I heard a podcast the other day where the various hosts were all debating, among other things, how we got our sky-high divorce rate. Each of the hosts was proposing issues that might stand between a man and his wife, ways in which they could dislike each other. “When a man acts like this,” they would ask, “does it lower him in his wife’s eyes?”
But together, they were making an enormous mistake. They were forgetting that it takes two steps to get divorced. Yes, there are the things that separate the married man and the married woman. But first, they have to get married.
This means that the divorced man had to have two qualities… or perhaps the same quality that led to two different results. He had to have the kind of qualities that you need to get a wife… and he had to have the kind of qualities you need to lose one.
Or, looked at from the opposite direction, the woman first had to see something in the man that made her marry him, and then she had to see something in the man that made her divorce him.
Cause make no mistake; the hosts weren’t talking about the marriages that failed because the man divorced the woman. This was a podcast that dealt with ‘things wrong with today’s society’, and what they saw clearly was the death spiral of marriage, divorce, women getting alimony, child support, and the kids, men being afraid of marriage, men that managed to get married being divorced, more men being afraid of marriage, rinse repeat.
So what we need to look for is not ‘the cause of divorce’, but the disconnect between getting married and getting divorced. Some people aren’t getting married, and that is a disaster, but it isn’t the same disaster as those getting divorced.
Let me give an example. Suppose one man was the type that never did anything around the house. No ‘women’s work’. Suppose his friend was a real helpful type and was always jumping in to help get things done.
It is possible to look at both of these men and see something that some women might wish to marry. One can imagine that a woman saw the man who sat around the house as a ‘man’s man’… especially if he did lots of other things, outside things, changing the oil or building a fence or the like. One can imagine her marrying him.
Or, the other man. One can imagine a woman who said to herself, “This guy is wonderful! Life will be easy with him around.”
So it is possible to see both of these guys getting married. But it is also possible to see both of them getting divorced… for the reason they got married. It is possible to imagine the first wife going, “This guy never helps me,” forgetting that he didn’t help her before they got married. Or the second wife going, “He’s not much of a man,” and being attracted, later, to some manly man who helped her change a tire on the freeway.
It is possible to imagine both of those things, but it is also possible that only one of them is true. Or truer than the other. Research has shown, for example, that the man who helps around the house is more likely to get divorced than the other man.
But if we look at a man who is, for example, rather shy and introverted, it seems clear that it might be harder for him to get married than a man who is extroverted and outgoing. But it isn’t at all clear that the shy man would do less well in the marriage itself.
Conclusion
In the end I believe that all of this misses the point. Our modern problem is that we have false and unGodly methods for getting married, and false and unGodly ideas of what marriage is supposed to be all about once we get hitched.
Our goal in both should be to glorify God. Not to please ourselves. But those are complex subjects, deserving of other posts. In this post I wished to address the false idea that men getting divorced did not have to be first men who suceeded in getting married.
Links
This post is about marriage, and I have written a lot about marriage. This includes a letter exchange, currently on pause, withAndrew | Dad Explainsand Ryan Short. They are all about marriage, and cover a wide range of subtopics, and will, hopefully, eventually, cover more.
What Is Marriage #1A (Dad Explains) Questions on what marriage is / How marriage has changed / Legal vs. Religious Questions
What Is Marriage #1B (Von) Asked and answered “Is Marriage Real?”
What Is Marriage #2A (Dad Explains) Expands on marriage being real within the framework of “names” or nomenclature.
What Is Marriage #2B (Von) Marriage is a sexual union. That’s not all it is (by a long chalk), but that is its core.
What is Marriage #3A (Dad Explains) Asks the question, “Is marriage solely about children or are children a critical part of marriage itself?” and raises the spectre of infertile couples.
What is Marriage #3B (Von) “Marriage is… ordained by God for the purpose of producing a Godly seed…”
What is Marriage #4A (Dad Explains) Andrew summarises a bunch of his thoughts and adds several aspects
What is Marriage #4B (Von) Marriage is a covenant. Also, post more scripture!
What is Marriage #5A (Dad Explains) All about commitment.
What is Marriage #R1B (Von) A bit of a discursion deeper into covenant
What is Marriage #5B (Von) Marriage is Obedience.
What is Marriage #6A (Dad Explains) Artistic Compromise
What is Marriage #6b (Von) Marriage is Leadership, Marriage is Jurisdictions
What is Marriage #7A (Dad Explains) Marriage is a Dance