Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Monday, January 22, 2007
Jeff Jacoby :: Townhall.com Columnist
Are women giving up on marriage?
by Jeff Jacoby
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


ARE WOMEN GIVING UP ON MARRIAGE?

Did you know that a majority of American women now live without husbands? I didn't either, but last week the New York Times announced it on Page 1: "51% of Women Are Now Living Without Spouse."

Taken at face value, that's a pretty disquieting statistic. If society is to flourish and perpetuate itself, it must uphold marriage as a social ideal -- it must raise boys and girls in a culture that encourages them to eventually marry a partner of the opposite sex, make stable and loving homes together, and have children who will one day form successful marriages of their own. The news that most American women now live without husbands suggests that society's "ideal" is dwindling to a minority taste.

"At one end of the age spectrum, women are marrying later or living with unmarried partners more often and for longer periods," reporter Sam Roberts notes. "At the other end, women are living longer as widows and, after a divorce, are more likely than men to delay remarriage, sometimes delighting in their newfound freedom."

That delight is voiced by nearly every woman quoted in the story. "The benefits were completely unforeseen for me," says a 59-year-old divorcee, "the free time, the amount of time I get to spend with friends, the time I have alone, which I value tremendously, the flexibility in terms of work, travel, and cultural events." Such are the joys of non marriage, another woman exults, that "every day is like a present."

Roberts quotes William Frey of the Brookings Institution, who describes this apparently happy husbandless majority as "a clear tipping point, reflecting the culmination of post-1960 trends associated with greater independence and more flexible lifestyles for women."

Well, maybe. Or maybe not. For when you try to pin down the numbers, Roberts's startling finding turns out to depend on some awfully strained definitions.

"Women," for example, isn't the word most of us would use to describe high school sophomores. Yet the Times includes girls as young as 15 in its analysis. Not surprisingly, girls who in many cases aren't old enough to have a driver’s license are unlikely to have husbands. According to the Census Bureau's 2005 American Community survey, 97 percent of females between 15 and 19 have never been married. Incorporating nearly 10 million teenagers in the ranks of marriage-aged American "women" may be a good way to pad the number of those without husbands, but it doesn't make that number any more enlightening.

Actually, Census data show that even *with* the 15- to 19-year-olds, a majority of American females -- 51 percent -- are "now married." So how does the Times reach a contrary conclusion? By excluding from the category of women with husbands the "relatively small number of cases" -- in fact, it's more than 2 million -- in which "husbands are working out of town, are in the military, or are institutionalized." That startling Page 1 headline is true, in other words, only if the wives of US troops at war are deemed not to have husbands.

Marriage in America is undoubtedly less robust than it was 50 years ago. But it is not yet a candidate for the endangered-species list, let alone the ash heap. The Census Bureau reported last spring that by the time they are 30 to 34, a large majority of American men and women -- 72 percent -- have been married. Among Americans 65 and older, fully 96 percent have been married. Yes, the divorce rate is high -- 17.7 per 1,000 marriages -- and many couples live together without getting married. But marriage remains a key institution in American life.

Marriage advocates often grumble that everything is getting worse, writes scholar David Blankenhorn in his forthcoming book, *The Future of Marriage,* but it's time to acknowledge that some things are getting better: Divorce rates are declining modestly. Teen pregnancy rates are dramatically lower. Rates of reported marital happiness, after a long slide, appear to be rising. And a substantial majority of American children, 67 percent, are being raised by married parents.

By even wider margins, young Americans look forward to being married. The University of Michigan’s annual “Monitoring the Future” survey finds that 70 percent of 12th-grade boys and 82 percent of 12th-grade girls describe having a good marriage and family life as "extremely important" to them. Even higher percentages say that they expect to marry.

The '60s, the sexual revolution, no-fault divorce, the rise of single motherhood -- there is no question that marriage has been through the wringer. Americans have good reason to be, as Blankenhorn writes, “in the midst of what might be called a marriage moment -- a time of unusual, perhaps unprecedented, national preoccupation with the status and future of marriage.” Yet for all the buffeting our most important social institution has taken, it remains a social ideal: Boys and girls still aspire to become husbands and wives.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Jeff Jacoby is an Op-Ed writer for the Boston Globe, a radio political commentator, and a contributing columnist for Townhall.com. href="http://www.townhall.com/Secure/Signup.aspx">Sign up today

Be the first to read Jeff Jacoby's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: What About Folly?
Mr. Jacoby seems to think that aversion to marriage is something new, especially for women. But, I suspect that what we are seeing is the result of using modern technology for short sighted reasons. While carrying a Browning .50 machinegun through Southeast Asian Rainforests, doing what Asian boys were supposed to be doing for themselves, my grandmother sent me a copy of The Praise of Folly by Erasmus. (She also sent me the complete works of Eric Hoffer.) As I recall, Folly says something to the effect that the entire human race owes its existence to Her. What man would put his neck through the noose of matrimony were it not for Folly? And what woman would face the risks, pain and travail of childbirth and child rearing were it not for Her?

Now as someone who utterly lacks the necessary endearing qualities for marriage, I can speak as an outsider. Even in the early 1500s, marriage was viewed as a noose and motherhood as something risky, painful and exhausting. Still, people persevered despite these shortcomings and the race continued. Now, prosperity temporarily engendered by fossil fueled industrialism makes it possible for people to lead happy lives of solitude. Machinery is available to make domestic chores less burdensome so that a single person can keep a decent house, and can also afford one. Medical science has largely perfected ways of preventing motherhood. The results of this are that more people choose to live alone, avoiding having to put up with the annoying habits of others in a family unit, and the risks and duties of motherhood. But, what are they missing in this? The joys. And, with birth rates plummeting, these aberrational cultures are dying out. The only ways I can see to counteract what is really a culture of death is to reduce the unnecessary risks of marriage and to emphasize the joys it can bring. The Culture of death seeks to have individuals replace other persons, however imperfect, with consumer capitalism and the manic hoarding of junk items as a faulty means to happiness. Two essential changes need to be made. The first, and end to no-fault and easy divorces, and the second is a return to a modest way of life based on faith.

Old View of Marriage
It was the Jews, and only the Jews who gave us the tadition of one Man, one Woman. In the Roman Empire, the idea of a man and woman exclusively bound to eachother and thier children was radical as well as foreign

This tradition continued with the Christians (all of the 12 Apostles and many Church Fathers were Jews). The Catholic Church has a name for this Sacrament; Matrimony -the making of Mothers. Not fathers, or parents - but Mothers. It is the only sacrament that the people confer on eachother. The Priest just witnesses it. The Sacrament elevates women and motherhood. The Marriage Act was something holy. Therefore sex between spouses becomes elevated, and the fruits of the Act, children, ties together the natural passions of the spouses, God's Will, and the continuence of society. Ancient ties between the present and the past were linked through Matrimony. Mothers and children were protected and elevated, and Man's natural inclinations were satisfied. This working through the passions and not against them, was one of the hallmarks of the West until recently.

This view of marriage of course is totally incompatible with today's culture. Whether of not this can be recovered is THE bi question.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.