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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting because my understanding is that the sociological data shows that married parents have high levels of happiness. Having a stable family is an overall benefit to the individuals involved and society.

Certain demographic groups are more successful in forming and maintaining families including the college educated professional class, Asian Americans, and more religious people.

We talk about this issue with our teen. Alongside college and career prep, we want him to know the importance of family and the value of intentionally prioritizing a good marriage. It doesn’t just magically happen. Effort is both required and rewarded.

Married non-parents have even higher levels of happiness.

No it’s single women

This sites the study.

[Anonymous]

Link

https://www.forbes.com/sites/traversmark/2024/11/09/4-reasons-why-single-women-are-the-happiest-people-on-earth-by-a-psychologist/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t need men to survive like they did in the past. We have our own money, our own homes, and our own children. Who needs a man anymore?

Women who want a loving companion and a family for their children.

Agree, but that assumes a man who is a loving companion and good parent. A man who ticks those boxes will do well.

[Anonymous]

Here’s where I am seeing that married people are happier:

From U. Chicago
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4508123
“Being married is the most important differentiator with a 30-percentage point happy-unhappy gap over the unmarried. “

Brad Wilcox from UVA looking at GSS data
https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-is-happiest-married-mothers-and-fathers-per-the-latest-general-social-survey
“This new IFS research brief provides further evidence that happiness is linked to American family life. In particular, and contrary to the views articulated by many on social media, the mainstream media, and the American public, marriage and parenthood do not appear to be obstacles to living a happy life. Instead, these two traditional markers of adulthood are associated with a happier life. As difficult as marriage and parenthood can be, in general, men and women who have the benefit of a spouse and children are the most likely to report that they are “very happy” with their lives, according to the most recent round of the General Social Survey.”

[Anonymous]

While social data is interesting, it’s not the most important thing to me. In my own experience, I find parenthood within the context of marriage to be the most meaningful aspect of my life.

I agree with the point another poster made that when young people don’t value having children, they are less likely to value marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While social data is interesting, it’s not the most important thing to me. In my own experience, I find parenthood within the context of marriage to be the most meaningful aspect of my life.

I agree with the point another poster made that when young people don’t value having children, they are less likely to value marriage.

It's safe to say you didn't read the article...or even much of this thread.

Many women are specifically choosing to have children without a spouse because they can't find a spouse that is able to pull their weight either in terms of making an income or sharing the parental responsibilities, or often times both.

This really isn't about wanting kids or not.

[Anonymous]

The print article includes photos of the women and it’s easy to see why they’re single.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t need men to survive like they did in the past. We have our own money, our own homes, and our own children. Who needs a man anymore?

Women who want a loving companion and a family for their children.

Agree, but that assumes a man who is a loving companion and good parent. A man who ticks those boxes will do well.

And attractive and smart women are mostly able to find these men. The biggest hurdle I believe is that you have to find them early. You don't have to marry or have kids early, but I do think by age 25 or so most of the good men are in serious dating relationships. Obviously there are exceptions - good men who for whatever reason didn't want to be committed earlier - but the amount of good ones still unattached shrinks drastically as the years go on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s where I am seeing that married people are happier:

From U. Chicago
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4508123
“Being married is the most important differentiator with a 30-percentage point happy-unhappy gap over the unmarried. “

Brad Wilcox from UVA looking at GSS data
https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-is-happiest-married-mothers-and-fathers-per-the-latest-general-social-survey
“This new IFS research brief provides further evidence that happiness is linked to American family life. In particular, and contrary to the views articulated by many on social media, the mainstream media, and the American public, marriage and parenthood do not appear to be obstacles to living a happy life. Instead, these two traditional markers of adulthood are associated with a happier life. As difficult as marriage and parenthood can be, in general, men and women who have the benefit of a spouse and children are the most likely to report that they are “very happy” with their lives, according to the most recent round of the General Social Survey.”

Yes the body of the social studies data is that married women are happier than their single counterparts even if there are some outlier polls. You also see benefits in life longevity for marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While social data is interesting, it’s not the most important thing to me. In my own experience, I find parenthood within the context of marriage to be the most meaningful aspect of my life.

I agree with the point another poster made that when young people don’t value having children, they are less likely to value marriage.

It's safe to say you didn't read the article...or even much of this thread.

Many women are specifically choosing to have children without a spouse because they can't find a spouse that is able to pull their weight either in terms of making an income or sharing the parental responsibilities, or often times both.

This really isn't about wanting kids or not.

If it's a choice between having a child with a man who doesn't carry his weight financially or domestically and having a child without a man, you choose going solo 9 times out of 10, if not 10 out of 10. When you make a conscious choice to do it alone, you don't have to carry the resentment of having a deadweight partner, you don't have to share control over parenting decisions with a deadweight partner, and you don't have to risk a deadweight partner negatively influencing your children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While social data is interesting, it’s not the most important thing to me. In my own experience, I find parenthood within the context of marriage to be the most meaningful aspect of my life.

I agree with the point another poster made that when young people don’t value having children, they are less likely to value marriage.

It's safe to say you didn't read the article...or even much of this thread.

Many women are specifically choosing to have children without a spouse because they can't find a spouse that is able to pull their weight either in terms of making an income or sharing the parental responsibilities, or often times both.

This really isn't about wanting kids or not.

In a recent pew study, most single women without kids currently reported they either don’t want kids or aren’t sure they want kids. Only 45 percent said they want them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s where I am seeing that married people are happier:

From U. Chicago
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4508123
“Being married is the most important differentiator with a 30-percentage point happy-unhappy gap over the unmarried. “

Brad Wilcox from UVA looking at GSS data
https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-is-happiest-married-mothers-and-fathers-per-the-latest-general-social-survey
“This new IFS research brief provides further evidence that happiness is linked to American family life. In particular, and contrary to the views articulated by many on social media, the mainstream media, and the American public, marriage and parenthood do not appear to be obstacles to living a happy life. Instead, these two traditional markers of adulthood are associated with a happier life. As difficult as marriage and parenthood can be, in general, men and women who have the benefit of a spouse and children are the most likely to report that they are “very happy” with their lives, according to the most recent round of the General Social Survey.”

Yes the body of the social studies data is that married women are happier than their single counterparts even if there are some outlier polls. You also see benefits in life longevity for marriage.

Is it the body of social science or just the pro-family body of social science?

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert

- quotes legitimate social scientists, like Paul Dolan, a professor of behavioural science at the London School of Economics

- Notable quotes:

" We may have suspected it already, but now the science backs it up: unmarried and childless women are the happiest subgroup in the population."

"We do have some good longitudinal data following the same people over time, but I am going to do a massive disservice to that science and just say: if you’re a man, you should probably get married; if you’re a woman, don’t bother. Men benefited from marriage because they “calmed down”, he said. “You take less risks, you earn more money at work, and you live a little longer. She, on the other hand, has to put up with that, and dies sooner than if she never married. The healthiest and happiest population subgroup are women who never married or had children,” he said "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

It goes both ways and is partially self fulfilling. The typical woman nowadays isn’t someone most men would want to marry. Men historically were motivated to work hard and become attractive by the prospect of marriage and supporting their family. If you look around and the available women don’t appeal to you, or give away sex without commitment, what’s the point in making yourself a marriageable man? If young men are losing hope that a good future spouse for them even exists, it greatly reduces their drive to become marriageable.

Typical "blame the women" mentality, bro. Some men can't handle the idea of an independent woman they'd need to treat as an equal and not a substitute mommy/sex slave/subservient underling. So yeah, those men see the "typical woman nowadays" (i.e a woman with agency) as someone they wouldn't want to marry.

This is less "it goes both ways" and more you proving the pp's point: those men would've only been able to secure wives in a time when the wives had fewer/no options and had to go along with male bs to survive.

“Women are doing comparatively well when it comes to education and their early years in the labor force, and men are doing comparatively badly,” said Brad Wilcox, a fellow at the conservative Institute for Family Studies and a sociology professor at the University of Virginia. “That creates a mismatch, because people prefer to date in terms of comparable education or income.”

Men’s economic struggles seem to be having the biggest effect on women without a college degree, whose marriage rates by age 45 have plummeted from 79% to 52% for those born between 1930 and 1980, according to research by Cornell University economist Benjamin Goldman. “Young men without a degree are struggling so much as a group that there simply aren’t enough with steady jobs and earnings for non-college women to date,” said Goldman.

Rachael Gosetti, a 33-year-old real-estate agent in Savannah, Ga., said she broke up with her boyfriend, with whom she shares a 5-year-old son, over a year ago because she was tired of doing most of the child care, cooking and scheduling while also earning almost double her boyfriend’s salary. She has yet to date anyone else in part because she worries about living in a red state with a six-week abortion ban. “I have a child that I can’t leave behind to drive to Virginia if I had a pregnancy scare, and I definitely can’t afford another child as a single mom,” she said.

um ... ever heard of birth control???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t need men to survive like they did in the past. We have our own money, our own homes, and our own children. Who needs a man anymore?

Women who want a loving companion and a family for their children.

Agree, but that assumes a man who is a loving companion and good parent. A man who ticks those boxes will do well.

And attractive and smart women are mostly able to find these men. The biggest hurdle I believe is that you have to find them early. You don't have to marry or have kids early, but I do think by age 25 or so most of the good men are in serious dating relationships. Obviously there are exceptions - good men who for whatever reason didn't want to be committed earlier - but the amount of good ones still unattached shrinks drastically as the years go on.

Why is there a time limit on being a loving companion and good parent? Those are choices any man could make at any time. If they are choosing otherwise, they won't do well in the dating market and unattached women will do their own thing re: kids. But it's a choice those men are making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those women are not settling for men who are not compatible, full partners. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like if any of them met the right guy, they'd consider marriage.

But, doesn't that mean men are giving up too? The population of the U.S. is 50.5% female. If they aren't getting married, neither are men. Or is something going wrong with a large portion of the male population making them incompatible marriage partners?

Hard truth time: a large portion of the male population has always been comprised of "incompatible marriage partners" but women didn't used to have the agency to opt-out like we do now.

This. Most men are entirely unsuitable.

Most men shouldn't have kids. They are not prepared to give up their selfish lifestyles and take responsibility for them.