|
|
|||||||
|
Four in 10 say marriage is becoming obsolete From [censored] news 11-18-2010 WASHINGTON – Is marriage becoming obsolete? As families gather for Thanksgiving this year, nearly one in three American children is living with a parent who is divorced, separated or never-married. More people are accepting the view that wedding bells aren't needed to have a family. A study by the Pew Research Center, in association with Time magazine, highlights rapidly changing notions of the American family. And the Census Bureau, too, is planning to incorporate broader definitions of family when measuring poverty, a shift caused partly by recent jumps in unmarried couples living together. About 29 percent of children under 18 now live with a parent or parents who are unwed or no longer married, a fivefold increase from 1960, according to the Pew report being released Thursday. Broken down further, about 15 percent have parents who are divorced or separated and 14 percent who were never married. Within those two groups, a sizable chunk — 6 percent — have parents who are live-in couples who opted to raise kids together without getting married. Indeed, about 39 percent of Americans said marriage was becoming obsolete. And that sentiment follows U.S. census data released in September that showed marriages hit an all-time low of 52 percent for adults 18 and over. In 1978, just 28 percent believed marriage was becoming obsolete. When asked what constitutes a family, the vast majority of Americans agree that a married couple, with or without children, fits that description. But four of five surveyed pointed also to an unmarried, opposite-sex couple with children or a single parent. Three of 5 people said a same-sex couple with children was a family. "Marriage is still very important in this country, but it doesn't dominate family life like it used to," said Andrew Cherlin, a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns Hopkins University. "Now there are several ways to have a successful family life, and more people accept them." The broadening views of family are expected to have an impact at Thanksgiving. About nine in 10 Americans say they will share a Thanksgiving meal next week with family, sitting at a table with 12 people on average. About one-fourth of respondents said there will be 20 or more family members. "More Americans are living in these new families, so it seems safe to assume that there will be more of them around the Thanksgiving dinner table," said Paul Taylor, executive vice president of the Pew Research Center. The changing views of family are being driven largely by young adults 18-29, who are more likely than older generations to have an unmarried or divorced parent or have friends who do. Young adults also tend to have more liberal attitudes when it comes to spousal roles and living together before marriage, the survey found. But economic factors, too, are playing a role. The Census Bureau recently reported that opposite-sex unmarried couples living together jumped 13 percent this year to 7.5 million. It was a sharp one-year increase that analysts largely attributed to people unwilling to make long-term marriage commitments in the face of persistent unemployment. Beginning next year, the Census Bureau will publish new, supplemental poverty figures that move away from the traditional concept of family as a husband and wife with two children. It will broaden the definition to include unmarried couples, such as same-sex partners, as well as foster children who are not related by blood or adoption. Officials say such a move will reduce the number of families and children who are considered poor based on the new supplemental measure, which will be used as a guide for federal and state agencies to set anti-poverty policies. That's because two unmarried partners who live together with children and work are currently not counted by census as a single "family" with higher pooled incomes, but are officially defined as two separate units — one being a single parent and child, the other a single person — who aren't sharing household resources. "People are rethinking what family means," Cherlin said. "Given the growth, I think we need to accept cohabitation relationships as a basis for some of the fringe benefits offered to families, such as health insurance." Still, the study indicates that marriage isn't going to disappear anytime soon. Despite a growing view that marriage may not be necessary, 67 percent of Americans were upbeat about the future of marriage and family. That's higher than their optimism for the nation's educational system (50 percent), economy (46 percent) or its morals and ethics (41 percent). And about half of all currently unmarried adults, 46 percent, say they want to get married. Among those unmarried who are living with a partner, the share rises to 64 percent. Other findings: _About 34 percent of Americans called the growing variety of family living arrangements good for society, while 32 percent said it didn't make a difference and 29 percent said it was troubling. _About 44 percent of people say they have lived with a partner without being married; for 30-to-49-year-olds, that share rose to 57 percent. In most cases, those couples said they considered cohabitation as a step toward marriage. _About 62 percent say that the best marriage is one where the husband and wife both work and both take care of the household and children. That's up from 48 percent who held that view in 1977. The Pew study was based on interviews with 2,691 adults by cell phone or landline from Oct. 1-21. The survey has a total margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points, larger for subgroups. Pew also analyzed 2008 census data, and used surveys conducted by Time magazine to identify trends from earlier decades. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
The demised marriage is exactly where women on this board get their month to month parasite checks. Of course they are celebrating. Without marriage there would be no more free money for women. They would have to stand on their own feet or something. I don't think their daughters will have the same luxury. Too many young boys are learning about the scam that is divorce and how it favors those with female parts. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I don't think there are too many women on this board who collect spousal support. Sometimes, there are new posters who come here to ask about it, get some info, and then they leave. Quite a few women have come here recently to inquire if they will end up paying their stbx's. I don't know any of the 'regulars' here who do get spousal support........and we are the women that are here to read your rants. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
finz, That may be so, but there is a CONTINUED STREAM of new posters who require alimony. Which makes YOU finz, a part of a tiny minority who don't receive alimony. I believe you are illustrating hanz and my point exactly. The fact of the matter is, a married man has LESS rights to his children than an unmarried man, just the facts ma'am... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
[quote]I don't think there are too many women on this board who collect spousal support. Sometimes, there are new posters who come here to ask about it, get some info, and then they leave. Quite a few women have come here recently to inquire if they will end up paying their stbx's. I don't know any of the 'regulars' here who do get spousal support........and we are the women that are here to read your rants. [/quote] There are different theories about why marriage is declining. My own theory is that the internet is allowing younger men to learn about divorce. Learn about how marriage ONLY favors women. Learn about things like lifetime alimony, women get the kids, loss of assets, cheating [censored] American women, and all the reality of marriage that they keep hush hush on Thanksgiving dinner table. Marriage will continue to decline until modern women return to family values and can offer something to a man besides forced alimony. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
"Marriage will continue to decline until modern women return to family values " Just like my mom always said......Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
"Marriage will continue to decline until modern women return to family values and can offer something to a man besides forced alimony. " You mean women should stay at home, take care of their husbands and children, give up a career to do so....and then when their marriage falls apart, they should be able to support themselves with no advanced education or employment history? That is what your "return to family values" means. Sorry to be rude, but you're warped. :/ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I think he means either you are EQUAL, and while entitled to all of the same thing, are also responsible for all of the same things, or you are not. Problem is, many women fight for the RIGHTS, but use biological differences to justify special treatment, both societal and legally. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
No, that is not what he said at all. You can't have it both ways. Men want women to stay home and take care of the house and children because it makes their lives easier, yet they want to bitchh about it when it comes to divorce and then they have to pay alimony. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Marriage may be in decline, but half the people getting married are still men, well 99.999999999999%.............. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
"Men want women to stay home and take care of the house and children because it makes their lives easier, yet they want to bitchh about it when it comes to divorce and then they have to pay alimony." And women want to stay home and care for the house and kids, because it is easier, and has very little "standards" or supervision (ie, they can do what they want with little oversight), and then want to bytch when it doesn't "pay" very well. Hey, I am all for alimony is some cases, but if you want to COLLECT from the marriage, you should have to prove the other party did something WRONG. And that is something I think many women do not understand. Most men I know do not have a problem with "cheaters" getting screwed by alimony. What we have a problem with is a woman who CAUSES the downfall of the marriage, and then wants to collect on their actions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I can kind of understand how you think on this, Gr8. It does not seem right for a cheating woman to get alimony. But what happens if the husband cheats...do you think he should pay her alimony? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Yes. I think the one that causes the violation of the "contract" should not also be able to BENEFIT from that violation. Myself, hanz (I do not know yerna's story) and a few other men on this board have had to pay alimony to women who were DIRECTLY responsibile for the collapse of the marriage. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hey, I am all for alimony is some cases, but if you want to COLLECT from the marriage, you should have to prove the other party did something WRONG. And that is something I think many women do not understand. Most men I know do not have a problem with "cheaters" getting screwed by alimony. What we have a problem with is a woman who CAUSES the downfall of the marriage, and then wants to collect on their actions. ****************************** No I disagree. You just had your "contract" argument below and this situation is no different. If a husband and wife decide to have 4 children in 8 years and the wife is to stay home and child rear and then I don't understand why there is such an alimony shocker when it comes to divorce. He married her, he chose this lifestyle. Now I totally do not agree with all alimony scenarios, when women cheat, they both parties are gainfully employed, I don't agree with 20 year alimony payments, etc. but in some cases short term rehabilitative alimony is warranted. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
"If a husband and wife decide to have 4 children in 8 years and the wife is to stay home and child rear and then I don't understand why there is such an alimony shocker when it comes to divorce." And in some cases, I agree. But not if the one SEEKING alimony caused the divorce through basic means (such as cheating or abuse). Sorry, but you cannot cause the downfall of a company, leave the company, stop working for them, and still expect them to PAY you. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
[quote]"Marriage will continue to decline until modern women return to family values and can offer something to a man besides forced alimony. " You mean women should stay at home, take care of their husbands and children, give up a career to do so....and then when their marriage falls apart, they should be able to support themselves with no advanced education or employment history? That is what your "return to family values" means. Sorry to be rude, but you're warped. :/ [/quote] Let me explain my definition of family values since it appears there is no longer a universal definition. My definition has nothing to do with staying home or raising kids. My definition is that you don't sleep around while you are married. pretty simple. Not sure how to make that any clearer. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
You were very clear when you said " women need to return to traditional family values". Don't back peddle now. Women traditionally stayed home and reared children and did not work. It seemed pretty clear to me. If you google "women returning to traditional family values" nothing comes up about cheating or faithfulness. You know what comes up Mr. Loud and Clear? Gender roles. Duh. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I just googled it and this popped up at the top: ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_values "Promotion of "traditional marriage" and opposition to sex outside of conventional marriage, including pre-marital sex, adultery, polygamy, bestiality, and incest." Like I said, my theory is that marriage is dying because women sleep around after marriage, and men are starting to realize they get screwed during and after marriage so why bother? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I googled what you said "women return to family values" and these are the top 5 links: [censored].colby.edu/academics_cs/courses/HI398/.../Women-s-Employment.pdf [censored].mothersmovement.org/.../family_values/family_values.htm - Cached - Similar [censored].timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/.../india.../article6788637.ece - Similar [censored].springerlink.com/index/7276281R4165V071.pdf - Similar [censored].isreview.org/issues/38/women_family.shtml - Cached - Similar |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Post deleted by dsAdmin |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hopefully people will wise up and not get married before 30 also. ********************* That is the problem 99% of the time! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
[quote]Yes. I think the one that causes the violation of the "contract" should not also be able to BENEFIT from that violation. Myself, hanz (I do not know yerna's story) and a few other men on this board have had to pay alimony to women who were DIRECTLY responsibile for the collapse of the marriage. [/quote] I am included in that list. I am currently paying alimony to my ex who cheated. I agree 100%. If you caused the demise of the marriage, you should not reap any benefits after. Especially if you were not a stay at home mom and were continuously employed during the marriage. |