Life's short, get a divorce

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Then why is the divorce rate so high?

1) Britney Spears
2) Fundamentalists who get married at 18 so they can engage in some God-sanctioned boning
3) People who get married more than once are much more likely to end up in divorce in subsequent marriages
4) Lack of adequate pre-marital counseling

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

1) Britney Spears
2) Fundamentalists who get married at 18 so they can engage in some God-sanctioned boning
3) People who get married more than once are much more likely to end up in divorce in subsequent marriages
4) Lack of adequate pre-marital counseling

o.k. I understand that, but why now? It wasn't like this 50 years ago. Was the counseling better then? What does Britney Spears have to do with it? She's an idiot.

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

o.k. I understand that, but why now? It wasn't like this 50 years ago. Was the counseling better then? What does Britney Spears have to do with it? She's an idiot.

Celebrities like her who get divorced a million times promote the idea that marriage is not a lifetime commitment. Counseling certainly used to be better. The Catholic church requires the most marriage counseling out of any religion - and incidentally is tied for the lowest divorce rates of faith communities.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

Celebrities like her who get divorced a million times promote the idea that marriage is not a lifetime commitment. Counseling certainly used to be better. The Catholic church requires the most marriage counseling out of any religion - and incidentally is tied for the lowest divorce rates of faith communities.

So it is the counseling. I see your point about the celebrities getting divorced a lot. I didn't look at it like that.

[Sister Havana]

Down comes the billboard.

[EE-BO]

My theory is that it is a matter of living in a society with more choices.

What choices did the average wife have 50 years ago with a high school education and a work force that was heavily dominated by men when it came to careers that paid enough to provide for a family? What of the social stigma of divorce? (which I think arose from a matter of the not entirely inaccurate perception that at the time a bad marriage was better than being divorced.)

I think divorce is more common now because both parties in a marriage are more likely to have the education and opportunities to find a better life if they are not getting what they want/need/deserve out of marriage.

Granted, with that comes an element who surely give up too soon because they can or don't take marriage seriously- but that is their loss in the long run.

I see this phenomenon as potentially positive. It is a reflection of the emerging reality in which both partners in a marriage have a more equal obligation to perform because there is not one partner who is completely dependent on the other for a real life.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

My theory is that it is a matter of living in a society with more choices.

What choices did the average wife have 50 years ago with a high school education and a work force that was heavily dominated by men when it came to careers that paid enough to provide for a family? What of the social stigma of divorce? (which I think arose from a matter of the not entirely inaccurate perception that at the time a bad marriage was better than being divorced.)

I think divorce is more common now because both parties in a marriage are more likely to have the education and opportunities to find a better life if they are not getting what they want/need/deserve out of marriage.

Granted, with that comes an element who surely give up too soon because they can or don't take marriage seriously- but that is their loss in the long run.

I see this phenomenon as potentially positive. It is a reflection of the emerging reality in which both partners in a marriage have a more equal obligation to perform because there is not one partner who is completely dependent on the other for a real life.

I think this is true to an extent, but why do people think the grass is greener on the other side? I can see getting a divorce if cheating, mental or physical abuse is involved, but why get a divorce for anything else. Work it out. Why even marry again, because now you have to get used to a whole new set of issues the new spouse may have. I would rather stay with the original spouse since I would be used to his issues.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I think this is true to an extent, but why do people think the grass is greener on the other side? I can see getting a divorce if cheating, mental or physical abuse is involved, but why get a divorce for anything else. Work it out. Why even marry again, because now you have to get used to a whole new set of issues the new spouse may have. I would rather stay with the original spouse since I would be used to his issues.

I looked for research statistics on this but they differ greatly. I can say that the vast majority of people I know who are divorced got divorced because of one of the three reasons you mentioned and that none of them went into the marriage or the divorce lightly. Of course that's not a scientific sample.

Divorce is a traumatizing and difficult experience for everybody involved. To counter the question "Why get divorced for anything else?".. wellllll, do you want to spend every day for the rest of your life living with someone you don't speak to and don't like because they either changed drastically after getting married or weren't honest with you about who they really were before you married? Would you want to forego having children because your spouse decided after you got married that he/she didn't want children? Would you be able to stay married to someone who had a drastic change in their religious beliefs after marriage? Do you know what it's like to never be able to relax in your own home because you and your spouse can't be in the same room together without arguing? Or to sleep on a couch for 6 years because your spouse angers you so much that you can't sleep in the same bed with them? Or, to suggest marriage counseling and have your spouse refuse because "it's your problem you're not happy in this marriage?" It's not easy to categorize every reason into something acceptable. As for second marriages, I think that most of the time, people think they have learned something from the first time around and won't make the same mistakes again. Sometimes they're wrong, sometimes they make different mistakes. Lastly, when our society began the institution of marriage, life expectancy was much shorter, so people didn't have to be married nearly as long!

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I think this is true to an extent, but why do people think the grass is greener on the other side? I can see getting a divorce if cheating, mental or physical abuse is involved, but why get a divorce for anything else. Work it out. Why even marry again, because now you have to get used to a whole new set of issues the new spouse may have. I would rather stay with the original spouse since I would be used to his issues.

Hard to say.

Wine is one of my hobbies, and rather unexpectedly in the last few years I have developed a sideline where I appraise wine cellars to be considered among the assets in divorce proceedings.

It has been interesting work, and in virtually every case I will have some serious face time with one or both parties in which the reasons for the divorce will come up.

I have been surprised by what I have seen. But so far I have not run into what I would call a frivolous divorce. These people were genuinely hurt and the hardest part of doing these assignments is being a good listener as an adult with a life and children breaks down in front of a complete stranger.

The reasons vary, and the severity of the reasons vary. But then again- when I say the severity of the reasons vary, that is my perception of the severity. That is a far cry from what a person actually experienced.

I think that most people want desperately to love and be loved and will go to certain lengths- often great lengths- to preserve a relationship. Beyond that, it gets to our desire to maintain the status quo- better the devil you know and all that.

And so, as I see it- the genuine desire to divorce someone has not changed quite so much as the practical ability to execute that divorce and move on.

[susan314]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

My theory is that it is a matter of living in a society with more choices.

I think divorce is more common now because both parties in a marriage are more likely to have the education and opportunities to find a better life if they are not getting what they want/need/deserve out of marriage.

By the same token though, I think that we live in a more selfish society today than we did back then. People are far more concerned about "what's in it for them" than they were years ago. (About everything - not specifically marriage/divorce. I'm certainly not saying that people who get divorced are selfish!) You really could put a positive or a negative spin on that, but I don't think anyone would dispute the notion that in today's society people are more concerned about immediate gratification.

Back then, people were more likely to start and finish their career with one employer. (People were more loyal to their employers, and employers were more loyal to them.) Back then, people were more likely to save money and pay cash for a major purchase. (As opposed to getting in over their heads in credit, for the immediate gratification of the material good.) Back then, people were more likely to begin their careers and marriages in a community near their extended family. (Moving and living in new cities is exciting, of course...not trying to say that's a "bad" thing. It just creates complications in the marital relationship that weren't as big of an issue back then - time/expense involved in traveling to visit families, possible feelings of isolation, etc.)

I could go on, but I'm tired. To sum it up, society has changed in a myriad of ways since then, and a lot of those seemingly unrelated things may have had more influence on marriage/divorce things than we even realize.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by susan314

By the same token though, I think that we live in a more selfish society today than we did back then. People are far more concerned about "what's in it for them" than they were years ago. (About everything - not specifically marriage/divorce. I'm certainly not saying that people who get divorced are selfish!)

That is a fair point.

My question though is whether the shift in attitude towards self is due more to a change in fundamental human nature or to a shift in societal structure that permits fundamental human nature to more fully manifest itself.

I think the latter is true. Self-interest is at the core of all living beings. Survival of the fittest and all that.

But the beauty of having a society where people are free to look out for themselves is that those of faith have the opportunity to live by the example they choose and truly espouse it.

This is where a lot of the "religious right" in this country misses the boat. A society geared around choice is actually supportive of the Christian lifestyle because Christianity, like any other religion, is based in the strength of the individual to make choices in accordance with his/her beliefs regardless of peer pressure.

Catholicism is a test case for where US Evangelical Christianity is headed because of its stance on issues like this. My undergrad degree was Spanish Literature- with a focus on Medievel and Renaissance texts. The entire literary focus of that nation for hundreds of years centered around the murderous tendencies and sexual molestation of a political power that based itself in the hope and beauty religion is supposed to provide.

It amuses me that such behaviors continue today and are excused as outliers when in fact they are merely part of a culture steeped in our darkest history.

Christianity is only as good as the person living it and whether they pattern their life after its teachings or twist its teachings to justify their life choices.

And only the individual can really know which is the horse and which is the cart in that scenario.

A society that offers opportunity for ALL to be self-sustaining will allow for those whose personal beliefs guide them to a proper life to put in the effort necessary to ensure a life in accordance with those beliefs.

Anything less merely ensures that religion and societal trends dictated by a segment of society will be used to oppress others- in marriage and all other things.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

o.k. I understand that, but why now? It wasn't like this 50 years ago. Was the counseling better then?

Oh my God - are you serious?

It's not that the counseling was better - the sanctions were worse! (both applied by society and family, not to mention the law)

Divorce should probably be even more common than it is right now - people shouldn't stay in unhappy marriages. In the past, they did. It's not rocket science.

ETA: EE-BO's point on choice is spot-on

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Oh my God - are you serious?

It's not that the counseling was better - the sanctions were worse! (both applied by society and family, not to mention the law)

Divorce should probably be even more common than it is right now - people shouldn't stay in unhappy marriages. In the past, they did. It's not rocket science.

ETA: EE-BO's point on choice is spot-on

I disagree. back then people believed in working things out. That was a "we" "us" generation. Today it's about "I" or "me". You might be right about the counseling being better now, but the values were much better back then.

[scbelle]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Oh my God - are you serious?

It's not that the counseling was better - the sanctions were worse! (both applied by society and family, not to mention the law)

Divorce should probably be even more common than it is right now - people shouldn't stay in unhappy marriages. In the past, they did. It's not rocket science.

ETA: EE-BO's point on choice is spot-on

absolutely correct... the ramifications of divorce back when were much worse than they are today (religious, societal, familial, legal). Plus, if a couple were to divorce and had children, then a whole host of issues comes up-- who will care for them? Obviously, the mother would have the time, but the father was the one who made the money. In these cases, it just made more sense for a couple to stay together for the children. Today, both parents work (in a lot of cases), so monetary support and time are really moot points. In addition, the advent of the "no-fault" divorce hiked up the numbers because people could get out of marriages without a "fault" or reason.

[AChiOhSnap]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No one really knows -- but I'll bet we'll spend another few million dollars this year paying universities to do research on the subject!

Any investment to lessen the ultimate burden of ill-conceived divorce is fine by me.

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

1) Britney Spears
2) Fundamentalists who get married at 18 so they can engage in some God-sanctioned boning
3) People who get married more than once are much more likely to end up in divorce in subsequent marriages
4) Lack of adequate pre-marital counseling

CO. SIGN.

I think you've about covered 90% of American divorces...