The marriage strike is a media term for the recently acknowledged
sociological mass action social phenomenon of men choosing to avoid
legal marriage. The marriage strike refers to a behavioral trend,
usually of men, living within the Western world. Media commentators
examining the marriage strike believe that after a considered
cost-benefit analysis, the legal contract that is modern marriage no
longer represents an attractive option for men living in the changed
legal, economic, sociological, cultural, and demographic environment.
In
Britain, the number of weddings in 2006 was the fewest since 1895, with
the proportion of people getting married falling to the lowest level
since 1862, when marriage records began.
Appearance in the Media
In
2002, 'National Marriage Project', published their annual report on
the state of marriage in the United States, The State of /Our Unions.
The 2002 report was subtitled: Why Men Won't Commit - Exploring Young
Men's Attitudes About Sex, Dating and Marriage. This study broke new
ground in investigating men's role in the equation of contemporary
marriage.
The report found that young men were reluctant to
marry. Ten main reasons for their reluctance to marry were cited. The
first 3 reasons were:
* 'They can get sex without marriage'.
* They can enjoy "a wife" through cohabitation'.
* 'They want to avoid divorce and its financial risks'.
'Marriage Strike'
After
the publication of the Rutgers report, columnist and radio broadcaster
Glenn Sacks, and Dianna Thompson, the executive director of the American
Coalition of Fathers and Children, published a July 5, 2002 article in
the Philadelphia Enquirer, titled Have Anti-Father Family Court Policies
Led to a Men's Marriage Strike?.Versions of this original article were
then disseminated widely.
An excerpt from the Dianna Thompson and Glenn Sacks article:
'Kathleen
is attractive, successful, witty, and educated. She also can't find a
husband. Why? Because most of the men this thirty-something software
analyst dates do not want to get married. These men have Peter Pan
Syndrome--they refuse to commit, refuse to settle down, and refuse to
"grow up"'.
'However, given the family court policies and divorce trends of today, Peter Pan is no naive boy, but instead a wise man.
"Why
should I get married and have kids when I could lose those kids and
most of what I've worked for at a moment's notice?" asks Dan, a 31
year-old power plant technician who says he will never marry. "I've seen
it happen to many of my friends. I know guys who came home one day to
an empty house or apartment--wife gone, kids gone. They never saw it
coming. Some of them were never able to see their kids regularly
again"'.
'The US marriage rate has dipped 40% over the
past four decades, to its lowest point ever. There are many plausible
explanations for this trend, but one of the least mentioned is that
American men, in the face of a family court system which is hopelessly
stacked against them, have subconsciously launched a "marriage strike"'.
'"It's
a shame," Dan says. "I always wanted to be a father and have a family.
But unless the laws change and give fathers the same right to be a part
of their children's lives as mothers have, it just isn't worth the
risk"'.
Rutger's 2004 Marriage Report
In a 14 July
2004 article for Intellectual Conservative, retired professor of
psychology and commentator Carey Roberts wrote a follow up article, this
time on the findings of Rutgers University's 2004 The State of Our
Unions report.
In his 2004 article, Carey Roberts stated:
'When
almost one-quarter of single men in their prime courting years --
that’s two million potential husbands -- declare a Marriage Strike,
we’re facing an unprecedented social crisis'.
'News of the
Marriage Strike first began to settle into our national consciousness in
2002. That year, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe of Rutgers
University interviewed sixty men to probe their attitudes about
marriage. And to their surprise, they discovered that some of these men
were flat-out opposed to tying the knot. So this year, the Rutgers
researchers decided to launch a full-scale national survey of single
heterosexual men, ages 25-34. These men represent almost 10 million of
the nation’s most eligible bachelors. The report was just released last
month'.
'Among those men, 53% said they were not
interested in getting married anytime soon -- the marriage delayers.
That figure alone is cause for concern. But this is the statistic that
every American who wants to strengthen and protect marriage should be
worried about: 22% of the men said they had absolutely no interest in
finding their Truly Beloved. The report described these guys as
“hardcore marriage avoiders.”
'Why are these men refusing
to marry? Some of their reasons are spelled out in the 2002 report:
“Some men express resentment towards a legal system that grants women
the unilateral right to decide to terminate a pregnancy…There is also a
mistrust of women who may ‘trap’ men into fathering a child by claiming
to be sterilized, infertile or on the pill. Many men also fear the
financial consequences of divorce…They fear that an ex-wife will 'take
you for all you've got' and that 'men have more to lose financially than
women' from a divorce."
'Four decades ago, radical
feminists, taking their cue from Marxist-Leninist theory, decreed that
marriage was nothing more than gender slavery. Claiming to speak on
behalf of American women, feminists set out to radically rework -- or
even do away with -- the age-old social contract of marriage. And women,
mesmerized by the ephemeral promise of liberation and empowerment,
opted to go along for the ride'.
'Now, feminists are
succeeding beyond their wildest dreams. And women are left to wonder why
their Prince Charming is nowhere to be found'.
Distinction
*The
Marriage Strike is not 'organised'. It does not have 'leaders'. The
marriage strike is a sociological example of . Mass action refers to
situations where large numbers of otherwise isolated individuals
independently come to similar conclusions, at the same time, and then
act simultaneously on those conclusions in a seemingly coordinated
action. A bank run is another example of mass action at work.
*The marriage strike also differs in how individual men prefer to apply their individual strike against their legal system.
**A
man may continue a day-to-day marriage like relationship with a
partner, and choose to simply forgo the legal contract aspect.
**A man may choose to completely disengage from all relationships.
**Taking
advantage of a globalized world, a Western man may decide to pursue
marriage and long-term relationships, but overseas, within a different
legal jurisdiction, and a different cultural climate.
Key Elements
*Observers
of the marriage strike hold that the combination of no-fault divorce,
and prevailing prejudices within Western family law applied in divorce
courts that are substantially more likely to favor the wife over the
husband. This disadvantage extends to rulings over primary child
custody, child visitation rights, ownership of the family residence and
other shared property, child support, and alimony.
*It has been
observed that this situation enables a woman to unilaterally divorce her
husband, financially pauperize him, while simultaneously depriving him
of the right to see his offspring.
*Observations have been made
that since the divorce rate is high, and that women are more likely than
men to seek no-fault divorce, then such divorce scenarios are a likely
outcome of marriage, and therefore, men cannot be blamed for choosing to
side-step a marriage contract. Many women with financial assets or with
high paying salaries are also avoiding legal marriage.
*There
have also been numerous studies showing that approximately 76% percent
of no-fault divorces in the United States were initiated by women --
usually against a man who works a blue-collar job, and for subjective
grounds such as "emotional unfulfillment", rather than any actual
wrongful conduct of the man himself.
*Divorce is a $28
billion-a-year industry with an average individual case-load cost of
about $20,000. Furthermore, it is an unquestionable fact that those men
most unable to afford adequate legal representation, are most likely to
financially suffer the greatest in resulting judgments and settlements.
*Such
evidence gives rise to allegations that many women are unfairly reaping
a financial windfall through divorce at their ex-husband's expense, and
therefore, men should simply avoid this risk through avoiding marriage
altogether.
*Commentators have conjectured that marriage poses
absolutely no utility to a man whatsoever, in that traditional positive
benefits of consortium, financial security, and child custody have been
entirely revamped and eclipsed by reforms to original marriage laws.
*Likewise,
external commentators have observed that other social changes, such as
the opportunities presented by the advent of and the sexual revolution
now represent equal or greater benefits to the lifestyles of non-married
persons.
*Commentators hold that changes in family law have
created a one-sided situation that unfairly benefits women in both
marriage and divorce, to the man's detriment.
Legal Causations of Emerging Western Marriage Strike
The Financial Penalty of Divorce
*Marriage,
while being publicly understood as a union between man and woman, is
also a legal contract. Divorce then is considered a legal contract that
is broken, and legal consequences come into play. There is a division of
the previously shared financial assets of the married couple. Assets
are divided for distribution to both parties by a court order.
Typically, a woman will receive 50% ownership of the couple's assets on
the divorce decree. These assets include property, housing, vehicles,
savings, and investments.
No-fault Divorce
*No-fault
divorce is divorce in which the dissolution of a marriage does not
require fault of either party to be shown, or, indeed, any evidentiary
proceedings at all. It occurs on petition to the court, typically a
family court by either party, without the requirement that the
petitioner show fault on the part of the other party. Either party may
request, and receive, the dissolution of the marriage, despite the
objections of the other party.
Father's Limited Access to Children After Divorce
*In
the Western world, family law is structurally more likely to award
primary child custody to a child's mother in the case of divorce. This
legal situation results in fathers often having very limited access to
their children after divorce. In an attempt to balance the rights and
needs of the mother, father, and children, courts may award a couple
joint custody of their children after divorce.
Alternatives to Traditional Marriage
Cohabitation Without Marriage
*Strong
evidence suggests that Western men are choosing to cohabit, and not
actually marry. Living with a partner presents a legally safer
alternative, with marriage's benefits to both parties, a reduction in
the penalties found within marriage, and without the hostility of
divorce.
De-facto Law/Common Law:
*However, it should be
noted that family law can also be applied in some nations (eg, Australia
and Brazil) to de-facto relationships, also called common law
marriages. After a certain length of time, the breakup of a
non-marriage, live-in relationship can legally result in a man losing
his assets to his 'de-facto wife', as considered by the law.
Prenuptial Agreement
*A
prenuptial agreement, commonly abbreviated to 'prenup', is a contract
entered into by two people prior to marriage. The content of a
prenuptial agreement can vary widely, but commonly includes provisions
for the division of property should the couple divorce and any rights to
spousal support during or after the dissolution of marriage.
*All
marriage dissolutions (divorces) have property distribution plans,
either decided by the married parties, or decided by a divorce judge
using guidelines written by state law. So technically speaking, all
marriages have either a "prenup" decided by the marriage partners, or a
"postnup" decided by a judge.
*Prenuptial agreements are rarely
recognized by law in case of divorce. Prenuptial agreements are, at
best, a partial solution to obviating some of the risks of marital
property disputes in times of divorce. They are not the final word.
*Prenuptial
agreements cannot specify zero amounts, can expire after time depending
on state law (examples include Donald Trump divorcing Marla Maples
before five years expiration, Tom Cruise divorcing Nicole Kidman before
ten years expiration), and must be written properly to withstand court
challenges.
*Prenuptial agreements are frequently challenged in
court. For example, film mogul Steven Spielberg and actress Amy Irving
had a prenup, written on a restaurant napkin, that was thrown out by the
divorce judge, and Amy was awarded $100 million. Fashion models
Christie Brinkley and Peter Cook had a prenup that was written so well
Mr. Cook commented later that he would use Christie's prenup in his
future marriage, as Peter was only awarded $2 million.
Consequences of the Marriage Strike
*Men's
marriage strike is contributing to profound social changes in the West,
increasing the pressure upon policy-makers to protect men's human
rights in the equation of marriage & family. In mid-2008, the 2006
statistics on British births and marriages were released: 'Since 2006
the proportion of children born to married British parents is thought to
have dropped below 50 per cent for the first time. They are being
outweighed by those who are part of cohabiting couples or single-parent
families. It comes as data from the Office for National Statistics show
that women are having more children than at any time since the 1970s'.
*The
same day, the Daily Mail also reported on the latest set of numbers:
'Official figures indicate that only a minority of children of
long-standing British parents will grow up with a married mother and
father. Most will be part of cohabiting or single-parent families. In
contrast, only one in 50 children of mothers who were born in India
before they came here had unmarried parents.'
*On the issue of
less children being born into two-parent marriages, in 2006, Ann
Widdecombe, a former Tory Home Office minister, said: 'After the death
of the extended family, we are now seeing the death of the nuclear
family. "The long-term consequences are bad for everyone. A well-ordered
society is based on the bedrock of marriage, otherwise we will have
increasing social disruption.'
Projected Future Consequences of the Marriage Strike for Western Women
Just
as wider society is being shaped by Western men's disengagement from
marriage, the marriage strike also represents a profound challenge to
the lives of Western women.
*After the 2005 release of a
government-commissioned study of contemporary social trends, the British
government observed the future shape of British life: 'The report said
that by 2031 40 per cent of men and 35 per cent of women aged 45 to 54
in England and Wales would not have married. "At the age of 45 to 54 the
proportion of people married is projected to fall from 71 per cent in
2003 to 48 per cent in 2031 for men," a spokesman for the actuary
department said. "For women, the figures are 72 per cent to 50. "The
proportion of those never married by 45 to 54 is expected to rise over
the same period from 14 to 40 per cent for males and nine to 35 per cent
for females."
*In reaction to the publication of the same 2005
report, Jill Kirby, of the Centre for Policy Studies, stated: "The
serious decline of marriage is a very worrying development. Cohabitation
is an inherently fragile partnership. A lot of women in their forties
and fifties will be living alone, perhaps having had a relationship or
two but never having been married, with all sorts of emotional and
financial implications. The question is: do we want these predictions to
come true or do we want to try to recover some of the virtues and
values of the past?"
*The Telegraph's article on the government
report also observed that: The marriage projections have great
implications for Government policy, as well as significant sociological
effects. For example, terms such as mother-in-law and father-in-law will
become far less common and there will be far fewer hefty divorce
settlements in favour of women.
No comments:
Post a Comment