What we already knew: women are happier after divorce than men are

[BasilBabyEater]

Am loving the picture of Rupert and Wendy to demonstrate the story.

I think we're both pretty happy.

What's always pretty outstanding about these results is that women are really punished for divorce - the poverty alone, plus lack of status, distrust from other women etc (you might sleep with their husband) is a real turn off.

And yet we're still happier.

Shows just how good marriage is for men and how bad it is for women.

On average of course.

There are always the exceptions which intelligent people understand without having it spelled out, but I'll spell it out here for the benefit of the usual suspects.

That is a very good point Basil and quite a poignant one.

Oh thanks for pointing out there are exceptions to your sweeping generalisations

Referring to what 'we' know in a thread title is teeth itchy. How can you know what I know?

Well you know it now.

If you're a regular frequenter of this board, you will know it, because it's been mentioned several times. Nice to see it backed up by research (again) though.

What's the answer?

Mass divorce?

This thread is good timing Ive just come off a thread in Relationships where a guy has posted that perhaps he should "help" less around the house and become the carefree bloke his partner fell in love with to get more sex. I shit you not.

Basil Baby Eater i heard the same phrase in the film The Witches of Eastwick recently
In the film Jack Nicolson says "Marriage Great for the man Lousy for the woman"

But why the fuck is it made out to be the wife who curbs the mans freedom when its total crap.

And er, the sweeping generalisation is based on research.

Again.

This keeps happening.

Every time they do a piece of research on this subject, they find out that women are happier after divorce than men are.

Hence the sweeping generalisations.

Like, yerknow, poor people are more likely to shop in Morrisons than Waitrose. Sweeping generalisation there, based on very sound research. Mustn't make weeping generalisations though.

Well, mass divorce is one answer Dadthelion

The other one, is to perhaps even up the scales within marriage?

Make it better for women, so that they benefit from it as much as men?

Then there would be no need for mass divorce.

Might that be an idea to run with?

Basil another way in which they are punished is the vitriol from the media towards single parents. Not just from the DailyMail/Sun either but even a couple of the womens weeklies demonize single parents regularly.

Yes that's true.

Even single parents are down on single parents.

I've lost count of the times when other women have told me that although she's a single parent, she's not a "typical" one - she got divorced, kids have same dad, she's working, she's whatever-it-is-that-doesn't-fit-the-negative-stereotype.

Single parents themselves buy into that crap without realising they're doing it.

Feck lost a big post.

I am a regular on these boards.

I don't believe marriage is bad for women.

I do believe bad marriages are bad for women.

Marriage is not inherently bad for women. Or men.

Women tend IMO to do 'better' post divorce because women tend to be the 'keeper of the social' in relationships. Just another example of how sexism hurts everyone. Women do the phoning, arranging, present buying, all the wifework. So after divorce women get the relationships.

Which Your article also refers to. Something about women divorcing 'and going out with the girls' I can't quote exactly because clicking back into your link made me lose my last post.

I dunno.

Divorce was one of the best things that happened to me.

Me and my boy for 9 years, wall to wall Sky Tv, Cricket and pizza.

I'd recommend it, but my ex is a feminist who in no way was going to be left holding the baby on her own as it were.

I'm happy,she's happy. It can be done.

Men, marry a feminist.

Financially marriage is very precarious for women, for many reasons to do with traditional stay-at-home-parenting, (women's wages often not as good as men's so they become the SAHP or the 'part-time' one etc etc.) When a marriage is happy and all things are shared equally, then this may not be a big problem, but when things go wrong, women who have been the SAHP, the 'part-time one etc etc, are hit very badly, particularly if they become single parents as well, so marraige IS financially precarious for women. therefore, I agree with Basil that marraige is not as good for women as it is for men. there are lots of other reasons too, but the financial situation is the obvious one.

I get that you believe bad marriages are bad for women WF. Do you also believe they are bad for men? In which case, why aren't they as happy as women when they divorce?

Don't answer now if you can't be arsed, I'm off to bed as have realised it's very late and apparently it's going to be 25 degrees tomorrow so beach I think. Woohoo!

Good night.

Also what constitutes a bad marriage.

One man's meat is another man's poison and all that.

Must really go to bed now, "see" you tomorrow.

My punctuation and typing in that last post are completely embarrassing and a sign that I need to go and get some sleep!!

I'm Feckin roasting but will do my best...

I believe essentially tht bad marriages are bad for everyone within them, including (especially?) children.

As to why women do better out of marriages, I think the reasons are hard to unravel. Firstly not all divorced men are unhappy, clearly. We're talking about a trend. SOME men will be completely happy post-divorce. I love Dadthelion's logic that the men who divorce feminists and are therefore held to account are happy.

Marriage/coupledom isn't for everyone. But men are sold the marriage message as hard as women. Maybe they find it harder to adjust post-divorce?

And I already made the point about women holding the social threads in their hands - as part of the wifework often - but when marriages end, men do find themselves without the social network their wives nurtured.

There's also the much-quoted tenant that men who have children in the workplace are seen as successful, young and virile. Surely the reverse must be true?

And of course - and again this is a trend rather than getting into specifics - men usually have less access to their children after divorce. This is not a 'what about the menz' post. Usually if men have less access it's because they haven't put the time in/have been a shit in other ways. But not seeing your children - no matter what the cause or whether it's justified must have a significant impact on happiness.

www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/jul/12/money-biggest-taboo-relationship

Interesting article which is very true of many marriages. In the final paragraph, he says that "generosity of spirit" is possibly the answer. I agree, but "generosity of spirit" depends on a happy, working partnership. This "generosity of spirit" will not be available to his wife if/when they divorce and she will be considerably worse off. Having said that, his wife will, on divoce, be finally in control of her own budgeting and money (even though their will be less of it). For example, she will no longer feel that he that he is entitled to have "final say" on large purchases. And she may then feel "happier" - whereas that outcome of divorce will not have much effect on making him any happier (there is even an argument, that the loss of power will make him unhappier.)

So I think the fact that women are worse off financially after divorce, yet still happier than men, shows that marriage is not a "good" thing for women. I think power over finanacial control far outweighs arguments that Wilson was making re social aspects of divorce which, incidentally, really are generalisations.

God that Tim Lott article is horrifying.

It deserves a thread all to itself.

He is clearly a controlling git and his behaviour may possibly amount to financial abuse - he has the last say on where they go on holiday because he earns more money than her? Fuck, what sort of attitude is that?