just over half of US adults are married. Everyone else is either living alone or as single parents.

 

Venker knows, because she quotes Senior Writer D'Vera Cohn as having said it, that “[it's] beyond the scope of this analysis to explain why marriage has declined.†But that doesn't stop her from drawing her own conclusions.

 

(Since Pew won't guess the reason for this trend, then it isn't really my place to guess either, but Venker has already taken the liberty of pulling something out of her ass so I feel beholden to offer my own opinions.)

 

There are a variety of potential reasons why

singletons nearly outnumber married couples:

 

1. The result of an aging population

 

a) The population is aging:13.1% of the American population is over 65.

 

In an aging population, there are more women alive than men, and likely then more widows than widowers: In that age bracket, there are 0.75 males for each female. This isn't surprising since women, on average live five years longer than men: 75.92 years for the guys, and 80.93 years for the gals.

 

c) Most older widows won't remarry: I came across an old study, the outcome of which is probably timeless: Only 7.4% of white widows and 4.8% of black widows remarried within five years.

 

2. People are marrying later – perhaps once they've established themselves

 

a) Even Pew seemed to catch EVERYBODY PANIC bug when it claimed marital age has gone up six years for both men and women since (eeeeeeek) 1960, based on Pew's own statistics – but US Census doesn't quite agree: Average age of marriage for males and females were 26 and 22, respectively, in 1890. In 2010, they were 28 and 26 respectively.

 

I don't see why Venker thinks this is a big problem, the increasing age at marriage: This is the era of biotech, where people in shape are expected to live and bear children longer than at any other point in history.

 

Now both men and women are expected to establish themselves before marriage.

 

c) From the Pew Report: “The Pew Research analysis also finds that the number of new marriages in the U.S. declined by 5% between 2009 and 2010, a sharp one-year drop that may or may not be related to the sour economy.†(Oh, ya think?)

 

Some couples delay marriage because they want to raise their children in a married home, and they delay childbearing because they fear they can't afford the associated costs.

 

So here we are, looking at the decline in marriage, and Venker blames uppity women.

 

The following paragraph is the central plank of Venker's argument:

 

 

Quote

Second, we must retract the message Boomers sent young women about female empowerment. Indeed, it isn’t a coincidence that marriage rates have plummeted alongside America’s fascination with the feminist movement. Empowerment for women, as defined by feminists, neither liberates women nor brings couples together. It separates them. It focuses on women as perpetual victims of the Big Bad Male. Why would any man want to get married when he’s been branded a sexist pig at “hello� In the span of just a few decades, women have managed to demote men from respected providers and protectors to being unnecessary, irrelevant, and downright expendable.

 

At this point, I can only assume Venker's mischaracterization of feminism is either a deliberate falsehood or the result of a creeping dementia. She has surely been told time and again, by both women and men, that the various feminisms are about ensuring equal civil and human rights.

 

Even so, Venker comes out with the tired old canard about how feminism teachers women to be perpetual victims – and yet Venker also does the mental gymnastics necessary to determine feminists are not victims at all, but actually potential perpetrators of gendercide. (Venker's examples include a bunch of stupid comments from media personalities about how men are superfluous. Such arguments are terrifying, actually, but those with such a bent can be found hiding out in any political philosophy.)

 

The question Venker should be asking, despite the allegedly superior morals of RA readers, is why the Christian divorce rate is so high?

 

If the institution of marriage is in danger, then a large part of the responsibility for this fact falls upon the shoulders of otherwise 'moral' people who made the mistake of going into marriage asking, “What's in it for me?â€

 

Venker continues...

 

 

Quote

Rather, women’s search for faux equality has damaged marriage considerably (some might say irrevocably, but I’m an optimist) by eradicating the complementary nature of marriage — in which men and women work together, as equals, toward the same goal but with an appreciation for the unique qualities each gender brings to the table. Today, men and women are locked in a battle. The roles have changed too drastically, and the anger runs deep.

 

“Faux-equality?†Is it possible that even Venker, tool that she is, has too much self respect to use the plainer term“false equality�

 

If men and women are locked in a battle, it's because anti-feminist thinking

doesn't lead to a complementary partnership of equals, where the couple shares everything.

 

Nope: Such gender-essentialism leads spouses to believe they're entirely different from one another and thus incomparable for anything but procreation. The man has his own sphere and the woman has hers and they only overlap is in the bedroom.

 

That leads to precisely the kind of dissolution Venker claims to mourn.

 

Later in her article, Venker reproduces a letter from an MRA whom I can only assume has been burnt in the past. Rather than waxing poetic about the good old days when women were the legal property of their husbands, our MRA is honest about his opinion: He sees women as interchangeable – and, what's more, there's a flaw in the American model.

 

Venker doesn't challenge him on this; she sympathizes with his plight – I assume in hope that she'll get on at least good enough with the MRAs to they see her as a useful idiot (even if they do call her a dumb bitch behind her back).

 

In closing, here are some of the advantages if marriage. (Yes, it's a Heritage Foundation website. All the more reason for Venker to take it seriously.)

 

PLEASE NOTE: I didn't double, then triple check my sources for this smack-down. If you find an error, please let me know.

[tropaka]

I skimmed, but they are not including any information for common law relationships in the Pew research - if they did not, then there's another reason official marriages are declining/occuring later - because people cohabitate (opposite or same sex) and don't see an advantage to formalizing the relationship. Of course, if that info included common law, then forget it :-)

[DCmilly]

“Marriage: What's in it for men?â€

I'm not married yet, but my parents have been married for over 30 years and you can still tell how much they love and care for each other...So what does a good, kind, loving man who believes in equality get in a marriage? He gets love, respect, friendship, a sharing of burdens and a sharing of happiness and the assurance that his family will be there whenever he needs them, because they know he will always be there for them.

What does a fundie "headship" get out of marriage? Not much because the type of mutual respectful relationship doesn't exist for him. Also, his wife can't share his burdens or help him in a time of need because he sees himself as so far above his wife and the rest of his family.

[makepeace]

I've more often heard non-fundie men - men who have a liberal lifestyle and are bitter about divorce rulings and child custody - complain about marriage and vow never to become married. These men can be more sexist than fundies.

[genericJname]

The comments on that National Review article are pretty terrible: Don't get married. Your wife will refuse to put out, go have an affair, steal your kids and assets and kill your fetus.

[CC3]

My husband and I have been teaching premarital classes at our church for over a decade. We have been married 33 years. We have noticed a sharp decline in the number of couples wanting to get married. I have noticed a few reasons that I think cause couples to be reluctant to marry. One is many live together and see no reason to get married initially. When they begin to have children, some change their minds and want to get married. The other reason I see is the couples have come from single parent homes or divorced parents. They remember the pain of their parents divorce and don't want any part of marriage. My parents were divorced when I was 13 and in those days it wasn't very common. I decided I would get married once and if it didn't work out, that would be it for me. Statistics are frightening when there is over a 50% failure rate for a first marriage, and a higher rate for second and third marriages. One other idea comes to mind too. It costs a fortune to get married. My husband and I paid about $12,000 for our daughter's wedding seven years ago. It was a garden wedding with 200+ guests. Thankfully, she wasn't demanding and we didn't have to pay for a hall.

Suzanne Venker's theories didn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

[valsa]

I didn't click on the Pew study but, as tropaka pointed out, just because you're not married doesn't mean you're either single or a single parent. Tons of people live together in long-term relationships that are functionally marriages, without ever actually tying the knot.

As far as Venker goes, being a feminist doesn't mean considering all men to be sexist pigs, it just means (in my experience) being able to better recognize a sexist pig, male or female, when you interact with one.

Also, don't married men live longer?

[Rosa]

The divorce rate is actually down under 50% - it peaked when a bunch of people who got married young and with traditional gender ideas (in the '50s and early '60s) got divorced, and then started dropping.

I hear that "children of divorce don't want to get married" thing a lot, and personally for me it wasn't my parents divorce that made me want to not get married, it was their MARRIAGE. I know a lot of married-once people around my age (was at one's house today, actually) whose parents, Boomer-aged, married and divorced multiple times.

I wonder what the marriage rate among the fundies we read is? With the number of kids they have, and the high rate of unmarried over-18 SAH daughters, I'd guess it's WELL less than average, the % of adults who are currently married.

[CC3]

Rosa, The latest stats I could find had first marriage divorce rate at 50%. Could you provide me a link for your stats? We start a new class next week and like to have the most up-to-date stats. I look fondly on my parents' marriage because we had a stable home and my parents were good at keeping their marriage problems hidden from my brother and me. My life after the divorce took years to calm down and my mother is bitter to this day. I have heard it stated year after year in our class that people with parents who divorced are very fearful that history will repeat itself in their marriage. I don't have any idea about fundie marriage divorce rates. I do know those who marry in the church have the same divorce stats as those who don't attend church. Thanks.

[Jezebel]

One other idea comes to mind too. It costs a fortune to get married. My husband and I paid about $12,000 for our daughter's wedding seven years ago. It was a garden wedding with 200+ guests. Thankfully, she wasn't demanding and we didn't have to pay for a hall.

It doesn't have to cost a fortune to get married. It can be as cheap as putting on your best clothes and going to City Hall or the county courthouse. If a couple really wants to get married, not having the money for a huge poofy-white-dress wedding party might delay it, but if the money to do that doesn't seem to be forthcoming that won't stop them.

I hear that "children of divorce don't want to get married" thing a lot, and personally for me it wasn't my parents divorce that made me want to not get married, it was their MARRIAGE.

YEEESSSSS.

My parents had a terrible marriage. They got married in 1963 because my mom was pregnant with my brother, and that was what "nice" kids did back then. My mom was 19, my dad 20, and they were miserable together for almost 18 years. And they followed the model the fundies advocate--Dad goes out to work and makes the money (and the important decisions), Mom stays home, keeps house, raises the kids, and doesn't complain or let her looks go to seed (lest he be justified in cheating on her). My father's attitude was that "he who makes the gold makes the rules," and he forbade my mom from working even a part-time job once we were in school. It took her four years of secretly saving money out of her grocery allowance before she got her nerve up and hired a divorce lawyer.

When my parents told me they were getting a divorce, I wasn't heartbroken--I was relieved. It was the best possible thing they could have done. Their divorce was ugly enough (though far less ugly than many others I witnessed at the time), but the sheer ugliness of their marriage was what left its mark on me. I came out of my childhood determined never to marry out of necessity--be it economic or for social status. Living with their marriage, then watching them as they divorced, remarried, and divorced again forced me to think about what marriage really meant to me, and what would be required before I married anyone myself.

[Burris]

Rosa, The latest stats I could find had first marriage divorce rate at 50%. Could you provide me a link for your stats? We start a new class next week and like to have the most up-to-date stats. I look fondly on my parents' marriage because we had a stable home and my parents were good at keeping their marriage problems hidden from my brother and me. My life after the divorce took years to calm down and my mother is bitter to this day. I have heard it stated year after year in our class that people with parents who divorced are very fearful that history will repeat itself in their marriage. I don't have any idea about fundie marriage divorce rates. I do know those who marry in the church have the same divorce stats as those who don't attend church. Thanks.

Take heart: It appears the statistics aren't quite as dire as you believe.

I've written about this before, several times, offering links and statistics from every quarter – government, academia, news coverage, and other places – that paint a brighter picture of this situation:

The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada has this to say:

“The divorce rate for first marriages is likely lower; 'first marriages have a 67% chance of lasting a lifetime.'â€

...and...

“The percentage of marriages in a given year that will end in divorce before their 30th wedding anniversary has increased slightly from 36.1 per cent in 1998 to 37.9 per cent in 2004.â€

Age at first marriage has an impact on whether or not the couple will divorce, and so, too, does ones level of education.

In fact, if you're feeling really adventurous, play around Divorce360.com marriage calculator HERE. (The numbers are based on US Census data.)

REMEMBER: The calculator is a simple device that doesn't take into account all the relevant statistics. Its function here is to demonstrate that differences in age and education and other matters can have an impact, for good or ill, on the statistics.

What I actually find troubling here is that, because greater age at marriage and higher educational attainment – both marks of privilege in our society – form a kind of bulwark against divorce, what happens to people without those same social advantages? Social stratification where marriage, or stable cohabitation, can become a luxury item.

I can think of several ways that might stabilize marriage, based on the all these statistics:

*** Extensive premarital counselling that teaches better communication and problem solving skills – especially for people whose parents are divorced.

*** Better models of behavior from those public figures who 'sell' marriage – usually as part of a political or religious package. (I can only imagine how newlyweds would find it dispiriting to find out their favorite pastor was snogging the secretary and is now going through a divorce.)

*** A greater emphasis on education attainment for children, especially of broken homes, as well as modelling from married adults.

*** The people allegedly promoting marriage should actually do so positively, in their actions and in their teachings, rather than trying to force marriage against a fear-mongering backdrop – i.e., the usual apocalyptic scenario where all those unmarried folks are living a dangerous hook-up life of wild hedonism that will end in an inmarked grave.

(ASIDE: The way I see it, fundies are very poor at teaching about marriage: a) These teaching lack credibility because some of their own leaders – the most virulent ones – have been outed as cheating closet-cases. b) They should teach with humility as befitting the solemnity of the event, concentrating on this particular couple rather than pelting the star-struck lovers with a shrill recounting of divorce rates “in the world.â€)

Rather than being trend setters, some Christians sit behind and bemoan the world, forming their own insular economies and trading the Gospel only with each other.

It's wrong.

Here's the Salt and Light Rule: Walk the walk. When you fail, make amends. People will notice.

There are so many possible treatments to cure what ails marriage. These should start from a place of hopefulness and positivity.

[Burris]

My parents had a terrible marriage. They got married in 1963 because my mom was pregnant with my brother, and that was what "nice" kids did back then. My mom was 19, my dad 20, and they were miserable together for almost 18 years. And they followed the model the fundies advocate--Dad goes out to work and makes the money (and the important decisions), Mom stays home, keeps house, raises the kids, and doesn't complain or let her looks go to seed (lest he be justified in cheating on her). My father's attitude was that "he who makes the gold makes the rules," and he forbade my mom from working even a part-time job once we were in school. It took her four years of secretly saving money out of her grocery allowance before she got her nerve up and hired a divorce lawyer.

When my parents told me they were getting a divorce, I wasn't heartbroken--I was relieved. It was the best possible thing they could have done. Their divorce was ugly enough (though far less ugly than many others I witnessed at the time), but the sheer ugliness of their marriage was what left its mark on me.

This is so important in should be highlighted: It was also true in my case. I didn't fear marriage because my parents divorced; I feared it because their marriage was terrible, and if that was the institution than I wanted no part in it.

[Peas n carrots]

Myself and my friends are all in our late 20's/early 30's, and where we live this is probably the average age of marriage...therefore in the past 5 years myself and many of my friends have married or about to get married. Very few of us have parents that are still together, but their divorces don't seem to be as big of a reason as the cost of a wedding. Yes you can go to the courthouse and get the piece of paper, but I know it is 100% true of my family that they would have been extremely disappointed if we had not included them in the big day. We put on a small, inexpensive (by local standards) that was lovely, yet considering we had all my husbands immigration fees as well, it was a strain.

I think for my husband, his parents extremely nasty divorce when he was 16 has made him a better spouse. He is communicative, and if there is a problem he wants to talk it out. My father ran off when I was 2, and not having him around made realize that you can't depend on anyone else for your economic safety. My grandma, who was unhappily married for 56+ years, emphasized me getting an education and learning to take care of myself and do what I want to do in life and not depend on a man to take care of me. I think the main reason grandma was so unhappy was because she married at 20 and had a kid at 22...she went right from her dad to my grandpa and never got to do a lot of what she wanted to do in life. My mom had me at 17, so I think in a way my grandma wanted to break the cycle with me....and well, she did :-)

[FlorenceHamilton]

My life and the lives of my children are not statistics. My story is simply anecdote. I am twice divorced. My three children are form my first and longest marriage. My first husband was and is mental ill. I do not hate him, but the marriage was simply untenable. His outbursts and outrageous behaviors became a staple in our home. The children and I walked on eggshells most of the time, not knowing when the normal veneer would shatter and the crazy would ensue. We knew the riskiest time was dinner hour. There was something about deciding what and where to eat that triggered my spouse. It could get violent if one person simply did not feel hungry that night. As the violence increased, it became clear to me that it had to end. The divorce was actually less traumatic than the marriage. We have been a very amicable set of co-parents for many years.

Because people who have experienced trauma often fall into traumatic experiences again, my second marriage was much more traumatic than the first. I cannot even describe the experience except to say that I was married to a Sociopath and that the fallout will last the rest of my life.

My children are young adults, 24 year old twins and a 26 year old. It is clear that they have been affected by living through these things with me. Only one of my children is in a serious relationship. She is dating a young man who is from an Evangelical family. They are mainstream, but very conservative. My daughter has grabbed onto the idea that traditional beliefs may protect her from the pain I experienced. My other two children do seem gun-shy about making a long term commitment. I do think that the things that happened during their childhood have a deep effect on their ability to trust. However, I also think that the complexities of society in general are also affecting their reticence. They are uncertain about their financial stability with the economy in such flux. They are fearful about the stability of nations as they exist in the world. Society has become extraordinarily complex. The ideas of debate and compromise have given way to fixed ideas and inflexibilty. These things are also adding to their reluctance to move forward.

It seems to me that fundamentalists have a great need to simplify everything they observe into their world view. Rarely are issues so unifactorial as these folk paint them to be. Often, they point to statistic which seem t support their ideas. (And ignore statstic which do not.) The truth is that if you understand statistics, you know that these studies are limited to only the handful of variables allowed in the mix. You recognize that there are lots of other variables out there and interpret the data only within the context they are created.

There are no absolutes. Perhaps individuals who are drawn to the fundamentalist lifestyle are quite uncomfortable with this constant uncertainty. They need absolutes. Unfortunately, creating a set of fixed rules and ideas for a secure and predictable life is not working for them either. The reason is that absolute certainty cannot be acheived.

I am rambling this morning. Marriage is not a fixed thing that always works exactly as promised. Sometimes, the ebbs and flows are workable and people can approximate the ideal well enough to have a happy life. Sometimes, there are variables that are not workable for the parties inviolved. When this happens, we have the choice to remain in an untenable situation or to break the bond. In generations where the option to break the bond was nearly unattainable, then the things that got broken were the spirits of the people who lived in the prison of the marriage.

[Peas n carrots]

There are no absolutes. Perhaps individuals who are drawn to the fundamentalist lifestyle are quite uncomfortable with this constant uncertainty. They need absolutes. Unfortunately, creating a set of fixed rules and ideas for a secure and predictable life is not working for them either. The reason is that absolute certainty cannot be acheived.

I think you are onto something there Florence. I wonder if that is part of the reason why people in cities tend to be more liberal...at least socially liberal....than in rural areas. In cities you are constantly exposed to people and lifestyles different than yours, and are more likely to know on a more personal level people different from you.

Going back to marriage...I'm sorry your two marriages were traumatic. I also agree, that the economy has made a lot of my friends who are married wait longer to have kids. Also, having a lot of student loan debt makes it more difficult to save up to buy a home etc. I mean I know people do have kids anyways and they may not have a house or be in perfect financial shape, but almost always those babies were not planned. To me, it just seems so hard especially living in a large ci.

[Rosa]

Rosa, The latest stats I could find had first marriage divorce rate at 50%. Could you provide me a link for your stats? We start a new class next week and like to have the most up-to-date stats. I look fondly on my parents' marriage because we had a stable home and my parents were good at keeping their marriage problems hidden from my brother and me. My life after the divorce took years to calm down and my mother is bitter to this day. I have heard it stated year after year in our class that people with parents who divorced are very fearful that history will repeat itself in their marriage. I don't have any idea about fundie marriage divorce rates. I do know those who marry in the church have the same divorce stats as those who don't attend church. Thanks.

CC3, I had read the same articles Burris is linking, but when I went and looked for the single raw number, you're right - it's 50%, or in more concrete terms, 6.8 per 1000 Americans got married in the last reported year, and 3.4 got divorced. That's from the CDC. It's gone up again from a few years ago.

But the first-marriage stats are down in the 30% divorce rate.

p.s. I got married in December and it cost about $400 - license fee, ceremony fee, and lunch for about 20 friends at a downtown restaurant. Maybe $500, my partner paid the restaurant bill and I didn't see it.

[jenny_islander]

My husband and I also delayed marriage because we thought we "had to" go into debt for thousands of dollars in order to produce the "correct" wedding, or else we wouldn't "really" be married. Then I looked up the requirements for being married in my religion: 3-week wait, talk with priest to make sure we knew what we were getting into, 15-minute ceremony, 2 witnesses, zero dollars. The civil requirements: Sign a paper saying we were able to marry, get somebody else to sign a paper saying he/she had enough brains to read out the marriage ceremony of our choice, wait 3 days in case we were drunker than we looked, and pay a small amount of money.

It's really sad that social expectations kept us from tying the knot for years.