Had a quick check to see if this article had already been posted but seems not. I guess you could file this under 'tell us something we don't already know' - it's long been known that well-being stagnates or declines for women on marriage, while the opposite is true for men - but still good to see it being talked about. And in The Guardian, of all places!
*For years, the feminist writer Linda Hirshman courted controversy by advising that marriage, unless to an exceptional man, is often a “bad bargain” for women. With every child a woman has, she sees her pay and long-term professional opportunities decline, particularly if she leaves the workforce for a significant period of time.
Furthermore, marriage has historically presented women with two options, neither good: marry a man and sacrifice your autonomy and career goals to become financially dependent on him. Or marry a man and maintain your own career but be prepared to have a “second shift” career taking care of him and the home. Even among more open-minded millennial men, the female spouse still ends up doing the majority of caregiving and housekeeping.
More women, however, are foregoing marriage and motherhood. In doing so, they trade in their “second shift” and instead begin taking care of themselves. To use Hirshman’s language, they are rejecting a “bad bargain”. This new status quo frustrates men who feel entitled to female companionship, such as angry male “incels".*
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/13/you-dont-have-to-settle-the-joy-of-living-and-dying-alone