CDZ Why is the Traditional/Nuclear family so Vilified these days?

[Syriusly]

Through the 1950's and even into the 1960's the Traditional/Nuclear family lifestyle was very common here in the United States. This would be defined as a Single-Income family with or without children where the woman was the homemaker and the man was the breadwinner. These families based their lifestyle on the morals and values that they were taught by their parents and passed on to their children.

This type of lifestyle has slowly eroded over the last half century. Not only has this type of lifestyle become less common, but those people who still engage in it are often Villified. The men are seen as tyranical mysoginists who hate women while the women are presented as brainless twits, automatons, Stepford Wives, and traitors to the great Feminist sisterhood.

Why do you think it is that this lifestyle, which was once the core of American society has now become so hated and villified by such large segments of our society?

Morals and values aren't dependent on a certain type of life style.

In addition, the so-called "Nuclear Family" lifestyle was fraught with problems for women including often a lack of respect for the stay-at home woman and the works she had to do if she had children was often valued as "less then". Add to that, if things go south in the relationship a man could divorce her, she would have few resources, no job skills because "homemaker" doesn't work well in the outside job market. The so-called "traditional family" hid a lot of abuses - alcohalism, domestic violence, dependancy. It has it's good points, but the bad points shouldn't be ignored in the yearning for some non-existant golden age.

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

As is the crime rate, the rate of out of wedlock pregnancy, the incidence of single parent homes, and relative prison populations. And STDs as well.

How do you know women are more likely to be abused now? Back then men could rape their wives and get away with it. If a man rapes a woman now he goes to prison and/or she can leave him and she has job skills and no stigma of being a divorcee.

You will undoubtedly be surprised, XXXXXXXXXXXX when I tell you that rape sentences today are much, much lighter than they were back when our society actually valued women.
.

When exactly was that?

 

[Syriusly]

I find that different people have some really wild ideas about what constitutes a norm. I remember when I was in Korea and my grandmother died I was told I couldnt come back for her funeral since she was not immediate family. I was confused because my grandma was a part of my immediate family to me.

And so you learned, you do not dictate reality, and you can't force others to include you if they don't want to. Shattering.

Actually my mom got on the phone to a congressman and they had me home the next day with 2 weeks vacation to boot. I think reality got dictated pretty effectively. Dont you?

Every attempt liberals have made to *help* blacks has worsened the black lifestyle...first and foremost, their attack and dismantling of traditional family structure. "More black children grow up without a stable father in their lives as black men have been estranged from their children and emasculated by welfare policies."

More blacks are living in poverty now, and more are unemployed and in jail.

The nuclear family has always been at the very root of every single successful society since the beginning of man's time on earth. To destroy it is to destroy us.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/24/clarke-social-liberalism-the-new-racism/#ixzz3StBjmWjo

You are talking about racism not welfare. Whites have always been the largest demographic on welfare and their families were not torn apart by welfare policies. If the nuclear family has always been at the root of successful societies why do some white people (like you) pretend slavery and jim crow has no effect on todays Black community? BTW you didnt answer if you thought I was able to dictate reality or not.

Welfare is the frontman for racism. It always has been.

I hear that from Conservatives a lot.

There is no factual basis for that claim.

 

[koshergrl]

Again..even if you're going to pretend that despite the fact that there is no supporting evidence, almost all married women were raped and abused and it was the nuclear family's fault...TODAY we have stats that show unequivocally that women (and children) are much, much more likely to be abused OUTSIDE of a nuclear family, than in it.

So why do you want women to eschew marriage NOW?

Children living with their married biological parents are 10 times less to suffer abuse and neglect than their counterparts.

So..again..why are you vilifying the nuclear family? When is it ever a good thing to promote a lifestyle that leads to the abuse of children?

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf

Thats what I am asking you. If there is no statistic for marital rape in the 50's how do you know the rate is higher now?

I never said the rate of marital rape is higher now. I said women were much, much more likely to be abused outside, than inside, a nuclear family now. That's based on modern statistics, since you all maintain there are no reliable stats from back then.

Rape is a form of abuse as is incest.

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

How is this statement true if there is no data to support it?

I've supported it repeatedly.

"Women are also safer in married homes. As the figure above (derived from a recent Department of Justice study) indicates, married women are the least likely to be victimized by an intimate partner. They are also less likely to be the victims of violent crime in general. Overall, another U.S. Department of Justice study found that never-married women are nearly four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, compared to married women. The bottom line is that married women are less likely to be raped, assaulted, or robbed than their unmarried peers."
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
One way to end violence against women Married dads. - The Washington Post

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf

Is that a comparison with the 50's or just your way of deflecting?

At this point, I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. That is evidence that supports every single thing I've said. It's one of a couple of studies I've posted. That quote is from the Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, submitted to Congress, and written up by multiple publications. If there's a deflection, it's yours. I have tried repeatedly to argue the merits of the OP only, and you have repeatedly tried to change the subject. So I addressed your diversion....and you accuse me of deflecting, lol.

Anyway. Why do you hate the nuclear family? Are you going to stop pretending it's some sort of secret lethal woman trap now?

 

[Asclepias]

Through the 1950's and even into the 1960's the Traditional/Nuclear family lifestyle was very common here in the United States. This would be defined as a Single-Income family with or without children where the woman was the homemaker and the man was the breadwinner. These families based their lifestyle on the morals and values that they were taught by their parents and passed on to their children.

This type of lifestyle has slowly eroded over the last half century. Not only has this type of lifestyle become less common, but those people who still engage in it are often Villified. The men are seen as tyranical mysoginists who hate women while the women are presented as brainless twits, automatons, Stepford Wives, and traitors to the great Feminist sisterhood.

Why do you think it is that this lifestyle, which was once the core of American society has now become so hated and villified by such large segments of our society?

Morals and values aren't dependent on a certain type of life style.

In addition, the so-called "Nuclear Family" lifestyle was fraught with problems for women including often a lack of respect for the stay-at home woman and the works she had to do if she had children was often valued as "less then". Add to that, if things go south in the relationship a man could divorce her, she would have few resources, no job skills because "homemaker" doesn't work well in the outside job market. The so-called "traditional family" hid a lot of abuses - alcohalism, domestic violence, dependancy. It has it's good points, but the bad points shouldn't be ignored in the yearning for some non-existant golden age.

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

As is the crime rate, the rate of out of wedlock pregnancy, the incidence of single parent homes, and relative prison populations. And STDs as well.

How do you know women are more likely to be abused now? Back then men could rape their wives and get away with it. If a man rapes a woman now he goes to prison and/or she can leave him and she has job skills and no stigma of being a divorcee.

You will undoubtedly be surprised, XXXXXXXXXXXX when I tell you that rape sentences today are much, much lighter than they were back when our society actually valued women.
.

When exactly was that?

It wasnt in the 50's like she is trying to claim she wasnt talking about now.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats what I am asking you. If there is no statistic for marital rape in the 50's how do you know the rate is higher now?

I never said the rate of marital rape is higher now. I said women were much, much more likely to be abused outside, than inside, a nuclear family now. That's based on modern statistics, since you all maintain there are no reliable stats from back then.

Rape is a form of abuse as is incest.

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

How is this statement true if there is no data to support it?

I've supported it repeatedly.

"Women are also safer in married homes. As the figure above (derived from a recent Department of Justice study) indicates, married women are the least likely to be victimized by an intimate partner. They are also less likely to be the victims of violent crime in general. Overall, another U.S. Department of Justice study found that never-married women are nearly four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, compared to married women. The bottom line is that married women are less likely to be raped, assaulted, or robbed than their unmarried peers."
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
One way to end violence against women Married dads. - The Washington Post

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf

Is that a comparison with the 50's or just your way of deflecting?

At this point, I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. That is evidence that supports every single thing I've said. It's one of a couple of studies I've posted. That quote is from the Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, submitted to Congress, and written up by multiple publications. If there's a deflection, it's yours. I have tried repeatedly to argue the merits of the OP only, and you have repeatedly tried to change the subject. So I addressed your diversion....and you accuse me of deflecting, lol.

Anyway. Why do you hate the nuclear family? Are you going to stop pretending it's some sort of secret lethal woman trap now?

Of course you dont know. You always get forgetful when I catch you in a lie. This happens alot. Here is your statement. What did those links have to do with your comparison of the 50's to now?

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

 

[Asclepias]

And so you learned, you do not dictate reality, and you can't force others to include you if they don't want to. Shattering.

Actually my mom got on the phone to a congressman and they had me home the next day with 2 weeks vacation to boot. I think reality got dictated pretty effectively. Dont you?

Every attempt liberals have made to *help* blacks has worsened the black lifestyle...first and foremost, their attack and dismantling of traditional family structure. "More black children grow up without a stable father in their lives as black men have been estranged from their children and emasculated by welfare policies."

More blacks are living in poverty now, and more are unemployed and in jail.

The nuclear family has always been at the very root of every single successful society since the beginning of man's time on earth. To destroy it is to destroy us.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/24/clarke-social-liberalism-the-new-racism/#ixzz3StBjmWjo

You are talking about racism not welfare. Whites have always been the largest demographic on welfare and their families were not torn apart by welfare policies. If the nuclear family has always been at the root of successful societies why do some white people (like you) pretend slavery and jim crow has no effect on todays Black community? BTW you didnt answer if you thought I was able to dictate reality or not.

Welfare is the frontman for racism. It always has been.

I hear that from Conservatives a lot.

There is no factual basis for that claim.

It sounds good to them even though the welfare capital of the country is white and conservative.

 

[koshergrl]

I never said the rate of marital rape is higher now. I said women were much, much more likely to be abused outside, than inside, a nuclear family now. That's based on modern statistics, since you all maintain there are no reliable stats from back then.

Rape is a form of abuse as is incest.

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

How is this statement true if there is no data to support it?

I've supported it repeatedly.

"Women are also safer in married homes. As the figure above (derived from a recent Department of Justice study) indicates, married women are the least likely to be victimized by an intimate partner. They are also less likely to be the victims of violent crime in general. Overall, another U.S. Department of Justice study found that never-married women are nearly four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, compared to married women. The bottom line is that married women are less likely to be raped, assaulted, or robbed than their unmarried peers."
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
One way to end violence against women Married dads. - The Washington Post

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf

Is that a comparison with the 50's or just your way of deflecting?

At this point, I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. That is evidence that supports every single thing I've said. It's one of a couple of studies I've posted. That quote is from the Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, submitted to Congress, and written up by multiple publications. If there's a deflection, it's yours. I have tried repeatedly to argue the merits of the OP only, and you have repeatedly tried to change the subject. So I addressed your diversion....and you accuse me of deflecting, lol.

Anyway. Why do you hate the nuclear family? Are you going to stop pretending it's some sort of secret lethal woman trap now?

Of course you dont know. You always get forgetful when I catch you in a lie. This happens alot. Here is your statement. What did those links have to do with your comparison of the 50's to now?

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

"Women". Not "married women only". My argument has consistently been that women are safer within the confines of a nuclear family structure. What you think I said isn't what I said.

Meanwhile:

"Compared with married couples, cohabiting couples report lower levels of happiness, lower levels of sexual exclusivity and poorer relationships with parents. Annual rates of depression among cohabitors are more than three times higher than among married couples. By almost every measure, married couples are better off than cohabitors: On average, they live longer, have better physical and mental health, and are more productive in the labor force.
"Cohabitation also poses special risks to women and children. (In 2000, 41 percent of unmarried-couple households included a child under 18.) Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

I'm sure that any minute now you're going to actually address the OP and state why the left feels compelled to attack the nuclear family?

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Why is the Traditional/Nuclear family so Vilified these days?

I never realized it was

 

[Disir]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

 

[Asclepias]

Rape is a form of abuse as is incest.

How is this statement true if there is no data to support it?

I've supported it repeatedly.

"Women are also safer in married homes. As the figure above (derived from a recent Department of Justice study) indicates, married women are the least likely to be victimized by an intimate partner. They are also less likely to be the victims of violent crime in general. Overall, another U.S. Department of Justice study found that never-married women are nearly four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, compared to married women. The bottom line is that married women are less likely to be raped, assaulted, or robbed than their unmarried peers."
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
One way to end violence against women Married dads. - The Washington Post

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf

Is that a comparison with the 50's or just your way of deflecting?

At this point, I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. That is evidence that supports every single thing I've said. It's one of a couple of studies I've posted. That quote is from the Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, submitted to Congress, and written up by multiple publications. If there's a deflection, it's yours. I have tried repeatedly to argue the merits of the OP only, and you have repeatedly tried to change the subject. So I addressed your diversion....and you accuse me of deflecting, lol.

Anyway. Why do you hate the nuclear family? Are you going to stop pretending it's some sort of secret lethal woman trap now?

Of course you dont know. You always get forgetful when I catch you in a lie. This happens alot. Here is your statement. What did those links have to do with your comparison of the 50's to now?

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

"Women". Not "married women only".

What does that have to do with the 1950's?

Here is your claim. Anyone reading the thread can see you were comparing it with the 50's by your use of the word now. If you werent comparing times why would you use the word "now"?

The nuclear family provided support and protection for women in this country. Women are a lot more likely to be abused now, and the rate of abuse is much, much higher, now.

 

[Asclepias]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

I guess that puts her claims and deflections out of their misery.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually my mom got on the phone to a congressman and they had me home the next day with 2 weeks vacation to boot. I think reality got dictated pretty effectively. Dont you?

Every attempt liberals have made to *help* blacks has worsened the black lifestyle...first and foremost, their attack and dismantling of traditional family structure. "More black children grow up without a stable father in their lives as black men have been estranged from their children and emasculated by welfare policies."

More blacks are living in poverty now, and more are unemployed and in jail.

The nuclear family has always been at the very root of every single successful society since the beginning of man's time on earth. To destroy it is to destroy us.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/24/clarke-social-liberalism-the-new-racism/#ixzz3StBjmWjo

You are talking about racism not welfare. Whites have always been the largest demographic on welfare and their families were not torn apart by welfare policies. If the nuclear family has always been at the root of successful societies why do some white people (like you) pretend slavery and jim crow has no effect on todays Black community? BTW you didnt answer if you thought I was able to dictate reality or not.

Welfare is the frontman for racism. It always has been.

I hear that from Conservatives a lot.

There is no factual basis for that claim.

It sounds good to them even though the welfare capital of the country is white and conservative.

Why is the Traditional/Nuclear family so Vilified these days?

I never realized it was

Oh you must have missed coyote's comments about how marriage is a rape trap for women.

 

[koshergrl]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

 

[Syriusly]

So again..now that we've established that marriage does protect women and children, can we address the OP?
. So why REALLY do you think we shouldn't advocate for strong nuclear families, with a married mom and dad?

I have no objection to anyone having a nuclear family- or any strong family.

Or you advocating for such families just so long as it isn't done at the expense of every other family struggling to make things work with the dice life has rolled for them.

 

[Disir]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

About
Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

Our efforts address both the big policy issues of the day and the tougher, more personal issues impacting the heart and soul of our culture. Center of the American Experiment’s aim is nothing less than shifting Minnesota’s intellectual and political center of gravity to the right by focusing on time-tested principles of free enterprise, limited government, ordered liberty, and traditional American values.

To accomplish our mission, Center of the American Experiment publishes original research, writes commentaries, commissions studies, presents public programs that feature both local and national experts, hosts legislative roundtables, and delivers presentations to students and civic organizations. Each year, through these many outlets, we expose a broad audience to the ideas and solutions we believe will make a positive and lasting impact on Minnesota's future.

Since Center of the American Experiment opened shop in 1990, we have become the premier public policy organization in Minnesota. Today, we continue to be a major force driving Minnesota's transformation from a liberal, high tax, big government state toward a more conservative and free market future.

^^^that's your source.

It's reliant on a paper kicked out to the National Marriage Project.

I gave you stats. Further, you have no data to make your case.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

There is always the option of moving to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, I suppose.

 

[koshergrl]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

About
Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

Our efforts address both the big policy issues of the day and the tougher, more personal issues impacting the heart and soul of our culture. Center of the American Experiment’s aim is nothing less than shifting Minnesota’s intellectual and political center of gravity to the right by focusing on time-tested principles of free enterprise, limited government, ordered liberty, and traditional American values.

To accomplish our mission, Center of the American Experiment publishes original research, writes commentaries, commissions studies, presents public programs that feature both local and national experts, hosts legislative roundtables, and delivers presentations to students and civic organizations. Each year, through these many outlets, we expose a broad audience to the ideas and solutions we believe will make a positive and lasting impact on Minnesota's future.

Since Center of the American Experiment opened shop in 1990, we have become the premier public policy organization in Minnesota. Today, we continue to be a major force driving Minnesota's transformation from a liberal, high tax, big government state toward a more conservative and free market future.

^^^that's your source.

It's reliant on a paper kicked out to the National Marriage Project.

I gave you stats. Further, you have no data to make your case.

I also used the NIS-4 Report to Congress, which is where the information came from.

Your stats are meaningless.

Women and their children are at increased risk of harm, including death and rape, outside of marriage. So why do you people discourage women from getting married? Why do you pretend it is marriage that is risky, instead of the alternative?

I maintain (and have proven) that it's because that's the best way to funnel children into state-run, state-sanctioned warehouses. What other motive could you possibly have?

 

[koshergrl]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

About
Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

Our efforts address both the big policy issues of the day and the tougher, more personal issues impacting the heart and soul of our culture. Center of the American Experiment’s aim is nothing less than shifting Minnesota’s intellectual and political center of gravity to the right by focusing on time-tested principles of free enterprise, limited government, ordered liberty, and traditional American values.

To accomplish our mission, Center of the American Experiment publishes original research, writes commentaries, commissions studies, presents public programs that feature both local and national experts, hosts legislative roundtables, and delivers presentations to students and civic organizations. Each year, through these many outlets, we expose a broad audience to the ideas and solutions we believe will make a positive and lasting impact on Minnesota's future.

Since Center of the American Experiment opened shop in 1990, we have become the premier public policy organization in Minnesota. Today, we continue to be a major force driving Minnesota's transformation from a liberal, high tax, big government state toward a more conservative and free market future.

^^^that's your source.

It's reliant on a paper kicked out to the National Marriage Project.

I gave you stats. Further, you have no data to make your case.

Link?

 

[Disir]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

About
Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

Our efforts address both the big policy issues of the day and the tougher, more personal issues impacting the heart and soul of our culture. Center of the American Experiment’s aim is nothing less than shifting Minnesota’s intellectual and political center of gravity to the right by focusing on time-tested principles of free enterprise, limited government, ordered liberty, and traditional American values.

To accomplish our mission, Center of the American Experiment publishes original research, writes commentaries, commissions studies, presents public programs that feature both local and national experts, hosts legislative roundtables, and delivers presentations to students and civic organizations. Each year, through these many outlets, we expose a broad audience to the ideas and solutions we believe will make a positive and lasting impact on Minnesota's future.

Since Center of the American Experiment opened shop in 1990, we have become the premier public policy organization in Minnesota. Today, we continue to be a major force driving Minnesota's transformation from a liberal, high tax, big government state toward a more conservative and free market future.

^^^that's your source.

It's reliant on a paper kicked out to the National Marriage Project.

I gave you stats. Further, you have no data to make your case.

I also used the NIS-4 Report to Congress, which is where the information came from.

Your stats are meaningless.

Women and their children are at increased risk of harm, including death and rape, outside of marriage. So why do you people discourage women from getting married? Why do you pretend it is marriage that is risky, instead of the alternative?

I maintain (and have proven) that it's because that's the best way to funnel children into state-run, state-sanctioned warehouses. What other motive could you possibly have?

You haven't proven anything. You gave some information that came from a report on child abuse.

Your accusations are out of line.

 

[Disir]

She doesn't have that. It doesn't exist. Further, domestic violence as a whole has declined. You are most likely, as a female, to be murdered by your husband when you are leaving him. Secondly, if you are leaving a boyfriend.

Where are your stats?

Because every single study I pull up shows the exact opposite. There was a decline in the 90s, but it was slight, and it still didn't suck down to pre-60s.

And we have the stats SINCE then that support what I'm saying (as do the multiple studies that exist).

In case you missed it:

" Female cohabitors are victims of domestic violence far more often than married women, and children in unmarried households are at much greater risk for physical and sexual abuse than those in intact families. Indeed, the most unsafe of all family environments is that in which the mother is living with someone other than her children's biological father."

The risks of cohabitation Center of the American Experiment

About
Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

Our efforts address both the big policy issues of the day and the tougher, more personal issues impacting the heart and soul of our culture. Center of the American Experiment’s aim is nothing less than shifting Minnesota’s intellectual and political center of gravity to the right by focusing on time-tested principles of free enterprise, limited government, ordered liberty, and traditional American values.

To accomplish our mission, Center of the American Experiment publishes original research, writes commentaries, commissions studies, presents public programs that feature both local and national experts, hosts legislative roundtables, and delivers presentations to students and civic organizations. Each year, through these many outlets, we expose a broad audience to the ideas and solutions we believe will make a positive and lasting impact on Minnesota's future.

Since Center of the American Experiment opened shop in 1990, we have become the premier public policy organization in Minnesota. Today, we continue to be a major force driving Minnesota's transformation from a liberal, high tax, big government state toward a more conservative and free market future.

^^^that's your source.

It's reliant on a paper kicked out to the National Marriage Project.

I gave you stats. Further, you have no data to make your case.

Link?

It's in the about section of YOUR link. The article referred to the National Marriage Project in the text of the article.