Posted on 03/01/2006 7:09:06 AM PST by ZGuy
In the United States, living together instead of marrying has become the norm for couples -- half of young adults aged 20-40 are cohabiting instead of getting married. Cohabitation has increased nearly 1,000% since 1980, and the marriage rate has dropped more than 40% since 1960.
Some see substituting living together for marriage as an insignificant shift in family “structure.” Those who are better informed realize that the shift has disastrous ramifications for the individuals involved, as well as for society and public policy.
The faulty reasoning leading young adults to make such a poor choice must be exposed. Here are four myths surrounding the shift.
Myth No. 1: Living Together Is a Good Way to “Test the Water”
Many couples say that they want to live together to see if they are compatible, not realizing that cohabitation is more a preparation for divorce than a way to strengthen the likelihood of a successful marriage -- the divorce rates of women who cohabit are nearly 80% higher than those who do not. In fact, studies indicate that cohabiting couples have lower marital quality and increased risk of divorce. Further, cohabiting relationships tend to be fragile and relatively short in duration; less than half of cohabiting relationships last five or more years. Typically, they last about 18 months.
Myth No. 2: Couples Don’t Really Need That “Piece of Paper”
A major problem with cohabitation is that it is a tentative arrangement that lacks stability; no one can depend upon the relationship -- not the partners, not the children, not the community, nor the society. Such relationships contribute little to those inside and certainly little to those outside the arrangement. Sometimes couples choose to live together as a substitute for marriage, indicating that, in case the relationship goes sour, they can avoid the trouble, expense and emotional trauma of a divorce. With such a weak bond between the two parties, there is little likelihood that they will work through their problems or that they will maintain the relationship under pressure.
Myth No. 3: Cohabiting Relationships Usually Lead to Marriage
During the 1970s, about 60% of cohabiting couples married each other within three years, but this proportion has since declined to less than 40%. While women today still tend to expect that “cohabitation will lead to marriage,” numerous studies of college students have found that men typically cohabit simply because it is “convenient.” In fact, there is general agreement among scholars that living together before marriage puts women at a distinct disadvantage in terms of “power.” A college professor described a survey that he conducted over a period of years in his marriage classes. He asked guys who were living with a girl, point blank, “Are you going to marry the girl that you’re living with?” The overwhelming response, he reports, was “NO!” When he asked the girls if they were going to marry the guy they were living with, their response was, “Oh, yes; we love each other and we are learning how to be together.”
Myth No. 4: Cohabiting Relationships Are More Egalitarian Than Marriage
It is common knowledge that women and children suffer more poverty after a cohabiting relationship breaks up, but it’s not so well understood that there is typically an economic imbalance in favor of the man within such relationships, too. While couples who live together say that they plan to share expenses equally, more often than not the women support the men. Studies show that women typically contribute more than 70% of the income in a cohabiting relationship. Likewise, the women tend to do more of the cleaning, cooking and laundry. If they are students, as is often the case, and facing economic or time constraints that require a reduction in class load, it is almost invariably the woman, not the man, who drops a class.
So What’s the Conclusion?
A mass of sociological evidence shows that cohabitation is an inferior alternative to the married, intact, two-parent, husband-and-wife family. Increasingly, the myths of living together without marriage are like a mirror shattered by the force of the facts that expose the reality of cohabitation.
Dr. Crouse is senior fellow of Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute.
This is just off the top of my head though. I'll look at it some more and get back to you.
Oh, yes the Olden Days when women were considered "chattel." A great argument to strengthen your point in reply #512. And it was okay that virginity was required for women and not men? Now I can partially understand some of your earlier comments. Unfortunately, that kind of thinking has not been eliminated.
You rationalize John, to convince yourself of the righteousness of your own selfishness.
"I fulfilled my vows."
And are quickly looking to move on to newer, greener, pastures.
Your wife was "incredibly" loved? Three months after she passes from this earth, you publicly announce your plans to marry a much younger woman and have children. A woman the age of your deceased 41 year old wife, four years your junior, would now be too old for you. Furthermore, you a "Christian" man say, were it not for the fact that you want children, you'd just run around like the younger guys in their twenties.
Such premature pronouncements are unseemly, John and deeply disturbing. There was no appropriate mourning period.
The men I know who were incredibly in love with their wives, and lost them prematurely, including my own father (who lost my mother at 38), took several years to recuperate from their deaths before they could think about dating again. And when they began to date, they weren't making public announcements about how they were moving on to "greener" pastures, either.
You have made it painfully obvious your wife's premature death is a second chance for you to get what you so desperately wanted and she couldn't give you. Your relief over the new opportunities her unfortunate demise has brought you, apparently overshadows your despondency over her death. I find that repugnant.
Spouses are not pets. The people in our lives are unique and have value and purpose. We should mean something to each other. We should mean far more to one another than our modern culture encourages. You are going to find your deceased wife is not so easily replaced. And that's the way it should be.
And several months later John's looking to replace her with a 25 year old. Yes, we well understand.
Virginity was required for both. The problem is that there is no evidence that a man is or is not a virgin. If you have a problem with human biology then take that up with God. It's His design not mine.
You rationalize John, to convince yourself of the righteousness of your own selfishness.
How is it selfish to want to give a woman the world? How is it selfish to want to marry someone who wants to marry me?
Treating your wife as you outlined is traditionally the way all decent husbands treated their wives and is certainly not spoiling her.
Anyone who knows us could tell you that I spoiled her. Her parents even say that I spoiled her (and she was their baby too so you know she was spoiled.) If Andie74 has time and chooses to she can confirm this
me->"I fulfilled my vows."
you->And are quickly looking to move on to newer, greener, pastures.
And where did I ever say anything like that? I'd rather have my wife back but that's not in God's plan now is it.
Your wife was "incredibly" loved? Three months after she passes from this earth, you publicly announce your plans to marry a much younger woman and have children.
A. It ws her wish that I remarry. B. With a 5 year old daughter who needs a mom and me being a young man yet (half my life still ahead of me) it was a done deal that I would remarry. (her parents even gave me support and permission before the funeral so you can be upset at them too).
What's wrong with admitting the inevitable?
Furthermore, you a "Christian" man say, were it not for the fact that you want children, you'd just run around like the younger guys in their twenties.
No. If it were not for the fact that I am a Christian. I believe according to the bible dating is wrong (we are not to defraud one another. How can I express romantic interest in someone who I would not marry, it's misleading them.)
Such premature pronouncements are unseemly, John and deeply disturbing. There was no appropriate mourning period.
The mourning period is now. Lets say for example that a 21 year old woman loses her husband in Iraq. Is is wrong to assume that she will one day remarry? No. It's inevitable.
From the start of these conversations I've made it clear that I wasn't even looking until June. I've also related how my wife wasn't really herself for the last year of her life (debilitating mental illness). I've been mourning since last March. And will continue mourning until I go to heaven myself. That doesn't mean I'm going to stop living. My daughter needs her daddy to be truly alive.
And when they began to date, they weren't making public announcements about how they were moving on to "greener" pastures, either.
Show me once, in all the threads on FreeRepublic, where I said that to anyone. You and another female poster whose name I will not even mention seem to thrive on making false statements about me. I demand that you prove it or apologize. You have made it painfully obvious your wife's premature death is a second chance for you to get what you so desperately wanted and she couldn't give you.
What I desperately want is to have more children with my wife. She's in heaven now so that's kind of out of the question. You would rather I leave my daughter with no mother, no brother or sisters and a father who sits by his wife's empty bed crying all day? How can you have talked to me so many times and not have the slightest understanding of this? What personal experience of yours biases you this way?
Your relief over the new opportunities her unfortunate demise has brought you,...
Again you make false statements. Prove it or apologize.
You are going to find your deceased wife is not so easily replaced.
She will never be replaced. She cannot be replaced.
And several months later John's looking to replace her with a 25 year old.
If the woman that God has for me is 25 or 35 what business is it of yours to approve or disapprove? Who made you the judge of everyone else's happiness.
Does it offend you that I want children? If so, why. Why should it matter to you if I can find a wife who's younger who wants to marry me. What business is it of yours to deny her the chance to be with the man she loves.
I really don't understand why you seem to take this all so personally. Did someone leave you for a younger woman? If so, I'm not him. I stayed by my wife's side until God took her home. "Till death do us part" means exactly that.
I don't see how continuing conversation with you benefits anyone. May God bless you and keep you, and heal you of whatever hurts you carry.
Who the hell are you to pass judgement like this on other people? These are decent, Christian, hard working, Church going people. She had 4 stepsons and many step grandchildren from her first marriage. They had no problem with her remarriage to a much younger man after their father died,why should you?
Don't be so quick to pass judgement on other people's lives. I know few people who have as good and devoted a marriage or as true a love as theirs.
I figure if my wife's parents agree with and support my goals for my life and my daughter's, including remarriage, then I must be OK. (and they do btw)
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.