Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: add925

You might run and duck but just one question. What was the divorce rate in 1955?


7 posted on 10/14/2005 10:24:04 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Former Proud Canadian

Since divorce was difficult to obtain without fault - someone had to commit a sin of some kind or at least lie in in court about committing it - and women had few occupations in which they were employed that paid a living wage, and divorce was considered to be scandalous, the solution was to stay married but to lead separate lives from the same house. If you asked that question you'd find the rate was probably fairly similar.


46 posted on 10/14/2005 10:33:49 AM PDT by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Former Proud Canadian

Actually, I've read this before and think they are all good ideas. Too often these days spouses seem to be in competition rather than trying to make each other happy. And I'm quite sure the divorce rate in 1955 was nowhere near what it is today. Same with the out of wedlock birth rate. Ah, the good ole days.


90 posted on 10/14/2005 10:51:35 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Former Proud Canadian

What was the divorce rate in 1955?

Well, I'm sure a lot less because there wasn't an attorney on every corner offering a divorce for $175. Not to mention, women were raised to be good little homemakers instead of being able to make it on their own if the no good SOB stayed out all night and came home with lipstick on his collar. Women swallowed a lot back then (get your mind out of the gutter) and have more options now than to put up with the Man Hunt-Woman Cook mentality brought on by generations of patriarchal group-think.

I guarantee my day as Mom, Domestic Goddess and Taxi Driver is 1000% more stressful than any so-called "hard day" at work endured by a man. If anything, his quiet day at the office is a haven, uninterrupted by hazardous spills in the bathroom, broken glass, whining/fighting among children (there's nasty, and then there's FAMILY nasty), ear infections, barking dogs, horrible daytime television options, having to endure the boring chit chat of hair, nails and newest clothing fashions with other moms at these awful play groups, sucking down what you'd REALLY like to say to his mother, etc. (LADIES, I'M SURE YOU CAN ADD TO THE LIST!!)

HE should fix ME a nice cold drink and build a fire after such a day.


153 posted on 10/14/2005 11:26:44 AM PDT by Dasaji (Are the voices in my head bothering you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Former Proud Canadian
You might run and duck but just one question. What was the divorce rate in 1955?

Not to mention the illegitimate birth rate, the abortion rate, the crime rate, the single parent rate, the adolescent suicide rate, the unemployment rate (fathers not having competing with women for jobs to sustain their families), the high school drop out rate, the rate of single income families who could affort a home, the rate of single income families who could survive on one income, etc, etc, etc.

ALL of which have some connection to the so called Femanist movement.

223 posted on 10/14/2005 12:05:30 PM PDT by GSHastings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson