Article Re: Declining Interest in Marriage (by Men)

[2BizE]

I’m going to throw something out that may not be popular to say...but...I believe this trending attitude for men not to marry is coming from the trending new attitude of women not to marry and to be self sufficient.  In the past few hundred years since men and women have started marrying for love, it was really two different kinds of love.  For man it was for sex.  For woman it was for stability and protection.(and children).  The man was the bread winner, the patriarch, the strength.  Women filled the need for children, nurturing, support.

Society started placing more demands in bonds: sex outside marriage was forbidden. For man to accomplish his need to reproduce, it meant he had to get married.

In society today, that has changed.  The women can be self sufficient without the man.  She can fulfill many of her needs by herself. She doesn’t need to be married to make money, provide for her protection, have babies, etc  This has allowed men to change how they view marriage.  If they can get sex outside of marriage, then there is not a huge need for them to marry.

Always open to differing opinions....

 

[CV75]

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

Maybe this bullet point boils down to men's fears of getting stuck in a sexually unfulfilling marriage. Even when you believe in abstinence outside of marriage, is it better to remain single and celibate and hold out hope for future sexual satisfaction than to get yourself stuck in a sexually unfulfilling marriage? From my own experience and what I see from men who have been in that boat, I'm not sure I even know which is better.

I think whoever is fearful to this degree -- male or female -- must be overthinking it. If they are sexually inexperienced, how would they know what unfulfilling is, and if they are experienced, why wouldn't they learn from it?

The solution to overthinking, if they admit it, is faith and maybe counseling, and not so much focusing on the horror stories of others.

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, katherine the great said:

Really? How about couples taking responsibility for their own sex lives? The conversation should start before marriage and never stop. Spouses should meet each other’s needs and men and women’s needs are quite different. People should not be passive about something so basic. 

I have found it really interesting how frequently this message is promoted by LDS sex educators/therapists in the circles I frequent. So many questions about sexual propriety and the answer in every case is some variation of take responsibility to make your own moral judgements. If I think too hard about much of what the likes of Laura Brotherson have published, a good half of it could boil down to "take responsibility for your own sex life." The success Brotherson's and others work suggests to me that we as LDS want someone to tell us that it is okay to take responsibility for our own sex lives. My follow up question, then might be -- why do you think that many LDS do not take responsibility (or don't take responsibility until after their marriage comes to some crisis point or after divorce or other scenario)? What is it about the way we teach sex ed and chastity in the Church that leads so many to have trouble taking responsibility for themselves?

[strappinglad]

Maybe a sex-ed class should be scheduled in the Sunday School rotation like geneology is. Oh, I can just see the reactions. LOL 👿

[Duncan]

Just now, strappinglad said:

Maybe a sex-ed class should be scheduled in the Sunday School rotation like geneology is. Oh, I can just see the reactions. LOL 👿

They used to do that Standards night and one time we had this lecture on the "river of desire"..............................what? 🤢

[MrShorty]

17 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The solution to overthinking, if they admit it, is faith and maybe counseling, and not so much focusing on the horror stories of others.

I think that, statistically, the horror stories represent a minority -- perhaps a vocal minority but a minority nonetheless. I might add that one possible counter to all the horror stories is to highlight success. It is interesting that many of those who report fewer sexual hangups in marriage give at least partial credits to parents or similar adults who expressed in some way that they enjoyed and valued sex. I have seen many suggest that parents should should let their children know that they enjoy and value sex. Enough messages that adults value sex can provide a good counterpoint to the horror stories.

[Stargazer]

48 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

I’m going to throw something out that may not be popular to say...but...I believe this trending attitude for men not to marry is coming from the trending new attitude of women not to marry and to be self sufficient.  In the past few hundred years since men and women have started marrying for love, it was really two different kinds of love.  For man it was for sex.  For woman it was for stability and protection.(and children).  The man was the bread winner, the patriarch, the strength.  Women filled the need for children, nurturing, support.

Society started placing more demands in bonds: sex outside marriage was forbidden. For man to accomplish his need to reproduce, it meant he had to get married.

In society today, that has changed.  The women can be self sufficient without the man.  She can fulfill many of her needs by herself. She doesn’t need to be married to make money, provide for her protection, have babies, etc  This has allowed men to change how they view marriage.  If they can get sex outside of marriage, then there is not a huge need for them to marry.

Always open to differing opinions....

 

I think that's a very logical analysis of the situation and the history.

[smac97]

2 hours ago, poptart said:

You're not me,

I acknowledge that.  We all walk different paths in life.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

also going to guess you were probably far more privileged than I was.  Good for you. 

I don't know what his means. 

2 hours ago, poptart said:

Germany has better family courts, they won't hesitate to yank kids from violent households. 

Courts in the U.S. do this also.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

Also, their abortion laws are quite a bit stricter. 

Okay.  We only have so much control over such things.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

Considering the US likes to consider themselves a Christian country it blows my mind they do as little as they do for child welfare.

That could be a long discussion.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

People here like to rip on places like Germany due to whatever opinion they have on the Christian religion, in practice Germany blows them out of the water, I think.  Bavaria has a law where a crucifix is on display and the whole country is closed on Sundays, by law.  Try getting that passed here....

Pluralistic religious liberty is an important consideration in the United States.  

Also, Germany (and other countries) have a state-imposed and -enforced "church tax."  Such taxes are compulsory for Catholics in Austria, members of the Church of Denmark pay the "kirkeskat".  Finland.  Germany.  Iceland.  Italy.  Sweden.  Switzerland.  

There are, of course, controversies about whether tax exemption constitutes an undue or unfair advantage for religions in the U.S.  And so it goes.  But overall I am glad we don't have have a "state religion" in the U.S., 'cuz is sure wouldn't be mine.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

If your buddy was hosed that badly in court and he wants to try again?  Hmmm, doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, isn't that the definition of insanity?

I know many people who have had success in a subsequent marriage.  Two of my sisters.  A brother-in-law.  A sister-in-law.  Many friends as well.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

If I had my way this country would have an education, child support and foster care system that many Euro countries have.  As someone who had the life I did it irritates me when I see some entitled WASP suburbanite go on about muh religions being persecuted while voting against the interests of the least of these. 

Okay.

2 hours ago, poptart said:

That being said, I don't trust a lot of people here with the welfare of the vulnerable, they've proven we need gov't regulation considering how so many children just slip through the cracks and few seem to care. 

So you trust "the government" to competently handle "the welfare of the vulnerable?"

2 hours ago, poptart said:

I'm not going to go into religious orgs, there's a nice red banner that says no politics and for me it is very, very political.  I look at religion as basically another political engine of sorts so that's that.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

[CV75]

21 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

I think that, statistically, the horror stories represent a minority -- perhaps a vocal minority but a minority nonetheless. I might add that one possible counter to all the horror stories is to highlight success. It is interesting that many of those who report fewer sexual hangups in marriage give at least partial credits to parents or similar adults who expressed in some way that they enjoyed and valued sex. I have seen many suggest that parents should should let their children know that they enjoy and value sex. Enough messages that adults value sex can provide a good counterpoint to the horror stories.

I agree entirely! I'm not sure what kid would hang around a vocal minority such as this, but I do acknowledge that we live in an overly-sexualized society, especially for children, which can do a lot of harm anyay.

[Nofear]

FYI: This was a 2013 article (06/20/2013 08:29 am ET Updated Aug 20, 2013).

Though, there are a few more updated polls from Pew that are largely consistent. In particular, it is aslso single women as well who aren't looking for something more serious.
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/08/20/nearly-half-of-u-s-adults-say-dating-has-gotten-harder-for-most-people-in-the-last-10-years/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-and-experiences-with-dating-and-relationships/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/31/half-of-u-s-christians-say-casual-sex-between-consenting-adults-is-sometimes-or-always-acceptable/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/relationships-women-male-partners-global-age-gap/
 

[rongo]

1 hour ago, 2BizE said:

I’m going to throw something out that may not be popular to say...but...I believe this trending attitude for men not to marry is coming from the trending new attitude of women not to marry and to be self sufficient.  In the past few hundred years since men and women have started marrying for love, it was really two different kinds of love.  For man it was for sex.  For woman it was for stability and protection.(and children).  The man was the bread winner, the patriarch, the strength.  Women filled the need for children, nurturing, support.

Society started placing more demands in bonds: sex outside marriage was forbidden. For man to accomplish his need to reproduce, it meant he had to get married.

In society today, that has changed.  The women can be self sufficient without the man.  She can fulfill many of her needs by herself. She doesn’t need to be married to make money, provide for her protection, have babies, etc  This has allowed men to change how they view marriage.  If they can get sex outside of marriage, then there is not a huge need for them to marry.

Always open to differing opinions....

 

I think this is true of society at large, but not the LDS YSA community. Even those who struggle with the law of chastity but still believe aspire and want the traditional LDS family, for the most part, I think. Not achieving the ideal causes sadness and frustration, but I don't think most believing LDS actively seek for women to be self-sustaining without the man and fulfilling needs by themselves. And, I don't think most believing LDS young men seek sex outside of marriage.

[juliann]

2 hours ago, 2BizE said:

I’m going to throw something out that may not be popular to say...but...I believe this trending attitude for men not to marry is coming from the trending new attitude of women not to marry and to be self sufficient.  In the past few hundred years since men and women have started marrying for love, it was really two different kinds of love.  For man it was for sex.  For woman it was for stability and protection.(and children).  The man was the bread winner, the patriarch, the strength.  Women filled the need for children, nurturing, support.

Society started placing more demands in bonds: sex outside marriage was forbidden. For man to accomplish his need to reproduce, it meant he had to get married.

In society today, that has changed.  The women can be self sufficient without the man.  She can fulfill many of her needs by herself. She doesn’t need to be married to make money, provide for her protection, have babies, etc  This has allowed men to change how they view marriage.  If they can get sex outside of marriage, then there is not a huge need for them to marry.

Always open to differing opinions....

 

In every measure I have seen, men benefit more from marriage than women do....emotionally and economically. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

In every measure I have seen, men benefit more from marriage than women do....emotionally and economically. 

But do they think they do or do they believe the story they will be happier not being tied to one woman?

[2BizE]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

In every measure I have seen, men benefit more from marriage than women do....emotionally and economically. 

I agree with you. Trends do not always reflect best logic.

[katherine the great]

4 hours ago, MrShorty said:

My follow up question, then might be -- why do you think that many LDS do not take responsibility (or don't take responsibility until after their marriage comes to some crisis point or after divorce or other scenario)? What is it about the way we teach sex ed and chastity in the Church that leads so many to have trouble taking responsibility for themselves?

Laziness?  "The plan of happiness" presents a formula for happiness so perhaps LDS people seek a formula from church leaders in their sex lives as well. What they forget is that our sex drive is part of the natural man--no matter how much people speak of it in spiritual terms. Also, our highest leaders are usually very old and this probably doesn't occupy their thoughts so much anymore. Also, these are our spiritual leaders--not our carnal leaders. I think most men would have a much more satisfying sex life if they took the time to understand their wives. Most women need conversation, communication and emotional connection before responding physically to their spouse. Which is ironic because men connect emotionally through sex. So maybe men should just marry men and women should marry women. 🙂

[poptart]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

I acknowledge that.  We all walk different paths in life.

I don't know what his means. 

Courts in the U.S. do this also.

Okay.  We only have so much control over such things.

That could be a long discussion.

Pluralistic religious liberty is an important consideration in the United States.  

Also, Germany (and other countries) have a state-imposed and -enforced "church tax."  Such taxes are compulsory for Catholics in Austria, members of the Church of Denmark pay the "kirkeskat".  Finland.  Germany.  Iceland.  Italy.  Sweden.  Switzerland.  

There are, of course, controversies about whether tax exemption constitutes an undue or unfair advantage for religions in the U.S.  And so it goes.  But overall I am glad we don't have have a "state religion" in the U.S., 'cuz is sure wouldn't be mine.

I know many people who have had success in a subsequent marriage.  Two of my sisters.  A brother-in-law.  A sister-in-law.  Many friends as well.

Okay.

So you trust "the government" to competently handle "the welfare of the vulnerable?"

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

Actually, you can opt out, at least in Germany.

https://wwkn.de/en/about-german-taxes/church-tax-kirchensteuer/

Also, they don't mind paying it, the Church over there is less judgemental, much bigger on social justice and help for the poor.   The German order still runs nursing homes for the elderly and drug rehab facilities. 

I'm still for more control, it's not so much the religion but it's followers here that many besides myself have issues with and would like to see be brought to heel via legislation of some kind.

Good for you, I have not experiences as such, most of the people I know who married people from the mainland divorced.  Privilege has it's privilege I see.....

In this country?  So far i've seen greed and opportunism just get out of hand as well as exploitation of the system by privileged suburbanites.  After how my life has been?  Yeah I do trust the gov't a lot more then the American populace in general.  If that's what it takes, that's what it takes. 

[mfbukowski]

Well it's all just economics with covid and all.

No news here. 

I mean everyone knows that interest rates are the lowest they have ever been.

😜

[Hamba Tuhan]

19 hours ago, smac97 said:

Anyway, those are my preliminary thoughts.  I welcome yours.

I read the article. Not one of those eight reasons explains why I have never married. I wish one did because they sound relatively easy to overcome!

Here are my preliminary thoughts:

Being single isn't great. The first summer after my mission, I went back to one of my areas to work and save money for university. I worked hard, but I was the only active YSA in the entire ward, and I was dreadfully lonely. I remember sitting on the end of the pier one evening watching the sun set across the sound. It was beautiful, but I felt completely empty experiencing it alone. I set a goal that night that I would be married within a year, and I prayed to God that I would succeed in achieving that goal. I told Him I just wasn't designed to live alone. I'm still not there yet all these years later ... and I'm still not designed to live alone.

When I first moved to my current city to begin my PhD, I went to a YSA fireside with one of the local bishops. He told us we needed to date more. Afterwards, I asked him how many women he had dated before marrying. Needless to say, I had already exceeded that number by many dozens. I'm not terribly impressed by people who married in their early 20s telling me to date more when I've clearly dated far, far more than they ever have.

I really want to marry a Latter-day Saint woman who shares my faith and values and who likes me. For some reason, women outside the Church are far more attracted to me than women inside the Church. This has been the case literally everywhere I've lived as an adult. I'm kind of glad it has happened because the attention of non-member females has assured me that I'm not a horrible person.

Many times the mothers of single females in the Church have liked me too. I've had at least half a dozen mothers tell me they've done everything they could to 'sell' me to their daughters. In one case when I was working in America, after a woman broke off our relationship, her mum kept sending me little notes begging me not to give up on her. As odd as it's been, this has also helped assure me that I'm not a horrible person.

On several occasions, I have responded to attention from non-member women by dating them. It's pleasant enough on the surface, but the gospel is the core of my being, and it's just not satisfying not to be able to share that part of me. Consequently, I've given up on dating outside the Church. And in fact, I'm just not interested in dating 'for the fun of it' anymore full stop.

It hasn't helped, I suspect, that everywhere I have lived post-mission, including in the US, active single men have far outnumbered active single women. Before moving here, I was in a singles ward in America. The male-to-female ratio was 2:1. Before that, the stake I lived in when I was studying at a Big Ten university had a male-to-female ratio in the YSA category of 3:1. I've lived in two different branches that had no active single females at all. When I first moved here, we jokingly referred to our YSA Sunday school class as 'first elders quorum' because some Sundays it was all men or just one woman.

Of course this is not a numbers game; it just takes one woman. But the one active YSA female in our ward back then was a little odd, ended up moving in with an extremely 'progressive' non-member boyfriend, and has now formally left the Church. I don't feel like I missed out on anything there.

And that brings up the point about faithfulness. Again, back when I was pursuing my MA in the American Midwest, the YSA in our stake travelled one weekend to a much bigger city to attend a house party with the YSA there. I was excited to meet some more women I could potentially date. At one point, I walked into the kitchen, and most of the local females were in there discussing how the prophets were a bunch of out-of-touch old white men who had no right to tell them how to live their lives. Er ... no, thanks.

And that brings me to another thought. It has been my experience that many Latter-day Saint women still want to marry but they don't really like either the Church or men, or both. At least four rock-solid good men in my current ward have been tossed aside by their wives. The men have all stayed active. Three of the wives have not. The last sister I actually dated in my stake (a divorced woman with a young child) told me on our first (and only!) date that I shouldn't expect anything to happen between us because I was too 'churchy' for her.

And so be it. I'm just not interested in being less for the sake of not being lonely. I sometimes think of Moroni wandering for years by himself, and I tell myself that, if necessary, I can survive being alone too. In the meantime, there is far too much to be done. I'm grateful that I live in a stake where Church leaders still recognise my worth. I currently serve on the high council with the portfolio for missionary work and missionary preparation, and pre-COVID, I was a temple worker. I've twice been ward mission leader, I've taught primary, I was Young Men president for six years, I've been a part of three bishoprics (twice as counsellor), and I've served with three different stake presidencies.

I'm not angry, depressed, or violent. I don't play computer games. I'm good with money. I work hard. I cook well and keep a clean and tidy house. I'm fit and healthy. I love spending time outdoors -- camping, climbing, etc. I've been told that I'm both patient and kind. If no one currently wants that in her life, so be it. I still love the idea of marriage and family, and I trust that the Lord has eternal plans for me.

Edited December 3, 2020 by Hamba Tuhan

[nuclearfuels]

19 hours ago, MrShorty said:

Among the more complementarian among us, I see some subtle denigrations of manhood in how we justify our prescribed gender roles. I frequently hear someone claim that the reason men are designated to preside in the home is because otherwise men would not engage in the home at all. Among the justifications for why men are given the priesthood is some form of men would not otherwise engage in the Church at all if we didn't throw them the priesthood bone. Again, yes, we honor manhood/fatherhood, but men are so disengaged and lazy and unambitious that we have to deny women (the clearly superior gender) certain roles so that we can force those roles upon incompetent and unwilling men (okay, maybe I'm exaggerating a little bit here).

I guess what I see is that instead of simply honoring manhood/fatherhood we need to make manhood/fatherhood equal to womanhood/motherhood. On the surface we say they are equal (different but equal, however that works out), but I think we have some undercurrents in our rhetoric that undermine the message.

Spot on

[nuclearfuels]

21 hours ago, smac97 said:

Anyway, those are my preliminary thoughts.  I welcome yours.

Thanks,

-Smac

Until polygamy is legalized and re-instituted, we'll see more and more of this. 

Women have been liberated.

Men have noticed and bid them well.

Religion is the only thing that has kept birth rates on life support.

Fewer people than ever consider themselves religious.

-

 

 

[rchorse]

4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I read the article. Not one of those eight reasons explains why I have never married. I wish one did because they sound relatively easy to overcome!

Here are my preliminary thoughts:

Being single isn't great. The first summer after my mission, I went back to one of my areas to work and save money for university. I worked hard, but I was the only active YSA in the entire ward, and I was dreadfully lonely. I remember sitting on the end of the pier one evening watching the sun set across the sound. It was beautiful, but I felt completely empty experiencing it alone. I set a goal that night that I would be married within a year, and I prayed to God that I would succeed in achieving that goal. I told Him I just wasn't designed to live alone. I'm still not there yet all these years later ... and I'm still not designed to live alone.

When I first moved to my current city to begin my PhD, I went to a YSA fireside with one of the local bishops. He told us we needed to date more. Afterwards, I asked him how many women he had dated before marrying. Needless to say, I had already exceeded that number by many dozens. I'm not terribly impressed by people who married in their early 20s telling me to date more when I've clearly dated far, far more than they ever have.

I really want to marry a Latter-day Saint woman who shares my faith and values and who likes me. For some reason, women outside the Church are far more attracted to me than women inside the Church. This has been the case literally everywhere I've lived as an adult. I'm kind of glad it has happened because the attention of non-member females has assured me that I'm not a horrible person.

Many times the mothers of single females in the Church have liked me too. I've had at least half a dozen mothers tell me they've done everything they could to 'sell' me to their daughters. In one case when I was working in America, after a woman broke off our relationship, her mum kept sending me little notes begging me not to give up on her. As odd as it's been, this has also helped assure me that I'm not a horrible person.

On several occasions, I have responded to attention from non-member women by dating them. It's pleasant enough on the surface, but the gospel is the core of my being, and it's just not satisfying not to be able to share that part of me. Consequently, I've given up on dating outside the Church. And in fact, I'm just not interested in dating 'for the fun of it' anymore full stop.

It hasn't helped, I suspect, that everywhere I have lived post-mission, including in the US, active single men have far outnumbered active single women. Before moving here, I was in a singles ward in America. The male-to-female ratio was 2:1. Before that, the stake I lived in when I was studying at a Big Ten university had a male-to-female ratio in the YSA category of 3:1. I've lived in two different branches that had no active single females at all. When I first moved here, we jokingly referred to our YSA Sunday school class as 'first elders quorum' because some Sundays it was all men or just one woman.

Of course this is not a numbers game; it just takes one woman. But the one active YSA female in our ward back then was a little odd, ended up moving in with an extremely 'progressive' non-member boyfriend, and has now formally left the Church. I don't feel like I missed out on anything there.

And that brings up the point about faithfulness. Again, back when I was pursuing my MA in the American Midwest, the YSA in our stake travelled one weekend to a much bigger city to attend a house party with the YSA there. I was excited to meet some more women I could potentially date. At one point, I walked into the kitchen, and most of the local females were in there discussing how the prophets were a bunch of out-of-touch old white men who had no right to tell them how to live their lives. Er ... no, thanks.

And that brings me to another thought. It has been my experience that many Latter-day Saint women still want to marry but they don't really like either the Church or men, or both. At least four rock-solid good men in my current ward have been tossed aside by their wives. The men have all stayed active. Three of the wives have not. The last sister I actually dated in my stake (a divorced woman with a young child) told me on our first (and only!) date that I shouldn't expect anything to happen between us because I was too 'churchy' for her.

And so be it. I'm just not interested in being less for the sake of not being lonely. I sometimes think of Moroni wandering for years by himself, and I tell myself that, if necessary, I can survive being alone too. In the meantime, there is far too much to be done. I'm grateful that I live in a stake where Church leaders still recognise my worth. I currently serve on the high council with the portfolio for missionary work and missionary preparation, and pre-COVID, I was a temple worker. I've twice been ward mission leader, I've taught primary, I was Young Men president for six years, I've been a part of three bishoprics (twice as counsellor), and I've served with three different stake presidencies.

I'm not angry, depressed, or violent. I don't play computer games. I'm good with money. I work hard. I cook well and keep a clean and tidy house. I'm fit and healthy. I love spending time outdoors -- camping, climbing, etc. I've been told that I'm both patient and kind. If no one currently wants that in her life, so be it. I still love the idea of marriage and family, and I trust that the Lord has eternal plans for me.

Although I managed to get married shortly before 30, my experience prior to that was similar to what you describe. Finding someone to marry is not as simple as many make it out to be, especially as a member of the church.

You have my respect for staying faithful in the face of this particular challenge. I won't pretend to know fully what it's like, but I do have at least an inkling.

[MrShorty]

13 hours ago, katherine the great said:

What they forget is that our sex drive is part of the natural man--no matter how much people speak of it in spiritual terms.

I don't think forgotten is right. It is a common topic of discussion in the circles I frequent, so it seems far from forgotten. Disputed or misunderstood seem more accurate. I see many arguing that our sexuality is "God-given" and "God created sexuality and declared it good (before the Fall)" and "sexual union is ... a very real sacrament of the highest order" (according to Elder Holland).

It's getting a good ways away from the OP, and I don't know how far down the rabbit hole to go. I think there is more than mere forgetting at play here, if your assertion is closer to the truth. If the Church is supposed to be a major source of moral truth, then I would ask that the Church help us correctly understand these truths rather than letting us delude ourselves.

[katherine the great]

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Until polygamy is legalized and re-instituted, we'll see more and more of this. 

Huh? So women will continue to resist choosing the number of children they bear, but will embrace polygamy?

 

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Religion is the only thing that has kept birth rates on life support.

CFR. From what I've seen, education is the biggest enemy to high birth rates--at least in America. 

[smac97]

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Until polygamy is legalized and re-instituted, we'll see more and more of this. 

I'm not sure polygamy is the cure for the diminishing respect and reverence society has for the institution of marriage.

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Women have been liberated.

I am very happy that women in many parts of the world have increased access to education, employment, affordable and effective birth control, and other means of self-reliance.  I am saddened, however, that these developments have, in some ways, had an adverse effect on marriage and the family.

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Men have noticed and bid them well.

I guess the OP article is suggesting that, in a way, men are increasingly feeling "liberated" from marriage.  Broadly speaking, this is not a good thing.

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Religion is the only thing that has kept birth rates on life support.

I think there are a number of cultural influences that affect birth rates, religion being a biggie.

3 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Fewer people than ever consider themselves religious.

My wife and I consciously chose to have a large family because A) we both came from large families, B) the Church's teachings influenced us, C) we kept feeling impressed to have more children (until we didn't).

Thanks,

-Smac

[rongo]

19 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I guess the OP article is suggesting that, in a way, men are increasingly feeling "liberated" from marriage.  Broadly speaking, this is not a good thing.

Isn't there a difference, though, between what lies behind society at large's trending away from marriage, and what lies behind trending away from marriage in LDS culture? It's cropped up in this thread more than a few times where people have simply made a 1:1 correlation between what's going on in society and what's going on in "normative" LDS culture (by which I mean, among active, believing members. I think it's a given that very inactive or disaffected Mormons probably mirror society's underpinnings). 

For singles who believe in LDS truth claims and try to live the fulness of the gospel as taught in the Church, I don't see how women or men feeling liberated from marriage would drive their difficulty marrying. There are a number of factors we're discussing here, but I don't think that's the driving force in normative LDS culture and society. I think the vast majority of singles want to progress towards and succeed at getting married, and where that's not currently in the cards, I don't think it's because they are exulting in feeling liberated from marriage.