My family is very conservative, so I grew up bombarded by messages from Drs Dobson and Schlesinger about how cohabitation is Evil and will make you a bitter, angry person with bad teeth*
They always stress this “fact”: that people who cohabitate before marriage are more likely to divorce and/or have lousy marriages in general.
I haven’t been able to find much backup for this (other than on other conservative websites). Does anyone know if it is true, and if so, why?
*okay, I may be exaggerating a bit. But that was the impression I came out of my childhood with
I don’t know if it’s true, but it makes perfect sense to me, although I consider it a good thing.
Here are some thoughts on the subject (no cites, this isn’t my area of expertise):
People who do not cohabitate before marriage usually do so because of some sort of belief in the sanctity thereof - they believe that marriage somehow makes their relationship different other than giving it social and religious legitimacy. To a lot of people who cohabitate before marriage, the marriage itself doesn’t change any fundamental quality of their relationship - they’re still in love, they still live together, etc.
As such, people who refrain from cohabitating before marriage can stay together out of the sheer respect for the establishment of marriage. It’s more important to them than just their relationship. Also, the type of personal behaviors that lead to divorce are probably more linked to individuality and independence of thought - subservient spouses seem less likely to leave for whatever reason. The kind of upbringing that makes people respect marriage as something that transcends their relationship is also the kind of upbringing that typically stifles individuality and independence and fosters values such as humility, community and piety.
Basically it’s not that cohabitation would make you break up, but the kind of arrogance required to consider casual divorce might not be present in somebody who would think cohabitation isn’t such a great idea.
This is an important point to note. The key phrase here is that correlation does not imply causation. The best predictor of how many motorcycle accidents a biker will face is the number of tattoos they have – but tattoos do not cause bike accidents. Rather, both tattoos and riding dangerously are both symptoms of high risk tolerance.
Cohabitation does not cause divorce - it is an indicator of people who are more likely to accept divorce.
That study seem unusually suspect. They talk about born-again Christians extensively but then throw in some data from some other Christian denominations as an afterthought. Everyone else in the study is labeled as a “Non Born Again Christian”. That doesn’t inspire much confidence. You aren’t going to catch me citing that.
My wife and I lived together for 4 1/2 years before we got married. During that 4 1/2 years most of our friends had married and divorced. We have been married for 26 years.
Though I was raised in a home that went to a protestant Christian church, it didn’t take. I’m a tweener, betwixt Taoist and Deist. Mrs. Nott is a Methodist, but we don’t see the inside of a church unless somebody’s been hatched, matched, or dispatched.
This is a sample of one couple, and it’s statistically insignificant. Still, here we are.
Why is that? I am honestly asking, as I’ve never really spent a lot of time thinking about this; it’s just been an unexplored meme in my life. As Bill the Cat noted, there are many more I was exposed to growing up in my family. I feel that I’ve worked hard to think about each one before deciding to accept it (or not, as happens more frequently).
(bolding mine) Again, why is “stifling individuality” a good thing?
I agree with you there, minus the GD editorializing. I wanted to know if there was any hard data to back up this particular paradigm. This may make an interesting GD debate and you are free to start a thread over there if you wish.
I’ve got to agree with AskNott. My SO and I have been together for 13 years now, with no vows. We’ve watched over half of our friends get divorced in that time. The standing joke is we have the longest non-marriage around. I don’t think that divorce statistics can be boiled down to co-habitation/premarital sex/age/religion.
Please… Who said anything about casual divorce? Maybe the problem is casual marriage, not divorce. If people had to think harder, know their partner better, know THEMSELVES better before marriage, the divorce rate would probably plummet.
Ya know, 100% of divorces begin in marriage. Therefore, marriage causes divorce.
People don’t cohabitate for a reason when they do. Not just for the sake of not cohabitating. I think couples that would otherwise break up might stay together for that very same reason. I think such couples are not real human relationships, and as such should not be together or have children.
I never said stifling individuality is a good thing. I meant that I consider a spouse leaving to be a good healthy thing a lot of times. Even if there are children. I have friends from both categories, the way I perceive it, people who grew up with divorce and people who grew up with their parents barely tolerating each other just for the sake of the children(or the sanctity of marriage). The latter group seems to be a lot less adjusted, happy or capable in the real world. Yeah the plurality of anecdotes is not data, but is that not how we shape personal opinions anyway?
I don’t wish to debate this just because I’ve found out that a lot of scientific data I dug up on the subject from my university was flawed. The experiments/statistics were often biased to underline one agenda or the other. People tend to latch on to scientific studies that support their personal points of view - I know I do it, I know others do it too.
I feel I have to explain myself. In that statement I was referring to “arrogance” and “casual divorce” as good progressive human behaviors. If you think the problem is casual marriage, then what’s so special about marriage? It’s the same kind of attitude that cohabitation is fundamentally bad. Both marriage and divorce should be as casual as possible, a natural human cycle, the less importance you give to marriage the less painful your divorce will be. Getting to GD in here, so I’ll stop.
ITA. We have absolute freedom in who we choose to marry. I don’t have to marry anyone just because he knocked me up, or my dad wants to make a business arrangement with his dad, or he is the right pedigree. And yet people still abuse that freedom by making their choices based on a hormonal surge, or to escape from their family, or to placate their family, or whatever other fool reason there is.
I would disagree with groman there. People need to realize how serious marriage actually is, and make their decisions accordingly. If you’re not willing to put in the work necessary to get to know yourself and your partner well enough to make a smart decision, then don’t get married. Enjoy the companionship and sex of a relationship without the eventual headache of a divorce.
Either one that leads to a situation where a higher principle (religion, respect for the sanctity of marriage, spirituality, for the sake of the children…) would prevent a separation that would otherwise happen. I think such situations are more likely to happen with noncohabitating couples because they tend to be religious, repsect marriage and tend to believe that divorce is going to ruin their children. If you are going to break up, but your children or the idea of marriage stops you - you’re no longer in a loving human relationship, you just tolerate each other for some higher ideal.
I found the site as a referenced source from a Googled site (that’s kosher in GQ, isn’t it?) so it’s not a pet site of mine or anything.
I believe the distinctions are accurate. Born-again Christians are a self-described group of people who are a subset of Protestants.
I also believe the site as a whole has an anti-born-again bias (in case you think they are pandering to born agains). If you go to the main page and search for “divorce,” you’ll find many non-flattering articles about “born again” Christians. As a matter of fact, the referenced quote in my original Google hit was a previous survey they did where they compared divorce rates of various Christian denominations with that of atheists and agnostics. The atheists had the lowest divorce rate, with Baptists having the highest.
And on the page you cited, the people were not asked to describe themselves as “born-again” at all. They just answered some questions that described their beliefs without labeling them.
The CDC study that gazpacho linked to said that athiests had the highest rate of divorce, followed by Protestants, other religions, fundamentalists, and finally Catholics.
