Why did western society begin to devalue marriage so much in the last 60 years?

Marriage is falling out of favor because marriage was created out of, essentially, economic necessity. Back when technonology was shit, the only way women could survive was through having a man provide for her. "Marriage" was essentially a contract saying "I get exclusive rights to your pussy and you raise my kids/cook my food, in exchange I'll use my superior strength to protect you, hunt shit and/or bring money home."

Fast forward to today, and that economic necessity is no longer there. Women are entirely capable of being financially independent and even raising families by themselves. Thus they have less patience for mens' bullshit (women initiate the divorce 66℅ of the time).

Men on the other hand are more weary of marriage now because child support / alimony laws make it so that men have more to lose than women.

These factors combined have made marriage just far less desirable in general for everyone.

All going as planned...

Because are current societal organisation and technologies make it unnecessary in its positive practicalities yet still contains its negative consequences.

Marriage was basically an assurance of inheritance to children, mostly in political inheritances, but we don't need it to do that any more, nor do we follow the same system of inheritance. So the only reason to do it are for sentimental reasons.

I think most neet males have finished High School user, I expect most even have college level (UK definition college, not university).

If you want to be so melodramatic about people getting laid go to /r9k/. People getting laid isn't any sort of 'great travesty' and certainly isn't a new one.

*our

Marriage is awful, that's why.

>le 1950s ideal marriage was always the case meme
Bullshit. Peasant women worked just as hard as their husbands did.

It hasn't.

Marriage rates have been going up and divorces are way down.

To me it seems as though there are too many people trying to live their own autobiography. If part of someone's life can't live up to the standards of the story they've imagined telling their imaginary kids/old friends/GILF fuck-buddy it has little to no value in their eyes. Anything and anyone that doesn't fit the desired narrative will be discarded if possible and with minimal remorse due to any one of an infinite number of possible justifications.

It's the kind of behavior I would guess used to be evidence of a person spending too much time reading fiction. As for the last 60 years? I want to say the rise of Television and serialized media in general, but I'm no expert ann frankly I hope there's a lot more to it than that.

Care to back it up? What country are you speaking of?

Working equally hard =\= equal results.

Or are you about to tell me that women are as good as fighting as men, hunting as men and doing hard labor as men?

Because of rampant hedonism.

Who cares about the familiar when you can have the new and exciting?

Marriage isn't devalued, probably the opposite now. It was an economic unit at the foundation of society when the family unit was more important than individual laborers and specialists in the widespread society. Now marriage is romanticized to a fault, attached less to long-term economic considerations, and more to emotional considerations. Hence why it seems "devalued" now.

because of how hard you can get screwed in terms of financial security if the marriage fails, and how easy it is to end the marriage if it fails.

marriage is a meme, and a slowly dying one at that.

Working women means more production and stronger economy.
The soviet union also had its women working so how could the US compete if 50 of the population was unproductive?
in parallel archeology philosophy histroy were all debasing religious dogma.
Better economic conditions and material conditions lead to the differneces between the genders being less important for a properly working society, detrimental even. It also meant that there is no real need to hate on gays as the acceptance of same sex couples doesnt matter any longer. Of course the demographic problems were unaddressed and low childbirth was replaced with immigration.
All these contemporary gender games are a symptom of whats to come. A society of people who treat gender as a game since it becomes essentially inconsequential to one's life and what one does.
It creates even more fluidity and adaptability in a world that keeps on chaning faster and faster.
People need to be completey fluid and moveable from one position in life to another.
Of course if we cannot quickly come up with solutions to the lose of gender roles, like the ability to raise kids within artifical womans, there will be a conservatiev backlash and the gender identity games will be rejected cause they cannot fully fullfill their promise.
They will probably reserge again as technology advances even further in its ability to change people on a biological and physiological level.

Because the bad side won WW2, duh

People are afraid of committing; want the ability to continuously remake and recommit themselves over and over again, even though this ultimately leads to a profound sense of emptiness and dissatisfaction.

Women entering the labour pool = higher tax revenue
Socialization of childcare due to single parent households = expansion of gov't power

>"Marriage" was essentially a contract saying "I get exclusive rights to your pussy and you raise my kids/cook my food, in exchange I'll use my superior strength to protect you, hunt shit and/or bring money home."

i feel lazy and prudish for wanting this, but it's better than getting knocked up and having an illegitimate son look after me when i'm 60 and greeting customers at meijers because social security became a meme. then again, i guess spending old age married to someone i'm just pretending to love is just as bad.

This kind of remaking and recommitting happens regardless. Even a person in a stable career and marriage will never be just themselves, they'll be in a process of constant change and becoming. This emptiness and dissatisfaction is inevitable. This is part of why existentialism is somewhat misguided.

>Women are entirely capable of being financially independent
A married couple in 2016 where both work has less spending power than a couple in 1960 where only the man worked. Source: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (often called "Pocahontas"), of all people

Thread/

Because there's tons of money to be made in doing it.

>So the only reason to do it are for sentimental reasons.

There are a lot of legal, property and tax implications of being married. At the end of the day, all romantic sentiment aside, marriage is a contract that has certain benefits and restrictions.

Marriage?

Nigga, I ain't got no time or money for that shit.

>1960
We're talking about one of America's greatest peaks here. That may not come back for a long time if ever.

Because women use alimony as a permanent extortion scam.

This.

If it was up to men there would probably be much less marriages, and since of the western world is now atheistic, marriage isn't taken as seriously as it once was.

>peasant
Back to Ching Ching land with you wang

Protip: Lose weight and go outside more often. You'll eventually be able to talk to girls.

Kek

That's bullshit.

If anything, your post show why marriage is falling, but not because of the way you think.

This kind of materialism and this egoistic way of seeing life is why marriage is falling. You don't care about family, you don't care about your partner, you are just a mercenary that only cares about money and about yourself.

Honestly, marriage is better now than it was for the past couple generations at least. When it's not an absolute necessity, it become something you want to do and can commit to.

Perhaps the worst thing that ever happened to marriage was conservative evangelical Christianity.

...

Back to your basement, this is a board for intelligent discussion

He's right though.

You can care about your family and your partner without marrying, especially today.

>you cannot examine the state of marriage in America on what is supposedly an American website without paying homage to our global citizen neighbors the Chinese. Fuck off and stop trying to shit up our dialogue.

I'm not him, but my impression of his post is that he is not very interested in that, considering he has a very low opinion on women.

Marriage existed long before any religion you christian fucktard.

No, s/he is not.
Find the caring part in that text.

Yes, but women weren't economically independent in hunter-gathering settings.

[Citation needed]

>hunter gathering
No even in the first civilization there was marriage outside of religion you ignorant buffoon.

t. legbeard

This post highlights why marriage is failing, not because it's right but because of this way of thinking.

That everything is in service of money and profit, rather than those things serving people, the families and communities. That marriage only existed for financial reasons.

It's just like you hear people say "anti immigration hurts the economy", modern thinking is simply that we serve money, and so must our actions and life choices

What does that have to do with anything? The statements he makes are true.

I agree. It's that materialistic mind set coming through.

Economist here. Economics was a mistake.

Yes, and when you have a lot of people living in a place over a long period of time, at some point you need a narrative and a set of values to keep those people within well-defined families, and handle property and ressources accordingly. Religion is a good tool for that, but I'm not claiming every single sedentary culture did it this way (although most that I can think of did).

I doubt marriage in hunter gathering settings was related to religion. Without a lot of people sharing a culture, can you really establish a religion that commands a complex set of values and behaviors? Trading of women between groups was a matter of diplomacy and economy.

That entire text deals with relationships as contract where everyone is totally egoistical. This may be a surprise to you, but not everyone thinks like the agent of an economics model.

Yeah, so what does marriage has to do with that? No one is forcing the people you speak of to marry.

Could you explain better?

My sister divorced after having four babies. My mom always gave her money. My mom caused it to happen.

Why commit when u have other options?

In my opinion, because in an hyper technological industrial economy, like ours, high man power is not necessary, unlike in a pre-industrial economy, were people had to "produce" more people in order to produce more wealth.

a lot of factors. But a major one is that we got rich enough to leave loveless marriages that, in the past, we'd stay in for economic stability.

Yes user women dont really love you they just use you like a sucker.

Apparently.

I believe there were a lot of factors but a major reason was the hardships of great depression, and WW2. In these times, relationships and love were devalued due to the hardships of life. Through 60s-80s, the children of people who grew up during the depression were not taught about the importance of relationships by their parents. In this time, the divorce rate skyrocketed. The broken relationships of the 60s-80s caused the adults of the present to have no idea how to have relationships. After all, many of their parents had shitty home lives too. This bad view of marriage has carried strongly into the 2010s.

Also, theirs a lot of propaganda out their about the evils of marriage.

Why should they?

Marriage is a spook.

>mfw thinking about all those qt German women raped by the Soviets

Delicious

Getting married was the best thing to ever happen to me, having a combined income and shared responsibilities is awesome. I honestly don't understand people who live alone.

Because marriage was a socio-economic bond that protected both parties. Now the courts will do that for you. A woman doesn't have to worry about getting married if she can just have the legal system force her baby-daddy to pay up.

Modern marriage and having kids = signing up for extortion

The sexual revolution and promotion of "free love".

IMO he's right but not in the "FUCKING WHOOOOOORES" way. The sexual revolution and free love put emphasis on the idea of casual sex and hook up culture. You have access to all of that fairly openly without the confines of marriage (compared to previous generations where you'd have to be discrete about that shit and keep it on the d/l) means that marriage no longer has as much value. Why get married and shackle yourself to one person when you can just go to bars and clubs, get drunk, get fucked and repeat with a new person--man or woman--with no real consequence? You're also starting to see the rise, and promotion, of polyamorous/open relationships because the idea of "exclusivity" is becoming unpalatable in a culture that increasingly desires social freedom and a laissez faire attitude with regards to sex.

Don't worry my Schneckchen, I won't hear you and your little friends' screams of horror during the gang rapes because I will be deep in my bunker getting married. And you are so grown up to think of Uncle Dolphie's feelings!

>Women are entirely capable of being financially independent and even raising families by themselves.

Tbqh this isn't really true though; it's just that the traditionally masculine responsibility of a man to take care of his family has been seeded to the State.

In my country we are taxed very heavily and women get loads more benefits in general than men do, especially if they have children out of wedlock.

Only Western society? I'd say most people worldwide don't value it as much as they should. Too many people think marriage is just a sex contract and nothing more.
Love in general has partially shifted from "caring about someone" to "person I want to have sex with".

Many of the modern world's views on love and marriage are revolting.

Ever heard of the fable about the fox and the grapes?

>"Why did western society begin to devalue marriage...?"

Are you an idiot? We only recently had a large movement crusading to grant marriage to same-sex couples. The concept of marriage is pretty valued.

>same-sex couples.
Can you say "sex contract"?

homosexual """"""""""""""""""marriage""""""""""""""""""

That's literally the point. Marriage is now so devalued that nobody even cares who gets married anymore.