From the Patriot Post:
The U.S. Census Bureau last week released demographic data on married versus unmarried couples in the U.S., and, not surprisingly, the results aren’t good. According to the Associated Press, “It’s a trend that’s been creeping along for decades, but in the 2010 Census, married couples represent 48 percent of all households. That’s down from 52 percent in the last Census and, for the first time in U.S. history, puts households led by married couples as a plurality.”
The AP quotes Portland State University demographer Charles Rynerson, who says, “People in their 20s are postponing marriage for many reasons, including money. We also have an aging population, so there’s more people living alone.” The median age for marrying now is 28 for men and 26 for women. Fifty years ago, it was 23 and 20, respectively. The difference could in large part be due to so many Americans’ opinion that marriage has become obsolete. According to a Pew Research Center study, 39 percent hold this view. Here in our humble shop, we still hold to the age-old view that marriage — between one man and one woman — is the building block of society. In a culture that wants to cram that building block into a round hole, however, the traditions that made America great are slowly being abandoned.
Pastor Susan 
Three in four couples who married after 1990 celebrated a 10-year anniversary, according to census statistics reported Wednesday. That was a rise of three percentage points compared with couples who married in the early 1980s, when the nation’s divorce rate was at its highest.
Cited from the Washington Post article breaking down the stats. So there is some hope. Though marriage may be down, the amount of people waiting to get married, on average, are older and more mature (28 vs 26 in 1990). Also, people without a college degree are three times more likely to divorce than people with a degree.
You’ll see some changing stats with the new generation. They’re slower and more cautious when marrying (at least, those with degerees are more cautious) but that could be a result of being raised in the 70s and 80s, and seeing the results of increased broken homes, as well as discovering a new dynamic of marriage, which isn’t the traditional breadwinner/homemaker mentality.
Just some food for thought. Here’s the original WaPo article — http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/number-of-long-lasting-marriages-in-us-has-risen-census-bureau-reports/2011/05/18/AFO8dW6G_story.html
– Anthony
Yeah, I heard about this. Kinda expected it to go this route and eventually swing around to some form of moral backlash in the future.
As much as I agree that things have shifted in the past 50 years… I’m not sure I’m buying that it’s “in large part” because we think its obsolete.
50 years ago, women had few other options. If you had no likelihood of working besides as a teacher or maybe nurse, and would be stuck living with your parents most likely until you did marry, getting married as young as you can to the first guy who shows an interest makes a whole lot of sense.
If we took that same woman, kept her values and views entirely the same, and dropped her into the current time, would she still marry as early when she has other options to pursue in the meantime? I wouldn’t say that’s because its obsolete just because she’s able to get a job and support herself on her own for some time until she eventually finds a guy that she feels is the best match for her even if not her first offer.
Just because she is single for longer doesn’t mean that she doesn’t place any value on it anymore because it’s a long term goal rather than a soon-as-possible goal