3 ms·
No, they definitely haven't replaced them. But divorce being more common has certainly opened up doors for plenty of women to escape abusive relationships. That
by wickedsight 2y ago
No, they definitely haven't replaced them. But divorce being more common has certainly opened up doors for plenty of women to escape abusive relationships. That doesn't mean that they can all find that open door or all have an open door.
There are still plenty of people in religions where divorced is frowned upon (to put it lightly) and there are also plenty of people who are mentally unable to pull out of a toxic relationship. But the reduction in societal pressure that 'marriage is forever' definitely has an impact.
- a-french-anon 2y agoDivorce laws indeed had some good outcomes like you wrote, but it also allowed people to make carefree choices when choosing a mate - something that should be a well thought out, very long-term deal - and as we all know, we're now in the realm of perverse incentives on the subject. And don't get me started on the vicious interactions between the "soft deprecation" of fault divorce, the abolition of adultery laws and economic aids for single parents. Clearly not the best mixture of choices.
- wickedsight 2y ago> it also allowed people to make carefree choices when choosing a mate Lets flip that coin... Religion/tradition forces people to get married before they actually knew each other well. Then they move in together, have kids and must stay together forever. I feel like 'we need to get married to live together' is way more in the realm of perverse incentives. In the 70's, people on average married around age 22. Right now that's closer to age 29. Which one seems more carefree to you? To me it's the getting married at 22 without having lived together.
- mensetmanusman 2y agoThis might have survivorship bias though, since marriage rates are down 75% from the 70s, so we aren’t comparing apples to apples.