Yes, scoundrel I am. And an egghead who looks things up, to boot. @JonF wrote "that modern society, modern psychology, and modern thinking simply revolves around" self-interest and self-actualization in criticizing MC, and that this self-centeredness (or lack of "grit," as another poster who shall remain nameless put it up-thread) is largely to blame for the "modern" ill of divorce.
Or, as that same nameless poster wrote, "We do want easy..and when we don't get it, we pop pills and throw tantrums. Sorry but it seems an ailment specific to our modern culture."
Really? --------------
"To be at risk for divorce, couples must first be married. Rates of first marriages have fluctuated dramatically over the past 70 years. In the 1920s annual marriage rates were approximately 99 per 1,000 single women. Rates declined during the Depression era (early 1930s) to 81 per 1,000 single women. Marriage rates then rose to an all-time high of 143 per 1,000 women in the post-World War II era and declined steadily for the next 30 years.
"The declining propensity to marry also is reflected in a decrease in the proportion of women who marry to avoid having a child out of wedlock. During the 1960s, approximately half (52%) of all women were pregnant when they married, whereas in the 1980s, only one-quarter (27%) of women were pregnant when they married.
"Since the 1860s...divorce rates increased after every major war, decreased during the Great Depression, and decreased during the post-World War II economic boom....However, most scholars believe that the single most important social change which made divorce possible was the increase in the employment of women and the corresponding economic independence that employment provided."
Patricia H. Shiono and Linda Sandham Quinn, "The Future of Children," Children and Divorce, vol. 4, no. 1 (spring 1994).
Well, well, well, well, well. An easy fix! Lower the glass ceiling. Get 'em barefoot, preggers, and back in the kitchen! Knock 'em up while they're single -- that'll make 'em marry!
Alternate hypothesis: This is way more complicated than "people used to have grit" and "people want everything to be easy." --------------------
"Changes in marriage patterns could also reflect alterations in the norms and attitudes surrounding marriage...The acceptance of a single life as a legitimate alternative to marriage would represent a marked attitudinal shift in the U.S.
"Throughout most of American history, the majority of people have probably regarded the failure to marry as undesirable. Not everyone married in 18th and 19th century America and many married only in their late 20s or in their 30s; but these decisions were more the result of social and economic circumstances than of personal choice.
"Historically, single persons have been denied access to many of the privileges enjoyed by married persons, but unmarried adults have achieved a marked increase in independence and freedom in recent years. In Colonial times, virtually all unmarried people resided in a family environment, either with their own parents or in the homes of others where they worked as servants. Unmarried persons remained dependent upon the families with whom they lived, and only at marriage did they become fully independent adult members of society."
Arland Thornton and Deborah Freedman, "Changing Attitudes Toward Marriage and Single Life," Family Planning Perspectives, vol. 14, no. 6 (Nov-Dec 1982)
(Now that sounds like a wonderful era of love-matches to me.... ) ---------------------
"Wars produced dramatic changes in the landscape of marriage and divorce in Western societies. From the Civil War to the present, wars involving the United States have delayed, accelerated, and undermined marriages...each postwar period has been marked by a dramatic short-term increase in the divorce rate.
"After the Civil War divorces increased from a rate of 1.2 per 1,000 marriages in 1860 to 1.8 in 1866. Similarly, after World War I, the rate rose from 5.5 in 1917 to 7.7 in 1920. After World War II the divorce rate soared to a new high, which many attributed to the fragility of hasty wartime marriages...A recent study of veterans from World War II and the Korean conflict (Elder and Clipp 1988b) found that traumatic memories of combat are associated with less stable, nurturing marriages. Only 43% of the men with such memories were still married to their prewar spouses."
Eliza K. Pavalko and Glen H. Elder, Jr., "World War II and Divorce: A Life-Course Perspective," American Journal of Sociology, vol. 95, no. 5 (March 1990)
In other words, situational (rather than dispositional) factors, but situational factors seldom receive attention, especially from the individuals themselves IMO.
-----------
Complaints "of rising divorce rates date back to the nineteenth century; most have a very modern ring to them. Wilcox (1891) cites the economic emancipation of women as a fundamental factor, one which also accounted for higher rates in New England states. Urbanization and industrialization were said to broaden knowledge and expose people to alternative modes of living.
"In The Marriage Crisis, Ernest Groves (1928) argued that divorce was rising because a new pleasure-seeking code was replacing a code of behavior anchored in obligation and self-denial."
Samuel H. Preston and John McDonald, "The Incidence of Divorce Within Cohorts of American Marriages Contracted Since the Civil War," Demography, vol. 16, no. 1 (February 1979). -----------------
"During the Progressive Years the divorce rate, which had been rising steadily since the Civil War, attained critical dimensions...In 1880 there was one divorce for every twenty-one marriages; in 1900 there was one divorce for every twelve marriages; in 1909 the ratio dropped to one in ten, and by 1916 it stood at one in nine.
"In 1881 the New England Divorce Reform League was established to conduct research...educate the public and lobby for more effective legislative curbs on divorce...Efforts to arrest the spread of divorce by legal means took two forms. State campaigns were waged to amend local divorce laws, and repeated attempts were made to achieve uniform marriage and divorce laws...through a constitutional amendment.
"After their admission to the Union in 1889 North and South Dakota retained Dakota Territory's generous ninety-day residence requirement. Sioux City, largest and most accessible town in the two states, soon developed a substantial divorce trade and gained national fame as a divorce colony.
"Antidivorce forces were active within the established Protestant churches. During the Progressive Era repeated efforts were made in all the great Protestant denominations to stiffen their positions on divorce.
"The attack on divorce hinged on the common belief that divorce destroyed the family, which was the foundation of society and civilization....Lyman Abbott, an influential Progresive editor and associate of Theodore Roosevelt once charged a prominent divorcee with being 'the worst type of anarchist' because divorce, like anarchy, threatened to destroy society altogether. President Roosevelt, in addressing Congress on the need for uniform [divorce] legislation, described marriage as being 'at the very foundation of our social organization.'
"Marriage and the family are, of course, quite different institutions, but critics of divorce did not usually distinguish between them."
William L. O'Neill, "Divorce in the Progressive Era," American Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2 (Summer 1965).
-------------------
So let's all celebrate and defend and work on our individual marriages because they matter to us for a panoply of reasons -- but, um, let's not gild the lilly about how it was all sunshine and roses in Ye Olden Tymes -- and would be again, "if only."
) 
