Is Divorce Underrated

Is Divorce Underrated?

Tim Harford’s article starts with Carrie Bradshaw’s quote about the difficulties single women were facing when they outnumbered single men in New York. He brings the concept of Speed Dating to prove that even rational people adjust their dating standards depending on what they can get as most don’t seem to be particular about “the mythical special one”. He introduces the imagination of Marriage Supermarket and Law of One Price, where any partner is equally good as long as the sexes are split equally; even a slight scarcity of one sex creates powerful advantage to that group and causes bad news for the other. In 1950s, traditional marriages considered division of labor, men being the breadwinners1, while women specialized in homemaking. Unhappily married women would rationally stick it out as they had fewer alternatives in those days. Technology improvements over the years made it easy and rational for women to focus on higher education, maintain career options as divorce insurance. A self-reinforcing loop started as more people divorced, the more divorcees they could meet. Further analysis linked no-fault divorce laws, the contraceptive pill, and women’s increasing power and career. Career and divorce further created a second-reinforcing loop for women. It has empowered women to leave marriages that are not working, making them happier and safer from abuse.

I am personally fascinated with some of the concepts mentioned in this article. I never could have imagined the Marriage Supermarket where men and women are being checked out as products or compared as an economic unit; even one missing man puts every woman in a weak bargaining position etc. Also the matching problem and how it’s not just unique to marriage but also to a job market. I guess only economists think like this? I can understand the speed dating concept where competition, supply and demand exists and even a small discrepancy between the sexes could create dramatic effects. But I doubt very much whether the suggestive evidence from this study should be able to answer the age old question, “Do people spend their lives looking for the one person, who is a perfect match for them in all respects”?

I was thinking about the author’s description of traditional marriages of 1950s. I guess if I looked back to my parent’s & grandparent’s generation, a bit more traditional and religious background, the word divorce and having multiple partners was a taboo. But I attribute that not just to the division of labor like the author did but may be to the societal impact on single women at that time. Divorced women were rare and became outcasts in that conservative society (by even their own family members). I agree that may be the lower number of divorces has something to do with lack of higher education and financial independence of women (society in general) at that time. I am also sure there were compromises here and there and I can’t certainly elaborate on whether there were a lot of unhappy couples who wished they could separate and find other partners. I felt the optimal divorce rate for their generation was near zero (or bare minimum) even though that sounds absurd!

Current trends2 are changing even