Look, lesbians only exist for the sake of sexual titillation of straight men. This I know, because the porn-Bible tells me so. Of course their same-sex so-called unions are not going to last if the silly dykes try to take them seriously, and without even involving a male third as God intended! :mad:
At least two, by my count.
I was in a band a while back, and my bassist was a lesbian. She said that her relationships are hard because, (and I paraphrase), “Women are just mean to each other, just because I am a lesbian doesn’t change that. You know how groups of women frequently don’t work well together? Imagine being in a relationship with that shit going on.”
She went through three relationships while we were playing, and they all ended in cheating (by both parties.) I kind of figured that it would be the other way around, honestly, with dudes having a hard time staying together in marriage versus the ladies.
That really surprised me. But the gay (dudes) couple I have known that went the marriage route a long time ago are still happily married. Maybe its because of the old homage “men are marrying the person they see now, while women marry what they hope the person will be.”
The rates quoted in that article for both seemed very low:
In contrast in heterosexual marriage 20% are divorced within 5 years. Now still not apples to apples given that 7 years of ability to have gay partnerships likely is not the same as “within 5 years” - likely most of those are still under the 5 year mark - but still seems low. Of course age and class differences and other confounders may explain lots too but so far those numbers suggest that gay partnerships are less likely to end in divorce than heterosexual ones and male gay partnerships are particularly unlikely to. Breaking out the confounders and selection bias issues would be enlightening but likely not yet possible.
Una, is there any truth to the idea that a greater number of self-identified lesbian women have some degree of bisexual attraction than gay males do?
However, the OP stats are about civil partnerships in the UK, whereas that 20% rate is for the US. According to this spreadsheet from the ONS, 8.1% of marriages in England and Wales end in divorce within 5 years and 13.8% in 7 years.
Good point. So maybe in the same ball park with the notable bit being that gay male partnerships in the first years of availability are relatively stable compared to both lesbian and heterosexual ones. Which seems likely to be explainable by selection bias and confounders. IOW a remarkably unremarkable stat.
Well…maybe women should be isolated during that time of month. Less bridges burnt if a napalm flamethrower outburst is done in the antarctic.
Interesting but unsurprising stats.
Interesting because the divorce rate does seem to be somewhat lower than for straight couples, though there are a couple of probable reasons for that. One is that a lot of the early civil partnerships were of people already in long-term relationships (from anecdotal evidence - no stats) which had lasted despite marriage rights. Another is that there is less societal pressure (note I said less, not no) on gay couples to get married, esp. if there are no kids involved, so they’d be more likely to be marriages made purely by choice.
Unsurprising for several reasons already mentioned in this thread.
There is some truth to the Uhaul stereotype (and I’m a lesbian in the UK). Too-quick marriages are obviously more likely to end in divorce.
Children also bring pressures into a marriage that can help break it up. It’s worth noting that, for a lesbian couple who want to have kids and have both parents named on the birth certificate, they have to get married first. (Same for men, but it happens less often). It’s like you’re forced to get married. But then you might end up with years of trying to have a baby via insemination, which is difficult, expensive and stressful in itself.
Straight couples often have kids and then get married but that is not an option for same-sex couples who want equal rights for both parents.
And women in lesbian relationships are more likely to have sole or main custody of kids from previous relationships (with women or men) than men in gay relationships. Step-kids, and still-involved exes, bring their own pressures into a relationship.
Lower incomes for women could well play a part too - I hadn’t thought of that, but it’s a good point.
Quite apart from the arguments and difficulties that arise when you have money problems, if you end up unemployed or on a very low income you can be better off single than married. That applies to everybody, but statistically women are more likely to have low incomes and obviously that applies doubly to relationships with two women.
It’s not actually a statistically-significant difference, though, with the number of civil partnerships and the number of years involved. Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if the difference continued to be true over time.
I think all the above would explain more than just women being more likely to grumble about minor problems. That might actually be true - it does correlate with my own experience - but I don’t know if it would actually lead to more divorces.
I bet this explains a lot of it. Economic issues cause lots of relationship-fracturing stress, and although things are better than they once were, women still generally make less money and have fewer economic oppurtunities than men.
Touching on that, is there a meaningful difference between lesbian and straight women’s earning power, or do we have no relevant data?
I don’t see how that works. ISTM that it is usually better to be unemployed but partnered with someone employed than to be single and unemployed. Economies of scale mean that two can live on one income more easily than one can live on no income, IYSWIM.
It appears that lesbians make more money than straight women. They do so for a number of reasons - they work more hours(which is part of why men make more money on average than women). I would guess that they are less likely to have children to care for, less likely to take time off from work to be pregnant, etc. (Note that I said less likely - not never.)
Regards,
Shodan
And, in case there was any doubt, cite (pdf) that gays and lesbians have fewer children, at least in the US.
Regards,
Shodan
Clearly this points to the fact that women must be the single greatest reason in ALL divorces. (as attested to by a divorced man)
Even with pooled resources, tax credits and state benefits often mean that two single people who houseshare and thus also share household bills are better off than two people living as a couple - sometimes far better off. It also tends to cause friction if one partner has to live off another, especially when there are no kids involved.
Children is my first thought.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob2/civil-partnership-statistics--united-kingdom/2012/index.html
Looked up the study, there is no controlling for difference in rates, other than an observation of age difference with male separation.
There are many other differences noted in general though, eg that 80% of partnerships were between 2 single men, vs 63% between women - more women had previously been married etc.
Otara