I agree. While I am happily married, it was a decision we made after much careful thought, and with the understanding that we didn't really need to do it in order to live happily together. Marriage is merely a formality that for many, represents only a complication to their lives that they don't necessarily need. To each his own, and I would not criticize anyone's decision to marry or not.

Your assumptions about my marriage are actually quite comical.

Perhaps you misunderstand that marriage, regardless of the couple's dynamic, is a big step to take. We took that step seriously enough to talk it through before we went there, and when people fail to do that, they end up in loveless marriages or get divorced. I will not pretend to know your life, as you have mine, but your response is a big clue to the unrealistic views you have of marriage, and how seriously one must take it if it is going to be a positive step in one's life.

Many couples are getting divorced these days because their combined incomes put them in a different brackets, they otherwise wouldn't qualify for..School, housing, loans, healthcare the list go's on and on..I'm actually thinking about it, family and friends don't need to know..Of course I've been Married 25 years now !

Divorce rates are actually down significantly since the late 1970's and early 1980's for college graduates. Everybody always touts the supposed 50% divorce rate, but recent research has shown that for couples who have never been married before and who are both college graduates, 5 in 6 will NOT end up divorcing :-)

If you are receiving public assistance in any way, it does not make financial sense to get married. I live in NJ, and I personally know several people who are living with their significant others, with children. The woman files as a single mom with kids and gets free healthcare, free childcare and either food stamps/WIC or welfare. If they married, and combined their incomes, they would lose all that money and the benefits.

Isn't surprising to me that they choose to keep the money.

They are also not reporting to Social Services that the man is living with them or they wouldn't get the food stamps, cash assistance, etc.

builder...I agree. I did it three times and the last one was a financial disaster! Unless you are going to have a family, (and then better get a pre-nup) there is really no reason to tie the knot.

My current relationship has lasted 13 years and we did not get married. It keeps us both on our toes...the other one could just walk out if they don't like the situation. We keep our finances separate from each other and it works just fine. He tends to his money and I tend to mine. We share some of the expenses, but I keep my property and he keeps his. No co mingling of assets. Life is good!

The income and education disparities in the not married crowd are interesting...For those with education and income, the marriage rates are actually quite high.

Seems common sense...when you wait to marry because you are mature enough to make a good decision, rather than the disastrous reasons like being financially dependent on another, it's just going to be a better decision.

The absolute reason I was married to my soulmate(s) was because it was LOVE. Honest to goodness, make each other tick, still sleep cuddled everynight after many years LOVE. Didnt get anything out of it except I swapped insurances, and I can make decisions for things I otherwise couldnt do. Beyond that, you are right, Builder. There is no reason to. It should be thought out carefully, and only attempted after at least a few years, tons of thought, and not based on material things, only the feeling of LOVE. My first marriage ended in death, and this one will, as well. Of this I am sure. Love made a man who said he would never get married (like me, thats what our "deal" was for many years) ask a girl who felt the same way. So, agreed! I say before they allow marriages, they need to talk to a couple who have been married for 50 years HAPPILY first.

Don't know who did you wrong F Walsh, but your stereotyping because of it, is quite childish.

I have been with the same woman for over 30 years now without a single moment of unfaithfulness.

Like I said, just because you had a negative experience, doesn't mean you're world view of men is even remotely accurate.

Do you always blame everyone for your own issues?

The main issue today is that there are financial disincentives to getting married. Because of this, many couples choose not to get married unless they are planning on having children. With the economy in the state it is in, fewer couples today can afford to have children so this results in fewer couples getting married. It really is not the difficult to understand. I think that once the economy improves and more people again start looking at having families the marriage rate will increase. Even though single women having children does not carry the stigma it once did, most couples that plan on having kids still feel it is best to be married.

love is not enough for marriage; you need compassion, kindness, mercy, understanding and a LOT of patience!

that is why I think a lot of marriages fail, because people think love is all they need, and only love is enough to make marriage last

@Crimsonwife

Divorce rates are actually down significantly since the late 1970's and early 1980's for college graduates. Everybody always touts the supposed 50% divorce rate, but recent research has shown that for couples who have never been married before and who are both college graduates, 5 in 6 will NOT end up divorcing :-)

Can you please cite me your source. In all of the empirical data I can find, the divirce rate is highly dependent on geographic location, social status, etc. Even though the "official" divorce rate is 50%, depending on who you are and where you live, I suspect the rate is closer to 60-75%. If anything, the divorce rate is increasing exponentially because of lax family courts and laws.

I agree with NYMike.

Enough said.

It happened in Nazi Germany, and anywhere else there is a socialist/marxist regime.

Oh, must we bring the NAZIS into EVERYTHING sheesh. And you're not even correct about it! A. The Nazis ven gave bonuses and medals for families and having kids! B. It was FASCIST, not socialist/Marxist.

If the rest of your rant has as much credibility as this ...

Many people today can not distinguish between love and lust. Successful marriages are not a reflection of what each partner gets out of the relationship. It reflects what each puts into the marriage. If one enters a marraige asking what is in it for me the marriage is doomed. One should enter marraige asking oneself what can I do to make my partner's life more fulfilling.

Unfortunately in today's selfish hedonistic society doing for others is seldom a consideration.

I couldn't agree more. It is unfortunately all about finances and more importantly what happens financially when it ends.

The process that we have designed in order to part ways has made "getting married" a reverse decision. It's painful and it damages a persons willingness to get involved. Our kids witness the devastation and they begin to choose against marriage.

CalgaryGirl-

love is not enough for marriage; you need compassion, kindness, mercy, understanding and a LOT of patience!

Which should fall into the love category if one isnt selfish.

Here is the bottom line...Women used to marry for the financial security, men for sex. Women are, on the whole, more financially secure than they used to be. Follow the trend of women in the work force, and you will find your answer as to why there are less marriages as a % of the population.

True. That, and morals. If you wanted the piece of ass, you married the girl first.

The VAST majority of couples don't have ONE actual "college degree" between them, much less two, so I'm not sure of the relevance there. Besides, the fact that couples who both have degrees don't divorce as often may be related to any number of factors...waiting longer to do it...older...fewer money worries...fewer kids causing fewer headaches...fewer "degreed" people bothering to get married in the first place, so a smaller number of possibilities for mismatches...any number or combination of factors. In any event, it doesn't change the declining trend, Crimson.

As with every other aspect of society, the game players are allowed to dominate. SO He's living with her, but they aren't married so they can "get over" on society and have taxpayers write checks to her and not have to count his income in the eligibility. Two women living next to me for a few years, both police officers. for a couple of weeks a fella made frequent visits, looked like a colleague of theirs. Then no more visits from him. Few months later she starts showing. Pretty girl is born and the two women have their daughter. It would be a big mistake to think they weren't filing claims against the taxpayers since she is a "single Mom", wink, wink. Woman at the office had a baby, never married. Spent a huge part of her office time learning about gubmint programs. Had gubmint employees locate , shake down and collect support from the Dad. Filed all kinds of claims against the taxpayers. She was living a lifestyle at least twice what her paycheck would purchase, the extra half coming from the taxpayers. All those social workers doing things for her paid by the taxpayers too. Women do not need men now except as sperm donors. They have the Taxpayers and a tremendous amount of charities and churches fullfilling the Dad responsibilities. And we wonder why we our gubmints are broke.

Steve - I suspect the system is the way it is now, because for years and years and years men basically evaded their fatherly responsibilities - in way of raising their children and paying for them.

the pendulum swung, and swung hard in the other direction.

and now you're experience the pain and frustration that women felt before you.

it's not right, fair or just that you are being abused the way you are.

but given your rant, I lack any empathy for you. "it's a part of the distruction of the family"...I think you started it by getting a divorce, did you not? I dont believe the courts ordered you to get divorced did they? you destroy your own family, and the two of you - decided to become rotten human beings sans-divorce...it's not the courts fault you two suck at life.

own it.

Go figure, gays want to get married and straights increasingly don't want to.

IReadyYou "Women do not need men now except as sperm donors. They have the Taxpayers and a tremendous amount of charities and churches fullfilling the Dad responsibilities."

But the question is, which came first...the chicken or the egg?

I suspect those resouces existed not because women didnt want men to fulfill those roles, but because men didnt want to fulfill them. Over time, no doubt many women will simply be content with accessing those resources rather than relying on the man - who probably has proven unreliable to begin with.

Fact is, if men didnt have sex with women...they couldnt get pregnant and abuse the system.

You're asking women to shut their legs, but not asking men to stop making the booty calls.

BOTH MEN AND WOMEN OWN THIS REALITY...dont hang it all on womens shoulders, simply because they are the ones left raising the children and therefore seeking the assistance.

(for the record, isnt it plausible those two women living next door are lesbians who intentional created a child to raise, and legally cant get married...and legally cant adopt because most states dont allow gay adoption, and perhaps did not have the funds to get sperm via a sperm bank? I know a few lesbians who got prego the old fashioned way, by having sex with a man - with is permission for the intent to have a child. it's the 21st century dude, they arent all just having babies so as to get those lucrative (laugh) checks from the govt)

Steve (post 1.7), Stop blaming your miserable life on liberals. Take a good look inside, and you might find that you, and only you, are responsible for your lot in life.

Jessica, I see agreement and disagreement in your theory.

1) With the chicken or the egg, that is up to view of the sexes.

2)The only thing I really disagree with is that those laughable lucrative checks are often times just that. Very lucrative, and have seen them with my own eyes.

Marriage is an institution that developed from religious morals regarding remaining faithful to one spouse. Modern society has turned the religious ceremony into something secular. The government officiates marriages, and debates are held over who can and can't be married. The secularization of marriage directly leads to a lack of seriousness, significance, holiness, and importance of lifelong commitment and sanctimony.

The secular world needs to let go of marriage as a secular institution. Couples willing to live together, regardless as to whether they tie the knot religiously or merely choose a lifestyle with a partner, man and man, woman and woman, grandmother and grandson, should simply sign contracts for secular marriage bonds - asset sharing, living will, and other such rights can be assigned through a legal agreement.

Government needs to back out of the marriage business. This will solve many problems. A) The acceptance of non-traditional marriage will be removed from the political debates of today, where it has no business being looked into at all, and will instead be decided by each individuals religious group rules. B) The sanctimony of marriage will be tied to religion, which people will take as seriously as they dare, and will only committ to with the proper reverence and respect. C) People that don't take religion seriously will not get married and spike up the divorce rates.

Why should marriage, which is celarly a hsitorically religous rite, be a secular obligation?

I got married two years ago, and thought that my wife was an awesome, charitable, and loving person. I was so convinced that I proposed too soon and got married too soon. It turns out that she was a shop-a-holic and drove me into bankruptcy. We have a 20 month old daughter, and when she got pregnant with our second child, she decided to divorce me. She got her well-off parents to hire an expensive lawyer and now I have to pay about $3000 per month to her in spousal and child support, and I only get to visit my daughter for twice a week for an hour and a half. This is because she hired an expensive lawyer with her parents money, and I could not afford to defend myself legally.

I would not recommend marriage to anybody. It was the worst mistake I ever made, and I learned a powerful lesson the hard way. I will be struggling with this for the rest of my life.

I urge anybody who is discerning marriage to decide very carefully and really get to know the person who you are marrying. Don't just pick that person just because they are there, and you don't think you can find anyone else. You would be much better off alone than if you marry the wrong person. Don't ever rush into things, and if they and their parents are rushing you into marriage, that is definitely a red flag.

I would also not recommend marriage if you do not have a steady and secure job, because if you have children, they are very expensive in this economy, and if you can't afford to take care of them, the Department of Children's Services will bend over backwards to take your children away from you and put them in a shoddy foster home. This is very common now-a-days.

wowed, im not disagreeing that they can - at times - be lucrative.

I dont believe by and large, they are though.

the system is flawed no doubt...but then again, the folks who rely on this system are equally as flawed.

Calgary girl and wow by the force: I have to agree with both of you: all that calgary girl listed is love and I must add respect as another one that calgary girl didn't mention:)

The standard thinking by many today is: "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?"

Most folks cannot commit to the type of dressing they want on their dinner salad let alone assume the personal responsibility and selfless attitude required for a happy marriage.

We live in perilous times!

Methinks Steve is off his meds. Or on them.

Why on Earth would any man actually want to Get Married?

When you consider that the system is set up so that if things don't work out - you can't just shake hands, part friends and call it a day - No...

The system is set up so that almost ANY woman... take that husband into court...and utterly SMASH him... I mean, what man with half a brain would subject himself to that?

People are slowly starting to realize that marriage is nothing more than a government-issued business contract, wherein two parties come together and join assets into a single entity. This business contract then receives a tax break and special rights over others who are not governed by this legal document.

Of course, people start letting their emotions take over, and they try to justify their contract with notions of "love" and "commitment". So you have to ask: Is "love" only possible if you place a metal ring on your finger and sign a government document? Can you only be committed under a legally binding contract? Does metal, on your finger, make you "love" more? A logical person would laugh at these concepts... yet most people are more emotional than logical.

I hope that anyone who considers my post informative and/or helpful will consider this post to be a Christmas Gift to you!

There was an author, now deceased, who stated that: "Love is as love does". That author's name is M. Scott Peck M.D. Doctor Peck wrote many very interesting and profound books. He was a practicing phychiatrist by profession in addition to his prodigious writing acumen. Millions, including myself, have had their lives changed, for the better, by reading his first book: THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED, and many others he penned. If you are considering marriage or even cohabitation with a significiant other you may learn more than you can possibly imagine by reading this book, very carefully and deliberately. Happy Holidays and a healthy and prosperous New Year to all of you Newsvine'ers!

http://www.mscottpeck.com/index.html

Marriage rates have dropped because more and more women want boytoys and not a stable relationship with men.

Men on the other hand, are the same horndogs they've always been so it can't be their fault.

I've been happily married for going on 7 years now. However, we did everything "backwards" except have children. We lived together for 7 years before getting married. Bought a house two years before getting married, as we knew at that point that we were still in love and very committed. We've fell on very hard times in the past few years, but pulled through. Having each other made it easier to get through. That's what people forget about marriage, or commitment in general. It's staying together through thick and thin. Not bailing at the first sign of trouble. The fact that we took out time and didn't rush into it helps, also. No children too soon (still none). Living together really helps a couple to get to know every quirk and whether or not they are compatible.

Demos, you are incorrect. Marriage (wedlock) predates all modern religions. Nor did 'fidelity' (or morals) have anything to do with it (except perhaps on the wife, because men like to be sure their children are theirs, several religions allow men to have as many wives as they can afford to 'keep'). It was only recently that China included monogamy (and free will) into their definition, previously most marriages were arranged and it was expected that the men would have other women. "Marriage" evolved as a means for a man taking financial responsibility for another man's daughter (and usually required a bribe (dowry)). Love rarely entered into it, it was usually more about political or financial reasons, desire for legal progeny, property, a contract, an alliance. Any religious trappings are merely rituals designed to mark the 'happy event', there are many variations on this (look up what the Hopi Indians did when a couple entered into a committed relationship). In this country there are financial benefits to being married. I'm all for doing away with them, I wasn't happy when my pay check decreased $70 per week just by withholding at the 'single' rate instead of the 'married' rate (one deduction in both cases). I don't see where people who are married deserve a tax break just for that fact, if anything they should be the ones paying more since 'two can live as cheaply as one'. Or better yet, everyone pay the same, there's a thought. Religion doesn't 'own' marriage, and being religious doesn't make people better at staying married (except, I suppose when the women are so brainwashed they put up with any kind of crap from the husband because divorce is not acceptable).

TheStarryEyes - If you were married 2 years and had a 20-month-old daughter when you got divorced, then your wife was five months pregnant when you got married. Perhaps if you had waited longer to have children and given yourselves time to really get to know each other, your story would be different. The birth of a child is stressful on the best of marriages even when the child is planned. As for child and spousal support, you are obligated from a financial standpoint to help pay for those kids until they turn 18...period. It doesn't matter how rich her parents are, the children are yours and you have to pay to help raise them. The child support payments won't last forever, although it might feel that way. No woman gets lifetime alimony after a 2 year marriage, so the spousal support will also end. Stop complaining. Life is hard.

I am happily married and love my husband, but honestly living with someone instead of marriage almost seems more romantic. Maybe because it is legally less complicated and one is certainly there because one really wants to be there.

Although with long term cohabitation you get common law marriages which I know nothing about.

"I have always been of the opinion that a man about to get married should know either everything or nothing." Oscar Wilde

sorry Jessica. I gave a couple of accounts of how someone was using the system. You are interested in speculating about what caused it. I am sure that anyone who ever took anything from anyone else offered a reason. In fact a telltale givaway that someone may feel guilty about what they took, is when they go into a thing about it when no has yet accused them of something. You want to fabricate something that justifies in your mind "a taking" go ahead. I was commenting on the real situation that exists today, that is a woman can do quite well in the financial and social support arena if she so chooses. IF it makes you mad to read it, sorry. 25 years ago it wasn't possible for women to get all the taxpayer support they get now. The systems were created and now they exist. Simple. Women can have children and send the bill for it to someone else when it used to be the family man who took care of things. You may think all men are horrible - but that's your problem. I know some fine men who take care of the family. If you don't know any I'd just have to say what I heard the old folks say " you're hanging with the wrong crowd".

Come on now. Marriage is dropping because of all the traumatized kids that watched their parents go through divorce are now grown up.

Why do you need a contract to prove you want to be together?

The negatives outweigh the positives. One person with bad credit. One person with kids. Claim less on your taxes. The unnecessary expense of a wedding plus taxing your friends with bridal showers, bachelor and bachelor'ette parties. The honeymoon. If you get the divorce, alimony.

Getting married benefits everyone except for the people getting married; jewelers, wedding planners, hall owners, divorce attorneys, bakers etc.... The only absolute plus is cutting expenses by living in one location and you don't need a contract to do that.

It is all religious or traditional mumbo jumbo. Tradition that is being broken because we have much more common sense. We can actually think for ourselves instead of following a path already laid out for us. Women are self sufficient and no longer need a working man in their adult years. Yes, we can have kids just like any other mammal on earth and we can do it without a contract and without being banished to hell.

Maybe we are finally realizing we are just another species on this planet and as long as we get along everything will be alright.

I also think the kids have seen what their parents have gone through and witnessed the "down side" of a marriage and then thought "I'm not going to do this". Having gone through my second divorce a few years ago (stayed married for the kids), I can say that I DEFINITELY would not do it again.

Hey Steve and F Walsh! Maybe you two should hook up and do us all a favor, considering you're both bitter/angry individuals with nothing better to do than "sex" bash.

As far as the discussion is concerned, my fiance and I have been together for 10 years. We're getting married next summer after completing our educations, finding stable jobs, and settling into our house. We made a committment early that we wouldn't rush into a marriage just because people decided for us that it was time. More people should look at their personal situations and base their decision on where they are, not where people feel they should be. Just my opinion...

Enough, you are right on! Too many people do NOT read history. Marriage was NEVER about love until the late 1700's and then, it was only amongst the well-to-do. The poor didn't marry at all and most lived together and bore children without marriage. Marriage was simply to benefit men to help them achieve more property and power. For the middle class, it was to bear farm hands. That's why boys were so desired. They would grow up to work the family farm and support the family. Girls were just married off to other families. Also, women were likely to die in childbirth and that was a problem because, if they died, who cared for all those kids? Women were not highly regarded. Really, only up until the eighties, women had very few choices other than marriage. They even had to get their husbands PERMISSIONS on many things! So, I can see why marriage is dropping out of favor for women. But for all these people to play up marriage with hearts and flowers is completely laughable. Marriage has rarely been for love and, historically, it's always been for a man's convenience and not for the benefit of women.

Steve does have a point, though expressed poorly! Until the legal system behind marriage and divorce is geared more toward equality than protecting women and children, I would reccomend pre-nups and non-marrigae to my male freinds and relatives.

Prime example: My highschool classmate gave up a scholarship to university to get straight to work, so that he may take care of his pregnant girlfriend. She had twin girls, and he had twin jobs. Worked very hard, and built himself a very promising business to support him and his family. When the twins were 12 years old, he got into a car accident and was desperate for blood. They tested the wife and kids. They were not his daughters. He filed for divorce, and is now paying child support and alimony to a wife that lied to get married and kids that are not his.

Is that fair?

The decline of the institution of marriage is just another "gift' from the most ignorant, self-centered, generation this country has ever seen....the Baby Boomers. You know, the same people who also gave us the drug culture, failed public education, a failed economy, an STD epidemic, a f**ked up healthcare system, and...... oh hell, it would take way to long to list them all!

Lusitania

Many couples are getting divorced these days because their combined incomes put them in a different brackets, they otherwise wouldn't qualify for..School, housing, loans, healthcare the list go's on and on..I'm actually thinking about it, family and friends don't need to know..Of course I've been Married 25 years now !

My parents are doing that. I am a freshman in college and because of their combined incomes I wasn't able to receive hardly any federal assistance at all, yet my parents can't help me pay for college at all because of debt. They are getting a divorce so myself and my siblings will hopefully qualify for help. I've worked my butt off trying to pay for my first year of school, and I still ended up having to take out loans because I ran out of the money I had worked for. It's sad, but that is happening with some families. Unfortunately the divorce is starting to get mean and it's affecting my siblings in the wrong way :/

Browns has good points, especially on the traumatized kids growing up to eschew marriage. After years of volunteering in schools, so many sad little kids - including the first grader who weeped because his mother wasn't there for the class party - I just told him that he knew she would have been, if she could (he seemed happier, but I may have been glossing over the truth, really had no idea).

For my Boomer generation, a number of my friends, like me, had parents that divorced at 20-some years. The parents married as teens in the 50s, and just changed - or at least one did.

Wow. There are a lot of angry, bitter a**holes on here! And AnonymousArizonan is their leader! Jesus, go work on that sunny personality. Who would want to be around that crappy, judging attitude all day? No wonder you're obnoxious, its all you have. Must be lonely, I feel sorry for you....

I am the child of mother who divorced 3 times by the time I was 14 years old. I saw first hand how this impacts everyone involved. I do not fault my mother for any of it and I love her dearly. I may not have had a father in the picture for my entire life, but I had a mother whom sacrificed everything to ensure my older sister, brother, and I had everything we needed in life. However, I do freely admit these experiences shaped my adult views on marriage.

I honestly believe since the 1970s, our country no longer values marriage the way it used too. In today's world, if you see a couple celebrating their 70th Wedding Anniversary (which my great aunt and uncle did this year), its rare. I think our great grandparents and grandparents all wanted to be married. Couples didn't give up so easily when the marriage hit rough patches. Women forgave their cheating husbands (and so did husbands for their cheating wives, but a lot less), back in those days. The vows of marriage were much stronger than and people did stay married. Divorce was seen as a disgrace in society and a failure by the majority. Women stayed at home, raised the family, took care of their children, and served their husbands. Women were more viewed as property in some circumstances, and not valued as much as they might be today.

Today, people 'fall in/out of love and divorce' faster than a republican runs to a lobbyist for money. If they get married and it doesn't work, its "OKAY" to get a divorce and move on. The values they take on their wedding day don't mean nearly as much as they used too. Of course, there are many reasons for getting married and just as many for getting divorced as well. What works for one couple may not work for another, its all up for them to decide.

I still think marriage is a great thing in this country. If you can find the right person, go for it, and do not give up when things aren't a rose garden. I was lucky enough to find a man that loves me and shares all of the same values I do as well. My hope is that we follow the modern example that my grandparents set forward and that my mother now has today. She found the right one and has been married for 25 years.

Marriage has been turned into nothing more then a legal liability for most men and will continue to grow into a liability for women as well as they contine to close the gap on men in terms of income. People can quote statistics, history, personal experience, even the media if they want to. After all is said and done the reason people don't want to get married is that because of the laws in this country and the judges and lawyers that use them. Without a marriage contract there is no alimony or seperation of assets. (I am not talking about child support if there are children involved that is something else so please don't make a stupid comment about it).

If you go to Vegas and play red or black in roulette you have a 50% chance of winning. If you lose no big deal you are out a couple of bucks. In marriage if you win you keep what you have and may improve your life slightly but no real major benefits but you have a 50% chance of losing at least half of everything you worked all your life to establish to that point and may have to continue to pay for the rest of your life.

If you don't get married you get all the same benefits I mean you don't have to be married to live together or have children. So why risk it.

In today's society with the morals displayed by many of the population there is absolutely no reason to buy the cow if you can get the milk for free.

There are 3 main groups that are finally getting what they've worked so hard to accomplish, the collapse of the American Family Unit. First Hollywood! They've portrayed there are no smart Husbands in Commercials. Husbands are represented as stupid and a drain on the attractive, smart wives and kids. Look at all the sit coms on TV. Most are about happy single people having intercourse without consequenses, while those that do have married couples in them are portrayed as having nothing but strife & bitterness. Second, the Government. They provide more money to Single Parents and punish married couples in their tax laws and social programs. They appoint judges that selectivly support Women over men in Courts. They also educate in our schools that people who decide to abstain from intercourse before marriage are stupid and un-educated, while providing condoms and free abortions to the children behind the parent's backs. Third, there is the PC crowd! They claim that anyone who might disagree with abortion, anyone who supports parent's rights, supports punishing child pornagraphers, or isn't comfortable with having their children learn about bi-sexuality, transgender or any other deviant behavior, should be fired and/or thrown in prison. All of these forces working together to destroy marriages will take its toll over time. Nuff said!

IReadYou "I gave a couple of accounts of how someone was using the system. You are interested in speculating about what caused it. ... You want to fabricate something that justifies in your mind "a taking" go ahead."

I am not justifying anything, merely pointing out that things dont happen in a vacuum. I am not fabricating anything...why shouldnt men who spawn children be held financially responsible for them? And if they manage to elude responsibility, why wouldnt we as a society want to ensure children (not the adults) are taken care of?

"I was commenting on the real situation that exists today, that is a woman can do quite well in the financial and social support arena if she so chooses. IF it makes you mad to read it, sorry. 25 years ago it wasn't possible for women to get all the taxpayer support they get now. The systems were created and now they exist. Simple."

Doesnt make me mad. Not any more mad than any other type of fraud and abuse. But since we are too inept to properly fund programs to ensure they work for the people, not get abused by them...we'll always have this issue. whether it's medicare, medicaid, social security, welfare...or in the private sector with insurance fraud.

I dont have a desire to toss the baby out with the bathwater due to some bad apples...or should we just sterilize every man so that women cant become baby mama's? I dont know, so many options really.

"Women can have children and send the bill for it to someone else when it used to be the family man who took care of things. You may think all men are horrible - but that's your problem. I know some fine men who take care of the family. If you don't know any I'd just have to say what I heard the old folks say " you're hanging with the wrong crowd"."

??????????? We are talking about women holding their hands out to the system for help. NOT ALL WOMEN...and therefore, you should be smart enough to reason I wasnt talking about ALL MEN when talking about men not fulfilling their duties of raising the children they produce - financially, emotionally and physically. defensive much? I dont think all men are horrible, but some most definitely are. Just like some women are. This is REALITY 101...try to keep up. I also know tons of great men, but the reality is they dont "take care of the family" anymore than their wives do. It's a mutal "taking care of the family" sort of deal...imagine that?

But Kudos man...you taking care of your family all by yourself. So your wife, she doesnt pitch in at all? At least she's leaching off you and not the govt huh?

I think a big part of the decline in marriage is that it has not evolved fast enough to keep up with the fast-changing society we live in. Marriage was a modern invention - in the hunting and gathering days groups of humans shared responsibility including reproduction - this included shared mating and shared raising of children. That all changed with the Romans and eventually the Roman Catholic Church which decided to setup the current idea of marriage (i.e. one man and one woman in a monogamous relationship). This worked for a long time... afterall people really were not allowed to buck the dogma and marriage rates were high.

Fast forward to the last few decades and you see the influence of organized religion falling quickly and also the rise of woman's economic independence. Add to that the fact that humans really never were monogamous and there is little surprise that marriage rates are plummeting. Unfortunately, the expectation of the traditional marriage is not at all realistic and goes against our biology. Like it or not we evolved in social groups that were not monogamous - in fact, there probably isn't any animal on the planet that is strictly monogamous - it just doesn't make evolutionary sense. Thus, the traditional marriage is really a religious invention and not a natural one.

That doesn't mean marriage can't be great, and work for many people. I think the problem is with expectations of people getting married. If you absolutely demand monogamy form your mate the chances are good your marriage will fail or turn loveless - marriages with more flexibility have more chance to endure. I'm not passing judgement on anyone's decision to be monogamous in their marriage or not - it is just a simple fact of human nature and evolution. Just because you choose to believe in the Christian convention of marriage doesn't mean it is realistic or even healthy for many people. Again, religion has much less to do with reality than with fantasy...

You can get all the benefits of marriage without actually getting married

Except the benefit of knowing your partner is committed enough to stand up in front of witnesses and enter into a religious and/or legal contract with you.

Why do you need a contract to prove you want to be together?

Why do you need a contract to prove you will fulfill a business obligation? So that the other party knows that you won't simply walk out if you get a better offer, when you get cold feet, or if things go south. This can be especially important if you have kids together-how do you tell junior that mom or dad just walked out the door with your mail carrier without looking back or saying goodbye?

People always talk about those who come from homes with parents who divorced and/or had terrible marriages and don't want to repeat those mistakes. Then DON'T repeat them! I am one of those people. My dad was a terrible, abusive alcoholic; and my parents had a horrible marriage. I grew up seeing and experiencing this, but marriage itself wasn't the problem. The alcohol, abuse, and enabling were the problems. Thankfully, due to my mother's prayers (seriously), all of us kids wound up marrying people who were not alcoholics and not abusive (if you know about patterns in abusive families then you know how unusual it is for all three kids from an abusive alcoholic family situation to marry non alcoholic, non abusive spouses.) Only later was I able to realize the messed up patterns in my family that caused so many problems and work to keep from passing them down to my own child. If you come from a situation like that, I would recommend you get help so you won't repeat the pattern. Again, MARRIAGE is not the problem; it is the dysfunctional dynamics in the family that are the problem. You will tend to take those into any relationship, whether it is a marriage, cohabitation, or anything else.

Marriage was a modern invention - in the hunting and gathering days groups of humans shared responsibility including reproduction - this included shared mating and shared raising of children. That all changed with the Romans and eventually the Roman Catholic Church which decided to setup the current idea of marriage (i.e. one man and one woman in a monogamous relationship).

You might want to look a little further back into history, Overlord.

Greek and Roman men were not allowed to be married to more than one wife at a time and not meant to cohabit with concubines during marriage, and not even rulers were exempt from these norms. That these facts have generally received little attention and occasioned no surprise among historians specializing in this period bespeaks a remarkable lack of cross-cultural awareness.1

Moving on to the Greco-Roman world, elite polygyny looms large in the Homeric tradition.21 By the historical period, by contrast, SIUM was firmly established as the only legitimate marriage system: polygamy was considered a barbarian custom or a mark of tyranny and monogamy was regarded as quintessentially "Greek."

SICU means "Socially Instituted Universal Monogamy."

... ancient Egyptians and Babylonians are classified as "monogamous," regardless of well-documented resource polygyny amongst their rulers.8 This problem is well illustrated by the Western North American Indian Data Set. In each of its 172 societies, monogamy is found to be the dominant form of marriage, accounting for 60+% of all unions.9 At the same time, in only 28 cases, or 16%, is polygyny reported to be absent or very rare:...

The "problem" this quote appears to be referring to is that the data is not absolute since it does not make the case that any of the societies mentioned was completely monogamous, and it is difficult to know to what extent exactly those societies were monogamous, even if monogamy was the dominant form of marriage by percentage.

The three above quotes are from princeton.edu.

Add to that the fact that humans really never were monogamous

See Princeton article. Furthermore, the article postulated:

In this scenario, the spread of monogamy is a function of decreasing resource inequality among men.These assumptions are borne out by simulation models and successfully tested against indices of resource inequality and women's power in 127 modern countries. These data show that greater resourceinequality significantly increases the incidence of polygyny and also indicate positive interaction effects of inequality and women's power on polygyny.34 Economic development is found to be negativelycorrelated with polygyny, suggesting that male resource inequality diminished with economic development.

In other words, almost to quote, the data showed a negative correlation between polygamy and economic development.

Marriage rates in society are vague indicators of a society's values. All our marriage rates tell us is how optimistic the public is feeling these days. There's no shortage of headlines on consumer and investor optimism and it's effects on the economy. Marriage, like other investments, takes a certain level of optimism because there is the inherent risk of losing your shirt and then some, or having rewards beyond anything you expected. Beyond that it's a loose reflection of society's attitudes toward cooperative/collaborative work. We love Batman, but Robin and their joint contributions are an afterthought. The CEO's get to live the highlife while the employees that make it happen scrape by.

Divorce on the other hand is more a reflection of personal character and to some extent society's value of character. I find that people that get divorced tend to lack foresight, perseverence, problem solving, and insight. They lack the foresight to see that commiting to someone for the rest of your life, regardless of your age, is extremely challenging to say the least (getting married young is hard because you're less sure of yourself as a person and you've got a lot of years to live, getting married older is hard because people tend to be a little too sure of their ways and have difficulty working with the ways of other's). They lack the perseverence and problem solving to work on something challenging for the long term without measurable exponential returns. Lastly they lack the insight to see their own contributions to the dysfunction in the relationship. The increase in divorce rates largely reflect society's deminishng value of these qualities leading folks to feel more open to admit such short-comings in an indirect way. We like the quick solutions (that often bite us in the butt now AND later) over measured problem solving(especially if it's difficult for everyone, but paticularly the weathy).

What the @!$%#? They didn't take it away. It costs like 20 or 40 dollars to get married, and nothing to move in together after married... In fact, the then moving in together part cuts costs by only paying for one place. No, this is actually GOOD for marriage. Did you catch any of the articles pointing out that people can't get divorced because of the economy? How it's causing people to think more carefully about who they say "I do" to because they can't just up and divorce? Get a clue. Making getting married or divorced harder actually will lower divorce rates, and cause people to be serious about these things instead of viewing getting married like buying a car.

And, as the article points out, most people walk away from divorce with a harsher view on marriage and relationships (which is because they're too stupid to realize they married the wrong person is what was wrong, not that they got married at all), so lower divorce rates is very, very good for marriage.

Of all the things the 1% took away from us when they blew up the economy, this one makes me the most angry. >:[

Bull@!$%#. The so-called 1% didn't take marriage away from you. You may want to look toward cultural marxism for your demon. Marriage was once a religious institution. The cultural marxists have created the atmosphere where the most powerful force is government, the individual is too unintelligent and too weak to make decisions for themselves.

The government stepped in to regulate marriage and divorce. The government then destroyed family values by making divorce easy and paying extra money for children in single parent households. The black community has a single-parent household rate of 80%. Why is this?

I take it you two didn't realize that Swirlscape was employing a little something some of us like to refer to as sarcasm. That's right, sarcasm. Sound it out now. S-A-R-C-A-S-M. There, now isn't learning fun?

the defenders of the rich are always trolling.they're quick to jump on any criticism of the wealthy.i wonder if it pays well

Marriage is nothing but a piece of paper that gives the partner certain legal rights and, at times, can simplify divorce. Personally, unless there were children involved, I would just live together keeping all finances clearly separated. Even a married woman should always keep a personal account just in case. In the final analysis, people should do what they think is best in their situation.

Susi-Oh,

Marriage is much more than a piece of paper. Once married, you don't need to return the engagement ring, it's yours. Just ask Kim Kardashian. She got a $2 million ring, tax free. Getting married also gives you the right to get a new dress and hold a party in your honor. Just ask Kim Kardashian. Additionally, marriage gives you the right to sue your partner for divorce and collect stud fees (alimony). This can be a lot of money, if you marry the right person. Just ask Donald Trump's ex's. So, I can't agree that marriage is just a piece of paper. It's a lot more.

It's hard to get married when so many young people are back living at home after college with parents in a downsized house with both space and privacy issues. That has to be a factor causing many people to postpone the big day.

There's also a moral factor, though. I know a few couples in long term relationships who consider themselves married in terms of lifestyle, but refuse to be legally married until same-sex couples have the same opportunity in all of the States. Others, no doubt, know people with the same convictions. Extrapolating this by the number of people I don't know, it seems there should be a sizable number of people postponing marriages across the country on just that alone.

Troll

Steve @ 1.7

Not sure why you are getting so many votes because your comment is pure, unadulterated hogwash. Do you always blame everything on society and the government?? BTW-- Nazi's were fascists not socialist/Marxists-- totally different system-- neither of which we have today in this country. You should count yourself lucky not to have lived in Nazi Germany -- where even Americans were beaten and murdered by the SA thugs.

Mike - then you add in the gay couples that would get married if they could, but cant. you subtract the ones that would have just "bucked up and married straight" who are no longer feeling compelled to live a lie...and that affects marriage rates too.

as another poster pointed out somewhere, you also add in all the women who WOULD have married in the past, soley for the financial stability factor...who are now educated and taking care of themselves, and they no longer HAVE to get married just to be certain they wont be mired in poverty.

Atlas - your idea that marriage was once a religious institution, and things were so much better before is odd. Women were property before, in the eyes of a religious marriage. In Christianity, Women had no choice in who they married, their parents sold them as if they were cattle to the highest bidder.

So what point in our history regarding marriage and religion were you looking to go back to?

Women arent property, this isnt the middle east...and im not interest in a christian version of sharia law.

So what, exactly are you looking to achieve?

This is the LAND OF THE FREE...so as such, you have the right to carry out the most religious and holy marriage you can muster...and anything anyone else does shouldnt matter. Dont blame other people if you suck at life, especially not the socialist/marxists who are destroying your vision of the perfect world.

You can move to the middle east if you prefer religious dogma dominating govt/nation.

I know why marriage rates have fallen: Women have changed

Instead of a stable relationship with men that could foster into something meaningful, more and more women want BOY-TOYS to satisfy short term urges.

Men on the other hand, are the same horndogs they've always been so it can't be their fault.

Now that men and women are equal, both sexes are now looking for hotties for one-nighters

There is no word in the language we use that when applied to women carries the venom of bum, deadbeat or looser.

There is no word in the language in the language we use that when applied to men that carries the venom of slut, skank or whore.

It is sad that our society finds characters like Peg Bundy(Married with Children) or Charlie Harper(Two and a Half Men) funny.

Marriage will continue to decline as our morality continues to decline.

Marriage will continue to decline as our morality continues to decline.

Time will tell. But in reality people have been humping outside of marriage since the beginning of time, so I don't think that's the case.

Like how many couples are waiting to have kids, I think the recession is at fault.

I think lawyers should stay out of divorces unless absolutely necessary. If my husband and I ever divorce, we would split everything down the middle except the kids (however the responsibility would be split half and half with them). You don't need a lot of money to get married in the first place: I borrowed my wedding dress, my husband's suit was donated to him, our church made the cake, bouquet of flowers, and we used the church's building for naught. We have been married for over 7 years...you don't need to go into debt to get married. Divorce should be a simple paper that should be filed. You shouldn't need a lawyer (they can charge anywhere from $300-500/hour!) in order to get a divorce. I would rather separate from my husband and then reconcile with him and get back together. If you really love someone, maybe you only need a break. For those who think I am brainwashed: I am NOT. I have been to so many different churches while growing up (my choice for my parents NEVER went to church) and now I found one that makes me whole (but my husband does not go to church at all). The MAIN reason why marriages are so frowned upon is because the morality of our society has gone to crap. All marriage is is a piece of paper, for many. To me, it is the highest commitment you can make on Earth besides committing to follow Christ. BTW you don't need to be rich to afford your kids...you just have to be creative, resourceful, and be willing to use things second hand (we have three and no more).

The decline of morality begins with the Baby Boomers who spent the past 40 years to vote themselves more benefits than the system could possibly sustain without breaking. Now it is broken.

The boomers inherited a freest and most prosperous nation the world has ever seen. They leave for their children a nation with a bankrupt Social Security, bankrupt Medicare, bankrupt pensions both public and private and a $15 trillion dollar and counting debt. The Boomers inherited the "Land of the Free" and voted to transform it into the worlds "Prison Nation". American Boomers have left their children with a future of poverty and despair.

How many Boomers protested when George Bush added the free prescription drug plan onto an already bankrupt Social Security system at the urging of the AARP?

Don't go blaming corrupt politicians for the economic tragedy we face today. It is the boomers who voted out any politician who dared speak the truth about how Social Security and Medicare were intergenerational ponzi schemes.

You Boomers knew drastic changes were needed in your voting back in 1992 when Ross Perot showed you all where the country was headed with his campaign. You ignored him. Thanks a lot Boomers.

You Boomers could have elected a LIBERTARIAN at any time and saved the country from this mess, but you valued your benefits more than your children's future.

jem: your naivite is unbelievable...beginning with using libertarian and morality in the same sentence. No wonder you think if this were the 1950's, and women's primary means of financial support included marriage, everything would have been just peachy...

Marriage is nothing but a piece of paper that gives the partner certain legal rights and, at times, can simplify divorce.

Wait, wouldn't NOT getting married simplify divorce even more? :)

Aren't you judgmental? Your bitterness is almost tangible. Other people can be happy without doing things the way you would.

Fortunately in today's world it is possible to live together, provide for each other's future and not have the formality of 'marriage'.

Not entirely. As you point out, you can't benefit from each other's social security benefits. In fact, contracts won't give you access to many of the benefits that the government bestows on married couples. Even when you have the contracts, they are subject to challenge. Think you have each other covered in your wills? Think again. Wills can be contested by your partner's family and you might lose. If you were married, there'd be no issue. You'd also get a hefty tax break on the inheritance.

Also, think about the legal aftermath of the World Trade Center bombings. Spouses of victims received compensation from the government. Unmarried partners received nothing unless their relationship was recognized by the state in which the victim was living at the time.

How about you let us scrutinize the skeletons in your closet Anonymous.

I dealt with, and fought to work on, a loveless marriage for years. It wasn't until I was able to see that I'm worth more than putting up with that crap that I moved on. Now, my Girlfriend and I don't even consider marriage. Why should we? We've both been there before, we both love and are committed to each other. Our future is together, but the need to add my last name is not an area of concern.

@Gedeprime: who cares about last names? Getting married doesn't mean you have to change your name - I wouldn't.

@Tony (and atlaswillshrug): marriage was always a contract first. When religion became important (state backed), then religion became part of the contract. If the state didn't care about marriage then they wouldn't have tried to control it as much as they have throughout history (i.e. who marries who etc). Having said that, I do believe that marriage is important for society (contract wise and more) and I have broken up with men who "don't believe in marriage" as it was clear that they weren't feeling any real commitment. If that's is what both people in a relationship want (especially when kids are not an issue), then this is a free country.

Marriage is just a legal contract. You don't need marriage (or religion, Tony) to be committed to your partner, to love your partner, to honor your partner, and to be faithful to your partner. If it takes a legal contract for you to behave the way you should have been all along, you've got problems, and your marriage is going to fail.

My husband and I were together for eleven years before we got married. We got married primarily for financial reasons. We needed the rights that come along with that legal contract - if one of us gets in an accident, the other needs visitation rights and decision making ability. There's also healthcare for spouses and tax reasons to tie the knot, along with hundreds of other special rights on a state and federal level that come along with marriage.

Tony Actually she's correct on the legal history of marriage. The ceremonial history is slightly different, but the legal status of it is pretty correct.

Agreed, EvilBeagle.

AnonymousArizonan, you should probably work on your public forum posting skills because you really come across as little beyond a troll at this point, and I'm not sure whether that's your intention or not. You may have some valid points, but they don't register because of the personal attacks and tone that you alone KNOW everything. Several of your posts have been collapsed because so many people have reported them. Settle down.

Anonymous

Since we have been happily married now for 17+ years I think your estimations are incorrect. Perhaps you should not be so judgmental of others. Especially when their lifestyle in no way affects you.

I got married three years ago and I thought that my wife was the best person in the world, a loving, compassionate, caring, and charitable person. I was so convinced of this that I proposed too soon and got married too soon. It turns out that I did not know her as well as I thought I did. She turned out to be a severe Shop-A-Holic, and she drove me into bankruptcy. We have a 20 month old daughter, and when she got pregnant with our second child, she filed for divorce. She got her well-off parents to hire an expensive high-end lawyer and took me for everything. Now I have to pay her $3000+ per month in spousal and child support, and I only get to visit my kids for twice a week for an hour. This is because I did not have the money to defend myself legally.

I would not recommend marriage to anybody. It was the worst mistake I ever made in my whole life, and I will be struggling with the consequences for the rest of my life.

If you are discerning marriage, I urge you not to rush into things. You need to get to know your partner very well before you marry them, and this can take years. Don't just marry that person because they are "there", and you don't think you can find anyone else. You will be so much better off alone than if you marry the wrong person.

I also urge you not to get married if you do not have a steady and secure job or source of income and money, because if you have children, they are very expensive in this economy, and if you cannot afford to take care of them, The Department of Children Services will bend over backwards to take your kids away from you and put them in a shoddy foster home. This is very, very common and happens all the time -- a lot more than most people realize.

The Commandments this world would be a much better place. 6. shall not kill 7.shall not commit adultery 8.shall not steal 9.shall not lie 10. don't covet

Trying to remember which commandment was "Thou shalt get a state recognized marriage"

AnonymousArizonan is a troll. Stop feeding it and it will go way.

As a lesbian would can not get legally married, I can tell you that legal recognition does not make a loving couple. I've been with my wife for 12 years (we had a committment ceremony/wedding in 2005 that was illegal) and im 32 years old.

Anyone who's been in a long term relationship knows that it takes work...and when you are not legally binded, it takes even more work to keep it together. There might be perfect couples out there that never fight, never have rough patches...but I dont know them. What I do know is that we always work through our issues, and never around them.

We arent perfect, we have our flaws...we irritate each other at times. We sometimes are not on the same page, but what we are great at is loving each other and making it work.

It's hard work...there is no easy button. Most people dont find out 2 years into their relationship that their partner has a disease like Multiple Sclerosis, let alone at the age of 20. To face the future with such uncertainty, is difficult beyond words. The fear of not knowing what will fail on her - eyesight, balance, leg movement, arm movement...all of the above, or when...is at times too much to bear.

Legal recognition or not, I know what our love is and true commitment is. I know what it takes to care for someone, trust in someone and believe in someone...and I know what it feels like to have someone be all those things to me as well.

I dont need people like Annonymous to validate our committment to each other...

it would simply be nice to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, and not like a second class citizens in our own country...a country that is supposedly the land of the free, in which everyone is afforded the freedom to pursue happiness and liberty.

to each their own...I wish all of you the best of luck in love and life.

People, stop humoring Arizona. Shes a sad disgusting troll who obviously is so freakin miserable with her lonley pathetic life that her only outlet is to troll MSN comment threads looking to piss people off. I mean Christ, shes commented on EVERYONES comments and had all of them collaped. No one wants to hear from her and she knows it. Shes the kid in class that eats her boogers. Stop feeding this little pig and it'll go away.

I love you (for getting women are at fault - our gender is indeed the one at fault)... But, you're wrong about there being no point to marriage. Marriage says you two are officially committed for life. The problem is, most people don't understand that. They think marriage is like buying a car. They think it's just another life step you have to do to say you're all growned uped. Because they are actually not all grown up, they fail to grasp the point in marriage and fail to grasp how to marry the right person. And, they think if they do marry the wrong person, they can always divorce and remarry... Except when they get to that point they've put on 40 lb.s, look like @!$%#, and have two kids.

Nothing is black and white. People have their own reasons for marrying or not, and blaming any one thing, or an entire gender, is quite narrow minded. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with not getting married. What people do is their own business, and if it works for them, it's no one's place to sit in judgment.

You just keep showing the crazy, don't you? You're onto everything but your medication apparently.

The world is not black and white. Again, no one has to live as you do, or think as you do in order to be perfectly happy. From the tone of your posts, I'd even argue that no one should. Due to the tone of your posts, which by the way, get funnier/sadder by the minute, I am just going to ignore you now. It's just getting too easy for me, and a bit unfair.

But really, get over it. Some people choose not to marry and some do. Why they do either is not your problem or anyone else's, and no one has the right to criticize those decisions, as they are personal.

Brenda, it isn't the entire reason, but accounts for a good chunk of the drop.

It's the old John Wayne bit. When told that everything isn't black and white, he barked back, "Why the hell not?!" Stupid people need to pretend the universe is simplistic because otherwise they feel confused and inadequate. Nietzsche refers to this as "lying their way out of the Actual." There is no point in discussing anything with such people. It won't get you anywhere. And it certainly won't get them anywhere, which is just the way they like it. Don't engage the unengageable: just "Ignore This Author" and eventually they'll go away. Or, if they are particularly desperate for attention, create a new screen name which we will have to ignore in turn. As the poet said, "I do not chat with swine."

Very true, MacinPhoenix. Such a simplistic view that does not allow for anyone else's opinion to count even as an "agree to disagree", is a sign of stupidity and insecurity within the self. I suppose I should never have responded to AA at all, but having been that kid in school that didn't let anyone around me get bullied, I got a bit carried away when I saw her going after everyone, myself included, in that pathetic and judgmental manner. Then it was like shooting fish in a barrel when I kept responding so I had to stop, arrogant though that sounds. She would have continued on and on and not only become hugely boring, but it wasn't going to accomplish anything positive.

That I have found a reference to Nietzsche on MSNBC in the comment section has restored hope for me. ;)

Brenda funny I find that the men are the ones who seem to get bored. My husband cheated on me and he sex any time with me that he wanted. Then he wanted a son. It had to be a son to carry on the name. His mother told me he was not ready to settle down yet ( he was 26 ) he jumped into marriage because all his friends were married. Well I had a son but because my husband couldn't stay faithful we divorced. He never tried to see his son after the divorce and never payed child support. My son was three now he's 30. And my son has never seen his father. He remarried I heard and that ended in divorce. That tells me something. My daughter was married 14 yrs. and her husband couldn't handle having a son that was autistic. So he bailed out leaving her and his other 3 children ( girls ).

Anonymous, Brenda, while I agree that women have a role, you can't blame one particular gender for disintegration of marriage.

Yes, there are women who take advantage of their men, get divorced and take half. But I would argue the same amount of men cheat on their wives and break up their own families. Both are wrong.

I'm 29 and not married. I'd love to be married, but there is just so little hope out there that a marriage will actually work it's discouraging. I do believe that, if possible, both women and men should enter the marriage with their own resources, so as not to have to depend financially on the other. In order to do this, you have to get married later in life because that's when you are more established. Since our marriage laws are archaic and tend to cater the person with less money, regardless of fault, I also believe in prenups.

Saying low marriage rates are only women's or only men's fault is as bad as saying it's only Repubs or only Dems that screwed up our government.

US women did not do anything but graduate from high school at the top of our class, go on to higher education and land jobs to provide for ourselves. US women no longer feel the need to marry just to become Mrs. Whatever His Name is and look to him as a soul provider and feel as if we are more than a wife and a mother. If the right man happens to come along good but if he doesn't, I have no problem paying my bills, enjoy a good steak and vacation without him.

While I agree that it takes two to tango in a divorce, it's never 50/50. One side usually is at more fault then the other. Courts usually award the wife custody and hang the father as the bad guy and rake him across the coals when it comes to child support. My best friend, God bless her soul, is doing that very same thing to her ex as we speak. Not to mention how she enjoys telling him he can't see his kids now and then to punish him. Granted, he did cheat on her, but she sorta made that happen. I know he has a choice and nobody forced him to cheat, but when the kids came, that became her priority and he was knocked to the back of the line when it came to sex. When I was young, it was different, the marriage came first and the kids where tag along's. Something happened and now when kids come along, they are first and the marriage is second. There is something to be said to being put on a pedestal and doing the same for your Husband. Sometimes I think I missed the good old days. today Marriage is something you play at for a bit until the next game comes out.

Us women did it to ourselves. We basically forced Men not to desire marriage.

lol First... so? It appears that you think we women are pining away for a man to marry us.. and that is simply not the case. Women have more opportunities than ever before in history and no longer need to rely on marriage for financial security. This is a good thing for BOTH sexes. If I were a man, I would be glad that a woman chose to marry me because she just wanted me... instead of knowing I was chosen from a list of potential financial plans.

As to the rest of your first rant, let me guess... your son's wife took off with another man and he still has to pay child support and the two of you are pissed about it? Your personal experience is hardly representative of the world at large.

Granted, he did cheat on her, but she sorta made that happen.

Unless she actively grabbed his penis and forced it into places it shouldn't have been, she bears NO responsibility for this man's actions. Children are a huge responsibility and that responsibility is often placed squarely on the mom's shoulders. If this prick of a man was whiny because his wife was too tired for sex, he could have simply taken on some of the responsibility rather than throw a sexual tantrum. /rant off

Thank you, Just! Took the words right out of my mouth.

Granted, he did cheat on her, but she sorta made that happen.

Now it's the victims faults? Whatever happened to personal responsibility in this country? Regardless of what is going on in the home, you don't cheat on your spouse. You work it out, or you don't work it out, but you don't get to go bang some tramp, bringing home god knows what STDs and disappointing the entire family (kids included) because you didn't get enough attention.

If my boyfriend ever came to me to me with this problem and was willing to work on it with me, I can guarantee that it would get resolved. If he cheated on me before giving me the opportunity to resolve the issue (and doing some of the work himself), he'd be out in a heartbeat. I wouldn't think twice.

Wow Brenda, I am surprised to see your reply come from a woman. Had any man posted that on this thread, others would be all over him. However, there is plenty of guilt to go around between the genders.

There are so many issues at work here, it is a wonder anyone gets married. Women no longer need the financial security. Men can find plenty of women to have sex with (w/o marriage), as can women now that they are a major part of the work force. Divorce laws, lawyers, courts and the media publishing everything has made plenty of people run the other direction from marriage. Women now couple with women, and men with men; and they are not part of the marriage statistic even if they want to be. Then we have all the children who grew up with divorced parents and witnessed the BS on both sides first hand. That's enough to keep most from ever considering going through it (I know it has done that to mine).

@ Brenda - You think children should come second? Hmm, I guess I have to say I disagree with that. Married or no, the children need to come first, otherwise you're probably better off not having any. As for marriage in general, as our society grows and evolves the concept of what marriage is or should be evolves with it, and I don't necessarily believe that is a bad thing.

Children were tag alongs??? Uh..... Seriously? Sounds more like someone is having an affair with a married man.

Perhaps she meant it in a different aspect, but I actually agree with what (I believe) Brenda is referring to regarding the marriage coming first.

My intent is to spend the rest of my life with my wife- but I've only got about 18 years (estimated) to rear my kids before they move on to do their life with their partner/by themselves. After the kids are out of the door, I still have my partner.

Seems worse to neglect the partner for 18 years expecting them to be happy about it afterwards. IMHO, people forget about the whole spouses being together for each other once children come along, and the entire establishment is now about the kids. Not to downplay the necessity of providing for/caring for your children, but remember the adults in the situation are human too, and need 'caring for' the same.

Brenda: geez...no reason to get married for a woman except economic dependency??? women "did it to themselves?" Oh my gosh woman...just what century are you from??? If a marriage isn't based on something besides 'she gives you sex and sandwiches and hegives her the paycheck' it wasn't going anywhere anyway. Life was great when women had fewer options? Wow....what's with all the self-hate? That horse has left the barn, don't ya think? (sure hope you're not a mom)

Anonymous Artichoke @ Brenda - You think children should come second? Hmm, I guess I have to say I disagree with that. Married or no, the children need to come first, otherwise you're probably better off not having any

Guess I shoud clarify the tag along thing. What I ment to say I that My Mother and Father took their marriage very seriously. In fact they pointed it out to us that we would not even be here if they didn't. Their Marriage came first most of the time. There where times when they had to focus on us before the marriage, but for the most part, the Marriage is what held the familly together. This does not mean the ignored us and didnt feed us. That would be rediculous to say the least. We never felt unloved or ignored, but woe the day when we tried to play one against the other, never worked. So if you are telling me I should never have kids because I would not put them first is silly. Its the marriage that makes it work, not the kids.

Justmytwocoppers - Unless she actively grabbed his penis and forced it into places it shouldn't have been, she bears NO responsibility for this man's actions

That statement is just silly. What you are saying is I can marry a man then ignore his needs for the whole marriage and expect him to never cheat on me? Thats just silly. You would be practically telling him to go cheat.

PH - Now it's the victims faults? Whatever happened to personal responsibility in this country? Regardless of what is going on in the home, you don't cheat on your spouse

See above.

Sorry if I didn't get everyone questions answered. By the way, the one who said it was my son would be wrong. If you had read my statement, it was concerning my friend and her ex husband.

Gotta ask, why get married if you don't put the marriage first? For that matter, why have children if you don't put the marriage first? Why would you get married, have children, divorce your husband and then put the children you said come first through all that? Seems to me some of you got it backwards, should show the children marriage is important to make a family strong so the divorces don't happen. Bond between husband and wife, marriage, is the foundation for the family. Don't put the foundation first, then the kids you put first will suffer first.

That statement is just silly. What you are saying is I can marry a man then ignore his needs for the whole marriage and expect him to never cheat on me? Thats just silly. You would be practically telling him to go cheat.

Ridiculous. Of course, he has the right to divorce you for failing to meet his needs.. But responsibility for committing adultry lies solely in the hands of the one who committed adultry. Again... a REAL man would have stepped up to ease the weight of parenting so the woman wouldn't be too tired for sex. Your assertion that she ignored him through the whole marriage is just stupid. The fact that there were kids is proof of that.

My assertion was concerning your statement, not what the article said. Ps. if you divorce you commit adultery as well. In the eyes of God you are married for life. Oh and who said anything about the man not participating in raising the children. You and I both know that when children come along, we tend to shift our focus to them. What if he all the sudden cut you off from sex? For me that would be an unbearable situation, even at my age.

An unbearable situation would warrant divorce... not be an excuse for infidelity. Adultery in the eyes of the law... not your religion. You do realize that not everyone belongs to your religion, right? And you have no authority to speak to what I know and what I don't. When my children came along, my focus was on the family... the same as it was before the children. You can try to justify infidelity all you want ... let's see if you can still justify it when it happens to you.

Where did I say i justify infidelity? Love it when people read what you write and then add to it what they think you wrote. Also you should look up the word Adultery and read what it says. Even when you are separated from your spouse it is considered adultery. Sound like you are the one trying to justify having adultery. I myself did not get married until I was sure it would work. Yes you may say there is no way to know if a relationship would work or not, but yes there is. It's called not sleeping with every Tom, Dick, or Harry and getting to know the person for several years before making that move. I speak from experience of age and Marriage. Women of today are all about me me me. Sorry, that doesn't fly. That's why there is so many divorces these days and kids growing up screwed up because of their parents.

@ Brenda - So if you are telling me I should never have kids because I would not put them first is silly. Its the marriage that makes it work, not the kids.

Hmm, again I will have to disagree with you. Being married does not automatically make you parent material, nor does not being married automatically disqualify you as a parent. I know many a single mother or father who are wonderful parents. I also know many married couples who never should have had children. Of course, the reverse is also true in either case. The thing is, I honestly believe that if you have children, married or not, they must be the priority. Otherwise you simply should not have children. Let me explain it this way; your children are not just your future, but every possible future. What you teach them is carried on to the next generation, and the next, and so on. I read a quote once that summed it up quite well. It went something like "In a thousand years the kind of car you drove, the size of your wedding ring, and the house that you lived in will not matter, but how you raise your children will". That's paraphrasing, but close enough to get the point across. Do you see what I'm saying?

Brenda :::speaking patiently and slowly::: you said she was at fault for his cheating because she stopped having sex with him when the children were born. THAT is justifying his infidelity.

http://www.answers.com/topic/adultery - The legal definition of adultery - Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.

It was YOU who claimed that adultery was: " Ps. if you divorce you commit adultery as well. In the eyes of God you are married for life." If you are divorced, then you are not legally married.

As for your smug self-righteousness - I was a virgin when I married (not sleeping with every Tom, Dick, Harry) we had dated for 5 years before getting married. And I was married for 25 years. So, spare me your crystal ball declaration that it could never happen to you. It has been said that if there is ever a lesson that you need to learn, God will provide the opportunity for you to do so.. so I would be careful to learn humility before God starts those lessons.

And finally, unless you are speaking to us from beyond the grave, you are also a "woman of today" so you might want to refrain from generalizing simply because you know a few people who are selfish. I know a few Catholic priests that are pedophiles... should I assume, then, that all catholics are pedophiles? My children are not screwed up as a result of the divorce anymore than children of widows would be. They have a strong, loving mother who teaches them respect, tolerance... and above all, resilience. So, I would love to tell you not to judge until you have walked a mile in my shoes... but my shoes are far too big for you to fill.

Brenda - I completely agree with you that both partner's needs should be met, most of the time. Surely, there was a problem with sex in the marriage. But with that said, a real man would address the issue by either helping out more at home to relieve the burden, or seeking counseling. Heck, maybe even getting a divorce if it was that bad.

But cheating is the WORST thing you can do to your family and, to me, it has nothing to do with religious or legal or cultural terms. It's primarily a medical health issue - anyone, man or woman, who cheats puts their trusting partner at risk for disease - and a mental health issue - anyone who has been cheated on is going to suffer for quite some time. I just think that if, at one point you cared about someone, you should be able to either fix the marriage or walk away instead of playing Russian Roulette with their life and happiness. So, anyone who decides to cheat, in my eyes, is a terrible human being that should not be afforded any excuses or justification.

An unbearable situation would warrant divorce... not be an excuse for infidelity.

Some people feel that as long as they are meeting their responsibilities in the relationship as the provider (paying bills, putting food on the table, meeting the needs of the family, etc.) that is the biggest deal. Leaving the relationship (divorce) would be failing at that, whereas having your needs met on the side while still 'doing the right thing' regarding the responsibility of the family would be likely easier on their mind.

That is a likely reason why people cheat instead of leaving their marriage. It all depends on the person's outlook on things. Relatively similiar to the thought that if you have a cold, your partner can get you some soup- but if you break a bone, you go see a doctor. Sometimes your partner can't (or won't) meet your needs, and to some going to see the specialist in those occasions is no big deal.

Sometimes your partner can't (or won't) meet your needs, and to some going to see the specialist in those occasions is no big deal.

That has got to be the most ridiculous excuse I have ever heard in my life. What part of "forsaking all others" do you think this practice would apply to? Not to mention the risk to your partner.. The reason people cheat is a lack of honor, for themselves and others. Newt? Is that you?

As for sex being a "need".. yeah, I don't think so. People are celibate for a number of reasons which would indicate sex as a "want" rather than a "need." Once you are a grown up, the teenaged boy's claim that he will suffer some medical malady without release simply doesn't fly anymore. A "need" is food and water and shelter from the elements; everything else is a "want."

Why are you assuming everyone is getting married for the specific reasons you did Just? There are many reasons to get married- each couple decides their marital bounds, not the government. There are married people who actively engage in a swinging lifestyle- is that adultery? Legally yes, but not considered by the spouses.

That has got to be the most ridiculous excuse I have ever heard in my life.

Of course, you don't agree with it. Then again, it isn't worded (or even intended) for females to 'get', because rarely are they in the position that it applies to. It is coming from the 'provider' prospective, and until here recently rarely were women in that position.

As for sex being a "need".. yeah, I don't think so.

Sex and the urge to procreate are very much 'needs'. SOME people have less animalistic instinct, whereas some have more. Those who exhibit higher intelligence levels generally have the ability to ignore or not be influenced by those animal instincts, but people often forget that humans ARE animals, and have the same instincts.

Marriage is an invention of human society. If two people are committed to one another they know and God knows. There doesn't need to be a piece of paper that says so or a ring with a shiny rock on it. I like to think, "What did humans do before churches, lawyers, and courts?"

Great post, except for the "God knows" part. Gods and goddesses are every bit as much an invention of humans as marriage.

agree chad

They don't pick their partners very well. :) You seem you may have. That's always nice to see... To see not all people think marriage is just this thing to do...

It's not that simple AA. I picked my partner very well. We put a lot of thought into the decisions we made. But even with a boat load of thought and good intensions it still wasn't enough to save the marriage. People change. Situations change. Situations change people. Some things just have to end, and as sad as it was, I pushed to end the marriage after struggling for years trying to save it.

I loved being married. I felt like I was complete. Now, my Girlfriend and I are able to live extremely happily together without the change of last names. Our commitment to each other isn't diminished by the fact that some holy man, J.O.P, or random guy dressed like Elvis was there to say a few words, then stamp and file a piece of paper. Chances are that one day we will get married, but that will be for financial reasons. We can cover the emotional reasons without the legality.

Java- At least one more in the country here! :) Our life isn't perfect, but we know we always have each other to understand us and to lean on if needed. Now, if only I could get him to take me to the movie that I want to see....

Nope - we're 31 years and counting. My parents were married for 53 years (together for 60 - high school sweethearts) and his parents, almost as long. It helps to be friends as well as lovers, as lust ebbs and flows over the decades but when you've got a friend who always has your back and you have his, with whom you can discuss anything, and have been through hard times (death, surgery, long-term unemployment) and good (children, travel), it's special and you know it.

For those of you who have (or whose parents have) long marriages -- 30, 40, 50 years -- first of all, congratulations to you, sincerely.

But has it occurred to anyone that the very reason a 25- or 50-year anniversary is SUCH a big deal in our society is actually BECAUSE it's so extraordinarily uncommon? Very few marriages make it that long. As others have said, people do change over time, and if you and your spouse happen to change in relatively the same direction, then a long marriage is possible. But people aren't the same at 45 or 50 as they are at 23, and if two people grow and change in different directions, as they obviously very often do, then two people who were compatible in their 20s simply may not have that same, deeply fulfilling relationship with each other when they're in their 40s.

To me, it's logical and pragmatic. There's nothing outside of societal convention that indicates that human beings were meant to be lifelong monogamists. Indeed, VERY few of us are. So that's why it's such an aberration when two people hang out together for 50 years. Good for them. :) But I don't think we need to hold it up as the IDEAL... as if everyone who doesn't have one marriage that lasts a lifetime is some sort of failure. I just don't see it that way at all.

I was married for almost 25 years. But people change, as was mentioned. I changed into a middle-aged woman. And he changed into a lying, cheating bastard who thought that a 21 year old cocktail waitress was interested in his wrinkly ass and not just his wallet. <shrug> No way to reconcile those differences.

Divorce rates are high in two points during a marriage:

1) Within the first few years. They realize they made a mistake.

2) When the kids (if applicable) leave for college, leaving only the parents in the house. The spouses look at each other and realize they don't know each other anymore.

If you get past stage 2, many marriages go all the way. But not all apply.

Chad - But I don't think we need to hold it up as the IDEAL... as if everyone who doesn't have one marriage that lasts a lifetime is some sort of failure. I just don't see it that way at all.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Sometimes there are circumstances outside of our control, sometimes we make mistakes, and sometimes we simply change. Human beings are dynamic organisms, and no two are exactly alike. I think the phrase "different strokes for different folks" is applicable here. No one should have to bear a stigma for not having been married for X number of years.

Java: you've got plenty of company still ---No divorces on either side of our families, even in the second and third generations...and plenty of marriages over 20 and 30 years among both family and friends. Common? Maybe not, but there's plenty of us out here...especially those who don't get married right out of high school. Grow up a bit first...get some education. It actually works.

Well, if you marry the right woman to begin with, then you're not going to get divorced unless you're really stupid. :) Yes, a lot of women are trash... But, I'll let you in on a secret... Those women are at least 50% lesbians who pretend to be straight to use you for sperm and money, the other 50% are control freaks with trust issues who intentionally sabotage their relationships to prove to themselves it can't work because they believe it can't. Healthy women exist. Be a healthy man and you can marry one of us. It's that simple. Become a better man, and say no to women who aren't on your own level. Don't slump. Don't be desperate. Women are not all sluts, money grubbers, lesbians, etc. Learn to tell the bad apart from the good, believe in the good, and tolerate nothing less.

Healthy, romantic love relationships are not a fairy tale, and they do not end in disaster.

And now your hatred of women is showing. Nice attempt to couch it with the "disclaimer" that healthy women exist.

And your assumption that lesbians are in the same category as gold diggers just displays your homophobia on a platter.

Your attitude and judging convince me that you are unhealthy in the extreme. I would feel sorry for you if you weren't so openly hateful.

Anger issues too? How...uhm...cute.

For the record, and not that it matters because you obviously have no interest in intelligent conversation and think only your opinion matters, but one does not have to be male to hate women. If pointing out the obvious in your posts makes me an insensitive, self loathing straight person that is a feminist, then okay...haha...got me there, but of course, you're dead wrong. That you can't even respond to someone calling you out on your own hateful words without attacking like some sort of rabid badger suggests a lot. None of it good.

You've done nothing but blast the decisions that others make about their lives, and assume all manner of things about them that you have no way of knowing. What's so difficult about admitting that not everyone has to, wants to, or should live as you do? I mean, really, speaking of unhealthy...

Evilbeagle/Rosie O'Donnell is that you? I have been following the banter, and EvilBeagle, and while you make some very interesting points, I am concerned that you may actually be the antagonist in this instance, unfortunately. There is a line in speaking one's opinion, and just as we may not all appreciate AA's viewpoint in certain instances, by why take it so personal? Defensive much? Sure you can try to stand up for segments of people, but who are you to make the rules on what we believe.

It was fun for a while, that's all. I have no other excuse other than AA is a bully and I hate bullies.

My intention is not to convince others of my opinion, so I will disagree that I have a desire to make rules on what anyone believes. I honestly don't care. AA simply rubbed me the wrong way, and had she approached myself and others in an intelligent manner, I would have responded in kind.

In the end, I decided she was best ignored.

Wreck, get a prenup!

@AnonymousArizonan

Your continued lack of civilized language and warped values makes me really damn glad I married a foreign woman. Been happily married for 13 years .

Why spend your life working your ass off with the threat of having it all taken away by a stroke of a judges pen hanging over your head.

Ah, that is exactly the reason why the marriage/divorce laws are as archaic as they seem. They were made to protect women who were left high and dry by husbands who just up and left. Not too many years ago a widow didn't own anything that belonged to her husband, her husband's family did. And labor laws being what they were, women could only work in sweatshops or as domestics. A widow or divorcee could only live on the kindness of her own family. A woman could not make contracts on her own, etc. Remember, women didn't even get to vote until 1920, and today, they are still only making 74% of what a man makes in like work. Yes, there are individual women who do better, but not the majority. Also note that the Emancipation Proclaimation of 1863 required the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to force people/employers/schools to do the equitable thing. Our laws traditionally run two generations behind the problem.

Yea Arizona, healthy women are out there... and we are all pretty sure that you are not one of them.

The increasing amount of ignorant and outright crazy people like Arizona is probably to blame for the marriage decline; because honestly, who would want to marry that?

@Evilbeagle Don't waste your time with AnonymousArizonan. She is obviously either a troll or 12 years old. People like her that see things in "black and white" forget that they don't live in a black and white world...

Very true, Jimmy. I stopped wasting my time on her earlier when I realized what she was up to.

Well AA is being extreme as per their norm, but it is my experience that couples who need 10 years to decide to get married have at least one person who is ambivalent and not as committed and the success rate is pretty low (i.e. see lot's of people get married after 7 years together and divorced a couple years later). If you "don't know" after a year that you want to spend your life with someone, then there is usually a problem somewhere. If you do know early, but just wait 10years to actually sign the papers for other reasons, then those do have a higher success rate.

I do take exception to the comment "Yes, you can stay out late, you can party all the time, and dress to impress, but all that appear to be so pathetic when you reach 40 and still doing that." If that is the only reason to get married, then I worry about you. Also, as a 40yo single who doesn't stay out late, party all the time and over dress (but never stop dressing nice somewhat - have some pride), I can say that marriage doesn't have anything to do with those activities. I've known plenty of married people who partied all night at all ages - we call them immature. Congratulations on growing up and not feeling the need to party every night.

What about those of us who are extremely committed in our long term relationships but hate the associations that come from marriage and the church? My partner and I have been together for 6 years now, have a house together, we don't party, most of the time we stay at home like an old couple. I just absolutely hate the church and how much it ruined my childhood. Now I could go to the courthouse and go get a marriage certificate and that would be all fine and dandy but it does nothing for us. I can't receive social security because of my job and we are saving plenty for retirement anyway. Anyway, even if I got married at the courthouse it would still be filled with religious connotations (because the US is so steeped in religion at the government level) and that is a personal choice that i'm absolutely uninterested in.

You can't receive social security because of your job? I hear a lot of excuses there, tigntink. Nothing says you have to have any church wedding. Try a Unitarian service (sample vows here:

As long as the officiant is legally recognized in your state to perform the ceremony, you're good to go.

Ten years means your love is one-sided. You are raping him. He doesn't want you. It does not take a man ten years to fall in love. They may take longer than we do, but not so long you could hit menopause waiting. That kind of evolution would make our species extinct.

Ooooor, they just didn't want to get married after knowing each other for 10 days. People change over time. People don't just jump on marriage like they used to. Knowing how your partner grows and changes BEFORE marriage is not a bad thing.

Certain benefit structures require you to sign away your SS. I don't pay into it therefore I won't recieve it. It's fairly unusual but worth it.

Again. What is the point of getting married? It does nothing. If you think that marriage will magically make your partner stay with you when times are bad you are completely wrong. The only benefit I see in marriage is if we ever had children it would make paperwork significantly easier.

I can easily see my partner and I having another 50 great years together, he is the one I really want to grow old with and no piece of paper can make that bond any stronger.

Anyway, even if I got married at the courthouse it would still be filled with religious connotations (because the US is so steeped in religion at the government level). . .

I've never been to a marriage at a courthouse, so I'm not sure what religious connotations would be involved in getting married there. I'm curious what you mean and what religious things would happen at a marriage at a courthouse.

Actually, when my husband and I got married at our county courthouse, the judge did quote I Corinthians 13:4-7, the 'love is patient, love is kind' verses.

Some of your thoughts I can agree with but your one sided argument betrays your bias. Men never change their minds? They never decide the next bimbo is better? Men never get their women pregnant and then bolt? And seriously, single mothers (even the ones that were married) represent the highest percentage of people in poverty so how do you think they're rewarded? Recent studies have shown that both men and women increase their standard of living with marriage now that women are working but with divorce most women have a drop while some men increase theirs. Why do you think this is if the system rewards her? No disrespect intended but it sounds like you didn't choose your partner very well; a lot of men make this mistake (as do women). You choose your partners based on shallow criteria and then act surprised when she is shallow. Next time forget about who has a nice a-- and worry about what kind of woman she is and what kind of partner she will make, then if you treat her well you won't get the shaft. And living together is a very stupid thing to do if you're going to combine finances in any way; not saying it can't work but it's very hard to sort out these things without a marital contract if things don't work out. I make more money then most men and there's no way in hell I'd combine any finances at all without being married, which I am, and that includes buying a house (especially buying a house). Fortunately, I also chose my husband carefully based on what kind of partner I thought he'd make and as of now am quite happily married. Good luck.

Well said, Liz.

yawn

Tired,

I, for one, am thrilled at your self-identification as a robust womens libber. However, given the antiquated, sexist, patricarchal tone of your post you may want to consider re-labeling yourself as the mid-twentieth century dinosaur and fact-challenged moron that you clearly are.

Women, myself included, often seek gainful employment for the sake of exercising our minds, challenging ourselves, contributing to the income of our household so that our children can have better lives--need I go on? Perhaps there are ladies out there who work so they don't have to "beg their man" for money, but I would suggest that if their husband is the type of "man" who makes them beg like a dog for any portion of his paycheck, perhaps the problem lies with him, not his wife. With regard to your compensation remark, women are now out-earning men, and graduate from college at a higher rate. Facts matter, so work on getting your's straight.

Yes, competition is the bedrock of a capitalist system, and if you're falling behind you may want to consider whether you've become an entitled, complacent white man who resents the more robust, competitive workforce that women and minorities have helped generate. Perhaps an investment in yourself is the order of the day, going back to school maybe? Also, it's the rare corporation that will agree to the hiring arrangement you describe--show up one week, and then take the next week off. Even part-time arrangements expect you to be there x number of hours per week.

So, you want to spend more time with your kids? Do it. You want to help out around the house? Do it, especially since even women who work hours equaling or exceeding those of their husbands shoulder more of the kid-rearing and home management duties than their spouses do, although the tide is turning (for real men) on that front. Quit paying lip-service to the concept that kids and family matter while tacitly placing limits on the amount of time you're willing to contribute to the household, while wishfully relegating women back to a "Mad Men" dystopia of squandered talent and ambition as a "solution" to your own rather obvious inertia. Finally, stay away from generalizations--it's the harbor of the ignorant, intellectually lazy buffoon. Women are the sole breadwinners in many homes today, and their husbands are thrilled to be at home raising the kids.

Tired-You sound like a babbling 16th century idiot

Marriage-It's called commitment. Raising children, gee whiz, another commitment. In this world of plastic people that's a hard pill to swallow.

Tired - Why do I work? Because I love it. The times I have been inbetween jobs I was absolutely miserable. The house would be completely clean by 10am and then what the hell do I do? Staying at home is mind numbingly boring and I end up with a sort of cabin fever with in a week. I work because it makes me happy.

I'll tell you why women need to work.

Because their husbands, who work full time and make plenty and then some, refuse to pay any bills and would rather leave their wives and children starving with no heat, electricity or food then give up their daily nights out with the countless bar sluts they screw.

Or, because every time their wives ask for a measly five bucks, they demand sex, their way, right now, because, bi-otch I own you now.

This really has nothing to do with the decline of marriage. But Tired asked a question, and so I answered.

Women want to work because they want the same satisfaction of providing for their family and the intellectual challenges that many careers have.

Same reasons men do. Shocking, isn't it?

@crystalinamp: Clearly this is not true for *all* men, as also much of what Tired stated was not applicable to many women.

My wife spent the last 8 months out of work after we moved so I could take a job. I didn't mind that she didn't work, and she just found a part-time position. I don't "go out to bars and screw sluts." I don't mind paying the bills. I don't mind giving my wife money when she needs it, and I don't demand anything from her in exchange.

We have something called a "healthy, respectful" relationship in which we are both fully invested. There is no "ownership" over eachother. They do indeed exist. Women work because they want to work for reasons of their own, not because of some irrational fear of domineering by their husbands.

Matt

You are absolutely correct. It does not apply to every man. I never claimed it did, and never meant to imply such. I was simply giving a first-hand reason of why some women need to work.

I'm glad to see that you are an honorable husband. I'm glad you are in a healthy respectful relationship.

I have not been fortunate enough to develop one of those myself yet, but I do believe that there are still good men out there-somewhere-and that one day I will have the honor of being in a loving commited relationship with one.

I'm sorry if my post was felt as an attack on men. That was not my intention, and I apologize if there was any misunderstanding.

Why do women work? A lot of them have careers, just like men do. Perhaps it is something they have wanted to do their entire lives. They go to college to learn how to do this thing then they graduate and they do it. Obviously they get paid for what they do just like men do-therefore it is work. Some women need the money and some do the work because they enjoy it-for a lot of women it's both. Is it that difficult to understand?

Yeah -- common sense!!!

Amen to that!

yawn

You pay a lot less taxes for being married, for one.

I'm not saying that's a reason to go out and do it, just saying there are certain financial benefits.

Yeah, but who could afford the premiums!?

marital insurance = prenuptial agreement.

Unfortunately prenups are no guarantee.

True Martial Insurance = Don't Get Married

If you don't trust your partner enough that you think she/he will hamstring you, you probably shouldn't get married to them in the first place.

LOL, kind of like the only truly effective form of birth control, don't...!

.The "one party" being the man...