Over at Dalrock’s Double Think and Cane’s Recoiling from Resounding Resentment, there’s been some debate on the topic of what it means that women are divorcing less in early marriage.
There’s two things I want to address with this post.
———————————————————————————————————
First, 
Dalrock has covered this before but average age of first marriage has skyrocketed. It dipped down after the wars in the ’40s and ’50s because there were many less men because many had been killed. Thus, men were a commodity and they were scooped up. Likewise, divorce laws and other such nonsense were not passed yet.
However, since the ’60s and ’70s and the sexual revolution the age of first marriage has skyrocketed as feminism became more ingrained in society. You’ll note that by 1980 that the average age of marriage for women climbed to a previous norm of 22 years, and in the next 10 years went to 24 years of age, by 2000 was at 25 years of age, and by 2014 will likely be 27 years old.
Note that average age means that half of the population is OLDER than this when they are married. So half of the women getting married are older than 27 which is very close to the proverbial “wall.” There’s only so far that women can put off marriage because of fertility, and we’re already seeing the crunch on that.
- One factor of the decrease in divorice from 1990 to 2010 is likely due to women hitting the wall and wanting babies.
Women who married and divorced when younger often believe they can trade up whereas those reaching into their 30s tend to be looking for more security, commitment, and children.
- Likewise, with the rise in cohabitation the women who would “divorce” often will not make it to marriage.
We see a similar trend here with cohabitation rates increasing drastically since the 1970s. The divorce rates skyrocketed because many of the women who were married in 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s divorced their husbands. And now in the 2010 there are about 5-6 million more women who would’ve been married but instead cohabited which decreases the proportional amount of divorces by that much.
Thus, I would posit the “peaked” rates of divorce were because of non-commitment minded women wanting to get out of their marriage and ostensibly trade up because they were relatively younger and hadn’t felt the impact of the wall yet. This artificially drove the statistics up (aside from cash and prizes of no-fault divorce and child support).
I would also assert that the increase in number of cohabitations is driving the amount of divorces down because the less commitment minded women don’t make it to marriage or they put up with a man who doesn’t want marriage. Additionally, a later age of marriage and the more commitment mind of women with baby rabies. There are likely a few other factors, but I think this is the major one.
You can see how this plays out below by comparing the graphs above to this one.
What I do not believe is that men have significantly changed over the past 20 years except for becoming more feminized and more unattractive in general.
———————————————————————————————————
Second, the problem most Christian men are having is that they equate “loving wives” as only doing good to them or some garbage like that.
Lest they forget Jesus often corrects or rebukes the disciples when they are off course. He allows them to go their own way even after saying it was the case. For example, Jesus prophesies Peter’s denial and then allows Peter to go off and do it. He allows Peter to make those mistakes because He knew it would be a good lesson and potentially lead to repentance.
Jesus continues to ‘lead’ at all points in the Scriptures but He doesn’t take responsibility when the disciples make mistakes. 1 Cor 5 and 1 Tim 1 talks about handing those who would disobey to Scriptures over to Satan. It doesn’t say to take responsibility for them since we cannot control other Christians. Matthew 18 says to basically disavow Christians who aren’t willing to repent of living in sin.
In essence,
- Husbands are to be the ‘head’ / love / treat as co-heirs / etc. You do this because God wants you to, not because the wife will or won’t.
- Wives are to submit / respect / helpmeet / etc. You do this because God wants you to, not because the husband will or won’t.
It is a clear cut example that a wife does not take responsibility for what her husband does, especially if it’s wrong. However, the very fact that we are having this conversation means that feminist thinking is ingrained in us so much that we are assuming that a husband has responsibility for his wife’s sin or mistakes because he is her ‘authority’ in marriage.
This is simply not the case. God and Jesus does not take responsibility for Christians when they go and sin. However, they are waiting with loving arms to welcome us back after we repent. BUT, the Father often does not clean up the mess we made when we went off and sinned. We often have to make restitution ourselves.
Matthew 5:23 Therefore if you are presenting your [s]offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your [t]offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your [u]offering.
Similarly, the problem is that many people are trying to do a 1 size fits all solution to the problem which doesn’t work. You’re going to handle a wife differently who:
- Is submissive,
- Says she wants to be submissive but isn’t,
- Is openly rebellious
Each situation requires different responses from the leader…. and love looks differently in each of these situations.
We, as Christians, need to understand that there are consequences for our actions. This is just a fact of life in the real world. It is something that God instituted with free will. However, we tend to want to insulate ourselves from actions and consequences when we really love or care about someone. But this is the worst thing you can do when you really love someone — see spoiled rich kids.
The problem is that feminist rot has so ingrained itself into mens’ and husbands’ heads that they believe they need to respond to a wife’s rebellion with positive reinforcement.
The reason why I use “positive” reinforcement” is because it is distinctly NOT GOOD to reward people — Christians or otherwise — for bad behavior. The Scriptures say nothing about brushing people’s faults or mistakes under the rug but rather unity through repentance.
It is NOT LOVING not to mention not honest, kind, or good to take responsibility for the bad or evil things that someone else is doing. We only do this for children because we need to teach them what is right. But wives are fully grown women with competent decision making. If they choose to stray from the Scriptures they can bear the weight of responsibility and consequences of actions themselves.
Now, Jesus is not about allowing those who are wallowing in consequences of their own actions if they cry out for help. This is the reason He often references the “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” verse from Hosea.
Matthew 14:28 Peter said to Him, “Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water.” 29 And He said, “Come!” And Peter got out of the boat, and walked on the water and came toward Jesus. 30 But seeing the wind, he became frightened, and beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!” 31 Immediately Jesus stretched out His hand and took hold of him, and *said to him, “You of little faith, why did you doubt?” 32 When they got into the boat, the wind stopped. 33 And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, “You are certainly God’s Son!”
But He does chastise those He loves (“You of little faith, why did you doubt?”) and allows them to at the very least experience the consequences of their actions (30 But seeing the wind, he became frightened, and beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!”).
