American Women Are Giving Up on Marriage (Wall Street Journal)

[Anonymous]

I'm happily married but it does feel like men like my husband are the exception. My husband got a ton of crap for taking a month off even though I had to be hospitalized and was still very sick. And that's more than many Dads do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marriage for a highly paid woman is like signing up for a servitude contract without any guarantees of payback. She enters it while still young and desirable for her fertility. When she's over 40, husband can just dump her and divide everything. Men are only valuing women for their looks, fertility and sexuality. Why enter a union where you are only needed for the qualities that last just as much, only to get disposed with HUGE collateral damage to you and your children in 10-20 years?

Marriage is only attractive to women without a good earning capacity.

Good point. Unless one strives to be a tradwife (fine if you want that), it’s not a good deal for women. Why cook for 2 when you could for 1? Why clean for 2 when it’s likely cleaner without a man and easier to clean? Many women can get easy casual sex if they want, but many would rather grab the rabbit. Unless you literally cannot provide for yourself (tradwife), it’s easier to go at it alone.

If you want a transactional tit for tat set up then marriage is clearly not for you. If you love and enjoy each other then you don't mind doing things for each other.

Give it up. women don’t want to be unpaid labor for men any more, which is a big big reason for the fertility decline.

You clearly feel jaded due to lack of good role models.

No, I feel jaded because of actual life experience and the material reality of being a woman. But sure, men could step it up collectively and become better role models. FWIW my dad was a great role model in terms of domestic labor such that I did not even realize how lazy most men are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

Proof is in the pudding, babe. women are choosing not to get married or have kids. It’s not because DCUM is populated by unhappy harpies. It’s because it’s too hard and unrewarding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another topical WSJ Article today about Asian countries having to pay people to get married...and it still isn't working.

https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/relationships/singles-dating-marriage-fertility-birthrate-south-korea-bdb40c7b

Saha-gu, a district in South Korea’s second largest city of Busan, offers singles who match at its events around $340 to spend on dates. Those who get married receive roughly $14,000 upfront and are feted with housing subsidies and more cash to cover pregnancy-related expenses and international travel. No participant has claimed the prize for marriage.

Churches and companies are lending a hand. Booyoung Group, a construction firm in Seoul, pays its employees roughly $75,000 each time they have a baby. Yoido Full Gospel Church, one of the world’s largest congregations in the world, gives its members $1,380 for each childbirth.

But marriage is a tough sell for many South Korean singles.

A recent survey shows roughly three-fifths of working South Koreans think it’s OK not to marry. Many say they don’t feel the need, and rising living costs are big disincentives, as are the punishingly long work hours in South Korea’s office culture. Women face additional barriers in re-entering the workforce after childbirth.

That’s not nearly enough money to raise a kid.

$75k sounds like a lot but that’s less than a lot of people’s salaries. It’ll all be gone within the first year of that child’s life.

You really need a solid $150k a year to raise a child comfortably. Over 18 years that’s $2.7M. Plus an additional $500k for college expenses.

If they tried offering $5M to have kids, people would have more.

Well, it's obviously unsustainable to subsidize the entire cost of having a child. That said, $75k is $75k more than anything provided in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

The basis of this thread is a WSj article that looks at national trends and provides supporting data.

It's not like this was just somebody randomly opining on the topic.

Also, the reason the article exists is because the relationship between men working and earning and childcare/household contributions is breaking down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

The basis of this thread is a WSj article that looks at national trends and provides supporting data.

It's not like this was just somebody randomly opining on the topic.

Also, the reason the article exists is because the relationship between men working and earning and childcare/household contributions is breaking down

How does the man getting paid more “offset” the woman’s unpaid labor? unless he is paying her a wage or giving her additional share of the joint assets? This kind of thinking is exactly why women don’t want to get married or have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

The basis of this thread is a WSj article that looks at national trends and provides supporting data.

It's not like this was just somebody randomly opining on the topic.

Also, the reason the article exists is because the relationship between men working and earning and childcare/household contributions is breaking down

Yes. So when the man gets paid more, there is a balance between the work that both partners provide, paid and unpaid. However, research has shown that men do NOT increase their non-paid labor in the house when women get paid more and/or have more intense schedules. Hence why the frustration of so many women who work their a* off, make the most $, and come home to take care of an extra toddler in form of a man. A man-child is not very sexually attractive. This is the reality for the future, as women graduate from college at higher rates and are more successful and will make more money.
I don't hate man. I'm happily married with two grown sons. But if I were to have a daughter, I would absolutely disapprove that she'd marry someone from a lower socioeconomic background and/or someone who doesn't make a lot of money and is ambitious. The data show that she'd probably have to do two jobs, while her H would contribute incrementally to the labor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

The basis of this thread is a WSj article that looks at national trends and provides supporting data.

It's not like this was just somebody randomly opining on the topic.

Also, the reason the article exists is because the relationship between men working and earning and childcare/household contributions is breaking down

How does the man getting paid more “offset” the woman’s unpaid labor? unless he is paying her a wage or giving her additional share of the joint assets? This kind of thinking is exactly why women don’t want to get married or have kids.

I think you meant to respond to me, I spoke about time use data. It "offsets" in terms of time spent during an average week is what I meant. I'm talking about men working more hours, not men getting paid more. Overall, men and women spend similar amounts of time on "work" both paid and unpaid. That was my point.

I do think this kind of approach to household income is missing the point though. Both spouses share all income earned by anyone who is working and they share all benefits from anyone who is doing housework. I do school drop-off so that my spouse can work, why on earth would I get paid a wage for that when I already have the benefit of any income earned during that time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

Proof is in the pudding, babe. women are choosing not to get married or have kids. It’s not because DCUM is populated by unhappy harpies. It’s because it’s too hard and unrewarding.

Absolutely true. I’m no “female incel”. I have sons and brothers and a father who was a great provider.

I am, however, a product of my lived experience. I’m attractive, fit, interesting and attractive. I’m independently wealthy thanks to that same father I love. But the idea of taking on a man on a full time basis again isn’t attractive to me in any way. I take lovers when I want to and won’t cohabitate or marry one again. Ever. So much hassle. I’ have yet to meet a man who does life better than me. If I find one, my opinion might change- but it’s been 8 years of enjoying my divorced life and I haven’t found anyone even remotely close.‘I love men! Love sleeping with them, flirting with them, being friends with them. At the same time, I will not tie myself to one legally or financially ever again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

The basis of this thread is a WSj article that looks at national trends and provides supporting data.

It's not like this was just somebody randomly opining on the topic.

Also, the reason the article exists is because the relationship between men working and earning and childcare/household contributions is breaking down

How does the man getting paid more “offset” the woman’s unpaid labor? unless he is paying her a wage or giving her additional share of the joint assets? This kind of thinking is exactly why women don’t want to get married or have kids.

I think you meant to respond to me, I spoke about time use data. It "offsets" in terms of time spent during an average week is what I meant. I'm talking about men working more hours, not men getting paid more. Overall, men and women spend similar amounts of time on "work" both paid and unpaid. That was my point.

I do think this kind of approach to household income is missing the point though. Both spouses share all income earned by anyone who is working and they share all benefits from anyone who is doing housework. I do school drop-off so that my spouse can work, why on earth would I get paid a wage for that when I already have the benefit of any income earned during that time?

Duh it doesn’t offset because the woman *doesn’t get paid.* That is the entire point. “the benefit of the income my spouse earns while I am his unpaid nanny, cleaner and secretary” is not a good deal for most women. Let’s not even get into the men who try to pull this off when they aren’t even out earning their wives.

[Anonymous]

I don’t buy that women who have never married are focusing on the “unpaid labor” aspect. That’s more of an issue that arises in marriage later on, after kids arrive. I think the likelier explanations are increased working areas, fewer social interactions generally (we see this in studies of Americans having fewer and fewer friendships, some of which would of course lead to romance), economic instability and fewer college educated, emotionally stable and well paid eligible men. More than ever, women are looking for income and education in men.

[Anonymous]

^^ Hours not areas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t buy that women who have never married are focusing on the “unpaid labor” aspect. That’s more of an issue that arises in marriage later on, after kids arrive. I think the likelier explanations are increased working areas, fewer social interactions generally (we see this in studies of Americans having fewer and fewer friendships, some of which would of course lead to romance), economic instability and fewer college educated, emotionally stable and well paid eligible men. More than ever, women are looking for income and education in men.

Do you think young women are stupid? It’s not hard to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another topical WSJ Article today about Asian countries having to pay people to get married...and it still isn't working.

https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/relationships/singles-dating-marriage-fertility-birthrate-south-korea-bdb40c7b

Saha-gu, a district in South Korea’s second largest city of Busan, offers singles who match at its events around $340 to spend on dates. Those who get married receive roughly $14,000 upfront and are feted with housing subsidies and more cash to cover pregnancy-related expenses and international travel. No participant has claimed the prize for marriage.

Churches and companies are lending a hand. Booyoung Group, a construction firm in Seoul, pays its employees roughly $75,000 each time they have a baby. Yoido Full Gospel Church, one of the world’s largest congregations in the world, gives its members $1,380 for each childbirth.

But marriage is a tough sell for many South Korean singles.

A recent survey shows roughly three-fifths of working South Koreans think it’s OK not to marry. Many say they don’t feel the need, and rising living costs are big disincentives, as are the punishingly long work hours in South Korea’s office culture. Women face additional barriers in re-entering the workforce after childbirth.

That’s not nearly enough money to raise a kid.

$75k sounds like a lot but that’s less than a lot of people’s salaries. It’ll all be gone within the first year of that child’s life.

You really need a solid $150k a year to raise a child comfortably. Over 18 years that’s $2.7M. Plus an additional $500k for college expenses.

If they tried offering $5M to have kids, people would have more.

Well, it's obviously unsustainable to subsidize the entire cost of having a child. That said, $75k is $75k more than anything provided in the US.

The point is that the costs of raising a child have gotten completely out of control. Then they offer a few thousand bucks an throw their hands in the air "we just can't figure out why nobody wants kids!"

When the answer is glaringly obvious - it costs millions to raise kids nowadays, and nobody has that kind of money. The average person should be able to afford housing, groceries, healthcare, college tuition, childcare, etc on a modest salary.

Until that issue is fixed, people won't have more kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really jaded. You act like no women has ever been happily married to a non-jerk before. That's really sad.

I'm not saying everyone wants a husband and children, but my husband and children enrich my life in so many ways and I would be very lonely and sad without them. Yes it's more "work" too - but I honestly don't know what I would do with all of my free time instead. No hobby takes that much time!

This place is an echo chamber of unhappy women. It serves basically the same function as an incel message board in reverse; it highlights the negative experiences of some people and encourages people reading it to identify with those negative experiences. It is, very often, pretty much removed from reality. Look at the conversation on housework and childcare. On average, women in households with children do more of those things than men, it's true. Men do, on average, about 16.5 hours per week of housework and childcare and women do around 31. Men, in turn, do paid work for 38.4 hours per week, to women's 21.6. The result is that men's combination of paid and unpaid work is slightly higher than women's, but overall it's essentially even.
Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ which draws on the American Time Used Study

That's not the story you get here though. The story you get here both ignores the fact that men, on average, are doing housework and childcare (a couple hours a day on average) and that they're doing paid work enough more than women to more than offset the extra unpaid labor at home.

Proof is in the pudding, babe. women are choosing not to get married or have kids. It’s not because DCUM is populated by unhappy harpies. It’s because it’s too hard and unrewarding.

Absolutely true. I’m no “female incel”. I have sons and brothers and a father who was a great provider.

I am, however, a product of my lived experience. I’m attractive, fit, interesting and attractive. I’m independently wealthy thanks to that same father I love. But the idea of taking on a man on a full time basis again isn’t attractive to me in any way. I take lovers when I want to and won’t cohabitate or marry one again. Ever. So much hassle. I’ have yet to meet a man who does life better than me. If I find one, my opinion might change- but it’s been 8 years of enjoying my divorced life and I haven’t found anyone even remotely close.‘I love men! Love sleeping with them, flirting with them, being friends with them. At the same time, I will not tie myself to one legally or financially ever again.

I love how there are all these divorcees and women in failing relationships ranting at those who say marriage can be good if you choose wisely.

Ladies, we get it, you chose poorly. But that doesn't make you an expert on relationships. But your responses (and way of responding) do shed light on at least some reasons your relationships failed.