Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 132 posts

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#91

Post by thriftwy »

Mz wrote: post #88
adekok wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See Florida for "lifetime alimony" Why would someone work if they can divorce, keep the kids, and get paid forever? Other states aren't quite as bad, but they're still bad: http://tomjameslaw.com/blog/what-judges-really-think-about-f... A study conducted in 2004 found that although the tender years doctrine had been abolished some time ago, a majority of Indiana family court judges still supported it and decided case…

Why would someone work if they can divorce, keep the kids, and get paid forever? Because unless your ex is very wealthy AND your alimony increases over time to keep up with inflation, alimony tends to not adequately support a middle class lifestyle by itself. Because women tend to outlive men and tend to marry men who are older than them (average: about four years). When the ex dies, you will be penniless if you didn…

> the ex dies, you will be penniless if you didn't also work

Why not work? After some time in divorce (immediately perhaps) you are supposed, as an adult, to support for yourself.

Especially considering you're going to send children into their own lives by 50, and retirement is only coming at 65. You definitely look forward for 15 years of work even if you are absolutely devoted to raising kids.

> if you don't have goals, interests and earned income of your own

But we can only put the very latter in alimony. Can't put goals there.

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#92

Post by ch4s3 »

adekok wrote: post #44
ch4s3 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a depressingly cynical outlook. >find yourself working your entire life to support your wife You do know that lots of women have careers now right? You can arguably do quite well as a team pooling financial resources and saving for retirement. It also makes you more resilient to changes in employment. >If you do not wand children there is no point in getting married. What if you just want to engage in a mutually…

See Florida for "lifetime alimony" Why would someone work if they can divorce, keep the kids, and get paid forever? Other states aren't quite as bad, but they're still bad: http://tomjameslaw.com/blog/what-judges-really-think-about-f... A study conducted in 2004 found that although the tender years doctrine had been abolished some time ago, a majority of Indiana family court judges still supported it and decided case…

Isn't this more an argument against living and marrying in Florida than marriage per se?

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#93

Post by Mz »

thriftwy wrote: post #91
Mz wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would someone work if they can divorce, keep the kids, and get paid forever? Because unless your ex is very wealthy AND your alimony increases over time to keep up with inflation, alimony tends to not adequately support a middle class lifestyle by itself. Because women tend to outlive men and tend to marry men who are older than them (average: about four years). When the ex dies, you will be penniless if you didn…

> the ex dies, you will be penniless if you didn't also work Why not work? After some time in divorce (immediately perhaps) you are supposed, as an adult, to support for yourself. Especially considering you're going to send children into their own lives by 50, and retirement is only coming at 65. You definitely look forward for 15 years of work even if you are absolutely devoted to raising kids. > if you don't have g…

> if you don't have goals, interests and earned income of your own

But we can only put the very latter in alimony. Can't put goals there.

If you got married and started a family because raising a family was a goal, alimony is related to that. Women have historically been provided for by husbands. For women, marriage has historically been a viable alternative to getting a job.

It isn't like buying a lottery ticket. Being a wife and mom involves a great deal of work. Raising kids well is a goal. Once they are raised, women need to find other things to do.

This seems to be lost on a great many men. Even women seem to often not see it. But it is a reality.

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#94

Post by [deleted] »

tetromino_ wrote: post #87
adekok wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you protect mothers by giving them welfare, you get more single mothers. If you give courts / child protection services a cut of the child support money, you get more divorces where the fathers are cut out of the children's lives. If you punish men in divorces, financially ruin them ("imputed income"), and don't let them see their kids, you get a massive increase in male suicide after a divorce.

> If you protect mothers by giving them welfare, you get more single mothers. Sure. But is it really worse for society to have single mothers on welfare than to have mothers trapped in toxic marriages for financial reasons?

[deleted]

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#95

Post by [deleted] »

ghostbrainalpha wrote: post #67
mlrtime wrote: post #3

Many men are understanding that marriage is a no win situation. You find yourself working your entire life to support your wife and family only to have a high percentage of ending in divorce. Your assets will be taken from you and you will be lucky if you get 50% custody. If you do not wand children there is no point in getting married.

Did you guys read the article? All the Hacker News comments seem to think the Marriage is going down because its not a good deal for high net worth me. This might be true, but was not the point of the story at all. Marriage is declining among the middle/lower classes. Its women who don't want to marry a man who doesn't have a job that are causing the rate to change. This does reinforce the cynical point, that in marr…

[deleted]

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#96

Post by [deleted] »

javajocky wrote: post #62
vlunkr wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A high percent end in divorce, sure, but it's not like you're playing a slot machine. If you and your partner are committed you can more than likely beat the odds. This is incredibly cynical. I'm pretty happy to work to support people that I love. It might be easier in some ways to be single, but it's not a "no win situation."

But that's not true -- it's actually fairly low. (see posts above).

[deleted]

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#97

Post by humanrebar »

ashark wrote: post #85
humanrebar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea is that if people follow that sequence, their odds of landing in poverty are much lower. Half of all babies are accidental, regardless of marital status. If sex is in the equation before "degree" (it is), then the whole sequence is flawed.

I like that the advice is nearly indistinguishable from "be born into a family where you'll be socialized to follow this pattern and provided resources to help follow it and to help get you back on track if things go awry, and golly, you probably won't be poor!"

He's not actually wrong. I just think leaving the word "sex" out of the description misstates the actual problem. One could start following that pattern, get pregnant in college, drop out, and be slightly better off than having a baby in high school (since you check the "some college" option on the application instead of "some high school").

If the problem is education and socialization, shouldn't the philanthropic classes be educating teens more about the statistics involved in getting pregnant and poverty rates? It seems like we're too busy not judging (which is an admirable instinct) to be explicit in our culture about the relationship between sexual activity, poverty, family structure, and pregnancy. We spend tons of energy on all sorts of techniques to level playing fields and give kids a leg up, but fail to broach this subject. If we think kids are mature enough to decide to be sexually active, we should make sure they're educated enough as well.

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#98

Post by greglindahl »

humanrebar wrote: post #97
ashark wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that the advice is nearly indistinguishable from "be born into a family where you'll be socialized to follow this pattern and provided resources to help follow it and to help get you back on track if things go awry, and golly, you probably won't be poor!"

He's not actually wrong. I just think leaving the word "sex" out of the description misstates the actual problem. One could start following that pattern, get pregnant in college, drop out, and be slightly better off than having a baby in high school (since you check the "some college" option on the application instead of "some high school"). If the problem is education and socialization, shouldn't the philanthropic c…

I don't know what sex education classes you had, but the ones I had (public high school, late 1970s in the deep South) definitely mentioned the impact that early childbearing had on education and lifetime income.

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#99

Post by thriftwy »

Mz wrote: post #93
thriftwy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the ex dies, you will be penniless if you didn't also work Why not work? After some time in divorce (immediately perhaps) you are supposed, as an adult, to support for yourself. Especially considering you're going to send children into their own lives by 50, and retirement is only coming at 65. You definitely look forward for 15 years of work even if you are absolutely devoted to raising kids. > if you don't have g…

> if you don't have goals, interests and earned income of your own But we can only put the very latter in alimony. Can't put goals there. If you got married and started a family because raising a family was a goal, alimony is related to that. Women have historically been provided for by husbands. For women, marriage has historically been a viable alternative to getting a job. It isn't like buying a lottery ticket. Be…

> Women have historically been provided for by husbands

I hope you know that women were also historically accompanied by dowry? Just the woman herself, with her raising a family, was not considered sufficient offering to match the groom.

If you hope to find a husband that would provide you towards the end of your life, you should (a) choose very carefully, and (b) have solid understanding of your own contribution. Otherwise, once your husband decides he doesn't want to spend the rest of life with you, it falls apart.

There's no doubt why alimony should be paid to support underage children. There's no reason why alimony should be paid to support an adult, a healthy woman of working age.

Re: How Did Marriage Become a Mark of Privilege?

#100

Post by atomical »

dguaraglia wrote: post #55
mlrtime wrote: post #3

Many men are understanding that marriage is a no win situation. You find yourself working your entire life to support your wife and family only to have a high percentage of ending in divorce. Your assets will be taken from you and you will be lucky if you get 50% custody. If you do not wand children there is no point in getting married.

I'm pretty sure not getting married is pretty popular with professional women too. Turns out they also have a career they care about. Who would've thought of women as humans, right?

Popular as a minority position?
Post reply on HN