A woman’s work is never done.

The indignities of marriage never stop piling up for feminists.  On top of being trapped in boring drudgery, Kelsey McKinney explains at Vox (the other Vox) that Obama’s latest bit of male groveling insidiously forces wives to train their husbands.  Clearly now the patriarchy has finally stooped too low:

What President Obama is suggesting, really, is that women — on top of dealing with internet trollsdomestic abuse, higher rates of sexual assault, and being paid less than men for the same work — must also deal with the mighty task of reforming all of the world’s males into decent husbands.

At the event, Obama also said, “Eventually we learn, but it takes us a little longer, because we’re not as smart.”

The president may have gotten this idea from his wife, who claimed in August that women are the more intelligent sex. But if that’s true, then it’s important women are able spend their time developing cures for cancer and renewable energy sources rather than training men to do the dishes.

What we need is a great hero, someone who can rescue feminists from this endless misery instead of expecting women to solve it themselves.  Won’t some big strong not-woman come rescue the poor feminists?

Posted in Feminists, Weak men screwing feminism up | 64 Comments

Selling sin.

Recently a self described conservative Christian mother of 5 came to scold me for criticizing the Christian Broadcasting Network’s endorsement of actress Janine Turner’s book praising single mothers:

I encountered your blog because I had found Janine Turner’s book in my church library and a Google search led me here. I am pretty disgusted with the condescension and misogyny that you express in so many of your articles. I am a very, very conservative Christian, married for 20 years with 5 kids to a wonderful man, and I can’t ever imagine Our Lord looking down on human beings with the contempt that you display in your writing. You do not have the heart of Jesus–he came to save, not to condemn…

It’s very sad to me that you can’t seem to recognize that there are many women out there who lived sinful lives, who now have sole care of a child from their past, and who have had a conversion BECAUSE of their struggles. One of God’s greatest talents is to bring good even from our sinfulness, as He did on the Cross. These single mothers are trying to work out their salvation with fear and trembling just like you and me, and all Janine Turner was doing with her book was trying to encourage women in that situation to hold fast to Jesus and not despair that God can’t do amazing things for their lives and their children because their circumstances don’t “look” wholesome and perfect…

As I’ve written before, as feminist thought has taken hold across our culture instead of becoming more vigilant to feminist rebellion Christians have become desensitized to it.  No matter how blatant the expression of feminist rebellion, we just can’t see it.  As a result, we no longer need radical feminists like Sanger and Friedan;  ordinary Christians now reflexively toe the feminist line.  In a world where unwed motherhood and kicking the father out of the home are celebrated feminist rights, objecting to Christians declaring these sins as godly is the new heresy.  Objecting to declaring evil good is now hateful, misogyny.

Make no mistake;  Miss Turner is quite open about what she intended to accomplish in writing her book.  This is not as the commenter implied a book about repentance.  In the forward to the book Miss Turner describes her own out of wedlock pregnancy and birth without a hint of repentance.  She presents her out of wedlock birth not as a foreseeable result of sinful choices, but something which life did to her (emphasis mine):

My Journey
I’ve often reflected, How did a Baptist girl from Texas end up as a single mother? My pregnancy, however, was the most miraculous event of my life. I would read to her in the womb, play Mozart, and pray with her. I even felt the joy when she kicked, literally, to the music of a Broadway show.

As my pregnancy progressed, however, it became increasingly evident that my journey as a mother was to be a singular event. One day I predicted that my daughter’s father would not be there when our baby was born. He responded by holding me tightly and saying that, yes, he would be there. I knew in my heart that he would not. Call it women’s intuition, but I knew. This is not how I envisioned the drama of my life, the joy of bringing a child into the world, but life presented itself to me in this way.

A bit further down she explains her mission in writing the book:

My Mission
There’s one thing I believe fervently, and that is that 90 percent of single mothers never intended to be single mothers. Most young girls, as they daydream about the day when they will have children, rarely say, “When I grow up I want to have a child and raise the child without a father.” Or, “When I grow up I want to get a divorce and raise my children all by myself.” It rarely happens.

I wrote this book to inspire these women. I wrote it so that single mothers of today would not feel alone, troubled, burdened, shamed, or depressed.

To drive home the need for such a book, Miss Turner points out that we are experiencing an explosion of single mothers:

The U.S. Census Bureau data published in 2004 reports that approximately 43 percent of women raising children are single mothers;  this number is likely higher today.  51 percent of women in America are not married.  The wisdom that the women of this book impart to us is that we are not alone.  Women have been doing it for centuries and through tragic circumstances in social environments that, for the most part, pale to any we could encounter today.

This is the message Miss Turner with the help of CBN, the married mother of 5, and her church (by placing this book in the church library) is selling to young women.  There is no sin, only circumstances that life hands you.  With a little girlpower and moxie you don’t need a husband, and your children don’t need a father.  Hold your head high.  You’ve come a long way baby.

Posted in Attacking headship, Book of Oprah, Church Apathy About Divorce, Denial, Feral Females, Stantons Heroes, Ugly Feminists | 219 Comments

A modern day Cyrano for a modern day Roxane.

H/T Private Man  LSFW

 

Related:

Posted in Chivalry, Game, Manosphere Humor | 40 Comments

More remarriage rate charts.

There was a problem with the time scaling of the remarriage rate chart in my last post. Here is the fixed version:
45plusremarriagerates1960to2010_cor

 

I also decided to take another look at the data in the NCFMR paper I used for this post.  I created all of the charts below using point estimates I derived from the NCFMR charts with the Engauge Digitizer tool (H/T Inge). I used a different estimation method when creating this chart in the past so some of the estimates are slightly different.

Here is a comparison of men’s remarriage rates in 1990 and 2011 broken down into ten year categories.  Note that the over 65 value for 1990 doesn’t match the same value in the chart at the top of the page (16 vs 19).  These appear to be different data sources, and some of the difference could be due to my having to estimate the numbers in the chart below.  However, the 2011 value for men over 65 below is almost exactly the same as the 2010 value in the chart at the top of the page (13 vs 12).

remarriage_men_age_1990_2011

Here is the same chart for women.  Interestingly while men in all age brackets have become less likely to remarry, all of the reduction in remarriage rates for women happened in the younger age brackets.  Even for men however the biggest changes happened in the youngest brackets.  This reduction in remarriage in the younger age brackets is bad news for women who want to have it all, because nearly two thirds of the women divorcing are under 45.

remarriage_women_age_1990_2011

The next chart lets you compare men’s and women’s remarriage rates across age brackets in the present:

remarriage_men_women_age_2011

Here you can compare men’s and women’s remarriage rates back in 1990.  Note the same crossover as the 2011 chart between the first and second age bracket where men become more likely to remarry than women.  This fits nicely with Rollo’s chart on SMV.

remarriage_men_women_age_1990

Finally, I focused on the 25-54 age brackets and showed the trend for each sex and age category combination from 1990 to 2011:

remarriage_men_wom_25to54_1990to2011

 

Posted in Data, Remarriage Strike | 244 Comments

Fewer men are working, and marriage is dying.

The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis has the following handy chart showing the long decline in men’s employment in the US (shaded areas represent recessions):

During this same time period the strength of marriage as an institution has declined as well.  Out of wedlock births are up (source):

The percentage of the population which is married is going down:

Median age of first marriage is going up (Source):

The closest to good news for marriage is that divorce rates stopped increasing after reaching 22 per 1,000 couples (per year) in 1980.  However, remarriage rates are in a steep decline:

45plusremarriagerates1960to2010_cor

 

Conventional Wisdom

Conventional wisdom is that the decline in men’s labor force participation and the weakening of marriage as an institution are linked, but only in one direction.  The standard narrative is that as men have (for whatever reason) worked less, marriage has been weakened because men are no longer filling the role of breadwinner.  There is certainly some logic here, and this must be a least part of the explanation.  However, in asserting that the connection works in only one direction the standard narrative requires a series of incredible assumptions.

The first assumption conventional wisdom requires is that a marriage based culture doesn’t create powerful incentives for married men to work hard and maximize their earnings.  Denying the incentive marriage provides to men to work harder has left a cottage industry of sociologists and economists scratching their heads trying to figure out why marriage makes men more productive and doesn’t do the same for women.  This incentive is denied despite the fact that we implicitly recognize that it is a powerful motivating force in other contexts.  Every family court judge in the land knows that marriage creates strong incentives for men to work harder, which is why courts feel the need to assign income quotas (imputed income) to divorced men in order to keep them working as hard after the divorce as they did while married.

The second assumption is that the desire to marry in a marriage based culture doesn’t create an incentive for young men to work hard to signal breadwinner capability or at least breadwinner potential.  To believe this, one would have to assume that young men aren’t aware that women place a high value on a man’s employment and earnings status when selecting a prospective husband.  This is absurd.  The reality is that sex is a powerful motivator for men (young and old);  just ask any marketer.

The third assumption is that feminism and the sexual revolution never happened, or at least that they didn’t fundamentally change marriage patterns.  Under this assumption, the only reason women are delaying or forgoing marriage is because women simply can’t find men with jobs.  Yet we know this isn’t true.  Feminists have completed a long and wildly successful march through all of our institutions, and young women are quite open about their plans to maximize their period of casual sex and only marry once they start to see their window of fertility close.  The reality is that women are delaying marriage not because marriagable men are scarce, but because they perceive them as so abundant they don’t feel the need to hurry and lock one down.

Conclusion

In a marriage based society, getting sexual access to the most attractive women requires men to work hard to signal provider status.  After the wedding, men feel the responsibility which comes with the position of head of the household.   Both of these are extremely powerful incentives for men to work hard and maximize their earnings.  However, we have moved from a marriage based/incentive structure for men to a quota/coercion based society.  As a result, we are seeing a shift in men’s attitudes about work.

Tying this back to the chart on men’s employment, what this means is one of two things is going on:

1)  The entire reduction in men’s earnings and labor force participation is due to the loss of incentives which were in place when we were a marriage based society.

or

2)  Structural forces have reduced men’s participation in the workforce (a shifting economy, global trade, an increase in welfare/disability payments, etc), while at the same time men’s incentive to push past these obstacles has been greatly reduced.  Put another way, we have reduced men’s incentive to work hard at exactly the time we need them working their hardest.  Even worse, each of these two problems feeds the other in a vicious circle.  Weaker incentives for men to excel results in a weaker economy, which weakens marriage, which then further weakens the incentives for men to excel.

No matter how you view it, we are paying a huge price for our decision to move from a marriage based family structure to a child support family model.  Moreover, this price is going to continue to increase as the inertia left over from the former model fades away.

See also:  How the destruction of marriage is strangling the feminist welfare state.

Edit Oct 6 2014:  Updated the remarriage chart to one showing the correct time scale.

Posted in Child Support, Data, Denial, Patriarchal Dividend, Weak men screwing feminism up | 298 Comments