# The class divide: Marriage as a ‘luxury good'



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

There has been a lot of research released lately flagging an alarming trend: Marriage is in trouble in the middle and lower class. Marriage is doing well in the educated middle/upper classes. Class is strongly related to education.

I think this article sums it up best: The class divide: Marriage as a â€˜luxury good'

"In recent years, people with a college degree have become more likely to get—and stay—married than their less educated counterparts, and those who stay married also tend to be much wealthier than unmarried adults.

"Some people have talked about marriage as a luxury good," said Susan Brown, a sociology professor at Bowling Green State University and co-director of the National Center for Family and Marriage Research."

The college degree seems to be the important factor:

When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America: The State of Our Unions 2010

"Among the affluent, marriage is stable and may even be getting stronger. Among the poor, marriage continues to be fragile and weak. But the most consequential marriage trend of our time concerns the broad center of our society, where marriage, that iconic middle-class institution, is foundering.

We could call them the lower-middle class or the upper-working class, but the better term is the moderately educated middle. They do not have BAs, MBAs, or PhDs. But they are not high-school dropouts either. They might have even achieved some college or training beyond high school. They are not upscale, but they are not poor. They don’t occupy any of the margins, yet they are often overlooked, even though they make up the largest share of the American middle class.

In many respects, these high-school graduates are quite similar to their college-educated peers. They work. They pay taxes. They raise children. They take family vacations. But there is one thing that today’s moderately educated men and women, unlike today’s college graduates or yesterday’s high-school graduates, are increasingly less likely to do: get and stay happily married."

This article, College Graduates Marry Other College Graduates Most of the Time - Philip Cohen - The Atlantic 

reviewed the American Community Survey taken in 2011. The Survey reviewed all people under age 50 who got married (male-females only) for the first time in 2011. Of this population, 71 percent of college graduates married another college graduate. 

In addition, the likelihood to marry was more strongly correlated with *women's education* than men's: 65% of women college graduates married a partner who had a higher degree than BA, compared with 78 percent of male college grads. In other words, more men than women were marrying a spouse with a higher degree.

New research just released found the same thing: people getting married, women often have the higher degree/education.

Record share of wives are more educated than their husbands | Pew Research Center

From the article:
"It used to be more common for a husband to have more education than his wife in America. But now, for the first time since Pew Research has tracked this trend over the past 50 years, the share of couples in which the wife is the one “marrying down” educationally is higher than those in which the husband has more education.

In 2012, 27% of newlywed women married a spouse whose education level was lower than theirs. By contrast, only 15% of newlywed men married a spouse with less education. 

Among college educated newlyweds (including those with postgraduate and advanced degrees), nearly four-in-ten women (39%) married a spouse without a college degree, but only 26% of men did so."

[Just to add this in from the other thread about men and marriage and the wage gap, from the same Pew release: "Does marrying someone with less education mean “marrying down” economically? Not necessarily. When we look at the newlywed women who married someone with less education, we find that a majority of these women actually “married up.” In 2012, only 39% of newlywed women who married a spouse with less education out-earned their husband, and a majority of them (58%) made less than their husband." BTW my first thought on this is that women coming out of college with a BA or greater have spent a lot of time in school, while their mate has been working and moving up the income ladder. But I haven't looked at the data to see if that is actually what happened.]

This is a lot of data, following trends over long period of time, coming from different sources, that support the same finding. That is strong evidence that they are catching a true change and not a one-off anomaly.

So what does all of this mean pragmatically? If you are a college-educated man or woman and want to get married, your chances are clearly good.

But, what about everyone else? Even for those who want to go to college, it is incredibly expensive. 

There is a substantial population who aren't going to want to go to college, who wouldn't be a good fit. 

Are we seeing a reflection that men do not want to get legally tied down to someone they will have to financially support? Especially when they are unreliably able to support themselves?

(BTW this is why I found the Dr Helen Smith speech to be just preposterous. To ignore the loss of jobs and education for men and only to focus on their not getting married- it's like complaining that the roof is collapsing without looking at the walls that are crumbling. You can't fix the roof until it has walls to support it!)

Are we seeing that women aren't willing to commit unless they can support themselves- or looked at another way, women aren't willing to legally tie themselves to someone they will have to financially support?

Where do we go from here?


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

Regarding the income being reportedly higher for the married couples--that could be because they are pulling in two incomes versus one.

I personally have a work brain and would feel very strange without having my own income. That is a scary thought to me. Because if you are with someone who supports you--what happens if they are not around anymore (barring pensions and related things)? I suppose we all get stuck in our ways.


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

The trend makes sense. Money stress, and long working hours, are both correlated with divorce. When the husband and wife are each pulling long hours, there's less time to nurture a relationship with each other.

And according to this NYT article, that time is critical to marriage success: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/opinion/sunday/the-all-or-nothing-marriage.html?_r=0

Furthermore, the more money you have, the more a divorce stands to affect the quality of life you can provide your children. So wealth becomes another incentive to stay and work it out.


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

northernlights said:


> Furthermore, the more money you have, the more a divorce stands to affect the quality of life you can provide your children. So wealth becomes another incentive to stay and work it out.


I believe that's where the saying, "It's cheaper to keep her" comes from.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

In re the "more education" thing -- women get more degrees but are still far less likely to get a degree in a STEM field, econ, business, or other career-oriented majors, and are far more likely to do liberal arts.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Here's the NYTimes take on marriage by economic status, complete with numbers and graphs!

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/marriage-is-for-rich-people/

Only one group - the very highest earning women - are marrying at rates greater than they were 40 years ago.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Jellybeans said:


> Regarding the income being reportedly higher for the married couples--that could be because they are pulling in two incomes versus one.


Definitely, this is a big factor. “It is the privileged Americans who are marrying, and marrying helps them stay privileged,” said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University."




> I personally have a work brain and would feel very strange without having my own income. That is a scary thought to me. Because if you are with someone who supports you--what happens if they are not around anymore (barring pensions and related things)? I suppose we all get stuck in our ways.


Yes, I am the same way. I think this is a primary change in women over the last, say, 40 years. For instance, my mom,who grew up in a working/middle class family and neighborhood, never thought she would need her own income, back in 1970. It was not really part of the cultural consciousness back then, for women in her and higher economic strata. 

Women are now encouraged to have their own income, or at least have the training to obtain their own income, even if they plan on being a SAHM/SAHW.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

This article must have been trolling for me. Both me and the Mrs. are well educated, relatively affluent, etc etc and would split in an instance if not for financial issues.

Money does not buy happiness, it merely buys more time to contemplate whether you should be happy or not.

In my experience at least, professional women become a powder keg of emotions if their careers don't pan out as they expect. Men simply toil along. It takes little effort to imagine where this ends up happiness wise.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Here's the NYTimes take on marriage by economic status, complete with numbers and graphs!
> 
> http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/marriage-is-for-rich-people/
> 
> Only one group - the very highest earning women - are marrying at rates greater than they were 40 years ago.


Yes; note that marriage rates have fallen for everyone except the very highest-earning women. The graphs show a trend, where the marriage rates have fallen less for those with more money, across both gender lines. 

This still supports that those most likely to get married are those who are in the upper classes.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

john117 said:


> In my experience at least, professional women become a powder keg of emotions if their careers don't pan out as they expect. Men simply toil along. It takes little effort to imagine where this ends up happiness wise.


I find this to be true as well. Women are raised with an awful lot of expectations today that men don't have. I guess it's a negative byproduct of the attempts to encourage women to achieve more.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

John Lee said:


> In re the "more education" thing -- women get more degrees but are still far less likely to get a degree in a STEM field, econ, business, or other career-oriented majors, and are far more likely to do liberal arts.


I think women have made good inroads in the STE, and currently there are more women going into medicine then men (especially when you include nurses.)


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

It is interesting, you would think that marriage would have economic benefits in reducing overall costs. One rent vs. 2, one cable bill vs 2, etc. From a purely financial basis, marriage shouild be cheaper than 2 people in a LTA, with separate households.

I kind of wonder if this is a reflection of other social issues, like large fraction of African-American single mothers and less to do with other stuff?


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

RA - but look at engineering. There are more women than 20 years ago, but not even close to 60/40. That is where the $ is, by and large.


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

John Lee said:


> I find this to be true as well. Women are raised with an awful lot of expectations today that men don't have. I guess it's a negative byproduct of the attempts to encourage women to achieve more.


I haven't seen this. I think you're a bit older than me, though? The women in their mid-30s with the best careers are all either fairly happy (various careers) or slogging through (law). Though the ones with SAHD husbands DO seem to have a better work/life balance. A SAH spouse really does support the working spouse in so many ways.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I think many middle and lower class people are not marrying because it is no longer necessary to do that for social approval, to live together and have children. They can live together and control their separate finances. And divorce and single parenthood are so common that they may feel there is no reason to marry. 

Marriage, at some level, is about money. And people marry their equals.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

naiveonedave said:


> RA - but look at engineering. There are more women than 20 years ago, but not even close to 60/40. That is where the $ is, by and large.


Dd18 is doing chemical engineering. She is always the leader in her lab groups, usually consisting of 3 young men and her.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

john117 said:


> This article must have been trolling for me. Both me and the Mrs. are well educated, relatively affluent, etc etc and would split in an instance if not for financial issues.


You'd split in an instant if not for financial issues? But both of you have great financial resources?

I fit in the article as a women who has post-grad degree, but married a man without even a BA/BS.



> Money does not buy happiness, it merely buys more time to contemplate whether you should be happy or not.


 I believe once you get past a certain level of money, it doesn't add that much. I think some research in the US has found that level to be about $75k as a median. 



> In my experience at least, professional women become a powder keg of emotions if their careers don't pan out as they expect. Men simply toil along. It takes little effort to imagine where this ends up happiness wise.


I don't see this with the women I work with, in medicine and research. But mostly we are moderately successful, thankfully, at least for now, our jobs are stable.

I think men's happiness and self-image are strongly reliant on their jobs/career. I think this is also becoming true for women- I know it is true for me.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

northernlights said:


> I haven't seen this. I think you're a bit older than me, though? The women in their mid-30s with the best careers are all either fairly happy (various careers) or slogging through (law). Though the ones with SAHD husbands DO seem to have a better work/life balance. A SAH spouse really does support the working spouse in so many ways.


Nope, I'm in my mid-30s, and I'm in law. I see a lot more men "slogging through" than women. So far I haven't seen any men leave to become SAHD, only women. Of course, some of this is because of the stigma associated with it for men. I also know more women than men still stuck in that "self discovery" mindset, although to be fair I have a few male friends like that too.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> I think women have made good inroads in the STE, and currently there are more women going into medicine then men (especially when you include nurses.)


It's a little disingenuous to say "especially when you include nurses" because it's actually "only when you include nurses." The majority of medical school applicants and matriculants are still men. But I agree women have made good inroads.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

naiveonedave said:


> It is interesting, you would think that marriage would have economic benefits in reducing overall costs. One rent vs. 2, one cable bill vs 2, etc. From a purely financial basis, marriage shouild be cheaper than 2 people in a LTA, with separate households.
> 
> I kind of wonder if this is a reflection of other social issues, like large fraction of African-American single mothers and less to do with other stuff?


I agree with this, I wondered about it as well. One of the articles showed that race actually isn't nearly as much of a factor as education. Educated blacks and educated whites are getting married, and less-educated people of both races are not. 

There are some graphs on this at the bottom of this article:
When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America: The State of Our Unions 2010

However, you'd think that cohabiting would solve that problem, and increase household income. I didn't look at research on cohabiting vs married (yet).



jld said:


> I think many middle and lower class people are not marrying because it is no longer necessary to do that for social approval, to live together and have children. They can live together and control their separate finances. And divorce and single parenthood are so common that they may feel there is no reason to marry.
> 
> Marriage, at some level, is about money. And people marry their equals.


This is one the things I wonder about most. My SIL has been with her fella for almost 20 years, but they aren't married (he won't get married.) They own their home, have great cars, go the Islands most years, basically have a nice life of a Dual-Income No Kids lifestyle. She fits right into this data, as she does not have an BA or BS (but did recently get her RN). 

Is there really any reason to be concerned about the lack of marriage, if there aren't children?

And, if there are children, where do parents who cohabit for the long-term, without marrying, fit in? Do they really need to get married, or are they OK as is?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> I fit in the article as a women who has post-grad degree, but married a man without even a BA/BS.
> 
> I believe once you get past a certain level of money, it doesn't add that much. I think some research in the US has found that level to be about $75k as a median.


Does your dh own a business, Rose? Does it bother you that he has less education?

And doesn't $75k seem low?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John Lee said:


> It's a little disingenuous to say "especially when you include nurses" because it's actually "only when you include nurses." The majority of medical school applicants and matriculants are still men. But I agree women have made good inroads.


Are you sure, John? Because I am at Children's Hospital regularly, and many of the residents are women.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> Is there really any reason to be concerned about the lack of marriage, if there aren't children?
> 
> And, if there are children, where do parents who cohabit for the long-term, without marrying, fit in? Do they really need to get married, or are they OK as is?


Well, there are no legal benefits, no insurance coverage.

Dh's aunt has been living with the same guy for 40 years. They have two kids. In France, where they live, everybody has health care coverage, so that is not an issue.

To me, marriage is about the legal and financial benefits. I don't need a piece of paper to stay with dh. I would stay with him just because I wanted to.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

John Lee said:


> It's a little disingenuous to say "especially when you include nurses" because it's actually "only when you include nurses." The majority of medical school applicants and matriculants are still men. But I agree women have made good inroads.


It's very close and depends on what factor you're reviewing: in 2011, women received 57.1% of all MD degrees earned; if you look at medical school entrance, in the U.S., women were 47.0% of all first year medical school students in 2010-2011.

Knowledge Center | Catalyst.org

When you add in nurses, women are definitely starting to be involved in medicine in greater numbers. But it's worth noting that men are entering nursing in greater numbers as well.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John Lee said:


> https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/


Okay! You are right!


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> It's very close and depends on what factor you're reviewing: in 2011, women received 57.1% of all MD degrees earned; if you look at medical school entrance, in the U.S., women were 47.0% of all first year medical school students in 2010-2011.
> 
> Knowledge Center | Catalyst.org
> 
> When you add in nurses, women are definitely starting to be involved in medicine in greater numbers. But it's worth noting that men are entering nursing in greater numbers as well.


Ah ok, are you in Canada? Apparently the numbers are different there than in the US. The number you are citing for MD degrees is in Canada.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Rose, can this thread get into class differences in marriage?


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

jld said:


> Does your dh own a business, Rose? Does it bother you that he has less education?
> 
> And doesn't $75k seem low?


My DH doesn't own his own business. He is an electrician and works for a union. It doesn't bother me at all. He is really excellent at his job (he would be a great contractor if he wanted, he is excellent at all sorts of trades, he designed our entire kitchen), and I am really proud of him. 

He is also smarter then I am, and keeps me on my toes. I love that man. <3

$75k would be low in my area, in Southeastern PA. It would probably be more than adequate in other areas. 

I had to go google it, I found that some studies found a linear relationship more money and happiness 
Science: Money makes you happier - MarketWatch

and I found this article from Time:

People say money doesn't buy happiness. Except, according to a new study from Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School, it sort of does — up to about $75,000 a year. The lower a person's annual income falls below that benchmark, the unhappier he or she feels. But no matter how much more than $75,000 people make, they don't report any greater degree of happiness.

Read more: Study: Money Buys Happiness When Income Is $75,000 - TIME Study: Money Buys Happiness When Income Is $75,000 - TIME


I don't value money enough to chase it down relentlessly. I think as long as one is comfortable enough that money is not a concern, more money won't add much more happiness. That is what I am going to stick with, anyway!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I guess I just don't think $75k for a household income is going to be much, even in a low cost of housing area.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117, you and I sound so materialistic.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Great financial resources need to be untangled in a split after 30 plus years together, and with two girls in 10 year college journeys that ain't as easy as saying "I do". 

In my case both of us have doctorates, her in hard science - math - and me in soft science - cog psych. We make similar money, similar years experience, but in three decades I have had 1 employer to her 7-8. 

Stability and moderate success are not much of an option in my wife's field (analytics consulting) while it's everything in my field (product and process design). I love what I do but if bagging groceries paid six figures I'd be just as happy at Kroger...


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

John Lee said:


> Ah ok, are you in Canada? Apparently the numbers are different there than in the US. The number you are citing for MD degrees is in Canada.


I am in the US- the link was showing data for the US, according to the headers.

Mine was from two years ago and the numbers aren't that far apart from those shown in your link. I would think your numbers are more accurate for 2013, given it is from the AAMC.

Still, it is very close. In 2013, 8,721 women and 9,435 men graduated from med school in the US per a PDF from the AAMC website. so out of roughly 18,000 graduates, there is less than a 1,000 difference in men/women. 

That website has some very interesting data. It shows more women than men graduating in 2013 from Johns Hopkins, Harvard, 50-50 from Yale, and many more men than women graduating in Case Western, Duke, and the Mayo Clinic. Interesting!


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

john117 said:


> Great financial resources need to be untangled in a split after 30 plus years together, and with two girls in 10 year college journeys that ain't as easy as saying "I do".
> 
> In my case both of us have doctorates, her in hard science - math - and me in soft science - cog psych. We make similar money, similar years experience, but in three decades I have had 1 employer to her 7-8.
> 
> Stability and moderate success are not much of an option in my wife's field (analytics consulting) while it's everything in my field (product and process design). I love what I do but if bagging groceries paid six figures I'd be just as happy at Kroger...


Gotcha. I hope there is a satisfactory resolution, however it plays out.

If your girls are on 10+ year college experiences, it sounds like they are following in their parents' footsteps, educationally.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

jld said:


> john117, you and I sound so materialistic.


Well, let's face it - you guys are exactly that.

Don't take it as a slam. You're allowed to be materialistic in the most capitalistic country ever on the face of the earth, and it's no sin if that's what makes you happy (as long as you're not crushing the unprivileged under your feet).


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

jld said:


> Rose, can this thread get into class differences in marriage?



Sure, it can go anywhere! What are you thinking of? Like marital rates by class, or reasons for/against marriage by class? etc...


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

RoseAglow said:


> There has been a lot of research released lately flagging an alarming trend: Marriage is in trouble in the middle and lower class. Marriage is doing well in the educated middle/upper classes. Class is strongly related to education.
> 
> I think this article sums it up best: The class divide: Marriage as a â€˜luxury good'
> 
> ...


This is an interesting thread.
Basically it corroborates with what I found whilst searching for statistics in that other thread about men and marriage.

The part about education interests me, although I don't live in the USA.
But I think it makes sense , given that education is expensive across there.

Down here it's a different dynamic, education is `100% state funded , so basically it's free.
But some trends are changing down here.
Before , most men would marry below their educational level because a lot of women weren't accessing higher levels of education. Now the trend is both partners are evenly matched ,in educational levels and jobs, and I guess that's because their chances at upward social mobility is almost guaranteed. Financial institutions tend to be more lenient with married couples and first time mortgages. Government social policies are also more biased to married couples even though they might be in the lower stratum.

So the trend here is , as soon as young people graduate from university, they get married.

In hindsight , a lot of the government's educational and social policies, and private sector lending policies were aimed at increasing the size of the middle class.
Looks like a bit of social engineering took place , seems as if it was successful.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> If your girls are on 10+ year college experiences, it sounds like they are following in their parents' footsteps, educationally.



More than one would hope to. Design Daughter studies Design and is heading for an MFA then phd, PreMedFrenchDaughter is sort of double majoring in neurobiology and French with med school or md/phd aspirations in psychiatry / neuroscience. 

Those who complain Organic Chemistry is hard never took "Advanced French Grammar" :rofl:


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> john117, you and I sound so materialistic.



Remember happiness for me is.. A Starbucks grande iced coffee, gas in my Mini, and a charged Nikon...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> Sure, it can go anywhere! What are you thinking of? Like marital rates by class, or reasons for/against marriage by class? etc...


Okay, I am just going to be transparent here, all right? There is no way dh and I would want our daughter marrying anyone making less money than she would, having less education, being less stable, less truly kind and good to her, than possible. We are definitely interested in equality, if not something better, for her. I am sure that sounds elitist, but it comes from my heart.

Dd always says she is not going to be a SAHM, but dh says, "We'll see." We want her to have that option, and to be able to do it comfortably.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> More than one would hope to. Design Daughter studies Design and is heading for an MFA then phd, PreMedFrenchDaughter is sort of double majoring in neurobiology and French with med school or md/phd aspirations in psychiatry / neuroscience.
> 
> Those who complain Organic Chemistry is hard never took "Advanced French Grammar" :rofl:


Okay, I think I told john this already, but I am going to show off about my daughter.

Dd is a chem eng major, but she is bilingual French/English, because dh is French and I am American. So she signed up to be a French tutor this semester, and had to be interviewed by the chair of the dept. 

The chair was nervous! Dd heard this woman's mistakes and accent, and while she is far too polite to say anything, was surprised, considering this woman has a PhD in French, plus has written books.

Now the chair has put up notices in the French classrooms looking for a native French speaker to be her helper for some activity next fall. Dd is the only person fitting the bill, but maybe the prof is too shy to ask?

Sorry, I warned you I would be showing off.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Well, let's face it - you guys are exactly that.
> 
> Don't take it as a slam. You're allowed to be materialistic in the most capitalistic country ever on the face of the earth, and it's no sin if that's what makes you happy (as long as you're not crushing the unprivileged under your feet).


Are you in this club, too, Cletus?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I'm not sure why marriage is upheld as the most important thing people should do, anyway. What is wrong with focusing on yourself for longer, getting a career, sowing some oats, gaining life experience?

I think people should wait until their 30's to get married, and even then, it shouldn't be expected to be "everyone's" priority.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Caribbean Man said:


> This is an interesting thread.
> Basically it corroborates with what I found whilst searching for statistics in that other thread about men and marriage.
> 
> The part about education interests me, although I don't live in the USA.
> ...


This is what I find most interesting about the trends. In your country, there is something to be gained by being married.

In the US, it would seem that there is still something to be gained by being married. Being married pools resources, the poorest people who could benefit from being married are the ones who are not getting married.



> Financial institutions tend to be more lenient with married couples and first time mortgages. Government social policies are also more biased to married couples even though they might be in the lower stratum.
> 
> So the trend here is , as soon as young people graduate from university, they get married.
> 
> ...


In the US we are the opposite. In many cases it is illegal to discriminate by marital status. (However, things like Housing and loans would normally still favor married couples or at least two incomes households). We have reverse-engineered things so that marriage has fewer benefits...or so it seems! 

What is the divorce rate in your country? Is it similar to the US, or are your marriages more stable? Do you see differences in divorce rates by class as well?


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

john117 said:


> More than one would hope to. Design Daughter studies Design and is heading for an MFA then phd, PreMedFrenchDaughter is sort of double majoring in neurobiology and French with med school or md/phd aspirations in psychiatry / neuroscience.
> 
> Those who complain Organic Chemistry is hard never took "Advanced French Grammar" :rofl:


If I were doing to do it all again, I would go for an MD/PhD in psychiatry/neuroscience. These are the two most fascinating fields for me. 

Best of luck to your daughters!


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

jld said:


> Dd always says she is not going to be a SAHM, but dh says, "We'll see." We want her to have that option, and to be able to do it comfortably.


But what if she doesn't want to be a SAHM? There is nothing wrong with being a woman who has and wants a career.


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure why marriage is upheld as the most important thing people should do, anyway. What is wrong with focusing on yourself for longer, getting a career, sowing some oats, gaining life experience?


:iagree:


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

jld said:


> Are you in this club, too, Cletus?


No, I am not. 

I make good money, but it is a byproduct of having been interested in college in a field that had good earning potential. I left one company that would have made me a millionaire in 5 years because the place was run by a never ending string of a*holes. I have turned down VP level positions at startups that had potential large compensation upsides because, as the sole provider for my family, with a SAHM and two children, it was better to be stable than rich. Our first home was a manufactured home in the country, and while we've doubled the size through our own sweat equity and now really have too much house, we're still there, having completely resisted the urge to become house poor and buy a McMansion that our income ostensibly says we could afford. I own modest cars and have overall modest tastes. My wife is like-minded. 

Money is not unimportant, but it has and will always be for me a secondary consideration.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

jld said:


> Okay, I am just going to be transparent here, all right? There is no way dh and I would want our daughter marrying anyone making less money than she would, having less education, being less stable, less truly kind and good to her, than possible. We are definitely interested in equality, if not something better, for her. I am sure that sounds elitist, but it comes from my heart.
> 
> Dd always says she is not going to be a SAHM, but dh says, "We'll see." We want her to have that option, and to be able to do it comfortably.


I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting your child to have the very best. She is smart and talented- bilingual, a leader even as she is surrounded mostly by men, and studying chemical engineering! You want her continued success!


----------



## EnjoliWoman (Jul 2, 2012)

I can extract a few reasonable assumptions out of all that I have read...

So the less income a person makes, (under $75K USD) the less happy they are (stressed, not as much fun time, can't afford to hire housekeeper/landscaper/nanny, etc.)

The less income, the less often they marry. This makes sense to me because they are stressed, unhappy and don't have a lot of free time to develop, cultivate and maintain that relationship; therefore their relationships in general are more volatile. Also if they are stressed and unhappy, they are probably more easily swayed to change partners (live in or otherwise) as they are seeking happiness and/or diversion from their unpleasant situation - no light at the end of the tunnel, so to speak.

Those who are more well-to-do and have a higher level of education have a number of things going for them. They likely have better communication skills (part of education), a better understanding of psychology (didn't we all take at least one course?), they have more free time and disposable income with which to cultivate that special relationship (unless they are work-a-holics but that may come later after marriage) and the money to throw at a rock/wedding/house.

Upon marriage I had 1 year of trade school and ex had a BS + 1 year toward a professional degree but he dropped out. 

When we separated 10 years ago he was well over the median pp income; I was making more than the median pp income but about 75% of what he was. 

I have no idea what he earns now but based on his lifestyle, vehicle, clothing, etc. I'd say he's at a similar income level as when we separated. I have reached the point where I have doubled the median pp income. Sometimes it's seizing opportunity, being good at something, being good with people and proving yourself out and not about education. In HS I was on the college track and my demeanor, associations and communication skills reflect that. Yet I know people with degrees who make awful grammatical errors and don't present as well, so I am able to 'compete' with those who have degrees when I do not.

I want a partner who earns approximately what I do - less isn't a big deal. I really admire someone with skills like the electrician mentioned by one of you - that has HUGE financial value, being able to do things yourself.

But even under the $75K median family income level, I would like to remarry. Go figure.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure why marriage is upheld as the most important thing people should do, anyway. What is wrong with focusing on yourself for longer, getting a career, sowing some oats, gaining life experience?
> 
> I think people should wait until their 30's to get married, and even then, it shouldn't be expected to be "everyone's" priority.


Agreed. All this hand-wringing over the lowered marriage rates implies that it's a bad thing, but that is not at all clear to me.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure why marriage is upheld as the most important thing people should do, anyway. What is wrong with focusing on yourself for longer, getting a career, sowing some oats, gaining life experience?
> 
> I think people should wait until their 30's to get married, and even then, it shouldn't be expected to be "everyone's" priority.


I totally agree with this.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Jellybeans said:


> But what if she doesn't want to be a SAHM? There is nothing wrong with being a woman who has and wants a career.


But Jelly, you don't have kids, right?

Sometimes it looks different when you have kids.

Dd grew up with a SAHM. She was homeschooled at her own pace, according to her own interests. She was breastfed on demand. She has lived in 3 countries, all because her mom was a SAHM and could just follow her dad around. 

Basically, we want her to be able to raise our grandchildren, if she has them, and wants to, in the manner to which she herself was accustomed.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Cletus said:


> No, I am not.
> 
> I make good money, but it is a byproduct of having been interested in college in a field that had good earning potential. I left one company that would have made me a millionaire in 5 years because the place was run by a never ending string of a*holes. I have turned down VP level positions at startups that had potential large compensation upsides because, as the sole provider for my family, with a SAHM and two children, it was better to be stable than rich. Our first home was a manufactured home in the country, and while we've doubled the size through our own sweat equity and now really have too much house, we're still there, having completely resisted the urge to become house poor and buy a McMansion that our income ostensibly says we could afford. I own modest cars and have overall modest tastes. My wife is like-minded.
> 
> Money is not unimportant, but it has and will always be for me a secondary consideration.


Look, Cletus, part of that materialism comment was a bit of a joke.

We live in a lower middle class neighborhood, in a 3 bedroom ranch. It has been completely remodeled, and is in a great location, but nobody on our street has dh's income or position. Okay, there might be one couple together making what he makes.

We drive two used vehicles. Some paychecks just sit in checking. We live pretty simply.

But you and I both know that we need money. And we have 5 kids to put through college.


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

jld said:


> But Jelly, you don't have kids, right?


Correct. But I know a lot of women with children who choose to have careers while being mothers. And I do not think there is anything at all wrong with that. 

Not meaning to sound like a pill but sometimes women with children will try to discount a childless woman's opinion or make it seem less valid (not that that is what you are doing but I am just putting it out there).


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Jellybeans said:


> Correct. But I know a lot of women with children who choose to have careers while being mothers. And I do not think there is anything at all wrong with that.
> 
> Not meaning to sound like a pill but sometimes women with children will try to discount a childless woman's opinion or make it seem less valid (not that that is what you are doing but I am just putting it out there).


No, you have a valid opinion; everyone does if it is sincerely held.

All I can say is that after I had children, things just seemed different than before. Maybe it was just me.


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

I think everyone who has children says the same thing. Lol.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting your child to have the very best. She is smart and talented- bilingual, a leader even as she is surrounded mostly by men, and studying chemical engineering! You want her continued success!


This is the thing. I can sit here and talk theory, but what is more revealing is what I actually want for my own child. And it is not less than the best she can get.

She wants to own her own business. Dh has mentioned that if she gets an idea, she should start it right out of college. DD is way more mature and stable than I am, I can tell you, and very smart. I don't have any doubt she could accomplish anything she set her mind to. And I just do not want her to settle for less than the best.

She wants a companionate marriage, btw. She would like to marry another engineer and run the business with him.

And we will clearly support whatever she does career and kid-wise.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Jellybeans said:


> Correct. But I know a lot of women with children who choose to have careers while being mothers. And I do not think there is anything at all wrong with that.
> 
> Not meaning to sound like a pill but sometimes women with children will try to discount a childless woman's opinion or make it seem less valid (not that that is what you are doing but I am just putting it out there).


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Jellybeans said:


> I think everyone who has children says the same thing. Lol.


I have learned things from people with no kids. It is important to share your opinion. We all truly learn from one another.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Jellybeans said:


> I think everyone who has children says the same thing. Lol.


ahem


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

ScarletBegonias said:


>


You WOULD make that smiley face, Scarlet. 

:rofl:


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

ScarletBegonias said:


> ahem


And this... :rofl:

You are such a rebel.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

A very high compliment  Thank you!


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

Are you sure They made you the right way?

I often wonder that about me... Like they messed up in the Girl Factory.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Having a wife who's been in the public school system and early child development, and having listened to the fallout, I will say unapologetically that it is overall better for the children to have one parent at home, if this is feasible for the couple.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

Jellybeans said:


> Are you sure They made you the right way?
> 
> I often wonder that about me... Like they messed up in the Girl Factory.


Story. Of. My. Life.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Jellybeans said:


> Are you sure They made you the right way?
> 
> I often wonder that about me... Like they messed up in the Girl Factory.


I think we're quite lovely so whatever mess up occurred, it was definitely in our favor:smthumbup:


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

COGypsy said:


> Story. Of. My. Life.


:rofl: I was waiting for you to arrive


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

jld said:


> And we have 5 kids to put through college.


did you say your H is French? Have you checked to see whether your children are eligible for French citizenship? 

My H is european (born and raised), and even though our children were born in the US, they have citizenship both here and in his home country (the paperwork was a pain, but so worth it). Now they can attend university in his home country for

drumroll!!!

$500 per semester. 

We've raised them both here and in Europe (made possible by the wealth we accumulated before kids through salary and some good investments, and by his flexible work and pay high enough to allow me to take time off to live abroad). The older one is bilingual, the younger one I'm not sure yet... I think a good foundation is there, but she was very young and I don't think it'll stick without more exposure.

But, this lifestyle requires that we stay married. I can only stay in europe for more than three months with a spousal visa. If we divorce, we lose both income and assets, and the ability to continent-hop with the girls. And we're not so wealthy that we can continue this life style on half our assets and half our income.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Having a wife who's been in the public school system and early child development, and having listened to the fallout, I will say unapologetically that it is overall better for the children to have one parent at home, if this is feasible for the couple.


If you truly believe this, and have a daughter, then you would understand the hand-wringing about the decline of marriage.

A women who gives up a career to stay home should be married, at least in the US, if she wants any hope of financial stability. She would be incredibly vulnerable otherwise to any number of potential catastrophes, such as illness of partner, death of partner, infidelity, divorce, illness or disability of herself...the list goes on and on. 

I would also suggest that the children of financially well-off parents are less likely to be in the public schools. Both my parents were teachers, my dad was a teacher for 30s years, and they sent my sister and I to a private school. But that was only feasible because they both worked (and that was with me having a full scholarship). I unapologetically disagree that it is always overall better for one parent to stay at home, but I totally support the option if one wants to do it that way.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

northernlights said:


> did you say your H is French? Have you checked to see whether your children are eligible for French citizenship?
> 
> My H is european (born and raised), and even though our children were born in the US, they have citizenship both here and in his home country (the paperwork was a pain, but so worth it). Now they can attend university in his home country for
> 
> ...


Yes, dd18 has French citizenship and our other kids will as soon as dh fills out the paperwork. 

Dh says higher education is better in America. I think he means for technical majors, anyway. And dd got many scholarships, so we are paying about $2k a semester, including books.

We aren't planning on divorcing, either.  Ever.

We saved my salary before we had dd, and that was our down payment for our house. And we have always lived pretty simply. Life still costs money, though. There is always something to pay for.

We live the way we grew up. We each had a SAHM and we think it is important. We at least want our kids to have that option in their marriages. It will be up to them, however.

The older four are bilingual; ds5 has never lived in France. Dd18 and ds11, ds8, and ds5 are all going to France for two months this summer to visit the grandparents. By the time ds5 gets back, he should be speaking very well.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Hypergamy.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

wilderness said:


> Hypergamy.


Well, maybe. At least parity.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

RoseAglow said:


> A women who gives up a career to stay home should be married, at least in the US, if she wants any hope of financial stability. She would be incredibly vulnerable otherwise to any number of potential catastrophes, such as illness of partner, death of partner, infidelity, divorce, illness or disability of herself...the list goes on and on.


From my time on TAM, I would say that simply being married isn't enough in this day and age to establish financial security for any parent giving up their career to stay home. Given all the fighting over assets and custody that occurs, I'd say mainly in families where one spouse is completely dependent on the other financially, I wouldn't consider staying home without a pretty solid post-nup detailing any future division of assets, assignment of retirement funds, etc. to adequately ensure support for myself and my children in the event of divorce or separation or other life change. If I am essentially re-investing my entire future earning potential into the family, then I want to be sure that I'm not going to be eating cat food when I'm 80 because the father of my children wanted a newer model, you know?

That being said, I have to say that there are very few rights that can't be conferred to a partner with a few affadavits. Affadavits that can simply be revoked rather than requiring intervention by the courts. A good estate planner is far cheaper than either a wedding or a divorce and would establish most of the same rights.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

RoseAglow said:


> If you truly believe this, and have a daughter, then you would understand the hand-wringing about the decline of marriage.


I have a 21 year old daughter.

I did not say that they should give up a career entirely, nor did I say that the woman should be the one to stay at home. Our best friends did it the other way around.

My wife currently works in the daycare for a very large local athletic equipment manufacturer whose employees are very driven and quite career oriented. I get to hear weekly the stories of the parents who are either uninvolved in their child's upbringing or endlessly flagellating themselves for the lost opportunity at being the primary influence in their children's lives.

Raising a family involves some risk to one's self and some sacrifices, if it is to be done right.


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

jld said:


> The older four are bilingual; ds5 has never lived in France. Dd18 and ds11, ds8, and ds5 are all going to France for two months this summer to visit the grandparents. By the time ds5 gets back, he should be speaking very well.


Are they going without you? (Asked in jealous awe, not with judgement)


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

northernlights said:


> Are they going without you? (Asked in jealous awe, not with judgement)


Yeah, dd18 is their second mother.

I know you are not judging, but I'm sure some do. But I am not going to go and stay with dh's parents for two months, lol. And they are fine with dd18.

Why do you think people judge on that, anyway? I am from a big family, and I always spent some weeks in the summer at my older sister's homes, far away.


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

jld said:


> Why do you think people judge on that, anyway? I am from a big family, and I always spent some weeks in the summer at my older sister's homes, far away.


I don't know... I think it's great when kids get some space from parents and have a chance to feel independent. I wish my in-laws were able to have our girls for a summer. Unfortunately, their health doesn't allow it.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure why marriage is upheld as the most important thing people should do, anyway. What is wrong with focusing on yourself for longer, getting a career, sowing some oats, gaining life experience?
> 
> I think people should wait until their 30's to get married, and even then, it shouldn't be expected to be "everyone's" priority.





Cletus said:


> Agreed. All this hand-wringing over the lowered marriage rates implies that it's a bad thing, but that is not at all clear to me.


Ultimately, I agree that the lowering marriage rate is not necessarily a bad thing. I definitely think it's good to wait until one is older, gets an education if they want to, has gotten some life experience.

I think one reason people tend to stay married when they marry older is that is you have a better idea in general of who you are, and who the other person is, if you wait until your late 20s/early 30s. When you marry someone at 18 or 22, you are still marrying potential. At 32, you have a pretty good idea of who that person is, are they a worker or a freeloader? If they were going to fail out of school, they probably already did it. Etc. You've had to support yourself and lived life, you've probably been in a few relationship, and you have a better idea of what is most important to you, etc.

I only ever planned on getting married if I had kids; I waited until I was 37 to get married. It is only now that I actually feel like there might be benefits to the marital state, even if no kids are involved. But I don't know if there will be these benefits remaining in another 25 years, when my son is the age that men in the US currently get married.

By the time my son is in his late 20s/early 30s, will marriage really only be a status symbol?

I guess this is why I started the thread. If marriage is something that only the well-off do, what will happen to those less well-off? Will something besides marriage replace it? Does it even matter?


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

COGypsy said:


> From my time on TAM, I would say that simply being married isn't enough in this day and age to establish financial security for any parent giving up their career to stay home. Given all the fighting over assets and custody that occurs, I'd say mainly in families where one spouse is completely dependent on the other financially, I wouldn't consider staying home without a pretty solid post-nup detailing any future division of assets, assignment of retirement funds, etc. to adequately ensure support for myself and my children in the event of divorce or separation or other life change. If I am essentially re-investing my entire future earning potential into the family, then I want to be sure that I'm not going to be eating cat food when I'm 80 because the father of my children wanted a newer model, you know?


I totally agree with this. DEFINITELY would want a post-nup. And a WHOLE lot of Xanax. Or even stronger anti-anxiety meds. I couldn't do it, actually, married or not, unless I came into a lot of wealth or married into a lot of wealth- like Bill Gates kind of wealth. 



> That being said, I have to say that there are very few rights that can't be conferred to a partner with a few affadavits. Affadavits that can simply be revoked rather than requiring intervention by the courts. A good estate planner is far cheaper than either a wedding or a divorce and would establish most of the same rights.


Yes, this is true. And if marriage goes the way of the Lexus SUV (e.g. status symbol out of reach for most people), then I think you might see more couples shacking up and going for affadavits. In fact, my SIL has held out on getting pregnant until her guy of 20 years married her; he refuses to get married. Now that they are in their mid-30s, she is starting to think about going the way of affadavits and going for kids. I hope they do, my son needs some cousins and she is my only hope!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

What's interesting is that usually the lower and middle classes follow the upper classes. It's almost like the lower and middle classes have given up.


----------



## committed4ever (Nov 13, 2012)

jld said:


> Okay, I think I told john this already, but I am going to show off about my daughter.
> 
> Dd is a chem eng major, but she is bilingual French/English, because dh is French and I am American. So she signed up to be a French tutor this semester, and had to be interviewed by the chair of the dept.
> 
> ...


Well my daughter can roll over ... on her tummy AND back!


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Cletus said:


> I have a 21 year old daughter.
> 
> I did not say that they should give up a career entirely, nor did I say that the woman should be the one to stay at home. Our best friends did it the other way around.


Can't argue there. In the other thread (was it deleted?) I argued that one of the items that should be on the feminist agenda is increasing paternal leave in the US. I think many, many women would prefer to stay home for the first year, maybe up until pre-school or kindergarten, but that can only come at grave costs to their career.

I work for an international company, and my US colleagues and I marvel at the maternity/paternity time allotted for our Canadian and European compatriots. 



> My wife currently works in the daycare for a very large local athletic equipment manufacturer whose employees are very driven and quite career oriented. I get to hear weekly the stories of the parents who are either uninvolved in their child's upbringing or endlessly flagellating themselves for the lost opportunity at being the primary influence in their children's lives.


That's a bummer! Maybe I am operating at a lower stress level in my job- I hear more stories of overly involved helicopter/attachment parenting gone wild stories for the kids in my son's daycare class. But mostly our group is pretty involved, at least the parents/kids I spend time with. Overall, I know only very few working women who wish they were at home. I actually only know 2, and one of them finally did leave to stay at home for a while. But again, I am speaking here of educated, career-oriented women. 



> Raising a family involves some risk to one's self and some sacrifices, if it is to be done right.


Can't argue that, either.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

committed4ever said:


> Well my daughter can roll over ... on her tummy AND back!


LOL!:smthumbup:


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

RoseAglow said:


> What is the divorce rate in your country? Is it similar to the US, or are your marriages more stable? Do you see differences in divorce rates by class as well?


Our country's a bit different , because demographically , women outnumber men either 3 :1 or 2:1, so the dynamics are different.

Our divorce rate is somewhere around one in every seven marriages. I don't know if the higher number of women to men ratio has any impact on the divorce rate.
But remember our population is small , and there is a high number of female immigrants from neighbouring countries. Lots of women come here to work and end up getting married.

Also lots of people are separated and live with another partner , but not legally divorced, so the actual " stability rate" of the marriage institution might be lower than the divorce rate. 
Women are less likely to file for divorce [ in my opinion.]

We basically have full employment [ less than 5% unemployment]
so the average woman is gainfully employed.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

jld said:


> What's interesting is that usually the lower and middle classes follow the upper classes. It's almost like the lower and middle classes have given up.


But what's really left to give up on? What makes the state of "marriage" so mystical and desirable as compared to building a partnership with someone like-minded and compatible without a fancy party and some jewlery? I can appreciate the religious significance, if one happens to lean that way, but otherwise, I just don't see much return on investment for just the one change in legal status.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

It was just an observation, COG.


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

COGypsy said:


> But what's really left to give up on? What makes the state of "marriage" so mystical and desirable as compared to building a partnership with someone like-minded and compatible without a fancy party and some jewlery? I can appreciate the religious significance, if one happens to lean that way, but otherwise, I just don't see much return on investment for just the one change in legal status.


Is there a sound , logical reason for a woman taking her time ,preparing herself, trimming the hedges , grooming herself, dressing in sexy lingerie to seduce a man when they could both simply not waste any time ,remove all articles of clothing , assume horizontal position, insert appendage X into socket Y and manipulate accordingly till desired effect is achieved?

Why put icing on cake if it's not good for our health?

Why do we put chocolate sprinkles on ice cream?

Why do we waste time layering a chicken sandwich with green salad , fancy dressing, condiments and cucumbers when we could simply put all the ingredients in a bowl and eat?

Because it just_ taste_ and_ feel_ different.

That's what makes us human.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

COGypsy said:


> But what's really left to give up on? What makes the state of "marriage" so mystical and desirable as compared to building a partnership with someone like-minded and compatible without a fancy party and some jewlery? I can appreciate the religious significance, if one happens to lean that way, but otherwise, I just don't see much return on investment for just the one change in legal status.


It's the commitment. The "fancy party" and "jewelry" are just ways of formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment. If you went through some alternative means of formally committing to each other and having it witnessed by others I think it would arguably be equally valuable.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

COGypsy said:


> But what's really left to give up on? What makes the state of "marriage" so mystical and desirable as compared to building a partnership with someone like-minded and compatible without a fancy party and some jewlery? I can appreciate the religious significance, if one happens to lean that way, but otherwise, *I just don't see much return on investment for just the one change in legal status*.


I added the bold- to me, this IS the question.

At least currently, people with a higher education are investing in getting married, and they are maintaining that investment by staying married.

One striking stat highlights the difference between women who are highly educated who have a birth out of wedlock (6% of births) vs. moderately educated (education below a BA, 44% of births) vs low education (54% of births).

That is a HUGE difference. 6% vs 50%. 

There is something about being married that educated women value and will wait for, that the rest of the women either don't value or won't wait for. It's like jdl said- it's as if they've given up. They are just moving ahead with having kids, lowering their chances of marrying, and generally having less money, less opportunity for their kids.

I think traditionally, marriage has meant Stability. And, for highly educated women, marriage is still stable, still happy. There is still a big pay-off in it.

But, marriage is less stable, less available, for those who are not highly educated. 

I am going in circles here. I can't quite put my finger on it but I just keep thinking "investment". 

I do wonder about long-term couples who are parents, who cohabit in the US. How many are there? What is their stability? Are their children getting the same benefits as married couples? 

Current research that I saw in a quick google seems to suggest that there is much less stability Nine in 10 children born to cohabiting couples this year will 'see parents split by the time they are 16' | Mail Online

However, it could be just a numbers game, as in, there are relatively fewer couples in this category at this time.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John Lee said:


> It's the commitment. The "fancy party" and "jewelry" are just ways of formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment. If you went through some alternative means of formally committing to each other and having it witnessed by others I think it would arguably be equally valuable.


But do you really even need that? If you are committed to each other in your hearts, why does there need to be public recognition?

If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


----------



## northernlights (Sep 23, 2012)

jld said:


> But do you really even need that? If you are committed to each other in your hearts, why does there need to be public recognition?
> 
> If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


The big white dress, of course!


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

jld said:


> But do you really even need that? If you are committed to each other in your hearts, why does there need to be public recognition?
> 
> If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


What does "committed to each other in your hearts" mean? Commitment is what fills the gaps when your "heart" is aloof. Marriage is more than love. Commitment is more than love. No one in this pseudo-romantic age seems to get that.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

jld said:


> If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


So that your children wouldn't be in the position of having to list your partner of 40 years in your obituary as your "boyfriend", of course!


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

But what makes formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment necessary? I mean clearly a domestic partnership affadavit might be needed to provide say, health insurance coverage for one another. A will, durable power of attorney, etc. could be put in place for long term financial and medical concerns, and so on. But as far as formal ceremony goes....it seems more like a big show than a life goal.

I am completely aware that I am one of the least romantic women I know, but what I never understand is what makes the day after whatever ceremonial formality so different from the day before said formality? To me, I eventually want a good, solid relationship built on respect, attraction, passion and compatability. What about a ceremony would create or guarantee that?

Beyond that though, I wonder if the reduced marriage rates are simply tied to the recent recession? We're seeing increases in divorces as the economy improves and people can afford to separate. I wonder if we'll see increases in the number of marriages as people can afford to spend money on weddings and honeymoons?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

northernlights said:


> The big white dress, of course!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Rowan said:


> So that your children wouldn't be in the position of having to list your partner of 40 years in your obituary as your "boyfriend", of course!


We'll all just be "companions."


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John Lee said:


> What does "committed to each other in your hearts" mean? Commitment is what fills the gaps when your "heart" is aloof. Marriage is more than love. Commitment is more than love. No one in this pseudo-romantic age seems to get that.


John, I am married. But even before I was married, I was committed in my heart to dh. I got married for the financial benefit, I'll be honest. Having a marriage license did not make me any more committed or love him any more.

And yes, I love him and am committed to him.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

COGypsy said:


> But what makes formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment necessary? I mean clearly a domestic partnership affadavit might be needed to provide say, health insurance coverage for one another. A will, durable power of attorney, etc. could be put in place for long term financial and medical concerns, and so on. But as far as formal ceremony goes....it seems more like a big show than a life goal.
> 
> I am completely aware that I am one of the least romantic women I know, but what I never understand is what makes the day after whatever ceremonial formality so different from the day before said formality? To me, I eventually want a good, solid relationship built on respect, attraction, passion and compatability. What about a ceremony would create or guarantee that?
> 
> Beyond that though, I wonder if the reduced marriage rates are simply tied to the recent recession? We're seeing increases in divorces as the economy improves and people can afford to separate. I wonder if we'll see increases in the number of marriages as people can afford to spend money on weddings and honeymoons?


COG, we spent $500 on our wedding. A few people, lunch at Olive Garden, night in a hotel. I am competing with you for Least Romantic Woman.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

jld said:


> But do you really even need that? If you are committed to each other in your hearts, why does there need to be public recognition?
> 
> If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


Actually, tax breaks for married people are really the result of typical deductions for married people--mainly mortgages, dependent spouses and children. When I was married we usually ended up owing a few thousand every year because we had two strong earners and a nearly paid for house. No deductions = marriage penalty, definitely not a tax break! The IRS *loves* DINKS, let me tell ya!


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

jld said:


> But do you really even need that? If you are committed to each other in your hearts, why does there need to be public recognition?
> 
> If we eliminated tax breaks for married couples, made sure everyone had health care insurance, and aallowed people to authorize anyone they wanted to be with them in the hospital, why would we need marriage at all?


I would add, allow each person to designate their Social Security beneficiary, just like 401ks, bank accounts, life insurance, etc. Then I think most of the legal benefits to being married would be eliminated.

The only legal remaining benefit, such that it is, would be that being married would mean you and your spouse were a legal family. But all else being equal, that would be an intangible, a 'feel good', a status symbol, so to speak (to bring it back to the thread title.)

Commitment- in one's heart, in one's brain, where ever- is only as good as the will behind it. I think that is the crux of the issue.

A spouse can get married and still NOT be committed to the marriage, or they might be committed to being/staying married but not be committed to the other spouse.

However, it makes sense that the person who is willing to legally go on records as making a commitment will also be the person who is more likely to stick to that commitment.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

jld said:


> COG, we spent $500 on our wedding. A few people, lunch at Olive Garden, night in a hotel. I am competing with you for Least Romantic Woman.


My wedding was bigger, but only because my father overruled the destination wedding we wanted. I told him if he wanted the bigger wedding that he would have to plan it, I wasn't interested. So I found a site in town, bought a dress and sent him the name of my caterer. He pretty much did the rest.

It was nice though, and clearly important to him, so that made it a good reason to go with the flow.

My sister and I did make it very clear that my wedding fulfilled both of our fluffy white dress quotas from that point forward!


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

John Lee said:


> I find this to be true as well. Women are raised with an awful lot of expectations today that men don't have. I guess it's a negative byproduct of the attempts to encourage women to achieve more.


Everyone is raised with a great deal of expectations. The problems that can come of this are varied. Saying that overall women get strung out when their careers don't go the way they expected but men just go with the flow... does no one think that's weird to make such a sweeping statement?

Society is raising EVERYONE to expect to 'reach for the stars' and 'dream big' etc. No one is meant to be happy if they're just picking up garbage or cleaning floors etc. All children are expected to have grand dreams, and no one seems to be teaching their children to be realistic. Once the child realises that all their dreams will not come true, that's when you get people with depression etc, and that's not just a problem females are encountering.


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

RoseAglow said:


> Commitment- in one's heart, in one's brain, where ever- is only as good as the will behind it. I think that is the crux of the issue.
> 
> A spouse can get married and still NOT be committed to the marriage, or they might be committed to being/staying married but not be committed to the other spouse.
> 
> However, it makes sense that the person who is willing to legally go on records as making a commitment will also be the person who is more likely to stick to that commitment.


Exactly. Marriage doesn't per se mean commitment, and non-marriage doesn't per se mean lack thereof, but it means something when people go out of the way to define, record, and declare their commitment, and when people do nothing to ever actually define and outline their commitment, I'm not as convinced it really exists.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

There are some benefits for married couples only if one spouse is working. With two working and making good money... Not so good.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John Lee said:


> Exactly. Marriage doesn't per se mean commitment, and non-marriage doesn't per se mean lack thereof, but it means something when people go out of the way to define, record, and declare their commitment, and when people do nothing to ever actually define and outline their commitment, I'm not as convinced it really exists.


John, I really and truly was committed before marriage. I really and truly got the piece of paper for health insurance.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> There are some benefits for married couples only if one spouse is working. With two working and making good money... Not so good.


Right now, but that could change.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

RoseAglow said:


> Commitment- in one's heart, in one's brain, where ever- is only as good as the will behind it. I think that is the crux of the issue.
> 
> A spouse can get married and still NOT be committed to the marriage, or they might be committed to being/staying married but not be committed to the other spouse.
> 
> However, it makes sense that the person who is willing to legally go on records as making a commitment will also be the person who is more likely to stick to that commitment.


I'd note as well that most of the current legal benefits of marriage aren't automatically inferred with the filing of a marriage certificate. There is still an approximate [email protected] of paperwork to change names, change beneficiaries, change insurance policies, change advance directives, transfer assets, etc. All of that has to be done on a case-by-case basis whether you're getting married or filing any other paperwork. So in the end, you're still doing a lot of work to fulfill your entitlements.

My ex asked me if I was going to change my name back after our divorce. I told him I'd have to hate him a lot or love somebody a lot to go through changing my name on every legal document concerning me all over again!


----------



## John Lee (Mar 16, 2013)

jld said:


> John, I really and truly was committed before marriage. I really and truly got the piece of paper for health insurance.


I wouldn't dare doubt that for a second. I'm speaking more generally. 

Do declarations and ceremonies matter at all? Why take oaths? Why sign contracts?


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

COGypsy said:


> But what makes formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment necessary? I mean clearly a domestic partnership affadavit might be needed to provide say, health insurance coverage for one another. A will, durable power of attorney, etc. could be put in place for long term financial and medical concerns, and so on. But as far as formal ceremony goes....it seems more like a big show than a life goal.


I think traditionally marriages were meant to be a celebration of a rite of passage. Back then nearly everyone got married- it was really a matter of being able to comfortably survive.

Things have changed! Marriage is no longer necessary and weddings now often run into 10s of thousands of dollars. Luxury good indeed!



> I am completely aware that I am one of the least romantic women I know, but what I never understand is what makes the day after whatever ceremonial formality so different from the day before said formality? To me, I eventually want a good, solid relationship built on respect, attraction, passion and compatability. What about a ceremony would create or guarantee that?


The ceremony doesn't create or guarantee it; it formalizes it, legalizes it. It creates a legal tie. The rest is up to the couple. 



> Beyond that though, I wonder if the reduced marriage rates are simply tied to the recent recession? We're seeing increases in divorces as the economy improves and people can afford to separate. I wonder if we'll see increases in the number of marriages as people can afford to spend money on weddings and honeymoons?


I wondered this too. The number of studies and their longitudinal nature seems to argue that this is true trend, not accounted for only by the Recession. However, since education and occupation/employment are closely tied, the Recession must have had some effect.


----------



## EnjoliWoman (Jul 2, 2012)

COGypsy said:


> But what makes formalizing/ceremonializing the commitment necessary? I mean clearly a domestic partnership affadavit might be needed to provide say, health insurance coverage for one another. A will, durable power of attorney, etc. could be put in place for long term financial and medical concerns, and so on. But as far as formal ceremony goes....it seems more like a big show than a life goal.
> 
> I am completely aware that I am one of the least romantic women I know, but what I never understand is what makes the day after whatever ceremonial formality so different from the day before said formality? To me, I eventually want a good, solid relationship built on respect, attraction, passion and compatability. What about a ceremony would create or guarantee that?
> 
> Beyond that though, I wonder if the reduced marriage rates are simply tied to the recent recession? We're seeing increases in divorces as the economy improves and people can afford to separate. I wonder if we'll see increases in the number of marriages as people can afford to spend money on weddings and honeymoons?


I understand the argument and know many people that feel that way. I could be persuaded to change my mind if I met the right man who refused to marry but loved me and wanted to live with me otherwise. However, if it meant a lot to me and he refused... may he isn't the right man.

I'm a bit steeped in tradition in wanting that, but I think there is yet an additional level of commitment when you are legally bound to someone. I think it makes people take the vows more seriously because it's much harder to dissolve.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

naiveonedave said:


> RA - but look at engineering. There are more women than 20 years ago, but not even close to 60/40. *That is where the $ is, by and large.*


Not for long! What 'Stapling a Green Card' Portends for STEM | Science Careers

Add to that what happens when you get laid off at age 50something from your engineering job in an economic downturn.

H and I both majored in engineering and have advanced degrees from an excellent engineering school. He is now a medical physicist and I went back to community college for an RN and am a nurse.

I discouraged our children from engineering and told them medicine is the way to go for job security. Oldest is an MD and we have 2 PA's and another PA in the pipeline so far. One bucked the trend and majored in econ (at Harvard, so good job was forthcoming).

BTW, The oldest three ARE married and the Harvard grad is engaged to a fellow grad (ages 29,27,25, and 21).


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

Blonde said:


> Not for long! What 'Stapling a Green Card' Portends for STEM | Science Careers
> 
> Add to that what happens when you get laid off at age 50something from your engineering job in an economic downturn.
> 
> ...


Interesting!

I didn't know you majored in Engineering.
I majored in Mechanical Engineering back in 89 - 91.
In my class there were 23 students and only two were females. Back then it was a field women hardly enlisted in, they gravitated to Humanities and Social Sciences.

What field of engineering did you study?


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

I think marriage is really a social construct, we live by and that has survived because has worked in the past.

Marriage gives the state the ability to plan ahead and control the population to a certain extent.
In reality it is a contract between two people , but it is not like a simple business type of contract , but certain principles apply. The real value of it is not in it's legal boundaries , but the value the two persons involved place in it as an institution.
If they believe in it, it becomes valuable. If they don't , then it is worthless. There is no intrinsic value in it.

Everything else that surrounds getting married, the wedding , the honeymoon,are just parts that makes being human beings unique.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Caribbean Man said:


> Our country's a bit different , because demographically , women outnumber men either 3 :1 or 2:1, so the dynamics are different.


Wow!!! Those are big differences! Sounds like a great place to be if you're male! Lots of options! 



> Our divorce rate is somewhere around one in every seven marriages. I don't know if the higher number of women to men ratio has any impact on the divorce rate.
> But remember our population is small , and there is a high number of female immigrants from neighbouring countries. Lots of women come here to work and end up getting married.
> 
> Also lots of people are separated and live with another partner , but not legally divorced, so the actual " stability rate" of the marriage institution might be lower than the divorce rate.
> Women are less likely to file for divorce [ in my opinion.]


Interesting! So what happens when parents split but don't divorce? Are there legal issues for child support?



> We basically have full employment [ less than 5% unemployment]
> so the average woman is gainfully employed.


One day I dream of less than 5% unemployment rate in the US...probably a Utopian dream...or the outcome of a catastrophic loss in the population like the Zombie Apocalypse...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

There's some people who are cut out for health / medical careers and some that are not. My older girl was not into science at all, but excelled in the arts. Design was her calling and that's what she does. The younger is a true academician and loves science (even anatomy lolz) but I wonder if she'll ever see a live patient. Zero empathy. Should be funny as she's interested in psychiatry or neurology. But that's a few years away she just started college.

Neither is marrying material for now. The older wants to get married to an NBA player (and she has a chance depending on how the draft goes ) and teach at the college level. The younger seems to have some kind of repellant against male students, not sure why. I doubt she will forego a dozen years of college regardless of who the lucky guy is.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

Caribbean Man said:


> What field of engineering did you study?


I have a BS in engineering chemistry and an SM in Materials Science where my research was in ceramics (more specifically glass).

In undergrad school (late 1970's) I was in an advanced calc class with 3 women and 300 men.

I regret studying engineering because at the time, it was not very compatible with engaged motherhood (salaried 60+hrs/week pluss commute time). In hindsight, I would have loved pharmacy and jobs are more flexible in medical fields.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> There's some people who are cut out for health / medical careers and some that are not. My older girl was not into science at all, but excelled in the arts. Design was her calling and that's what she does. *The younger is a true academician and loves science (even anatomy lolz) but I wonder if she'll ever see a live patient. Zero empathy.* Should be funny as she's interested in psychiatry or neurology. But that's a few years away she just started college.


Radiology or Anesthesiology

Radiologists nowadays read digital scans from miles away (at their waterfront villa) and never see patients. Anesthesiologists see them for 5 minutes or so before their procedure.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> Neither is marrying material for now. The older wants to get married to an NBA player (and she has a chance depending on how the draft goes ) and teach at the college level. The younger seems to have some kind of repellant against male students, not sure why. I doubt she will forego a dozen years of college regardless of who the lucky guy is.


The 12 years does not have to be an obstacle. My oldest married while in med school and remains in residency. So no grandchildren there anytime soon and she is 29.

The 21 yo was hilarious! At Christmas her senior year age 20 she was bemoaning being an "old maid" and not having a BF as a senior and the fact that once she graduates she will not have access to so many equal matches... "Old maid" at age 20! :rofl: But look at this: Princeton mom: Women have a shelf life - Apr. 1, 2013


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

Blonde said:


> Radiology or Anesthesiology
> 
> Radiologists nowadays read digital scans from miles away (at their waterfront villa) and never see patients. Anesthesiologists see them for 5 minutes or so before their procedure.


Definitely Anesthesiology. After all, in addition to great hours and high pay--they also have the market cornered on those nifty calculator watches!


----------



## committed4ever (Nov 13, 2012)

john117 said:


> The older wants to get married to an NBA player (and she has a chance depending on how the draft goes )


That would be fat city. Add in the possibility of appearing on BW and she could be set for life.

2014 Mock Draft | NBADraft.net

I know. I'm really not contributing anything useful to the conversation.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

For Christmas I gave her a map of all the NBA cities marked with nearby graduate schools with good Design programs. Alas, no NBA teams in Rhode Island


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

RoseAglow said:


> D
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting! So what happens when parents split but don't divorce? Are there legal issues for child support?


Lol, right there ^^^ is where the problem is.
Some men support their kids 100%, after separation.
Some men support their kids 0%, they are deadbeat dads.

Then the law came in and said that if a man separates from his wife and does not pay child support,she could get a judge to order the state to garnish his salary , and deduct the amount required by that said judge for child support. The state collects the money from him on her behalf. If that man quits his job and the payments stop coming, immediately there is a warrant issued for his arrest.

I think some men fear divorce because the custody issues comes up and traditionally, the women gets the kids , so they fear loosing their kids. They simply separate ,maintain their kids , and always have access to the kids because their is not the bitterness of divorce proceedings.

As a result of this, most people only marry once, but there are lots of separated folks cohabiting with other folks.


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

jld said:


> What's interesting is that usually the lower and middle classes follow the upper classes. *It's almost like the lower and middle classes have given up*.


I don't agree. People get married every single day, regardless of their economic background. I don't think that is going to change. People will always get married.



COGypsy said:


> To me, I eventually want a good, solid relationship built on respect, attraction, passion and compatability. What about a ceremony would create or guarantee that?


The ceremony doesn't guarantee anything. It as to come from two people who want it enough to stay in it (or go through the motions of staying in it). Lol.



John Lee said:


> Exactly. Marriage doesn't per se mean commitment, and non-marriage doesn't per se mean lack thereof, but it means something when people go out of the way to define, record, and declare their commitment, *and when people do nothing to ever actually define and outline their commitment, I'm not as convinced it really exists.*


I hear what you are saying but disagree. My uncle has been with my aunt 30+ years. They have a great relationship and a ton of kids. They have never been married. Their relationship to me is a lot more "real" and "genuine" than some married people I know who can't be bothered to even talk to eachother or treat eachother kindly. 



EnjoliWoman said:


> I'm a bit steeped in tradition in wanting that, but I think there is yet an additional level of commitment when you are legally bound to someone. *I think it makes people take the vows more seriously because it's much harder to dissolve*.


I had a colleague that used to say: it should be harder to get married than divorced. Just saying. LOL. 



john117 said:


> The younger is a true academician and loves science (even anatomy lolz) but I wonder if she'll ever see a live patient. Zero empathy.
> 
> The younger seems to have some kind of repellant against male students, not sure why. I doubt she will forego a dozen years of college regardless of who the lucky guy is.


Haha. Your youngest sounds like a hoot. Has she ever liked guys? Maybe she's gay? Just saying.


----------



## EnjoliWoman (Jul 2, 2012)

Jellybeans said:


> I had a colleague that used to say: it should be harder to get married than divorced. Just saying. LOL.


I actually agree with that. To have a marriage license and get married in under a week, or same day, etc. depending on the state is crazy. Instead of waiting a year to divorce, you should have to wait a year to get married from the time you apply. I think a lot of people would have some second thoughts by then. Instead they get engaged and are married in a year and I think I a LOT of people start having some doubts but tell themselves it's cold feet, natural, already paid for wedding, etc.

But even in states where divorces can be obtained in a couple months, I think it is still more difficult to dissolve that just living together and even just owning a house together. Knowing you are committed, legally to sharing everything with that person - both your love AND your assets, I think tells me the are truly in it for the long haul even with a prenup. Whereas someone who just wants to live together, tells me they love me, want to be with me forever, paper doesn't mean anything, etc. - anyone can say that. 

And maybe I will meet someone, decide to live with him because I'm not sure about marriage and years and years later we feel it's silly after everything we've been through and don't ever finalize it. *shrug*


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

OP,

Another interesting about our laws is that if a man cohabits with a woman for over a certain period of time [ can't remember exactly how much] , lets say about 7 years , even if they don't get married, she is entitled to a part of his estate if he dies.
It also applies if he was married to another woman but not divorced from her , or even if she was just his mistress on the side and she had a child for him.


----------

