It’s infuriating to listen to people talk about lack of divorce (in certain cultures, times, etc) thinking it means a successful marriage.
There’s a comedian who did a bit that was something like “A lot of my friends have parents who got divorced. Mine should have but didn’t. I think I had it worse”.
Paraphrased horribly, but if someone recognizes this bit, please let me know because I’ve long since forgotten even though the gist of it has stuck with me.
Also infuriating is a certain psychologist saying “kids from parents that stay together do better”, completely missing the point that there was dysfunction which led to divorce.
I don’t think it’s an unfair thing to say - as a professional doing public communication, staying together for the kids is in the child’s best interest, generally
Obviously, if there’s abuse of any kind anywhere in the house, that’s no longer the case. And it’s not always going to be the best choice, but it’s a good idea to at least try
I wouldn’t read that as “we should make divorce harder, legally or socially” - if they went on to say that they’d be way out of line IMO
He’s doing a shit job communicating to the point that I question if he understands it. It’s easy: Dysfunction is a scale. You have families that are fine, and of course the data coming from those families say that kids that come from parents that stay together do better. Then you have abuse like you said. The problem is he’s treating the entire scale as a single data point “parents stay together, kids do better.”
Disfunction isn’t the only scale though - people break up for all sorts of reasons. It can be just as simple as “I’m not in love with you” or “I found someone else” - or just the fact their lives suck and they expected a partner or kids to make it better
Ultimately, when you communicate to the public, nuance doesn’t get across. You can’t say “the COVID vaccine is right for everyone, unless you have certain allergy or autoimmune disorders”. People hear what they want to hear and will latch onto additional detail - the best you can do is distill a message
For another example, we signal “daily flossing is inversely correlated with heart disease”. People who practice hygiene to that level are probably a lot more health conscious, and we’ve never proven a casual relationship - but putting the thought out there does more good than harm
I’m not familiar with the guy so maybe there’s more not mentioned in this thread that would change my mind, but the core message itself is solid - staying together is better for kids. That’s true for most people, and thinking divorce won’t impact your kids is nonsense (ask anyone who grew up through that). That should be part of the mental calculus in people’s heads
If you need professional help, they can deliver the nuance - that’s another public health messaging “see a therapist if you’re having problems”. You can’t get into how some therapists suck and how getting the right match is critical, but most people would benefit from the idea seeking therapy is just self care
No fucking shit. But he can’t even break it down into a simple one dimensional analysis. He’s still treating it as a single data point and presenting it as such.
The entire point of communicating information is to communicate the details and nuance. Good presenters can do it, bad presenters can’t (or don’t).
No, that’s my point exactly… Public health communication is deliberately oversimplified and stripped of all nuance like this. It’s a deliberate technique taught in school
I mean I recognize it, but as something I frequently say to my therapist. (They finally divorced when I was 24).
Many states will not allow a divorce if the woman is pregnant, it’s a twisted cycle of abuse and control.
A study recently published in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons found that states that restricted abortion access from 2018 to 2020 had a 75 percent higher rate of peripartum homicide — people who were killed while pregnant or in their first year after giving birth — than states without restrictions. The same trend did not hold in homicide rates for men.
Just like the pieces of shit that rail about “No fault divroce destroying the family”, Restrictions on the bodily autonmy of women leads only to death and misery, I refuse to call those people “pro-life” or “pro-family”, they are simply anti-womens rights.
How is divorce a matter of consent?
Traditionally both parties had to agree to get divorced if there had not been some “grounds” for the divorce that could be proved in court. That’s why the classic business for old timey private detectives was proving that their client’s spouse was committing adultery in order to legally justify a divorce.
Wait till you learn the reason man created marriage…
Probably lowered the rate of dudes “accidentally” ingesting arsenic in their coffee too.
I was reading a book where people anonymously share confessions. And one was about a person who worked at a Hospice providing care. They shared a lot of old women, on their last days, would confess to murdering their husbands.
There’s an ancient Greek story about a city where young women were killing themselves at an alarming rate, and the city eventually enacted a law where if a woman killed herself the body would be paraded through the streets naked before burial. After that law, the suicides dramatically went down.
The misogynistic interpretation of the author recording the story was that women were ashamed at the thought of being seen naked, even after death, and so this curbed the suicides.
My own interpretation is that it’s hard to hide bruises on a naked body.
No one should be trapped in a situation where they feel the only option out is suicide.
My own interpretation is that it’s hard to hide bruises on a naked body.
Considering that the ancient Greeks literally allowed men to murder their wives under certain conditions, I’d say that seeing bruises on a woman’s body would elicit no outcry amongst them.
Also… fuck ancient Greece. And fuck the Roman empire, too.
I was curious so I did a tiny amount of research and as it turns out, you’re pretty much in line with the data.
Information on ancient Greeks beating their wives is pretty sparse and what little we have suggests that it was so common that it barely deserved mention.
Beat their wives, fucked their kids, and gave rise to the society we’ve inherited today.
Persia should have one at Thermopylae
Were there laws allowing wives to murder their husbands under certain conditions?
None that I’ve heard of.
What do you mean “fuck them”, they don’t exist any more…
deleted by creator
Yeah this was more about the dudes not wanting anyone to see their women naked…dead or not.
Christ, that’s so horrific to consider, all around.
I had no idea there states that if you’re female you can’t get a divorce without consent. That’s insane. I’m going guess they’re all red states since they’re big on not respecting women.
Why would the socialists oppose women’s right to choose?
In US. politics, red refers to places with a (usually large) majority of Republican voters.
That’s dumb. Probably shouldn’t use it when talking online because its backwards from the rest of the world.
America is the only country that matters. Sorry.
Dear downvoters… I’m pretty sure the picture of a bald eagle in front of a US flag is a stand-in for “/s”.
Maybe. Maybe not. The ambiguity makes it fun :3
It’s the same for both persons In a marriage though
Sure, but when these laws were passed they were intended to keep women down. Just like women couldn’t vote or have back accounts. The fact they still exist, along with more of our rights being reduced, shows the misogynistic intent.
The law in Missouri, for example, only bans pregnant women from seeking a divorce.
Yeah the abuser and the abusee … You don’t see the issue here?
This is the definition of dense.
We frequently are shown photos in black and white to give a distance. Makes people feel like it was eons ago.
It wasn’t that long ago that women had rights. There are people still alive who were part of the first wave of women in the office.
Probably saw a decline in husband mysterious deaths too ^^
I mean, yeah. It would be harder to track, but desperate people do desperate things when the law makes it hard to leave.
Don’t tell that to your local conservative party…
Or do, they don’t care
Women suffering is a feature for them, not a bug
Just say it would be ashame if suddenly men are having accidents more often. “officer I had no idea why he didnt turn the electricity off before working” Bet they counter harder by removing women having bank accounts without men and only males can inherent. Back to the good old days. Though that only delays accidents until you have a son.
And people hound me about how I’ll die with cats and desperately regret not having a man to wash smelly socks for.
Marriage is psychological adrenalectomy.
Idk, I usually wash my wives dirty socks more often than she washes mine I’m pretty sure
My wife washes I hang and fold. team work makes for more sexy time…
Laundry is irrelevant if it’s on the first floor. I’ll do everyone’s but they gotta fold
Laundry is irrelevant if it’s on the first floor.
Can you explain this?
This is a new rule that I want to add in my household. Like proximity based cleaning, rather than running to teach kids room to grab their dirty clothes.
Cats are cool and so are you. Whatever works for you is the correct decision!
Ok, boomer
Millennial not boomer.
Just female suicide rate? I’d like to know the difference in married women rates. The difference in rate should be even bigger.
