Divorce RISING in Asia, achtually

TLDR: The manosphere is selling you Titanic tickets.

One of two possible explanations: the low quality males being exported there are causing it and/or degeneracy is global and cannot be blamed on the West or Western women. Pick ONE or BOTH. It cannot be statistically denied unless you a bluepill little bitch.

DO THE RESEARCH.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233709670_Divorce_Trends_in_Asia
Abstract This paper presents and discusses recent trends in divorce for countries in Asia, highlighting both wide variations in divorce patterns and recent changes in divorce trends for countries in the region. Three broad regional patterns are evident: an East Asian pattern characterised by increasing divorce rates, though there are signs of stabilisation in some countries in the last few years; an Islamic Southeast Asian pattern characterised by declining divorce rates until recently; and a South Asian pattern with relatively stable and low divorce rates.

The paper also discusses divorce in international marriages in some East Asian countries and Singapore.

so try to find the PDF for that race-mixing fun! Isn’t there a piratebay for academic papers?…

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Age-specific-divorce-rates-for-women-Singapore-1980-2009_fig3_233709670
Like the West, women under 24 most likely to divorce because their brain hasn’t finished developing yet.
So they outgrow the husband.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Crude-divorce-rates-East-Asia-and-Singapore-1976-2009_fig1_233709670
South Korea rates highest among those in chart.

NO free rides.

JSTOR of paper: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43498086?item_view=read_online

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272506770_Divorce_in_Asia
The only areas that aren’t divorcing as much are Muslim.
Good luck enjoying your sinful way of life when your kids have to put up with rape gangs.

Onto some specific countries:

It’s almost like the r-types are toxic wherever they go… it isn’t the women, it’s THEM. Sexual locust.

However, they can divorce if they’re married to a foreigner. They can also claim asylum or citizenship (green card style) by going to the embassy of the foreign spouse’s country. Does the manosphere talk about this? No. It’s a ponzi of beach, e-books and pussy. Only a few at the top can actually succeed, by profiteering off the latecomers.
Contrary to popular belief in the manosphere (read: delusion) one CAN divorce as Filipino – as long as your spouse is foreign. See:

“The Church’s strong opposition to divorce is probably the main reason why the Philippines is the only country in the world, together with the Vatican, where divorce is not legal. Except for Filipinos who are married to foreigners and seek divorce in another country, and for Muslim Filipinos who are governed by different marriage laws¹, about 95% of Filipinos need to file a nullity of marriage or an annulment² to legally terminate their marriage. However, only a small fraction resort to these remedies because, while the outcome is uncertain, costs are high (usually not less than three months of average labour earnings, and sometimes much more) and the legal procedures are long and complex. Completing a matrimonial dissolution case typically takes between six and eighteen months but the procedure can also extend over several years (Lopez, 2006).”

Sorry I understand data, I guess? My opinions are based in reality.

It’s a technicality, she may not divorce you but she will still leave you.

STARE AT THE CHART. LOOK AT IT. NOT MY OPINION.

cook the rice, pay the price

They ain’t traditional, living in sin just isn’t.
“The increase in union dissolution has been accompanied by a parallel increase in the proportion of Filipinos who live together with their partner without marrying. In the past two decades, the proportion of cohabiting Filipino women of reproductive age almost trebled, from 5.2% in 1993 to 14.5% in 2013 (Abalos 2014; PSA and ICF 2014). As cohabitation has much higher dissolution rates than formal marriage (Figure 3), the rise in cohabitation will likely lead to an increase in the proportion of Filipinos who are separated³. The rise in cohabitation may also be attributable to the country’s “marriage crisis”: cohabitation may be preferable to marriage precisely because it is relatively easier and cheaper to end.”

And over HALF of Filipino women WANT to be able to divorce the weebs:

don’t hate the messenger, hate the data

“While most Filipinos still hold conservative views about marriage and divorce, a growing segment of the population is becoming more receptive to the idea of divorce. Figure 2 shows that over the last decade the proportion of Filipinos who agreed that “Married couples who have already separated and cannot reconcile anymore should be allowed to divorce so that they can legally marry again” increased from 43% in 2005 to 60% in 2014. This growing acceptance of divorce may have contributed to reducing the stigma of being divorced or separated, particularly among women, who were, and still are, expected to make all possible efforts to keep their marriage intact.”
The Bible says to forsake a cold or abusive husband so… dunno where they get that idea.
If women are keeping the marriage together, they are de facto head of the household.

“The increasing exposure of Filipinos to the urban environment (42.4% were city dwellers in 2007 and 45.3% in 2010) has probably contributed to this growing liberal attitude towards divorce. Urbanization is commonly associated with non-traditional lifestyles and behaviors, and reduces the influence of the extended family on the decisions of young people, including mate selection. This means that children do not feel obliged (by their parents’ choice) to stay in a marriage when it has become unbearable. This constitutes a break from a still recent past when parents and other family members exerted strong pressure on couples to keep their marriage intact in order to strengthen family bonds and protect the family’s reputation.”
No comment.

Muslims are also more likely to wish to dissolve than Catholics, because legally it’s easier for them.
(see link for chart)
https://www.niussp.org/staging/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Schermata-2017-07-06-alle-15.11.09.png
So it’s nothing special inherent in a religion, it’s the laws and how easy they are.

Predictably, higher IQ (education filter) women have higher rate of divorce. Well, high IQ can see something isn’t going to work, ever. The same is true of high IQ men. I don’t know why the latter isn’t mentioned.
“Figure 3 shows the odds ratio or the relative probability of being divorced and separated among Filipino women, controlling for different factors. Highly educated Filipino women have higher odds of dissolving their union than women with lower levels of education. Higher education in the Philippines improves the economic status of women and is more likely to provide them with financial independence. Indeed, a key factor for Filipino women when they leave their husband is their ability to support themselves and their children. This sense of independence and empowerment also enables women to transcend the social stigma of being divorced or separated.”
The education doesn’t cause that, it’s the IQ filter OF education in many ways.
The ones who move West rely on the white tax welfare state to support leaving, yet another leech. Again, they’re materialistic and see white men as money banks.

“As cohabitation becomes more common and as more Filipinos come to embrace more unconventional views toward marriage and divorce, the increase in union dissolution in the Philippines is unlikely to slow down in the coming years. The continued expansion of educational opportunities for women and the growing mobility of young people to urban areas will also contribute towards the steady increase in union breakdowns among Filipinos. With the recent change in leadership in the Philippines, the political atmosphere has also become more open to laws opposed by the Catholic Church, as evidenced by the strong support for the revival of the death penalty. Despite this, the Catholic Church remains a force to be reckoned with in terms of divorce legislation in the Philippines.”
TLDR: IT WILL BE MADE LEGAL IMMINENTLY AS THE OLD GENS DIE OFF.
ONCE AGAIN, THE MANOSPHERE LIES.

My own country has sensible voiding laws so expect those to expand in Asia too. In the UK, if your spouse hid an STD (including lifelong ones like herpes) from you prior to marriage, it is grounds to have the union voided. It’s also a crime to willingly pass on diseases, aka without prior informed consent, so if they were to go more traditional, the manosphere would be fucked either way.
Especially if they relate it to the death penalty and kill the cads. They claim to want patriarchy, but they really, really don’t.

MALAYSIA
https://www.rage.com.my/divorce-on-the-rise/
“IN 2012, there were 56,760 divorces recorded in Malaysia. That’s one every 10 minutes. It’s no secret – divorce is becoming increasingly common. The numbers have doubled since 2004, and when we did a manual check at the KL Family Court (which oversees non-Muslim divorces), there was an astounding 266 divorce petitions between April 28 and May 30 – and that’s just in Kuala Lumpur!
But those numbers aren’t just made up of jaded old couples. There has been a steep rise in the number of divorce petitions being brought by young couples, according to Goh Siu Lin, a family practitioner and president of the Association of Women Lawyers. Halimatunsa’diah Abu Ahmad, a Syariah lawyer, has also observed a large number of young Muslim couples seeking divorces in court.”

You don’t see the likes of Cappy covering this data, do ya? Just like he says you must kiss the feet of every central banker and a certain religion famed for usury has nothing to do with interest payment. Follow the Pied Pipers!

“Across Asia, the stigma attached to divorce often was the single biggest barrier to getting one. In this generation, that stigma virtually does not exist.”
“In an article posted on the East Asia Forum in 2013, Professor Gavin Jones of the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore, said “divorce rates throughout East and South-East Asia appear to have been generally on the rise since the 1980s, partly because the stigma attached to divorce appears to have faded.””
“For a lot of young couples today, personal happiness outweighs an unhappy marriage….”
Global narcissism. GLOBAL.
An attempted abuser story:
“His own happiness was so important to him that he wanted out because he couldn’t change his spouse to his liking,” said Halimatun.
This is why courtship is so important. YOU CANNOT CHANGE ANYONE EXCEPT YOURSELF.
And why would a woman change after she got the ring? That’s insane.
“Women now make up 57% of Malaysian graduates — they are educated, financially independent and socially empowered. They no longer have to put up with harmful relationships.
…This means we will be seeing more two-income families, with young women progressively more career-oriented. That’s the good news. The bad news is, archetypal Asian stereotypes and thinking still exist, and the notion that a woman must shoulder the burden of household chores and child care has led to many divorces, said Goh.”

UP and coming economy = destroys family.
You picked this.

“In 1940, the average age of marriage in Malaysia was 18.5, and in 1970, it was 22.3, according to a research paper by Barbara Von Elm and Charles Hirschman titled Age At First Marriage In Peninsular Malaysia. Now, according to a National Population and Family Development Board survey on trends between 2000 to 2007, the average marrying age of Malaysians appears likely to increase to 33 in 2015.”

That’s a K force, good. Fewer unwanted kids. Demographic transition at play.

“But, perhaps just as importantly, getting married later could also greatly reduce your risk of getting a divorce. Sociologist Belinda Hewitt of the University of Queensland told the Sydney Morning Herald in 2012: “Basically, if you marry under the age of 25, you have about a four times increased risk of divorce.” Hewitt’s research also indicated that each additional year’s delay in marriage age reduces the odds of marital breakdown by almost six per cent per year for men, and nine per cent per year for women.”

So women are listening to the data and waiting.

INDONESIA
https://www.ucanews.com/news/indonesia-records-sharp-rise-in-divorce-rate/90725#

“More than 1,100 divorces have been recorded each day across Indonesia in the last three years, triggered by domestic violence and financial problems, a family care association reported.

It means that before 2017 an average of 288,000 divorces were recorded every year but the figure jumped to around 421,200 annually over the past three years, the association said.”

It’s easy to tell which MGTOW are wannabe abusers, claiming domestic abuse must be fake.
“About 80 percent of cases were filed by wives who suffered domestic violence at the hands of their husbands, said Sunarti.”
And for all the damage to children when their parents are divorced, it’s nothing to the trauma of living with an abusive parent or witnessing abuse of a parent. So hush.

And the Asian women are planning on locking down a white beta when Asians reject them.
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2011/08/20/the-flight-from-marriage
“WITH her filmy polka-dot dress, huge sunglasses and career as a psychologist, Yi Zoe Hou of Taiwan might seem likely to be besieged by suitors. Yet, at 35, she is well past Taiwan’s unspoken marriage deadline. “It’s a global village,” she shrugs. “If I can’t find a Taiwanese guy that accepts my age, I can find another man somewhere else.” Maybe—but since she still wants children, Ms Hou is also wondering whether to use a sperm bank or ask a male friend to be a sperm donor. She represents a new world of family life for Asians.”

STEP RIGHT UP STEP RIGHT UP
PLAY CPN SAVE A WHORE ASIAN EDITION

notice the race-mixers are the shit tier of whatever society they’re from?

https://www.economist.com/china/2016/12/03/divorce-is-on-the-rise-in-china
A huge cause is adultery. If only we had a Biblical solution to that. You cannot enforce half the Bible. It’s either sanctity of marriage or sanctity of mistresses. Pick ONE.

According to this, the weebs should be going to South America, but we know they just want a woman who looks like a little kid, so fuck data.
https://www.unifiedlawyers.com.au/blog/global-divorce-rates-statistics/
Marrying a Christian also means nothing, especially if one isn’t strong in the faith oneself. You don’t get a decrease marrying a Christian unless you also have always been a Christian. Recent converts, especially deceptive ones who feel entitled to ‘trade up’ to the church virgin after picking up STDs for years with no remorse, are like trannies in all their red flag glory. It’s the comparable gender equivalent. Sneaky fucker strategy in evolution, same thing. Your divorce risk will always be high if you’ve been to Pleasure Island, because of YOU. They act like female virginity can wash away all their sins, including divorce risk. Nope. If anything, the virgin wife would hold you to higher standards, including no porn or other cheating – causing divorce. I’d like to see that data. Do those waiting for marriage have higher standards to REMAIN married? I’ve seen so. Anyway, virgins want another virgin, not a used up manwhore (or ho). Nobody waits for a slut – who couldn’t wait for you. This PC idea you cannot help falling for someone is bull. Lust is not love.

Most common reasons include incompatibility (why did you date them?), infidelity (sue), addiction (sue) and abuse (again, sue them too).
“To get a divorce in the UK, you need to be married at least a year and prove to the court that your marriage has broken down due to one of the following reasons:”
True but you can void it if they had an STD and didn’t openly (i.e. not jokingly) disclose it before the signature.
https://www.gov.uk/how-to-annul-marriage
“the other person had a sexually transmitted disease (STD) when you got married”
just ONE

that’s the real reason the PUAs hate England
it’s legally tricky to be a slut here, from street harassment laws to passing on STD laws

CCP panic
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/How-Chinese-fell-out-of-love-with-marriage
“Then there is the age factor. Chinese are increasingly getting married later. The largest age group of people getting married in China is now 25-29, compared with 20-24 in the past, while the number of people over the age of 40 registering for marriage has risen sharply.”
W-w-who will pay for the Boomers?
Themselves. BOOTSTRAPS.
“Most parts of China have witnessed a declining marriage rate since 2013. Generally, there is a negative correlation between a region’s growth in gross domestic product and marriage rates.”
The (((economists))) don’t say that.
“China’s housing prices have been rising sharply since 1998, stressing newlyweds and their parents. Between 2004 and 2018, the outstanding value of individual housing loans increased sixteenfold from 1.6 trillion yuan to 25.8 trillion yuan. In 2018, these mortgages accounted for 54% of residents’ total loans.”
Boomer housing bubble strikes again!
Kinda like Marxism doesn’t work? Nah, get banks to dole out eternal loans.
“In 1982, there were 107.6 boys born for every 100 girls. The figure rose to 110 in 1990, and to118 in 2000. It has since exceeded 120.”
When I say they will eventually ban race-mixing, I am not kidding. And where China goes, the rest of Asia soon follows. They will protect their men and their women from foreign conquest. And they’ll be righteous in doing so. Sexual predation is wrong. Poaching from foreign races is degenerate. Mark my words, they WILL bring in laws to retain their women.
“There is a growing trend of people getting married and having children later in life, which has created to growing senior-care burden that could become a serious drag on the country’s economy.”
K-selection, meet Marxism.
The Boomers could always… get a job?
“China should take measures to help people who cannot afford to get married and raise children. The government should introduce a comprehensive package of pro-family measures, covering housing, education and health care.”
OH YES, THE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY A MARXIST GOVERNMENT… CAN BE SOLVED, WITH MORE MARXIST GOVERNMENT!
BRILLIANT JENKINS!

and Asian Millennials are divorcing like Boomers.

Due to economic boom.

The Boomer housing bubble MUST pop. This is not a purely Western problem.

Parental absence lowers child happiness and intelligence

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312357880_The_Effect_of_Parental_Absence_on_Child_Development_in_Rural_China_The_Effect_of_Parental_Absence_on_Child_Development

This includes emotional absence, re-marriage abandonment (abuse) and being ‘busy’ at work.

This study estimates the effect of parental absence on the development of children in rural China. Although some previous studies have looked into the effect of parental absence on children’s academic achievements, we investigate the effects of parental absence on both the cognitive and non-cognitive skills of children. Our results show that parental absence during early child development mostly incurs negative effects on the academic achievement and non-cognitive development of children. A child whose parents are both absent tends to have lower Chinese and mathematics test scores, lower self-assessment on his/her behavior, and is less likely to be happy and satisfied. A gender difference is also observed in the effect of parental absence: girls suffer more from the effect of both parents being absent on their mathematics test scores than do boys.

Remember, neglect is a form of child abuse.

A parent working over-time for their ego doesn’t actually care for the child.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151130084008.htm

We looked at children who were left behind with relatives when the parents left to seek employment far from home.”

For the study, which was led by Professor Su Lui and conducted at the Second Affiliated Hospital & Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, MRI exams from 38 left-behind girls and boys (ages 7 to 13) were compared to MRI exams from a control group of 30 girls and boys (ages 7 to 14) living with their parents. The researchers then compared the gray matter volume between the two groups and measured the intelligence quotient (IQ) of each participant to assess cognitive function.

The researchers found larger gray matter volumes in multiple brain regions, especially in emotional brain circuitry, in the left-behind children compared to children living with their parents. The mean value of IQ scores in left-behind children was not significantly different from that of controls, but the gray matter volume in a brain region associated with memory encoding and retrieval was negatively correlated with IQ score.

Since larger gray matter volume may reflect insufficient pruning and maturity of the brain, the negative correlation between the gray matter volume and IQ scores suggests that growing without parental care may delay brain development.

Both parents.

Skipping out to work all the time to get out of the house is still neglectful. We have the MRIs.

They have to do, like 1/3 of the parenting at least, some interactions.

“Our study provides the first empirical evidence showing that the lack of direct parental care alters the trajectory of brain development in left-behind children,” Xiao said. “Public health efforts are needed to provide additional intellectual and emotional support to children left behind by parents.”

Or shame the parents who think a promotion is more important than children.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3904543/

This is the red pill.

The Causal Effects of Father Absence

[not inc. if he was actively abusive if present, obviously]

The literature on father absence is frequently criticized for its use of cross-sectional data and methods that fail to take account of possible omitted variable bias and reverse causality. We review studies that have responded to this critique by employing a variety of innovative research designs to identify the causal effect of father absence, including studies using lagged dependent variable models, growth curve models, individual fixed effects models, sibling fixed effects models, natural experiments, and propensity score matching models. Our assessment is that studies using more rigorous designs continue to find negative effects of father absence on offspring well-being, although the magnitude of these effects is smaller than what is found using traditional cross-sectional designs. The evidence is strongest and most consistent for outcomes such as high school graduation, children’s social-emotional adjustment, and adult mental health.

https://adc.bmj.com/content/103/7/691

Parental absence in early childhood and onset of smoking and alcohol consumption before adolescence

Parental absence was associated with early uptake of risky health behaviours in a large, nationally representative UK cohort. Children who experience parental absence should be supported in early life in order to prevent smoking and alcohol initiation.

Pre-teen degeneracy. They’re also likelier to sleep around, do other drugs and commit crime but I’ve posted how that’s most common in mixed race kids before. Racial confound.

R-selected children with neglectful fathers (or mothers, and/or both) are lower quality per child than they otherwise would be. There’s no ‘sowing oats’ and novelty-seeking when you have kids, total myth. Normalizes child abuse.

Your deadbeat dad made you short

I ain’t playin’ today.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4697772/
It isn’t muh genetics, it was Daddy’s adultery.
The sins of the father shall be visited etc etc.

If only we were warned in a book of some kind.

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Sins-Of-The-Father/

Men: parental death and divorce during early childhood was associated with shorter adult height, and later puberty. Later puberty was associated with shorter adult height. Path analyses demonstrated that the relationship between parental divorce and height was completely mediated by age at puberty; although parental death was only partially mediated by age at puberty

The wages of sin. Deadbeats may as well be statistically dead. Actually better.

Good luck blaming the Jews for your Dad’s case of the Wandering Penis.

Most common cause of divorce: adultery.

Most common spouse to cheat: male.

Sure, the wife might file but… vitally, after she’s been publicly humiliated. The Bible says to leave if he won’t do his duty.

If their own father is still sexual competition (coughs in Freud) then logically the son’s body would shut down and delay puberty. Manwhore dads kill their son’s chances, since they’re bad parents. Adultery isn’t just spousal abuse, it’s child abuse. So severe, it gets the death penalty of both guilty parties in Christianity. Better an adulterous husband be dead, for his children’s sake. Health outcomes like this prove it.

The Sexual Revolution made you short… and ironically less successful in it.

Mixed race divorce and domestic abuse

I’m back. I decided to qualify the end of the last post. For shiggles.
Yes, there is data. I’m cracking down hard on the weebs.

“Marital Dissolution Among Inter-racial Couples”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4183451/

“Increases in interracial marriage have been interpreted as reflecting reduced social distance among racial and ethnic groups, but little is known about the stability of interracial marriages. Using six panels of Survey of Income and Program Participation (N = 23,139 married couples), we found that interracial marriages are less stable than endogamous marriages, but these findings did not hold up consistently. After controlling for couple characteristics, the risk of divorce or separation among interracial couples was similar to the more-divorce-prone origin group. Although marital dissolution was found to be strongly associated with race/ethnicity, the results failed to provide evidence that interracial marriage is associated with an elevated risk of marital dissolution.”

This is like saying cars don’t kill people, brakes do.

“As the U.S. population has grown increasingly diverse, it is important to update prior research to include interracial marriages involving Asians and Hispanics, especially given that they are more likely to intermarry (with non-Hispanic Whites) than are Blacks”

so if you’re so concerned about race, screeching at the weebs is your duty. Mudsharks already hate themselves. Asiaphiles are oddly proud of it.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=asiaphile
“The term applies to a non-Asian person particularly a white man who has yellow fever. Thinks all Asian chicks are hot, usually can’t tell the difference between a homely and a cute one just as long as she is Asian.”

I’ve posted about that before. Dick-blind.

It’s the baby prostitute of Mean Girls fame!

Thousands of years of evolution down the drain. Bet his WW2-fighting grandparents would be proud.

“In their study of multiracial identification among those with Black, Asian, or Hispanic backgrounds, Lee and Bean (2007) found that those with Black backgrounds more consistently identified as Black and not multiracial (similar to the “one-drop” rule as applied in the past), whereas those with Hispanic and, especially, Asian backgrounds exhibited more flexibility and choice in racial/ethnic identification and were more likely to identify as multiracial. Lee and Bean (2007) concluded that these patterns illustrated the salience of the color line that continues to divide Blacks from non-Blacks in U.S. society.”

So the existential risk to team white is team yellow.
If you’re being scientific.

“The homogamy perspective predicts that interracial marriages will be less stable than same-race marriages. Thus, Black-White marriages are expected to be more likely to divorce than either Black or White endogamous marriages; similarly, Asian-White marriages are expected to be more likely to divorce than either Asian or White endogamous marriages. The homogamy perspective further leads to the expectation that the stronger the racial boundary of the two groups represented in the couple, the greater the risk of divorce. Thus, Black-White marriages are expected to be at greater risk of divorce than Hispanic-White or Asian-White marriages.”

Although there is a speculated convergence (I’d guess once you control for class/money) that is similar to mixed race IQ being the mean of both sub-par parents (and so dragged lower).

“For example, he found that Chinese-White couple divorce rates fell somewhere in between divorce rates of Chinese and White endogamous marriages.”
“Similarly, Hispanic-White and Asian-White marriages would be expected to be more likely to dissolve than Hispanic or Asian endogamous marriages but less likely than White endogamous marriages”

But that hypothesis isn’t what actually happens and it’d be a more dramatic shift if you removed the religious couples from consideration, only counting those who could be allowed to divorce.

Atheists are more likely to divorce overall, but it’s hard to find studies.
Are they more likely to race mix? Probably.

OT

“Therefore, according to the ethnic convergence hypothesis, immigrant-native marriages would be expected to have divorce risks that fall between those of immigrant-immigrant marriages and native-native marriages. Also, if Hispanic and Asian interracial marriages are less likely to divorce, this could be because so many of these marriages involve immigrants. After controlling for immigration characteristics, the effects of interracial marriage should diminish for these couples”

Another thing to control, desperation to retain citizenship.

“To assess the homogamy and ethnic convergence hypotheses, it is important to control for correlated factors. Individual-level socioeconomic and demographic characteristics are associated with interracial marriage and are important predictors of divorce.”

Gold diggers gonna dig.

“Finally, while having young child(ren) has been shown to increase marital stability, this effect often decreased as the child(ren) grew older (Cherlin, 1977).”

Babies won’t protect you (actually they stress a marriage, especially if had too soon).

“In addition to the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of individuals, it is critical to control for couple-level characteristics.”

Dare you to count 10-score sexual attractiveness compared to their in-group.

That would burn.

“The homogamy perspective stresses that partner differences in any socially significant characteristics—not just race—may increase the risk of divorce, and spouses in interracial couples may differ on multiple characteristics. For example, Tucker and Mitchell-Kernan (1990) found that the age gap was larger for interracially married couples than other couples. Partners in interracial couples may also differ with respect to nativity and citizenship. Interracial marriages between immigrants and U.S.-born natives may be at greater risk of divorce because of partner differences in their reasons for entering the relationship.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Prostitution is a reason.

Kalmijn et al. (2005) found that larger cultural differences between the husband and wife increased the risk of divorce.

Breaking news: water, wet.

In addition, marriage to U.S. citizens may serve as a legal means to immigrate for many foreigners.

For that reason, no, it isn’t legal, and the other spouse has also broken the law by using that to gain power too. Technically the marriage wouldn’t count, since it was conditional as duress to defraud their nation (so also treason).

Such marriages may be motivated by the desire to obtain U.S. citizenship rather than love or companionship, as evidenced in many cases in France (Neyrand & M’Sili, 1998) and the Netherlands (Kalmijn et al., 2005).”

I ain’t sayin’ she a gold digger.. but she reaching for that green card n—er.

“Finally, group-level characteristics, such as marriage cohort, region of residence, religion, and women’s changing status, may be associated with divorce or separation (Trent & South, 1989). For example, interracial marriage has been more prevalent in the West than other parts of the country (Tucker & Mitchell-Kernan, 1990), and marital instability has been more common in the West than other regions, although this relationship has varied by race (Sweeney & Phillips, 2004) and has weakened over the years (Castro Martin & Bumpass, 1989).”

Because less get married in the first place!

The majority (93.5%) of the couples in our sample were endogamous, including 77.4% White-White, 6.4% Black-Black, 7% Hispanic-Hispanic, and 2.7% Asian-Asian couples. The remaining 6.5% of couples were interracially married (including 1% White-Black, 3.5% White-Hispanic, and 1.4% White-Asian pairings, as well as 0.6% of all types of minority-minority marriages combined).

There are far more total Asian-White couples than White-Black, if you’re going to criticize anyone.

1% mulatto vs. 4.9% genetic Asian admixture. Who’s the, ahem, “race traitor?”

Consistent with prior studies (e.g., Qian, 1997), there are distinct racial/ethnic differences in being in an interracial marriage (results not shown). Blacks are substantially less likely than Hispanics or Asians to have a White spouse (10.1% vs. 23.5% and 24.6%, respectively).”

Africans aren’t stealing da white wimmin.

Statistically. This isn’t the 19th century. Your assumptions are outdated.

Over one third of interracial couples (34.5%) involved a foreign-born person married to a U.S. native compared with just 4.2% of endogamous couples.”

Yeah. She a gold digger.
Isn’t that slave ownership?

Most slaves are sex slaves.
Made obvious in the final study here. What happens when a slave gets out of line?

“Consistent with the first homogamy hypothesis, interracial marriages are less stable: 13.7% of interracial couples compared with 9.9% of endogamous couples broke up during their SIPP panel.”

Duh.

“The descriptive results also confirm the second homogamy hypothesis in which mixed-race couples involving the most socially distant groups (e.g., Blacks and Whites) were most likely to break up: nearly 20% of Black-White couples divorced or separated compared with 13.5% of Hispanic-White couples and 8.4% of Asian-White couples.”

Hispanics are genetic Asian, that data is rigged.

Total Asian-White divorce should be 10.95%.

They should also break down by sex, so Asian Male, White Female or White Male, Asian Female for specific divorce risk per individual by demo.
If they controlled for IQ distance between the couples, that’d explain most of the divorce. Hard to steer a marriage when one party is pedaling backwards.

“For Asians, however, the results were consistent with the ethnic convergence hypothesis”

No you tortured the statistics into excluding most of the Asian population in America.
Shell games don’t impress me.

“Roughly 8.3% of Asian-White couples separated or divorced, a level that falls between the relatively high rates for White couples and the relatively low rates among Asian couples (1.4%).”

You said 8.4 earlier.

8.4/1.4 = 6x (times) the average intra-racial Asian divorce risk thanks to Asian-European miscegenation?
And they think that’s a good finding. Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining Zhang.

So this isn’t even good for the Asians with white fever. Since they’re marrying the dregs. They can’t even say it’s better for waifu.

“This may be a consequence of potential problems facing interracial couples including stress, social disapproval, and cultural differences. Furthermore, interracial couples differ from endogamous couples in important ways that may elevate the risk of divorce (such as greater age and education differences between spouses). To test this idea, we turn next to the multivariate hazards models.”

Nothing about racism and the urge to control, how weird.

Almost like they’re encouraging mixing whatever the cost.

“In general, younger age of first marriage, age and educational differences among the spouses (particularly when the husband is more than two years younger or less educated than the wife); lower levels of education (less than college); lower income; and having no or fewer young children were significantly associated with marital instability.”

So lower quality individuals choose to mix.
Groundbreaking.
Stupidity, poverty, atheist fertility predict their divorce (and decision to have wed in the first place).

“Interracial couples tend to have higher incomes and older ages at marriage (both of which are associated with lower rates of dissolution), so these characteristics cannot explain their higher levels of divorce or separation.”

I smell bullshit.
If they wed, bed and divorce like idiots…
could they be idiots? Why u no publish IQ data?

“Although, mixed marriages are also more likely to involve larger differences in age and education between spouses (consistent with the first homogamy hypothesis), which could partially explain their higher risks of marital dissolution.”

There we go.
Backpedal central.

Almost like marrying a virtual child (age gap) is unpleasant, too.

“Unexpectedly, however, the addition of controls for nativity/citizenship status did not alter the hazard ratio associated with interracial marriage.”

Huh.

“Thus far, the results support the first homogamy hypothesis, though the support was rather weak.”

Despite your best efforts to obscure it? Sure Zhang.

Interracial marriage was positively associated with marital dissolution net of couple characteristics, but this relationship was only marginally significant (p < .10).”

Still science.

“We presented the hazard ratios for race/ethnicity only, although the full models are available to interested readers upon request.”

What cover-up?

For a laugh:


All four hazard models.

“Nevertheless, the results were consistent with the second homogamy hypothesis in that the risk of marital dissolution was highest among Black-White couples, followed by Hispanic-White, minority-minority couples, and finally, Asian-White couples.”

Kek.

“Among Asians, the hazard of divorce or separation for interracial couples fell between that of Asian and White endogamous couples but the difference from White couples was not significant, thus failing to fully support Hypothesis 4. We had also hypothesized that nativity and citizenship between spouses of Hispanic and Asian interracial couples may help explain their higher risks of marital dissolution (Hypothesis 5). This idea was not fully supported because interracial marriages involving Hispanics or Asians did not experience elevated hazards of dissolution (so there were no significant differences to explain). Nevertheless, nativity and citizenship did help explain the relatively low risks of instability among Hispanic and Asian endogamous couples. When we added controls for nativity and citizenship in Model 4, the hazards for Hispanic and Asian endogamous couples increased, thereby narrowing the difference from both White couples and interracial couples. In fact, the difference between Hispanic-White and Hispanic-Hispanic couples became insignificant after controlling for citizenship and nativity in Model 4”

In short, when Trump lets the waifus out and relieves them of their fraudulent green cards, expect a lot of divorce.
MAGA.

Then again… there are other kinks to iron out.

“Among Hispanic-White couples, Hispanic husband-White wife were no more likely to dissolve than White or Hispanic endogamous couples.”

You see why religion must be controlled for.

“The contribution of this study is that it examines the instability of interracial marriage among Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians in contemporary American society, an era marked by increasing diversity and increasing prevalence of interracial marriage. Overall, although marital dissolution was found to be strongly associated with race/ethnicity, the results failed to provide evidence that interracial marriage per se is associated with an elevated risk of marital dissolution. “

No, you failed to provide evidence. You.
Shit methodology, son.

Our results do show that, on the whole, interracial marriages are less stable than endogamous marriages, even after controlling for couple characteristics.”

Uhuh.

“When we divided the results by race/ethnicity, the results were only partially consistent with the homogamy perspective.”

Despite your best efforts to minimize, consistent.
They should also study second-generation race-mixing, since the mixed tend only to reproduce with one another.

“Rather, the most consistent result was that the risks of divorce for interracial couples for all combinations (Black-White, Hispanic-White, and Asian-White) were not significantly different from those of the higher-risk origin group.”

That’s still divorce. More divorce. Quit trying to spin it.

“Even after pooling six SIPP panels together, the number of interracial couples was small, which may have contributed to the insignificant findings.”

True.

They are very abnormal, Hollywood lies.

“In our study, the effects of certain racial/ethnic combinations were similar for both men and women once controls were introduced into the models (e.g., among Asians and Hispanics).”

Appealing to “alpha” won’t work on this one.

Now for another paper I’m sure cannot be biased by one “Choi”…

Race mixing and re-marriage.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5300087/

Plot twist: The modern mudshark is a statistically divorced man remarrying Asian.

I wonder why they never mention this.

“The two most frequently crossed boundaries – those involving White-Asian and White-Hispanic couples – are more permeable in remarriages than in first marriages. Boundaries that are crossed with less frequency – those between minority groups and the White-Black boundary-are less permeable in remarriages than in first marriages. Collectively, these findings suggest that racial and ethnic sorting processes in remarriage may reify existing social distances between pan-ethnic groups. Racial and ethnic variations in how the relative permeability of boundary changes between first and higher-order marriages underscore the importance of considering a broad array of interracial pairings when assessing the ways in which changes in family structure and marital sorting behavior promote integration.”

Promote integration…

From the male (decision) side:

So white men are the race traitors.
Interesting.

White genocide, blame Yellow Fever.

Statistically.

“Tabular results also reveal that for Hispanic and Asian women, intermarriage rates are higher in remarriages than in first marriages. One-third of Asian women wed non-Asian men in their first marriage, but over half did so in remarriage”

Because they couldn’t get a white woman (again).

Hit that Wall hard, huh? Study adiposity, come on.

And it’s obvious white fever in the Asian’s case, a third!

It isn’t the race-mixing white women.
“Eight percent of White women cross ethno-racial boundaries in first marriage, as compared with 6 percent of White women who remarry.”
They seem to learn their lesson.

Table 4 shows the college brainwashing.
They definitely won’t spy on you.
“better-educated women are more likely than their educationally disadvantaged counterparts to cross racial and ethnic boundaries in marriage”
The women are brainwashed too. But it’s also seeking IQ parity, upper-class women typically went to college to find husbands, so more studies are needed and more white men allowed in the Western universities that are their birthright.

“It is conceivable that White-Hispanic and White-Asian marriages likely become even more common in remarriage when third party controls weaken following the dissolution of a first union

They ignore their family’s wishes, bad sons should be disinherited.

and previously married individuals face experience limited availability of co-ethnic potential partners (Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013).”

LOL

Can’t get a white woman!

Right there! Ouch.

“Other scholarship claims that cultural dissimilarities between spouses increase marital conflict and instability by reducing the basis for spousal consensus and mutual understanding between spouses (Hohmann-Marriott and Amato, 2008; Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013; Zhang and Van Hook, 2009).

resentment

Presumably, couples that exit minority-only interracial marriages avoid similar unions in remarriage, preferring instead to form remarry endogamously, to wed a White partner the next time around, or forego marriage entirely.”

Using white people, again. So the white people are also getting dregs in the arrangement.
It’s like the marital equivalent of busing kids in to improve test scores.

“Descriptive tabulations show that one-in-three women who remarried wed never-married husbands, but only one-in-ten first time brides wed previously married men.”

Yeah if he failed as a husband once, why bet on a lame horse?
He didn’t keep his vows the first time. What a catch! (Throw it back!)

“These analyses, which indicate whether in couples’ mixed marital experiences biased the estimates of boundary crossing in first and subsequent marriages, reaffirm the reported results.”

So in many mixed re-marriages, the previously married party is the dregs of their group.

“base the analyses on recent unions” K.

“Partly this resulted because many large government surveys, such as the decennial census, stopped collecting information about marital order.”

Because it makes men look bad.

“In the context of rising intermarriage and remarriage rates, our study underscores the importance of disaggregating marriage order to clarify whether, in what ways, and for which groups changes in coupling behavior promote integration. Collecting data that permits these distinctions is necessary to avoid conflating potentially divergent intermarriage trends in first and higher order unions, some of which are driven by racial and ethnic differences in divorce rates.”

Oh, they know.
Most starter marriages are male-led affairs, they think (wrongly, QED) they can always trade up later (not to be entered into lightly….) and abandoning wife #1 has no social consequences.
So re-marrying men are largely to blame for the huge divorce rates. Good to know.

This explains why they rarely make it male-led data.

“This pattern, which is consistent with past findings, suggests that low barriers to social interaction across racial and ethnic groups when coupled with suboptimal marriage market conditions and weakened third party control can facilitate interracial remarriages for these groups (Aguirre et al., 1995; Fu, 2010; Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013).”

Random re-marriage should be illegal, it’s like flunking a driving test but serious. A society that lets adults (who should be mature enough to commit) re-marry capriciously like infinite respawns is condemning the culture, religion, spouses and children to the misery of an insecure life. What a betrayal.

They bitch about masculinity, when comes the manning-up? Men were respected when they stuck out their duties. Don’t take it on if you don’t mean it.

“Prior studies suggest that cultural dissimilarities between partners diminish grounds for spousal consensus, leading to conflictive, unstable marriages at high risk of dissolution (Hohmann-Marriott and Amato, 2008). In remarriage, previously married men and women from mixed-race unions may revise their mate criteria to avoid similar forms of partner incompatibility (Dean and Gurak, 1978).”

Except stupid white guys with yellow fever.
I wonder if they’re more likely porn addicts. That would be an entertaining study.

“Stated differently, intermarriage studies restricted to White-Black couples render an incomplete portrayal of mate selection behavior in the context of an ever more diverse society.”

They may not be getting married but they’re having more children than the white guys with Yellow Fever. It’s typical atheist sub-fertility so given the standard, limited dating patterns their grand-kids will be a quarter black.

“In similar fashion, although prior work shows that characteristics of spouses interact in shaping mate selection behavior (Fu, 2010), our data do not permit consideration of the joint distribution of spouses’ characteristics. We report analyses based on intermarriage patterns pegged to wives’ characteristics; however, auxiliary analyses based on husbands’ attributes yielded similar conclusions.”

Since the male proposes, it should be male-led data.
Look for r-selection traits and that’ll resolve most of it.

“How the mate selection behavior of widowed and divorced individuals is largely uncharted and certainly warrants investigation.”

Women are more likely to be widowed, men divorced, that’s why they don’t look for it – it makes the men look heartless.

“marriage confers legal rights and obligations, many of which are not extended to cohabiting couples (child support is a notable exception)”

It shouldn’t be, don’t have kids with someone you haven’t married first, or at least don’t expect the authority of a husband over a woman you didn’t yoke yourself to. If a man wants “his” kids so much, he should be taking primary care of them – not fobbing them off on a foreign nanny like some high-powered executive (daycare is abusive). The low IQ nanny normalization may be responsible for divorced children’s lower IQs.

“Specifically, racial and ethnic profile of former cohabiting partners are seldom recorded in US data suitable for analyzing inter-racial coupling behavior (e.g., ACS, Census, NSFG).”

coincidence

“The exclusion of interracial cohabitation will understate the extent to which couples cross ethnic and racial boundaries in forming co-residential interracial unions given that interracial unions are more likely than same-race unions to start and remain as a cohabitation (Kreider, 2000; Rodriguez-Garcia, 2015).”

Study separation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3315595/

The variable nobody wants to discuss.

“Despite the growing number of interethnic marriages in the U.S., few studies have examined intimate partner violence (IPV) in interethnic couples. This article examined past-year occurrences of IPV across interethnic and intra-ethnic couples and tested correlates of IPV specifically in interethnic couples. Data were from a national survey of couples 18 years of age and older from the 48 contiguous states. Interethnic couples (n = 116) included partners from different ethnic backgrounds, including black-white, Hispanic-white, and black-Hispanic couples. White (n = 555), black (n = 358), and Hispanic (n = 527) intra-ethnic couples included partners with the same ethnicity. Data analyses were prevalence rates and logistic regressions. The analyses showed that interethnic couples were comparatively younger and had shorter relationships than intra-ethnic white, black, and Hispanic couples.

Male partners in interethnic couples had higher rates of binge drinking and alcohol problems compared to male partners in intra-ethnic couples.

So much for happy mixing. Stock photos lied to me?

Still no mention of racism, so a white male hitting a non-white is okay if you’re married to them? Surely it’s more racist to treat them like breeding sows and sexual concubines.

Past year prevalence rates for any occurrence of IPV and acts of severe IPV were higher for interethnic couples relative to intra-ethnic couples.

Why isn’t this mentioned in Sex Ed?

Most occurrences of IPV for interethnic couples were mutual.

Obedient waifu trope is a myth.

Factors predicting IPV among interethnic couples included marital status, couples’ age, male alcohol problems, and female impulsivity.

Mounting evidence points to interethnic couples as a high risk group for IPV.

Why aren’t there PSAs?

Interethnic couples may be at greater risk for IPV because of their younger age, binge drinking and alcohol problems.

You can’t blame the drink. They drink to have an excuse.

Future research could build on this study by examining cohort effects and regional differences in IPV for interethnic couples, and the risk for IPV across interethnic couples of different ethnic compositions.”

Note: no (non-Hispanic) Asian-White data in this one tested. Hmm.

However, found this:

“Fusco (2010) used county police reports to examine interethnic and intra-ethnic couple differences in IPV for a more diverse community sample of whites, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics. Interethnic couples were more likely than intra-ethnic minority and white couples to have a prior history of IPV and to experience mutual IPV in which both partners were determined by police to be equally involved in perpetrating violence.

No world for submissive waifu.

I guess that’s what happens when you marry someone with higher T than yourself (those manjaws).

White women don’t look like such bitches now, huh?

Victims of IPV in interethnic couples were also at greater risk of being injured during the violence when compared to intra-ethnic couples.

Wages of sin?

Logically, you wouldn’t hold back with the out-group. It’s unconscious.

Diversity + Proximity = Domestic violence, in this case.

This may suggest that interethnic couples engage in more severe acts of partner violence relative to intra-ethnic couples, although Fusco (2010) did not specifically examine partner violence severity.

Wonder why.

So the white guys really do hate their waifu, deep down.
And the Asian woman does hit back (unlike whites).
Why don’t the MRAs ever mention this? Their mutual violence trope is racial, not sexual!

“Couples that included Asian partners or partners from ‘other’ ethnicities (n = 43) were also excluded due to their small sample size in the dataset.”

convenient, considering

For example, white-Asian marriages make up a large percentage of interethnic marriages (Hattery, 2009), but we were not able to include them in this study due to the small number of Asians surveyed.”

I smell bullshit. So they abuse one another but they don’t talk. To save face.

Enough for now. I’ve proven my point.

Why did no-fault divorce actually happen?

https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/5145-mnookin-and-kornhauser—1979—bargaining-in-the

Ironically, to enforce the Bible, in places.
Specifically the places where it wasn’t working. [1]

“Divorce was granted
only after an official inquiry by a judge, who had to determine
whether “appropriate grounds”-very narrowly defined in terms of
marital offenses-existed.6 When a divorce was granted, the state asserted
broad authority to structure the economic relationship of the
spouses and to maintain regulatory jurisdiction over the children
and their relationship to the parents.7 Doctrines such as collusion,8
connivance,9 and condonation’0 were meant to curtail the degree to
which parties themselves could bring about a divorce through agreement;
the procedural requirements reflected the view that everyone
was “a suspicious character.”

Among other things, no-fault divorce is also responsible for a lower spousal suicide rate, probably homicide (harder to measure) and certainly lower rates of domestic abuse. Overturning it requires an open admission these things do happen, one or both parties can be absolutely awful at their job and they still maintain the right to decide their intimate business over whatever State they happen to be stuck in. Appealing to tradition doesn’t really work when some of those values were very poorly aligned with the law at the time, to keep up Pollyanna appearances. To go back to all the old laws, men would have to prove good character (what is that? nobody would get married) and women would be able to press charges for seduction (rape by fraud is already historically present in the law books, i.e. nobody would get married). A lot of the modern “dating” process would also be swiftly made illegal.

Funny they never mention that.

And if men were the sex wriggling to get away, it begs two questions. Firstly, why the fuck did they propose? Second, wouldn’t that constitute abandonment on his part? A grave matter, severely punished, we all know of deadbeats who’d be whipped into shape by a return of fault laws. No-fault divorce treats men equally to women (justice is blind ‘n all), because they’re given the benefit of the doubt where they could be abandoned too.

A list of unisex faults and standards of proof are required, rooted in the post-Reformation Bible, instead of a reversion to a system that blatantly did not work. Two ruined lives plus children is not a success. For example, allowing divorce but banning re-marriage would silence many vocal oppositions. If there’s a limit on abortion and insurance claims, there should logically be one on an oath including “til death do you part”. These faults should be acknowledged in the marriage contract itself, along with ways to avoid them, and an expanded edition to make sure both parties really intend to follow through on their oath (which should be set in stone for legal reasons).

1 https://www.compellingtruth.org/grounds-for-divorce.html

“In the Old Testament, God allowed divorce if a man’s heart became so hardened against his wife that she was actually better off without him

…That isn’t rare. Calculate the odds of marrying anyone with mental problems nowadays. Any mental problem.

Unhappy wives used to hire men to fake affairs and “accidentally” get caught until the 30s when the only common American grounds for divorce was adultery. Your system needs work. Increase your marriage age to 18 for starters, you monsters. Child brides are both a Muslim and an American thing.

If you have a problem with keeping the age of consent at the age of adulthood…. what about voting?

Some simple changes and why:

  1. a hard limit on the number of times anyone can marry excepting widowhood.
  2. a grievance period for widows where marriage is not allowed, depending on how long they were married.
  3. if someone’s sexuality changes, they’re considered to have defrauded the other party of their agreed companionship.
  4. long engagements only, 6-12 months?
  5. one party letting themselves go completely is taken as a clinical indicator (already is) of passive-aggression or depression
  6. no addicts, taking up any addiction is grounds for no-fault divorce on behalf of the other party due to the brain damage effectively killing the person they married and rely upon
  7. marriage is not considered a license to any form of abuse, higher conduct is expected compared to strangers
  8. abandonment includes social, you agreed to be there for one another not at the club/bar/party
  9. romance must go both ways
  10. if someone turns out to be a psychopath (the only condition that can fake it until the wedding), divorce is allowed and the proven psychopath’s influence over the other party limited to account for their condition (ideally you test before marriage?)
  11. 18+, I hope this one is obvious.
  12. if one party works from home it is counted as work for the marriage
  13. real Christians only, married in a Christian ceremony
  14. complaining about their marriage online illegal (other people’s marital status or marriages too) – privacy law
  15. no atheists (think of the divorce risk), they don’t need a “piece of paper”, remember?
  16. adulterers can be sued again, but per act and depravity – would branding be too far?
  17. all bastard children from adultery aborted (risky but I’ll put it, it spares the legitimate children their rights)
  18. no adulterous unions could wed (because obviously they can’t be trusted with it)
  19. a cap on how much weddings can actually cost because... Jesus….
  20. earnings prior to marriage not counted in divorce proceedings, including inheritance, which skips over the spouse to the children.

I flatter myself these are common sense.

The State owns your children

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/mum-jailed-for-abducting-children-189525/

If you don’t quietly let the State hand them over to pedophiles and abusers in the “care system”, for big slavery bucks, you go to a big building full of them. But that’s old news, now they’re coming after all the other parents.

She made the children over the course of nine months, they belong to her. It was an investment of her literal body and some women die doing it. She did her job, including feed them – again, with her body. She gave them life and kept them alive.

If the former husband is unfit for the job, the successor takes over. That’s what divorce means. He’s still trying to have husband’s rights (over where she lives, the caregiver) without the responsibility. That won’t last.

Narcissistic divorcees refuse to let their former relatives be happy.

(That would include where the female happens to be one).

This isn’t a victory for “men”, or deadbeat* “husbands”, either. The State is over-ruling everyone, pay attention. No freedom of movement, like a slaughterhouse. It also rides roughshod over the new husband, whose rights are being denied.

*abandonment is Biblical grounds for divorce

Marriage isn’t a Christian duty

Tradlarpers lie about the Bible.

As in, blatant lying.

https://www.christianity.com/bible/commentary.php?com=mhc&b=46&c=7

Specifically (and atheists shouldn’t marry, that’s repeated* throughout the Bible) on Marriage:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians+7&version=NIV
I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. ”
“8 Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do.”
“17 Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts. 20 Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.”
“But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.”
“38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better.

I don’t criticize MGTOW for being unmarried…. as long as they’re moral.

I do criticize larpers who insist everyone must marry (like vain them) as if that were 1. possible or 2. desirable.

They think they have a right to “give away” these people’s bodies!

*There’s an interesting point in a commentary, since it’s against marrying diversity:

“The Greek word for “unequally yoked together” is not found elsewhere, and was probably coined by St. Paul to give expression to his thoughts. Its meaning is, however, determined by the use of the cognate noun in Leviticus 19:19 (“Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind“).”

However, a man can only love as a husband sacrificially

https://www.compellingtruth.org/when-marry.html

Your mother no longer comes first, nor your friends.

https://www.compellingtruth.org/grounds-for-divorce.html

Divorce is acceptable for abuse, adultery, abandonment of either party.

The poorer, innocent party should receive alimony for supporting the richer’s efforts to earn it.

Re-marriages of the sinning party are not Biblical.

Divorce risk factors

http://emorywheel.com/professors-study-marriage-economics/

Diamonds aren’t the problem, it’s the premium pricing that’s the problem.
People are living longer than ever, we need harder rocks.

It’s easy to find cheap, good quality diamonds and arrange a setting for the stone.

Husband/wife is a status.

Status-obsessed materialists (who want to get married but not be married) tend to divorce more because of the narcissism, and overt narcs tend to pair up with covert ones.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-narcissism/201712/how-the-3-types-narcissists-act-first-date

Once the money is gone, the spark fizzles out.

The study also found a correlation between marriage age and duration, which Francis wrote are positively related, meaning the older the person was when he or she got married, the longer the marriage was likely to last.

Maturity, waiting for the hormones to settle and personality to crystallize, few societies in history married off someone younger than 21-25, outside times of war (Regency, American Independence) but then only for re-population purposes, knowing it was less than ideal.

Another notable finding was that the larger differences in age and education between husbands and wives were associated with a higher risk of divorce,

Assortative mating wins again.

College IQ men marrying high-school IQ women is dysgenic.

 as was reporting that looks were important in marriage.

Vain men, bad husbands. As soon as she gets a little wrinkle, his “love” dies.

Evil people confuse lust with love. When the lust is spent, they claim to fall “out” of love. There is no falling “out” of true love, you can only be betrayed and detach. The love doesn’t go anywhere.

Marriage will get less expensive when it becomes more common.
As it is, only rich people can afford to marry.

That’s right, classism again.

Social media would make it a little gimmicky.

Abolishing no-fault divorce and making it hard (or impossible) to re-marry after a set N times would make people respect the institution again, nothing less will work.

Really, our era has the term “starter marriage” – nothing else will work.

If society didn’t get rid of rites of passage for both sexes, the social value of over-spending on a wedding would plummet. For women, debutante balls were important. Now the expense is carried over into bridal models.