Why Marriage fail today

[Autumnleaf]

Why Marriage fail today - Dr William Pierce.mp4 - YouTube

This guy made an 11 minute video explaining how the industrial revolution, feminism, and women working has undermined marriage. A friend of mine asked me to watch it and it seems to make sense. Before I talk to her about it I'd like to get some second opinions on it. The people here seem pretty up to speed on this kind of thing. What are your thoughts?

 

[Inkachu]

Marriages fail for a myriad of reasons. Trying to blame it on women (how DARE they want an education? a job? anything outside the kitchen and bedroom? REPENT!!!!) is as old as the Garden of Eden, and just as pathetic.

 

[ValleyGal]

My thought is this guy needs to take an introductory course in sociology, maybe a secondary course in sociology of the family, and maybe even a course in women's issues. Here's this guy who claims to be a doctor, and he has no idea how to see things from outside his century-old, north-american worldview, or empathize enough to see things from a female perspective.

It's titled "why marriages fail today." If he really wants to know why marriages fail, he need not look to feminism. Dr. Gottman spent his whole career (40 years) studying marriage and divorce. He can predict with 94% accuracy whether a couple will get divorced, and he can do this within minutes of observing a couple discussing a conflict. If your friend really wants to know why couples get divorced, she can pick up Gottman's book "Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work."

 

[LinkH]

Trying to use economics to explain such things can seem a bit dry and lifeless. The economic factors alone, the ones he mentioned from before the industrial revolution, are not enough to explain monogamy. Economically, a society that practiced 'serial monogamy' could have some of the same benefits. Overall, it may not be as good for the women, though, as monogamy. On the island of Java, if you compare the Javanese with the Sundanese, historically, you could say many of their towns have similar economic development, yet divorce is better accepted and more widespread in Sundanese culture, even if you compare Muslims to Muslims.

Social and religious factors helped keep divorce rates down in the past. There is a correlation between a woman's income and divorce, I've heard. As women earned more money, divorce increased. I believe that's historical, quasi-experimental research. The problem is social values were changing over time as well. I suspect you could get similar correlations with changes in values if you did a study of a society where divorce was on the rise. I haven't looked it up myself since it is not in my field, but I heard that from a well-published, well-respected cross-cultural psychologist who has researched such things.

I'm all for there being no feminist propaganda and the government not promoting such things. But how are you going to get rid of feminist propaganda without using the government to do it? Maybe the government not funding it would reverse the trend. Promoting motherhood and fatherhood as noble endeavors would be good, too. It is good if children stay at home with their mothers for a while instead of going to day care. The government has a vested interest in tax revenues, and there might be some pressure on the government to keep women in the work force in order to keep the cost of labor low if the trend of women in the work force decreased.

 

[Hetta]

I'm all for there being no feminist propaganda and the government not promoting such things. But how are you going to get rid of feminist propaganda without using the government to do it? Maybe the government not funding it would reverse the trend.

Feminism is a movement. It isn't funded by government. LOL.

 

[Hetta]

I'm not going to watch something I know is a bunch of nonsense. I can't imagine why you would have to "talk to" a female friend about it. Can she not understand it on her own?

 

[Avniel]

I'm not going to watch something I know is a bunch of nonsense. I can't imagine why you would have to "talk to" a female friend about it. Can she not understand it on her own?

Some people just like to have those sort of conversations I find it interesting to view different prospective on topics.

 

[ProudMomxmany]

Why Marriage fail today - Dr William Pierce.mp4 - YouTube

This guy made an 11 minute video explaining how the industrial revolution, feminism, and women working has undermined marriage. A friend of mine asked me to watch it and it seems to make sense. Before I talk to her about it I'd like to get some second opinions on it. The people here seem pretty up to speed on this kind of thing. What are your thoughts?

None of the above have "undermined" marriage. The truth is that there are a lot more options available to both women and men now. Women are no longer dependent on their fathers or husbands for economic security which makes the necessity of marriage an outdated concept.

The biggest problem with marriage (from where I'm sitting) is that people no longer want to try to work through the tough times. There's too much emphasis on "happiness" and as soon as someone is not "happy" they feel its time to go. The sad thing is that divorce is just as prevalent within the Christian community as it is in the US at large. It has everything to do with false expectations and nothing to do with "feminism", "the industrial revolution" or any of that other baloney.

***disclaimer...I am not an expert on marriage. My opinion is based solely on anecdotal evidence.

 

[Avniel]

I feel as though it has nothing to do with women in general I think it is cultural mentality that affects marriage. In a capitalistic society there is more worth in the individual vs the community due to the competition that form of marketing creates. There is a class system that is almost always created where those that earn more are valued higher then those that earn less. One could say that feminism lead to more divorces due to the economic freedom this movement created for women that no longer need their husbands to provide for them economically thus putting them on the same ground. So where as women would not divorce out of need now that need is no longer there. However that's just a surface look into the situation.

The reality once women gained their equality instead of having one self centered person in a marriage their is now two. We live in the Western Hemisphere where many cultures promote individuality over the greater good of the community. The real blame is capitalism and the media.If more men and women put their spouses first instead of themselves there would be far less divorces. To blame feminism is some what hypocritical, in the past men could afford being selfish because they controlled the income now that women have income they can be selfish as well which is too. In the past it was just men being self centered now it is both.

More concentration on community, less individualism and more empathy is what our culture needs in general.

 

[ProudMomxmany]

As an aside...are there folks here for whom English is not their first language? I'm having some serious problems wading through the awkward sentence structure with some of these posts.

 

[Avniel]

As an aside...are there folks here for whom English is not their first language? I'm having some serious problems wading through the awkward sentence structure with some of these posts.

Sorry phone posting

 

[WolfGate]

Didn't watch the video yet, but the picture that starts it made me giggle.

It's already been said, but a combination of the availability of financial independence for both genders combined with a culture shift towards self focused short term gratification have been the biggest threat to marriage.

 

[HannahT]

It would be nice if we could easily pin point something - or a few things - that caused the downfall of the family. Its just not reality though.

I have to admit though some groups tend to use the 'emotional' draw pretty effectively. They don't even need a media department. Sadly, if they can emotionally draw you in? Being short of facts - or being selective on facts - isn't something most will mind. I mean you have already drawn them in.

For example, at the beginning of the video? They spoke about how children had a better chance of surviving if they had both parents. This is true. If he died she was left most of the time with few resources, and pretty much nothing else. I, for one am glad that doesn't have to be a reality anymore. She is able to get a job now - where as in the past you didn't hire women. She is able to learn a skill to help support herself, and the children - there was no such thing back then.

If both parents were killed? The children were NOT any better off either, and as you can imagine WORSE off in many cases.

There were all kinds of social woes that effected everyone person in society, but it went unspoken. You JUST didn't go there.

It has always amazed me individuals that have it pretty good in life complain about everyone else's life. They are good at complaining, but sadly their solutions tend to be more about stereotypes...than solutions.

That sense of laziness is why people back in the day had to suffer so much. I noticed he didn't go into that part. Yet, it was a HUGE part of most lifes.

Just like the bible? You can't be selective on history, and use music, graphics, and certain tone of voice...and think it works wonders. People do that with the bible all the time. They cherry pick portions to their advantage, and use it to shame the rest of the audience. It maybe very effective in the short term, but longtime you find it isn't.

 

[mkgal1]

In looking over this guy's bio.....he (personally) had quite a bit of data for his research:

Pierce married five times. His first marriage was to Patricia Jones, a mathematician whom he met while attending California Institute of Technology. They were married in 1957, and had twin sons, Kelvin and Erik, born in 1960. Kelvin is an aerospace engineer, while Erik is a computer scientist.[6] The marriage ended in divorce in 1982.[42] Pierce remarried that same year to Elizabeth Prostel, whom he met in the National Alliance office in Arlington, Virginia. The marriage ended in 1985, at which time Pierce moved his headquarters to Southern West Virginia.[15] In the headquarters, Pierce acquired a Siamese Cat, Hadley, which stayed with him until his death.[43] In 1986, Pierce married Hungarian Olga Skerlecz, a relative of Iván Skerlecz, Governor of Croatia-Slavonia, in a marriage that lasted until 1990. Olga left "for greener pastures in California" after their divorce in 1990.[42] Pierce then married another Hungarian woman named Zsuzsannah in early 1991. They met through an advertisement that Pierce placed in a Hungarian women's magazine aimed at arranging international marriages. Zsuzsannah moved to Florida after their divorce in the summer of 1996. His final marriage, which lasted until his death, was with another Hungarian woman, Irena, whom he married in 1997.[4]

Maybe some focus inward would have given him some more accurate answers. JS.

 

[ProudMomxmany]

If this guy was married FIVE times...then I think he needs to just shut up about "why marriages fail" and get his own stuff in one sock. He is definitely NOT someone who's opinion I would trust.

 

[hijklmnop]

Not interested in listening to anything or anyone that posits that feminism is a bad thing. I'm just so over dealing with that level of ignorance.

 

[favoritetoyisjoy]

Marriage is of God, but society is generally Godless, so the high incidence of divorce in society is not surprising. A few Christians live their lives according to the standard that God isnt just a part of the equation of life, He is the equation. The rest are more prone to all sorts of problems including divorce, and that's not surprising either.

 

[seeingeyes]

In looking over this guy's bio.....he (personally) had quite a bit of data for his research:



Maybe some focus inward would have given him some more accurate answers. JS.

Poor guy. Probably has no idea what hit him. If I were that unlucky in love, I might start blaming the Industrial Revolution, too.

 

[LinkH]

Feminism is a movement. It isn't funded by government. LOL.

The government funds many initiatives that have feminism as part of their philosophy. In the US, government agencies will often try to create more 'equality of outcome' rather than 'equality of opportunity' in certain fields. A state-owned university hiring for science or busness professors may seek more 'diversity' on it's staff in terms of gender. What this means is that if two equally qualified candidates apply for the same job, and one is male and one is female, the woman may have an advantage.

State or federal governments may fund 'Women's studies' programs which promote feminism along with other university programs. Students in these programs can receive government-subsided student loans (like other students.)

I can see how government funding supports feminism. There is a lot of state-funded propaganda in this direction. But not a lot of state-funded propaganda talking about how important it is for mothers of small children to stay home with their children.

 

[Hetta]

The government funds many initiatives that have feminism as part of their philosophy. In the US, government agencies will often try to create more 'equality of outcome' rather than 'equality of opportunity' in certain fields. A state-owned university hiring for science or busness professors may seek more 'diversity' on it's staff in terms of gender. What this means is that if two equally qualified candidates apply for the same job, and one is male and one is female, the woman may have an advantage.

I don't see anything wrong with that.

State or federal governments may fund 'Women's studies' programs which promote feminism along with other university programs. Students in these programs can receive government-subsided student loans (like other students.)

Nothing wrong with that either.

I can see how government funding supports feminism. There is a lot of state-funded propaganda in this direction. But not a lot of state-funded propaganda talking about how important it is for mothers of small children to stay home with their children.

Why shouldn't fathers of small children stay home with their children? Why women? There is absolutely no reason, other than tradition, for a woman to stay home with the couple's children. It is between every husband and wife to decide this for themselves, on the basis of who is best fitted to work outside, and who best fitted to work inside the home. If a wife is an attorney and a husband is in a less professional position, why would they not use their God given commonsense so that she returns work and he stays home with the kids? There is no reason not to do so, if that is what this couple prefers. They may also decide that she wants to stay home and they will manage on less money for a time. Feminism is about choice - the choices that women didn't used to have, and now they do. I think that it's the reality of women having choicees that sticks in the craw of a lot of men. But we do. We can choose to go to college, study whichever course of study we want to study, choose whichever kind of career or profession that we desire. Many men still want to close women out and prevent them doing that but that is against the law (praise God) and if the government has to enforce that, then I'm glad that it will.