Threatpoint

Dalrock on explaining the use of divorce as a conditioning tool

Divorce reform was about more than giving women the ability to divorce easily while collecting cash and prizes. It is also about shifting the power dynamics within marriage. Economists Stevenson and Wolfers explain this in their paper Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: Divorce Laws and Family Distress.

In family economics, bargaining and distribution within marriage is important for good outcomes. These models rely on a "threat point" to determine how resources are shared. The switch to unilateral divorce gives power to the partner who wants out and takes power away from the one who wants to keep the marriage intact. See Emasculation Paradox for more:

Stevenson and Wolfers make it clear that divorce reform is about shifting power from the spouse who wants to honor the marriage vows to the spouse who does not. Read this as: women are overwhelmingly the ones who want to end their marriages. The study These Boots Are Made for Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers Are Women confirms this, along with the age of women at the time of divorce. Divorce reform shifts power from the husband, who wants to honor the vows, to the wife, who does not.

Stevenson and Wolfers present this in a feminist context, suggesting that husbands are cruel, violent figures who must be controlled to prevent abuse or harm to their wives:

We find a striking decline in female suicide and domestic violence rates in states that adopted unilateral divorce. Female suicide decreased by about 20% in the long run. We believe this is a robust result, and timing evidence supports this. There was no clear effect on male suicide.

They clarify that this is not about women escaping abusive marriages, but rather how the fear of divorce can control husbands, especially in cases where the husband might be abusive:

Under unilateral divorce, the threat of divorce becomes more credible for the unsatisfied spouse. This threat affects marital negotiations without the need for divorce to actually happen.

They found that this dynamic really works. They conclude:

This paper shows how changes in divorce law influence outcomes within families.

They were showing that changes in family law serve as a sword of Damocles over husbands, forcing them to bend to their wives' will out of fear of divorce. This understanding helps explain where walking through hell is not the typical result of divorce reform, but serves as a warning to keep husbands in line.

It is important to note that while these studies present the feminist narrative of taming abusive husbands, the real issue is that husbands live in fear of their wives becoming unhappy and destroying the family. Many women’s entertainment themes revolve around the empowerment women feel from easily divorcing. I don’t think this is some evil conspiracy from a cabal from behind the shadows, but if it was, would it look any different?

Christians reinforce these legal and social changes by adopting a feminist view of marriage. While the old paradigm held that a woman who couldn’t keep a man was a failure, feminists and many Christians now view a husband who cannot keep his wife happy as a failure. The wife who kicks her husband out of the house is now seen as heroic.

This shift in the Christian view of marriage impacts more than just Christian couples. Husbands are trapped by society cheering on their wives to divorce if they fail to make them happy.

And despite all this, wives report being miserable. SSRI useage is up, and disorder are skyrocketing. She won, so why is no one happy?

We are feeding millions of innocent men and children to the divorce machinery to keep this threat point in place, and it doesn’t even make women happier with their marriages.