Posted on 09/03/2017 11:34:00 AM PDT by EdnaMode
Thanks to cheap sex, marriage may be doomed.
The share of Americans ages 25-34 who are married dropped 13 percentage points from 2000 to 2014. A new book by sociologist Mark Regnerus blames this declining rate on how easy it is for men to get off.
Regnerus calls it “cheap sex,” an economic term meant to describe sex that has very little cost in terms of time or emotional investment, giving it little value.
Regnerus bases his ideas, in part, on the work of British social theorist Anthony Giddens, who argued that the pill isolated sex from marriage and children. Add online pornography and dating sites to the mix and you don’t even need relationships.
The result is “two overlapping (but distinctive) markets, one for sex and one for marriage, with a rather large territory in between comprised of significant relationships of varying commitment and duration,” Regnerus writes in “Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy” (Oxford University Press).
In generations past, women generally made men wait until marriage to have sex. To get a wife (and, therefore, sex), men had to be clean and presentable and have a good job. This, Regnerus reasons, gave men all the motivation they needed to become respectable members of society.
Now with porn on-demand and greater reproductive freedom, sex is a commodity available at any time. This has left men with little motivation for marriage, writes Regnerus, who cites demographer Steven Ruggles’ prediction that one of every three people in their 20s will never marry.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
"The filles du roi, or King's Daughters, were some 770 women who arrived in the colony of New France (Canada) between 1663 and 1673, under the financial sponsorship of King Louis XIV of France. Most were single French women and many were orphans. Their transportation to Canada and settlement in the colony were paid for by the King. Some were given a royal gift of a dowry of 50 livres for their marriage to one of the many unmarried male colonists in Canada. These gifts are reflected in some of the marriage contracts entered into by the filles du roi at the time of their first marriages.
"The filles du roi were part of King Louis XIV's program to promote the settlement of his colony in Canada. Some 737 of these women married and the resultant population explosion gave rise to the success of the colony. Most of the millions of people of French Canadian descent today, both in Quebec and the rest of Canada and the USA (and beyond!), are descendants of one or more of these courageous women of the 17th century. "
http://fillesduroi.org/src/kings_daughters.htm
To increase population and the number of families, the Intendant of New France, Jean Talon, proposed that the king sponsor passage of at least 500 women. The king agreed, and eventually nearly twice the number were recruited. They were predominantly between the ages of 12 and 25, and many had to supply a letter of reference from their parish priest before they would be chosen for emigration to New France.
Marguerite Bourgeoys was the first person to use the expression "filles du roi" in her writings.[3] A distinction was made between King's Daughters, who were transported to New France at the king's expense and were given a dowry by the king, and women who emigrated voluntarily and using their own money.[4] Other historians used chronological frameworks to determine who could be called a fille du roi.[5] Research by the historical demographer Yves Landry determines that there were in total about 770 to 850 filles du roi[6] who settled in New France between 1663 and 1673.[7]
The title "King's Daughters" was meant to imply state patronage, not royal or noble parentage. Most of these women were commoners of humble birth. As a fille du roi, a woman received the King’s support in several ways. The King paid one hundred livres to the French East India Company for the woman’s crossing, as well as furnishing a trousseau.[8] The Crown paid a dowry for each woman; this was originally supposed to be four hundred livres, but as the Treasury could not spare such an expense, many were paid in kind.[9] As was the case for most emigrants who went from France to New France, 80% of the filles du roi were from the Paris, Normandy and Western regions.[10] The Hôpital-Général de Paris and the St-Sulpice parish were big contributors of women for the new colony.[11] As such, most of the filles du roi were from urban areas.[12] A few women came from other European countries, including Germany, England, and Portugal.[13] Those who were chosen to be among the filles du roi and allowed to emigrate to New France were held to scrupulous standards, which were based on their "moral calibre" and whether they were physically fit enough to survive the hard work demanded by life as a colonist. The colonial officials sent several of the filles du roi back to France because they were judged below the standards set out by the King and the Intendant of New France.[14]
Almost half of the filles du roi were from the Paris area, 16% from Normandy and 13% from western France. Many were orphans with very meager personal possessions, and their level of literacy was relatively low.[15] Socially, the young women came from different social backgrounds, but were all very poor. They might have been from an elite family that had lost its fortune, or from a large family with children to "spare."[16] Officials usually matched women of higher birth with officers or gentlemen living in the colony,[17] sometimes in the hopes that the nobles would marry the young women and be encouraged to stay in Canada rather than return to France.
I have failed to notice if "bitterly" has had any role in the process.
More just another shrug of the shoulders and "it is what it is" declaration.
Well the Fur Trappers have modernized since then, LOL!
From “The Kids in the Hall”
https://youtu.be/ITLXo19248g?t=11
A favorite ZZTop song of mine-so true, so to the point, so politically incorrect in damn near every word-you could write a song like that back then...
The CD it is on is kept in my 4x4 for my listening pleasure...
Plus also the first person baptized into the Christian faith in Europe was a woman. Lydia was her name. She had a business.
“With that perception, why would American men risk marriage?! “Cheap sex” is just a side issue.”
Absolutely. And there is also cause/effect. Perhaps the cheap sex is BECAUSE men won’t marry...in other words, if a woman wants to get some, she now has to settle for guys that are NOT interested in risking everything for a good time..
Quite likely!
So guys - what did you choose: Thai, Russian or Filipino?
I teach at the college level and our Department keeps an archive of old yearbooks. I sometimes look at old yearbooks from that period (mid 50s - early 60s). It is almost shocking to look at the pictures. You are 100% right — compared to today, the students look like movie stars (or at least models). And everyone dressed pretty well. They also look poised, confident, intelligent and alert. It is almost as if we are degenerating as a race. It almost makes me want to cry.
Nah,you’re just getting old-——old people always feel that way.
You’re a real pig, you know? And I’m supposed to believe the woman who dumped you was the problem?
Such a simple answer.
And so perfectly accurate.
There was a flood of single Spanish men to the new world looking for adventure starting in the 15th century, too-soldiers, trappers, livestock ranchers, horse breeders, etc. A lot of them were also rebels with no love for the king-might be why they didn’t get sent any women and took Native American ones to marry instead-that’s what makes those of us who are their descendants American Latinos or American Hispanic instead of
American Spanish...
MrT5 was of Canadian French ancestry-most of his family are still in Quebec-they are all very proud of their Native/First Nations ancestry...
No need to bash women.
Poster number 7 captured the essence of the argument. No bashing on his part
That’s very sweet and so thoughtful! It’s nice to know there are decent guys here when these threads start up. Congrats on your long marriage - you are obviously a man of maturity and dignity.
I’m coming up on my 25th in September!
I'm in my mid-40s. My daughter is almost grown and I'm wanting to start a whole new life. I am already looking at women from the Ukraine, China, and Colombia. These women simply put American women to shame.
To which I observe fairly often: I have watched many men marry unsuitable, stupid, immoral, lazy females because of a hip-to-thigh ratio, a pair of legs and other things that come in pairs. Then it falls apart, the men get fleeced, and vow to hate women forever.
"Women are too emotional"--I hear this from men who can't control themselves long enough to make a rational assessment of a woman's character before marriage.
Facial symmetry? Check. Small waist, perky breasts? Check. Good family/mental health/spirituality/work ethic/kind heart/honesty?
Did you really stop to notice?
” I am already looking at women from the Ukraine, China, and Colombia. These women simply put American women to shame.”
Yea, sounds like you’re on the right track. Sorry you had to go through the learning curve. Get a good look at their families - if divorce is looked upon with shame (as was the case with my babe), then you’re on to something. If, instead, there is some family history with divorce, I’d recommend to stay clear, as your mate will have the same voices in her ear as Americans have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.