Feminism and Divorce

[ClementRome]

feminism is the #1 enemy of marriage and family. Feminism pressured some of the most family wrecking laws in the world, like no-fault divorce, abortion, modern divorce law and alimony(Miller v Miller) distribution of property and money, and the perversion of the roles between man and woman. Laws like these cause people to use marriage as a tool to extort money from their spouses and cause people to marry for the wrong reasons. As long as feminists continue to pervert marriage roles there will continue to be a rise in divorce rates and illegitimate children. Todays couples absolutely have no sense of roles or plan to guide their marriages and their children correctly. In the early 20th century, long before feminism reared its ugly head, the divorce rate was below 10%, and illegitimacy was rare. However, feminism taught women to have no bounds or limits in their actions and promoted propaganda that intentionally was designed to test and eventually ruin their own marriages. Sadly today its a common sight to see children being shuffled forth from mom and dad every month. Feminism also turned its sights to motherhood and sought to destroy one of the most valuable aspects of women. More and more common were children being dropped off to day-care centers and boarding schools. Children were viewed as a curse rather than a blessing. Children in the womb were not even considered humans anymore. Feminism not only seeks to de-value marriage and the role of husband and wife, but also even their own innocent kin and children. If you consider even your own children as disposable and discard-able how do you expect to have the right mind-set when taking care of them? knowing that in the past you one day considered them disposable trash? Can you imagine how this attitude can effect the mothers parenting?

With propaganda like this spreading like fire in the later 60s and 70s one can only expect a great deterioration in marriage. Lo and behold the 70s had the highest spike in divorce rates in the last 2 decades, a 35% increase in only 10 years time. No-fault divorce and abortion was shortly legalized after. Now today our country has a 55% divorce rate which is increasing. In California, which is a bastion of modernism and feminism the divorce rate is 75%. 1 week to 1 month marriages became a common thing. Same sex “marriage” started to spread. Marriage has been totally dragged into the mud today because of feminism and it gives many young women an attitude that is detrimental to any future marriages or relationships they may have. St. Paul was very clear that the usurping of the husbands position in the marriage is detrimental. And we see in todays divorce rates that that is quite true. And until feminism is abolished, abortion, same-sex unions, and divorce will always exist.

 

[Dale_M]

I think you are painting with too broad of a brush. For example, alimony existed before the rise of feminism. And I am not sure that the increase in divorce is due to feminism so much as due to the rising affluence of the US (and other nations) which made it economically possible to leave a marriage. Right now, In India, the divorce rate is soaring as single life becomes more affordable.

Few societies on earth take marriage more seriously than this one. Marriage comes early, sometimes even in youth, and is cemented by illegal dowries. Opulent weddings swallow life savings. So venerated is marriage that when bruised, beaten wives flee to their parents’ homes for sanctuary, they are often turned back, implored to make it work.

But now, in courtroom battles across the subcontinent, in cases brought by slum dwellers and outsourcing workers and millionaires alike, Indians are fighting in growing numbers to divorce. And as words like “alimony,” “stepchild” and “pre-nup” start to roll off Indian tongues, many observers bemoan a profound metamorphosis of values in a nation trotting toward new affluence.

“The great Indian family is definitely under threat,” said Shobhaa Dé, the author of “Spouse: The Truth about Marriage” and one of India’s most widely read social chroniclers. Dé, herself divorced and remarried years ago, described the new ethos as “unthinkable to an earlier generation.”

nytimes.com/2008/02/19/world/asia/19iht-divorce.1.10178712.html

And more recently the divorce rate in the US actually seems to be on the decline, in part because young adults are delaying marriage rather than rushing into right after high school, as was traditional in earlier generations.

For instance, one of the most commonly cited statistics about marriage is that half of marriages end in divorce. But that number reflects the expected lifetime divorce rate of people married in the 1970s.

The story is different for more-recently married couples. A comparison of 10-year divorce rates among college-educated men married in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s shows that divorce is becoming less common, said Dr. Stevenson, the Wharton researcher. Among men who married in the 1970s, for example, about 23 percent had divorced by the 10th year of marriage. Among similar men married in the 1980s, about 20 percent had divorced by the 10th year. Men married in the 1990s are doing even better — with a 10-year divorce rate of 16 percent.

The reason for these shifts, some experts say, is that many couples today are delaying marriage. And age matters. People who marry after age 25 are less likely to divorce than those who marry earlier, studies find. Men and women born in the 1930s who married in the 1950s have the highest marriage rate of any generation — about 96 percent married. But among more recent generations, the number has dropped to about 90 percent. The data suggest that the weakest relationships, which years ago might have resulted in a marriage followed by a divorce, are now ending before the couple ever heads to the altar.

nytimes.com/2009/06/28/fashion/28marriage.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=todayspaper

 

[Irish_Becca]

I haven’t checked out all your facts or anything, but I absolutely agree that feminism has done a huge disservice to, above all, women. Abortion is brutally violent to both women and children. Women are now almost forced to work outside the home, when the standard used to be only men would. The children suffer for this, as does the family unit. That’s not to say that it can’t work - sadly, I’m going through a divorce/anullment right now and working on my nursing degree - and it’s not what I wanted, but it’s what I’m stuck with. I blame feminism, also, for men not having to step up to the plate and support their families. The gender roles are blurred now, and it’s not a good thing.

 

[whatevergirl]

**I don’t know if feminism can be blamed for all of society’s evils now. Feminism, the advent of it, (not radical feminism) brought about the right of women to vote. That is a good thing. My MIL tells me that women started working, when the men went to war during WWII, and then women wanted to become doctors, etc as there was a shortage. I see nothing wrong with women gaining college degrees, and working outside of the home. The problem is that many women put careers first…and so have men. Our culture seems to believe that we have to keep growing our cars, houses, vacations, bank accounts, etc…without a care for family values, etc anymore. Likewise, I don’t believe in a husband working two jobs or working 15 hour days, and never see his family. Where’s the family unit in that, also?

I agree that feminism brought about radical feminism, which brought about abortion, and women wanting to behave as men…actually ‘become’ men, practically. But, our ancestors endured things in marriage that many women today would never deal with, ie: abuse. Many of my aunts were married in Italy when they were 15, 16…and they stayed married to abusive men who cheated on them. There are many that didn’t endure that, but divorce was frowned upon back then…so many women stayed in bad marriages, that frankly, were not healthy. So, I see both angles. I think that radical feminism is at the heart of divorce, abortion, and the decay of the family unit, absolutely.

I definitely think the gender roles have been blurred. With God, all things are possible…and I do believe there is a balance. I don’t believe in holding women back, in the days when women couldn’t vote, and didn’t have basic rights and there were no laws against abusing women if you were her husband–so change was necessary. Unfortunately, the pendulum has swung in the complete opposite direction.

I would like to see the connection between feminism and alimony though? If radical feminists wish to be disconnected from men…why would they want to take money from men, rather than be self sufficient? haha I have noticed that is often the case with feminism…they want to blame men for everything that’s wrong in life, and “make them pay.” I wonder if that is where it comes from. **

 

[JimG]

I haven’t checked out all your facts or anything, but I absolutely agree that feminism has done a huge disservice to, above all, women. Abortion is brutally violent to both women and children. Women are now almost forced to work outside the home, when the standard used to be only men would. The children suffer for this, as does the family unit. That’s not to say that it can’t work - sadly, I’m going through a divorce/anullment right now and working on my nursing degree - and it’s not what I wanted, but it’s what I’m stuck with. I blame feminism, also, for men not having to step up to the plate and support their families. The gender roles are blurred now, and it’s not a good thing.

Widespread use of birth control, availability of abortion, and above all, no-fault divorce, pretty much let men off the hook. The primary result of all these was to free men of responsibility.

It’s a ‘freedom’ which many seem to have embraced by first, making no permanent commitments (and women going along with this through cohabitation), and second, by treating any ‘actual’ marriage commitment as so much disposable paperwork–which in fact it is, since under no fault divorce, a marriage contract is less enforceable than a home mortgage, and less permanent. Since either party can walk away at any time, vows mean nothing.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

[A]bove all, no-fault divorce, pretty much let men off the hook. The primary result of all these was to free men of responsibility.

…]

nder no fault divorce, a marriage contract is less enforceable than a home mortgage, and less permanent. Since either party can walk away at any time, vows mean nothing.

Don’t get me wrong, the idea of no fault divorce is certainly against Catholic teaching, but in practice, it hasn’t really had any measurable effect on society.

Lemme 'splain:

Pennsylvania is a “no-fault” state. This means that parties may divorce either upon consent or two-year separation where one party alleges that the marriage is “irretrievably broken.” New York is a “fault” state. This means that parties may not divorce without proof or admission of “fault” – e.g. adultery, abandonment, indignities, etc. The astute among you might be wondering what this “indignities” creature is. It is, in fact, a loophole. In practice, the divorce rate in “fault” states is, and has historically been, identical to that in “no-fault” states. The reason for this is that the “indignities” count is used almost exclusively for collusive divorces. That is, two parties wish to divorce and agree that one party will file a Divorce Complaint alleging that the other has committed “indignities” (one sentence averment); the other party does not deny that averment and – boom – you’re divorced.

If one party resists the divorce, on the other hand, the mere fact of the parties’ separation can give rise to “constructive abandonment”, which is also grounds for divorce. In short, if you want to be divorced in a “fault” state, you can get divorced just as easily as if you resided in a “no-fault” state.

I’m not saying that no-fault divorce is a good thing; just that those looking to it to explain society’s ills would do better to keep looking.

– N.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Sorry, this is the interweb; I forgot to provide a cite, so you don’t think I’m just making this stuff up.

divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS2.shtml

As you can see, both PA and NY come in at 3.3 divorces per 1,000 people.

 

[Christy_Beth]

Feminism isn’ t the fault of only women. I mean, you can’t blame women for the mess we’re in. Men have played their role in it. You have those who don’t take their marriage vows serious (like my ex), along with the real need. In cases of abuse, intervention is nesessary. This dosn’t mean tht divorce is the cure-all.

I guess I’m sounding all mixed up. As a divorced person, who would rather have stayed married, I have been all mixed up. Although the divorce was over 20 years ago, I still find myself regretting that fact. But it wasn’t exactly uncalled for. It was a abusive relationship with someone who didn’t want the responsibility of a “real” marriage. He, and his family, basically kicked me out for failure to be his sex toy and the family slave. I could go on, but then I’d never stop. Like I’ve already said, it’s been over 20 years and it’s still sometimes painful.

 

[phoage]

Pointing fingers and assigning blame is not real useful for this type discussion and even so, there is plenty to go around.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am a man who was raised for the 1st 10 years by a single mother. My father walked out one day and never returned. I did not meet him until I was almost 50 yo. I have also been married 37 years.

Most of the things blamed on femanism were made into law by male voterrs and legislators. Certainly the right to vote on a national level was. Some of the femanist agenda was legislated by the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, most of which are men or predominantly men. Men get plenty of blame for this.

That being said, both parties, even many of those verbally opposed to these changes, have taken advantage of them to some extent. I rarely see a man, even on a date, open the car door for a woman.
I have not seen a woman stand by the passenger door as a pointed hint that she expects this courtisy.
I have opened doors for women and gotten strange looks but frequently do not get a Thank you.
Couples make the choise to both have careers and to have children instead of settling for aless affluant life style of a single income and a full time home maker.

I believe the Femanism issues are just a symptom of a greater issue, that of the digeneration of modern western civilization.

Patrick

 

[Bluegoat]

Most of the issues with regard to family life have little to do with feminism, IMO. They are related to a vision of capitalism that seeks unlimited and never ending growth and increased production.

In order for a nation to produce as much as possible economically, all available adults have to work at paying jobs. Other kids of work are irrelevant. They need to have a few children - who will buy lots of tvs when they grow up - but not too many so that the parents can’t both work. As well, large families mean that parents can’t spend their money on vacations, and electronics and other luxury products. We need a bigger GNP or GDP - that’s the measure of success!

Feminism, I think, has rather unwittingly played into this, and politicians use feminism as an excuse to pursue these policies, but there are things which show that is not the real reason. Look at maternity leave in the US. Most women would like something like what we have in Canada - a year’s guaranteed leave, and mom able to claim EI while on maternity leave. There are better programs in Europe, some even give new moms a mother’s helper for a few weeks. But that is not good for capitalism, though it is good for moms and babies.

I’m not sure why feminism has not addressed this more strongly, and realized how it is being used to obstruct women. In general, I don’t think it’s a matter of collusion, though there are a few feminists that see the important thing as being economically equal to men money is power. But many prominent feminists, not mostly people I see eye to eye with, but passionate about their cause, have pointed out all these issues and would like to seek real solutions.

So I think it is a matter of government (men, mostly) simply taking those things that support its own agenda and blaming feminism.

 

[JimG]

So I think it is a matter of government (men, mostly) simply taking those things that support its own agenda and blaming feminism.

A failure of government? Or a failure of personal responsibility? Government (with the consent of the governed) did liberalize divorce laws. But it didn’t instruct men to abandon their wives and children, nor wives to abandon their husbands. It didn’t instruct them that marriage vows were essentially meaningless. Or maybe it did.

 

[ClementRome]

I think you are painting with too broad of a brush. For example, alimony existed before the rise of feminism. And I am not sure that the increase in divorce is due to feminism so much as due to the rising affluence of the US (and other nations) which made it economically possible to leave a marriage. Right now, In India, the divorce rate is soaring as single life becomes more affordable.

nytimes.com/2008/02/19/world/asia/19iht-divorce.1.10178712.html

And more recently the divorce rate in the US actually seems to be on the decline, in part because young adults are delaying marriage rather than rushing into right after high school, as was traditional in earlier generations.

nytimes.com/2009/06/28/fashion/28marriage.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=todayspaper

India and Greece have the lowest rates of divorce in the world. In fact many orthodox Christian countries have very low divorce rates, Italy also. There are allot of people from India in my building. They seem to make American marriages look like a joke. I have never seen such strong family ethic in the Indian marriages. When I compare them to our American counterparts in the building it is almost embarrassing. Comparisons like this really show how far the western world has sunk in marriage. I mean a Pagan country has more knowledge on marriage than the western world.

Most of the issues with regard to family life have little to do with feminism, IMO. They are related to a vision of capitalism that seeks unlimited and never ending growth and increased production.

I have to disagree. Feminism in itself has given women, especially young women an attitude that is detrimental to marriage in the future. I mean women today look at the “sexist” verses of the apostle Paul and Timothy as horrible and untrue, yet they proceed to call themselves christian. In reality feminism has blinded their view to the biblical authoritys that God gave man and woman and the roles to be adhered in marriage. It all really started to fall after Betty Friedan wrote the Feminine Mystique which tore apart good family values. Yes, greed and capitalism adds on to it, but the divorce laws allow someone to profit off that capitalism(alimony, pre-nups, etc)

I bet by the year 2020 the divorce rate will be around 60%. And the liberal states like NY and CA marriage will be almost non-existent or treated as a joke. Same-sex marriage will probably have spread to over 50% of the nation.

Today getting into a marriage could mean the loss of your home and over half of all your income and capital. And people have been abusing this ad-nauseum so much that marriage in itself is becoming a joke. One day all of a sudden the person you thought you loved could throw you papers and forcibly take nearly all your capital. Even if one of the parties did not want to divorce they still could be forced to give up everything.

 

[Kaninchen]

Most of the issues with regard to family life have little to do with feminism, IMO. They are related to a vision of capitalism that seeks unlimited and never ending growth and increased production.

People like nice, simple cause and effect scenarios where bad things are the direct result of the views and actions of a few, easily identifiable naughty people - or in cases like ‘feminists’, ‘liberals’ and ‘Muslims’, very, very naughty people.

The idea that there might be a number of forces at play at the same time and that they interacted with one another - changes in production methods, changes in demand, changes in the labor market, changes in finance, economic/industrial change other countries leading to decline in major industries like steel and auto, changes in housing, far greater mobility in the demand/supply of labor leading to adult children moving far from their parents and grandparents, the availability of domestic goods that reduced the need for domestic labor, changes in a whole range of attitudes after the experience of the Second World War and so on and so on - is just too confusing and not easy to get cross about in the same way as a bit of foot-stamping about a few very, very naughty people.

 

[katy]

Today getting into a marriage could mean the loss of your home and over half of all your income and capital. And people have been abusing this ad-nauseum so much that marriage in itself is becoming a joke. One day all of a sudden the person you thought you loved could throw you papers and forcibly take nearly all your capital. Even if one of the parties did not want to divorce they still could be forced to give up everything

.

Sadly, this has happened to my own son. He got and education, good job, and a home. He felt all that was lacking was wife and children. He married a woman with nothing. She threatened him over and over again with financial ruin if he did not do what she wished. Finally, there was a divorce after only 3 years and she took half his retirement savings (bought a house) and gets more child support than some people make from a job. Very little of that money goes to the children, however. She uses most of it for herself. Nevertheless, she goes into the “poor single mother” routine to get sympathy whenever she wants something. The whole thing has made me feel that if I were young now, I wouldn’t ger marrried either.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

…]
The idea that there might be a number of forces at play at the same time and that they interacted with one another - changes in production methods, changes in demand, changes in the labor market, changes in finance, **economic/industrial **change other countries leading to **decline in major industries **like steel and auto, changes in housing, far greater **mobility in the demand/supply of labor **leading to adult children moving far from their parents and grandparents, the **availability of domestic goods **that reduced the need for domestic labor, changes in a whole range of attitudes after the experience of the Second World War and so on and so on - is just too confusing and not easy to get cross about in the same way as a bit of foot-stamping about a few very, very naughty people.

I’d be inclined to agree. All the phenomena you listed have led to what we call “postmodernism” or “secular humanism”. “Radical feminism” is probably both a "cause’ and “effect” in that regard.

For particular insight on the causes and effects of the decline in “community” and “family” since WWII, I would recommend the book “Bowling Alone” by Robert Putnam.

 

[TamaraSieja]

India and Greece have the lowest rates of divorce in the world. In fact many orthodox Christian countries have very low divorce rates, Italy also. There are allot of people from India in my building. They seem to make American marriages look like a joke. I have never seen such strong family ethic in the Indian marriages. When I compare them to our American counterparts in the building it is almost embarrassing. Comparisons like this really show how far the western world has sunk in marriage. I mean a Pagan country has more knowledge on marriage than the western world.

Actually, while Italy does have one of the lower divorce rates, they also have had a declining population for so many years that they are considered a “dying” country! In Italy there is no such thing as anullment. If you get married & divorced, you cannot have the marriage declared invalid in the Church, therefore you cannot partake in the sacrements. I was in Italy as a nanny and I encountered this situtation among many families. But as Italy becomes more secular and less Christian orientated, like the US, their divorce rate is skyrocketing similar to ours has.

Also, doesn’t India have one of the highest Catholic populations in the World? Not sarcastic, that’s a true question.

 

[ClementRome]

.

Sadly, this has happened to my own son. He got and education, good job, and a home. He felt all that was lacking was wife and children. He married a woman with nothing. She threatened him over and over again with financial ruin if he did not do what she wished. Finally, there was a divorce after only 3 years and she took half his retirement savings (bought a house) and gets more child support than some people make from a job. Very little of that money goes to the children, however. She uses most of it for herself. Nevertheless, she goes into the “poor single mother” routine to get sympathy whenever she wants something. The whole thing has made me feel that if I were young now, I wouldn’t ger married either.

that is sickening. Using marriage and children as a tool for money. How low can people go. Divorce laws really need to change…

A failure of government? Or a failure of personal responsibility? Government (with the consent of the governed) did liberalize divorce laws. But it didn’t instruct men to abandon their wives and children, nor wives to abandon their husbands. It didn’t instruct them that marriage vows were essentially meaningless. Or maybe it did.

and who pressured these things to happen? Who were the ones standing outside with the signs pressuring lawmakers and infiltrating the government with their own people. Do you think abortion would honestly be legal if people didn’t pressure and blackmail it to be legalized??

Also, doesn’t India have one of the highest Catholic populations in the World? Not sarcastic, that’s a true question.

No, it is mostly hindu. However Greece I believe has the second lowest rate which is mostly christian. Armenia too… With such low rates they are obviously doing something right and the western world could learn allot from them. Their families are much more structured to the way God gives out in the bible. But if the western world continues to demonize gender roles, homemaking, and chivalry then marriage will still be outta control.

 

[Kaninchen]

I’d be inclined to agree. All the phenomena you listed have led to what we call “postmodernism” or “secular humanism”. “Radical feminism” is probably both a "cause’ and “effect” in that regard.

I didn’t think you Catholics were too keen on ‘modernism’ in the first place, never mind postmodernism!

I think that the Second World War in Europe, in particular, led to what might be described as the shattering of certainties. Nothing in the ‘traditional certainties’ had worked to prevent the catastrophe and this, taken together with the truly awful reality of how the previous ‘alternative certainties’ (a vision of liberty and justice in a workers’ state) was turning out, called everything, certainly the certainty of certainties, into question.

 

[ClementRome]

I didn’t think you Catholics were too keen on ‘modernism’ in the first place, never mind postmodernism!

I think that the Second World War in Europe, in particular, led to what might be described as the shattering of certainties. Nothing in the ‘traditional certainties’ had worked to prevent the catastrophe and this, taken together with the truly awful reality of how the previous ‘alternative certainties’ (a vision of liberty and justice in a workers’ state) was turning out, called everything, certainly the certainty of certainties, into question.

While WWII had an effect, I would still think the 60s ‘revolution’ was the turning point of the US forever changing for the worse. The 60s boomer era was pretty much the cut-off point from structured married to un-structred marriage. Remember the world has gone through many wars before WWII, and people yet still were able to retain some sense of family structure. We still have WWI, the Napoleonic Wars, the communist revolution, American revolution, Civil war, Korea, French revolution, Punic Wars, Cold War, Pagan Rome’s persecution of Christians, the Mongol expansions of Genghis Khan, etc. We really can’t single out one war as the sole arbitrare.

Sometimes, I think even the reformation could have been a spark for it also. But its bad effects would only later surface around the 20th century when the Anglican Church OKed birth control and later on most protestant communities OKed abortion.

 

[katy]

In Italy there is no such thing as anullment. If you get married & divorced, you cannot have the marriage declared invalid in the Church, therefore you cannot partake in the sacrements. I was in Italy as a nanny and I encountered this situtation among many families. But as Italy becomes more secular and less Christian orientated, like the US, their divorce rate is skyrocketing similar to ours has.

How can this be? Not questioning your truthfulness, but how does the country a marriage takes place in have any effect on its validity? The Church doesn’t give annullments in Italy, but does in the US?

---

I do believe radical feminism has successfully taken aim at the family court system in the US, at any rate. Until people are caught in that meat grinder they have no idea how stacked the system is against fathers. Not that dads are perfect, but mothers are not either. The word “justice” should mean something. Genders should not be pitted agains each other.