Harvard study: Women more likely to divorce men who don't live up to the breadwinner stereotype

[davidn3600]

Research shows that couples are more likely to divorce when the man does not work full-time.

The US researchers say that while the gender stereotyping of women has relaxed, men still suffer from the expectation that they should be the breadwinner.

The finding comes from Harvard University researcher Professor Alexandra Killewald, who analysed data on the lives, marriages and finances of 6,300 couples, including 1,700 who had divorced.

----

Professor Killewald said: 'While contemporary wives need not embrace the traditional homemaker role to stay married, contemporary husbands face a higher risk of divorce when they do not fulfil the stereotypical breadwinner role by being employed fulltime.

'Often when scholars or the media talk about work-family policies or work-family balance, they focus mostly on the experiences of women.

'Although much of the responsibility for negotiating that balance falls to women, my results suggest one way that expectations about gender and family roles and responsibilities affect men's lives, too: men who aren't able to sustain full-time work face heightened risk of divorce.

'Expectations of wives' homemaking may have eroded but the husband breadwinner norm persists.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3710922/The-REAL-reason-modern-marriages-end-Women-likely-divorce-stay-home-dads-fail-live-breadwinner-stereotype.html

[Eleanors38]

1. NoNewzHere.nt

[Warpy]

2. I'd like to know if they bothered checking other factors

For instance, men who are chronically unemployed or underemployed tend to develop other problems, like turning to alcohol and/or drugs to numb the pain of not living up to their own stereotype. There are many other co morbidities in men who have been left behind by a rotten, rigged, and unfair economy.

Take this "study" with a pound of salt, people. It sounds like it might have been designed by a person with an agenda.

[renie408]

4. Exactly. n/t

[Hekate]

6. Yes, somehow I see an agenda between the lines. Could it be the stereotype exists inside the men?

...just as one point of reference.

[leftstreet]

7. +1

[Act_of_Reparation]

8. I second that.

When I was out of work for an extended period, my marriage nearly ended. It wasn't because I wasn't bringing in mad duckets, but because I'd slipped into a fairly severe depression and was abjectly useless around the house and absolutely no fun to be around.

Got help. Got a job. Marriage back on track.

[davidn3600]

9. It touched on that issue

From the article:

It is also possible that men take unemployment harder than women, which puts a bigger strain on the marriage.

But even if you entertain that theory, the bigger question is...who's driving the stereotype? Where is the pressure to be the breadwinner coming from? Society? Other men? Their wife? A combination? Regardless of the answer, it's frequently an area rarely ventured into by experts and advocates.

[Warpy]

12. I think the stereotype goes back to the agricultural revolution

when suddenly men were doing the bulk of the heavy work and women were no longer providing 80-90% of the caloric intake as they had been in hunter-gatherer societies. It's ingrained and long standing. Men who have been incapable of living up to it for one reason or another feel it most acutely.

Unemployed women are still working, after all, since they still tend to do the bulk of the housework and child care.

[davidn3600]

17. Wouldnt that suggest women may have to change their way of thinking too?

If it is ingrained, then it isn't ingrained in only men.

The ingrained gender roles exist in both the male and female mind, correct?

You want men to change and you want society to accept equality. But in order for that to happen, you need women to change their ideas of what is expected of men in the household as well as re-evaluate what position women should have. Otherwise women will end up creating their own glass ceiling. The wage gap will never close if we continue the status quo.

If women feel they need men to be the breadwinner and that men need to make more money. You will always have the situation where men are working 60 hour weeks to bring home more money. Men will always control the wealth.

[Elmergantry]

28. Nature. NT

[surrealAmerican]

10. ... not to mention that, even without those other problems ...

... financial stress is a major divorce risk. Couples fight about money. It undermines their relationship.

[B2G]

46. Exactly.

Very few families can make it on a single income these days.

[awoke_in_2003]

55. Almost every one of my fights with the wife...

have been about money.

[mercuryblues]

29. yup

the way the article was written, leaves a lot to be desired.



I think a reason of the higher chances of divorce in some situations is that the woman is not dependent on the man to put a roof over her head. She will not stay with someone for financial reasons.

I have 2 female relatives who earned more money than their ex. The money wasn't an issue for them, but it sure was for their ex. They divorced within 6 years of their marriage.

I have another relative whose wife earns more than him. He doesn't care; they have been married for 28 years.

anecdotal evidence for sure. But the study did not delve into the actual whys. Just took a guess at the why's and decided somehow women

[Marr]

39. So while it may seem like women make some sexist decisions, that's just mens' fault?

Sorry, but women have sexist prejudices, too.

[Warpy]

52. Nice strawman

Now go play with him. He's all yours.

[renie408]

3. There is a difference between not being the 'breadwinner' and not being able to hold

down a job. A man can still work full time and not be the primary breadwinner for his family. This is suggesting that women expect men to work. I am a woman. I can verify this anecdotally. Throughout the years, sometimes I was the breadwinner and sometimes my husband was. But he always worked and I do think I would have a problem if he didn't.

>>'Although much of the responsibility for negotiating that balance falls to women, my results suggest one way that expectations about gender and family roles and responsibilities affect men's lives, too: men who aren't able to sustain full-time work face heightened risk of divorce.

'Expectations of wives' homemaking may have eroded but the husband breadwinner norm persists.'<<

People connect to mates who can enhance their lives in one way or another. Helping to contribute to the family coffers definitely constitutes a method of enhancement. If you can't hold down a job, that's a little different from not being the breadwinner. I think 'breadwinner' and I am thinking major producer of income. Perhaps the wife earns the greater income, but may still want a husband who is a productive member of the household and society.

BTW...I have always worked, too, and worked hard. I think my husband would have a problem if I didn't work to contribute to our family and he would be right.

[treestar]

24. Suppose the job market is terrible?

Not holding down a job as a bad thing assumes there are always enough jobs. I see enough DU stuff on how the jobs are all going to China. So why should people who are unemployed be looked down on? Maybe they can't find one. Now unemployment is supposed to be down and it is probably better to be underemployed than unemployed in that situation, but there have been many bemoaning of this from us on DU.

[Brickbat]

5. "The husband breadwinner norm persists."

Patriarchy hurts men too. Gender role expectations are tough on everybody.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

11. My niece divorced her husband

... after he was unemployed for awhile.

I called it before it happened. (I also know my niece's values quite well.)

[Exilednight]

13. My first wife and I divorced because she started making more than I.

I didn't have a problem with it, but she did.

She would often throw it in my face, but I didn't see a problem with it. I was gainfully employed, often working about 60 hours per week and I pulled down a decent salary. She just happened to fall into a cushy job making a very generous salary.

Ironically, when I first met her she would complain about women not making the same money as a man, but she had a lesser degree than I and didn't nearly work as many hours, nor did her job have a short supply of qualified people, and she made a lot more money than I.

[Calculating]

14. This is just an example of gender stereotypes hurting men.

You can also look at the percents of women willing to date a guy who's still living at home with his parents, compared to men willing to date a girl who's still living at home. The numbers aren't even close. For all the progress made towards equality, it seems like a lot of women still expect their man to bring home the bacon. Gender stereotypes are harmful to everybody who doesn't fit into the 'proper norm'.

Note: I'm not saying it's ok for men to be deadbeats, but it does seem like women tend to consider the "financial worthiness" of their partner more than men do.

[treestar]

19. Is there really a study about that?

I wonder too why can't people live with their parents? Maybe it's to take care of them and maybe they contribute to the household. Maybe it's to save money for the future house down payment if the parents aren't taking rent. I always thought it unreasonable - it's a form on conspicuous consumption that you have to have a whole other house. What if you share with a sibling? I've seen siblings buy houses together. Is that equally as undesirable?

The prejudice is about living in the main home, which is funny it's OK to do that for the rich. I don't see any proof it is harder on men than women. I dislike the insult as it is meant, about "living in Mom's basement."

[GulfCoast66]

22. You certainlly can live with your parents or family member.

Or in my case have a family member living with you and paying their expenses.

But if you are fully an Adult and living OFF your parents, you are going to be judged harshly by society. And frankly, if you are as able and educated as your parents, I will probably share in that judgement.

We are all different and have different values and upbringing, but if I was gainfully employed and living for free off my parents after college to save money for a house I would have a hard time living with myself. Plus, my dad would have kicked me out on my ass. Because at that point I would have been asking them to sacrifice their future for mine. You take that responsibility on when you have kids, but once they are adults, it is on them.

Now if you are being productive and choose to share a house and expenses with any family member to prepare for your future, then more power to you.

I just know that the main reason I have a great relationship with my Mother is that we live apart!

But ask 50 different people and get 50 different opinions on this one.

[treestar]

23. I think you are rather harsh

and judgmental - poor people might need to pool housing resources. Or why can't people live the way they choose? In other cultures it is different too. Just seems like a thing that consumerism has gotten into our heads to make us buy more stuff. And you've proven nothing that there is any real study that men suffer more prejudice than women.

[GulfCoast66]

25. I support people's right to live

Any way they want.

My wife and I have an elderly(but very able) family member living with us. She covers her expenses, but were she in poverty she would be welcome.

But I personally would not allow an adult child to live for free with me unless the alternative was abject poverty. They have a job, they find a place to live. Now if they came to me with a plan to cover their share of expenses then I would consider it.

It may seem harsh, but my dad was loving and firm. Made it clear that when I was done with school, be it high school or college I was out the door. Made going to college attractive!

But I needed no pushing! Was ready to go.

[kcr]

43. They have a job, they find a place to live.

Because finding a place to live is just that easy! Just like buying a cheeseburger.

It may seem harsh? Yeah, anyone who would allow their child of any age to be homeless because principles! shouldn't have kids. It also shows a staggering lack of awareness of reality. Few people can find a job that pays enough to find a place to live right off the bat. Almost no one kicks their kids out of the home the minute they graduate college unless they're sociopaths, even if they have a job.

[prayin4rain]

47. Finally, confirmation that my parents are sociopaths. Haha nt

[GulfCoast66]

49. Right

And I thought my dad was a pretty good guy. Good thing I came to DU to find out he was a sociopath!

[prayin4rain]

53. Haha, knowing is half the battle :) nt

[GulfCoast66]

51. There are lots of different opinions

There was no need to 'kick' us out since we had been told our entire lives that when we reached 18 we had a few options...go to college, which my dad, who is according to you a sociopath, paid for in full. Or find a job in a reasonable amount of time and either pay him a fair rent or get an apartment. We went to college.

But we knew when we graduated college the deal remained the same, pay him or move out. If we had decided we could not find a job that suited us he would indeed have kicked us out. There was always the military.

My parents often said they were responsible to raise correctly, educate us and prepare us for independence. Dad often said he was not responsible for our happiness. That was on us.

[davidn3600]

32. It's an American and western thing

We live in an individualistic culture. Independence and self-reliance is now considered most important. In America, children are supposed to move out at 18, even if they don't have the finances to do it. In most other cultures, especially Asian cultures, it is very different. The complete opposite.

It didn't always be this way. It originated during the baby boom generation during a period of economic growth and when wages could pay the rent right out of high school. It became the foundation of the "American Dream" that is today becoming harder and harder to achieve.

It's a worse stigma for men than for women. For men, it is not a deal-breaker if the woman isn't living on her own. But most women would have a problem if the man isn't on his own. She wont respect him and wouldnt view him as being able to support a family. It's about the provider role. Women don't have the pressure to be a provider....men do, even today.

[treestar]

34. Is there any real proof of that?

That men are more disadvantaged than women over that.

Kids of dating age would likely be in the same boat. And when they turn 18, most middle class people are still under their parents as they go to college.

[The2ndWheel]

38. Everyday life would be the proof of it

When people use the "living at home in mom's basement" insult, what is the image of the first person you think of?

All the more so if men do have economic advantages. Men have the advantages, and a guy is still living at home at X age? Few people will want to deal with that guy. Women or men. Romantic interests or friends. Other than criminals, what's lower socially than an able bodied 30 year old guy living at home for whatever reason? A 35 year old guy doing the same.

Not saying grown women who don't have things in order are living the life, but men and women in that particular situation are looked at differently.

[treestar]

40. Well I wouldn't

or would at least consider their story/situation first instead of just judging on one thing alone.

[athena]

33. Yeah, sexism is all women's fault.

Right.



Get back to me when you have results on a study that shows that men don't consider the attractiveness of their partner more than women do. Or their partner's willingness to cook and clean. Or their partner's lack of interest in having children. Or their partner's expectation that her spouse take an equal share in taking care of children. Or their partner's desire to have a high-demand career that requires that she be on call all the time.

By the way, next time, don't forget to provide a citation for your study that shows that there is no income inequality and that women earn as much as men for the same job. If you can't provide such a citation, you cannot blame women for considering their partner's financial situation before committing to marriage.

[raccoon]

37. Thanks for point this out. nt

[Vattel]

15. Beware of false cause fallacies. The correlation could be explained in many ways.

[TexasBushwhacker]

16. I have to admit, if I worked full time

I would be pissed if my husband didn't work or only worked part time, unless he was taking care of the kids and the home. But I expect the same of myself. I would not be comfortable being financially dependent on a spouse or boyfriend. There are exceptions of course, but if he's able bodied, then yeah, I expect him to have a job. He doesn't have to make more than me though.

[uponit7771]

18. fuckin sucks

[treestar]

20. I have a relative who would love to be SAHD

Says he would love to do it if the wife is OK with it and has a job that would make enough! This is a millennial.

It could be eroding over time. Men probably do it to themselves.

[lostnfound]

21. Economic hardship is a stressor in any family.

Impossible o remove that as confounding variable, I think.

[ismnotwasm]

26. I need to see the study

This means that, a typical couple married after 1974, has a 2.5 per cent chance of divorcing in the next year, if the husband works full-time.
However, if he works part-time or does not work at all, the odds rise to 3.3 per cent.
Professor Killewald said that while our expectations of women's roles have changed, the stereotype of men being the breadwinners persists.
As a result, those who don't work full-time may be perceived as breaking a 'central component' of the marital contract for husbands'.

I'm calling bullshit judging by the timeframe of marriage and the stated percentage

[worstexever]

27. Yeah, we're all heartless gold-diggers

Just ask my ex-husband.

[TipTok]

30. Duh...

[athena]

31. I don't buy it.

It's extremely difficult to remove bias from this type of study. Usually, they just end up finding what the "researchers" believed in the first place.

Even in physics, where you're looking for or measuring particles no one should have any personal attachment to, bias creeps in and is extremely difficult to remove. In this type of study, where we all have a deeply personal expectation of how things are or should be, it's hopeless.

[alarimer]

35. I once dated someone who was incapable of keeping a job

No more than a few months here or there. And it wasn't just bad luck, it was indicative of some deeper, personal flaw, which I eventually figured out. Yeah, I get that there is structural unemployment out there, but when you can't even deal with the simple responsibility of showing up on time and doing what your boss wants you to do, you have bigger problems.

So I'm not really sure what this article is getting at. Everyone has setbacks now and then and, if you are in a true partnership, you manage somehow. But if the person who loses their job is not contributing in other ways, I can see where that would be a strain over and above the financial strain. Because it is true that women, in general, still bear the brunt of the housework and child care, even if they work full-time. So it may be that they resent the guy who loses his job, through no fault of his own, but still refuses to pick the kids up or make their lunches or vacuum or whatever. I certainly would, if I was working full time and my unemployed partner was sitting at home watching Game of Thrones.

[worstexever]

42. I married someone like that.

Would not do that again.

He is now homeless.

[sendero]

41. Well.

..... duh.

[taught_me_patience]

44. I wouldn't marrya woman who couldn't hold down a job

It's a symptom of a larger problem in their life. One condition of my marriage was that both of us have to work. It's not fair if only one person had to shoulder the entire financial burden of the family.

[Taitertots]

45. It's reasonable to put money before household labor optimization

When you both get home from work you can spend more of your time sharing household responsibilities instead of sharing your time with each other. It's a perfectly reasonable trade off to choose money over leisure time.

[Avalux]

48. My brother was a stay at home dad and raised his sons for 12 years.

When he decided it was time to get out there and go back to engineering, my SIL (a physician with her own practice) divorced him. Kind of the opposite of what they're saying here.

[GOLGO 13]

50. It rings very true. I make the money and therfore make the rules.

Everyone needs to know their roles in life.

[Freddie]

54. My daughter makes way more than her husband

So they decided he would be a stay at home dad. Working out fine so far except she gets mad at him when he plays video games instead of doing some things around the house when the 2-year-old takes his nap. Normal stuff.
In 2 years Mom-Mom (me) is retiring which will solve their child care issue.