Ruth Institute Blog

It’s a great way to keep your head clear. But does anybody care, I wonder?

by Carolyn Moynihan

It is always gratifying when research coincides with common sense and everyday experience, as in the case of a new study showing that a relationship in which sexual intimacy is delayed is more likely to endure. Read more…

A reader posted my AOL New article on her facebookpage and got this response from a friend:

I see multiple problems with her argument,
1. She does not mention divorce, which has already ‘redefined marriage.’ Divorce rates in our nation have been hovering around 50% for quite some time, and divorce can be very detrimental to children involved.
2. There are some heterosexual couples who are physically unable to bear children. As far as reproduction is concerned, they are in the same category as homosexual couples. Both of theses couples can adopt children, yet no one questions the ‘parental status’ of heterosexual parents who adopt.
3. There are many married couples who choose not to have children, so saying that the ‘essential purpose of marriage is to attach mothers and fathers to their children’ is an exaggeration that remains unsupported by empirical evidence.
4. In some cultures and ethnic groups, marriage rates are decreasing and couples choose to cohabit instead. These groups have already ‘gotten rid of marriage’ and they are not seeing an adverse effects.
I’m more inclined to agree with the comment on the article from Ken, and I’m very glad prop 8 was overruled; however, I do appreciate this woman’s attempt to provide non-religious argument against gay marriage…

I had a limit of 650 words for that column, so obviously I cannot deal with every possible objection. So let me briefly amplify my remarks, mostly to say that I have dealt with many of these issues multiple times.
1. On divorce. I write about divorce regularly. In fact, divorce was one of the first issues that got me into the study of marriage and family. I have a couple of recent podcasts, here and here. My books, Love and Economics, and Smart Sex, both deal with the whole range of marital breakdowns, without ever once refering to same sex marriage. Read more…

Ruth institute Advisory Board member Pat Fagan edits the Mapping America series for Family Research Council. In this month’s edition, he asks, “What increases the likelihood of a woman having two or more cohabitations in her lifetime?” Looking at two or more cohabitations is significant because this weeds out the couples who move in together right before getting married, and then staying married. All the research suggests that “serial cohabitation” is more risky than pre-marital cohabitation, and both of course, are more risky than not cohabiting at all. Read more…

Looks like further evidence of the results of the current trends to deconstruct marriage. 

by Carolyn Moynihan

Further to an earlier post on delayed adulthood, USA Today recently ran a report headed “Dating for a decade?” on how young adults put off the commitment of marriage for years, even though they have “paired off” and typically live together. Nobody seems very upset about it. Read more…

I just found a really cool blog called Sliding vs Deciding, by social psychologist and relationship expert, Scott Stanley. Among the interesting topics, “Coasting and Drive-by Opportunities,” “Oxytocin: I Feel Your Pain,” and “What Drives Sacrificing for a Partner.” One theme that emerges throughout: men and women related differently, and part of the differences are physiologically driven.
From his post called, “Well Its Men: Does he flip for her?”

I think commitment for the average man is a bit more like a light switch that gets flipped on (or not) at some point with a particular women when it comes to commitment. It’s flipped or switched on once he becomes clear Read more…

Lots of good stats in here.

by Carolyn Moynihan

When will young adults get the message that living together does not increase their chances of a lasting marriage? New analysis of US national data shows that, on average, cohabitation actually decreases by 6 percentage points the likelihood of marriage lasting 10 years or more. Read more…

I originally wrote this article, back when Love and Economics first came out. It has been reprinted more than anything I have ever written. I publish it here, for the benefit of new readers, who have never visited my old website. You can also download this as a pdf. I hereby give permission to reprint this, anywhere and everywhere that it will be helpful!

Research shows that cohabitation is correlated with unhappiness and domestic violence. Cohabiting couples report lower levels of satisfaction in the relationship than married couples. Women are more likely to be abused by a cohabiting boyfriend than a husband. Children are more likely to abused by their mothers’ boyfriends than by her husband, even if the boyfriend is their biological father. If a cohabiting couple ultimately marries, they have a higher propensity to divorce.

Most of the recent reports and commentaries on cohabitation report these difficulties, and at the same time, tend to downplay them. Living together before marriage seems to resemble taking a car for a test drive. The “trial period” gives people a chance to discover whether they are compatible. “You wouldn’t buy a car without taking it for a test drive, now would you?” Read more…

Carolyn Moynihan

Leading marriage scholars have come up with an index for monitoring the health of marriage in society.

Spring has sprung in the southern hemisphere and the wedding season is under way. A billboard in my city advertises a wedding “expo”, a sign of the trend that has turned a simple but dignified community event into a commercial extravaganza of daunting proportions. A young couple from abroad told me that it would cost at least forty thousand pounds to get married back home. That was one reason, apparently, why they had been cohabiting for six years. Read more…

Cohabitation Fast Facts

by Jennifer Roback Morse

Research shows that cohabitation is correlated with unhappiness and domestic violence. Cohabiting couples report lower levels of satisfaction in the relationship than married couples. Women are more likely to be abused by a cohabiting boyfriend than a husband. Children are more likely to abused by their mothers’ boyfriends than by her husband, even if the boyfriend is their biological father. If a cohabiting couple ultimately marries, they have a higher propensity to divorce. Read more…

by Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.

An accumulation of research from around the world finds that societies which endorse homosexual behavior increase the prevalence of homosexuality in those societies. The legalization of same-sex marriage-which is being considered by voters in several U.S. states-is the ultimate in societal endorsement and will result in more individuals living a homosexual lifestyle.

Extensive research from Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and the United States reveals that homosexuality is primarily environmentally induced. Specifically, social and/or family factors, as well as permissive environments which affirm homosexuality, play major environmental roles in the development of homosexual behavior…

A Danish research investigation studied two million adults living in Denmark, a country where same-sex marriage has been legal since 1989. This study uncovered a number of specific environmental factors that increase the probability an individual will seek a same-sex rather than an opposite-sex partner for marriage.

For Danish men, the environmental factors associated with higher rates of homosexual marriage include an urban birthplace and an absent or unknown father. Significantly, there was a linear relationship between the degree of urbanization of birthplace and whether a man chose homosexual or heterosexual marriage as an adult. In other words, the more urban a man’s birthplace, the more likely he was to marry a man, while the more rural a man’s birthplace, the more likely he was to marry a woman.

For Danish women, the environmental factors related to increased likelihood of homosexual marriage include an urban birthplace, maternal death during adolescence, and mother-absence…

For American men, the environmental factor most related to homosexual behavior was the degree of urbanization during the teenage years. Specifically, boys who lived in large urban centers between the ages of 14 and 16 were three to six times more likely to engage in homosexual behavior than were boys who lived in rural communities during those same ages. The authors offer the following possibility: “an environment that provides increased opportunities for and fewer negative sanctions against same-gender sexuality may both allow and even elicit expression of same-gender interest and sexual behavior.” …

For American women, the environmental factor most associated with a homosexual or bisexual identity was a higher level of education. And though that was also true for men, the pattern for women was more dramatic. For instance, a woman with a college degree was nine times more likely to identify herself as non-heterosexual than a woman with only a high school diploma…

[Researchers] believe one explanation is the fact that with more acceptance, even encouragement, of homosexuality at universities, more university women embrace a non-heterosexual lifestyle. For an example of how that might develop, see Dennis Prager’s article entitled, “College Taught Her Not To Be a Heterosexual.”

Based on the findings of the American research study, environments that sanction and/or promote homosexuality induce more individuals to engage in homosexual behavior…

Social and cultural norms, as well as legal regulations, influence human behavior including sexual behavior. So not surprisingly, as the United States and other Western Countries have become increasingly pro-homosexual-socially, politically, and legally-they have experienced an upward trend in the number of individuals engaging in homosexual behavior. That trend will continue if we move beyond mere tolerance of homosexual behavior (which is appropriate) to formally honoring it by legalizing same-sex marriage.