White women have highest divorce rate...

[BlackHairDiva]

Why is that though?

How true is that, though? According to the table, 15.5% of ww over 70 had been married twice, and 3.6% had been married 3 or more times vs. 18.1% of bw over 70 had been married twice, and 2.8% had been married 3 or more times.


I think to really know the answer to this we would need to look at the life expectancy of men /BM. If the life expectancy of men in general is 68. Then this would mean that these women falling in the bracket above may have married a second time not because they had marital issues. They got re-married because their 1st spouse had passed and they meet someone else.

 

[UmSumayyah]

Perhaps I missed it, but I'm surprised no one asked why they have the highest divorce rate...

This has been discussed in depth on a blog I saw, a few weeks ago maybe? The host had definite ideas about "why". None of them flattering.

 

[DarlingNikki]

This has been discussed in depth on a blog I saw, a few weeks ago maybe? The host had definite ideas about "why". None of them flattering.

I have my ideas but could you name a couple that were listed on the blog?

 

[UmSumayyah]

If you google "Harry Potter White Women" it should come up. He definitely chose a memorable nickname for himself.

 

[DayStar]

blk women are very negative

So now the only reason we have a lower divorce rate than WW is because we desperately hold on to our horrible marriages? erplexed




Damn!!!! We can't win for losing with our OWN black sister believing that crap!!!!!!! The brainwashing, negative stats worked!!!!!

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

That stat on black women marrying is interesting - considering the stats on OOW kids, are black women only marrying once they are too old to have children? Or are we having our children very early, and bringing the husband to the family equation later?

And even more interesting the interracial results - some men marrying white women realize they are not the endall, beall of womanhood, eh?

Naw, people need to take these stats in context.

WW may have the highest divorce rate, but I bet them chicks also have the highest remarriage rate. And ok, WW have high divorce rates, but when Black folks NOWADAYS ain't getting married, WTF does that mean? It's pretty common knowledge that the the marriage rate has declined and the OOW-child birthrate among Black folks has exploded over the past 30 years or so. This one study don't negate all of those other studies.

Also to the 2001 study, I'm like whoop-de-do... Is getting married before 70 a major feat? Also, people want to forget that these stats are taking into account previous generations of Black folks when marriage was more normative. Mama and Daddy (part of the Baby Boomer generation, the largest numerical number of the American population living today) and grandma and grandpa are skewing the stats - while I'm sure people are in here like, "Well, I guess all those other studies were wrong."

It says nothing about the barriers that Black folks are facing these days, in our generation, about marriage/divorce. My first thought was the Black folks aren't as likely to get divorced because (1) "it's cheaper to keep her" aka "I can't afford this divorce or (2) staying married for the kids to not be perceived as single parents, contributors to negative stats/stereotypes. That doesn't necessarily make it a better situation. Those families can be just as dysfunctional.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

Ya'll need to quit being on some "brainwashing from negative stats" when you don't understand stats in the first place.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

But 93% get married! That's - alot.

This also includes previous generations where Black folks were getting married and staying married. Doesn't negate a darn thing.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

So we went from approx. 30% of Black women get married to approx. 93%?

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

We should start using that stat when folks are talking about marriage - most of us WILL get married. Not saying you'll be a spring chicken, but it'll happen.

I think this is kinda irrelevant. If all the arguments are WHY folks should get married have to do with raising functional Black families, then it's kinda beside the point if people get married after their childbearing years are over.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

As of the date of the study, 93% of black women ages 70 or over had been married. Of those, 72% have been married once, 18% had been married twice, and 2% had been married 3 times.

For those wondering about the numbers, this is EXACTLY how all those negative statistics about black people are calculated. What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

While some Black folks get satisfaction out of seeing White folks *finally* being portrayed in a negative light in a research study, the analysis in this thread is way off. Before folks get to rejoicing.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

*I* feel like Black women don't divorce as much because we're more likely to "tough it out." Now the reasonings behind that may vary, but don't act like yall don't know plenty of black women who think they can't get "better" or that they've "lucked out" so they'll hang on to a marriage in shambles for dear life.

I also feel that WW may feel as though they have more viable options therefore they do not feel obligated to stay in a marriage unlike some Black women may feel.

 

[gymfreak336]

How true is that, though? According to the table, 15.5% of ww over 70 had been married twice, and 3.6% had been married 3 or more times vs. 18.1% of bw over 70 had been married twice, and 2.8% had been married 3 or more times.


I think to really know the answer to this we would need to look at the life expectancy of men /BM. If the life expectancy of men in general is 68. Then this would mean that these women falling in the bracket above may have married a second time not because they had marital issues. They got re-married because their 1st spouse had passed and they meet someone else.

Passed or got locked up.

 

[Southernbella.]

While some Black folks get satisfaction out of seeing White folks *finally* being portrayed in a negative light in a research study, the analysis in this thread is way off. Before folks get to rejoicing.

Please share your analysis of the numbers.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

Please share your analysis of the numbers.

I already did. http://www.longhaircareforum.com/showpost.php?p=7394433&postcount=96

Even taking this study into account, all of these other studies that people like to discount/disbelieve can *still* be accurate.

This study was taken from a Census Bureau dataset, which, of course, includes ALL living Black Americans in the United States. To me, it's like well, alright, we already KNEW our parents and grandparents were marrying and staying married. That's no surprise. They numerically outnumber this *new* dysfunction that it going on re: marriage/OOW-children in the under-35 set, so of course, the numbers present a different story. It skews the data.

Re: Other studies that people are referencing, people need to read all the qualifiers about marriage/OOW-kids before they draw wide-sweeping conclusions. They tend to reference a specific age demographic. You can't compare apples with oranges.

 

[Southernbella.]

I already did. http://www.longhaircareforum.com/showpost.php?p=7394433&postcount=96

Even taking this study into account, all of these other studies that people like to discount/disbelieve can *still* be accurate.

This study was taken from a Census Bureau dataset, which, of course, includes ALL living Black Americans in the United States. To me, it's like well, alright, we already KNEW our parents and grandparents were marrying and staying married. That's no surprise. They numerically outnumber this *new* dysfunction that it going on re: marriage/OOW-children in the under-35 set, so of course, the numbers present a different story. It skews the data.

Re: Other studies that people are referencing, people need to read all the qualifiers about marriage/OOW-kids before they draw wide-sweeping conclusions. They tend to reference a specific age demographic. You can't compare apples with oranges.

OK, I missed that, thanks.

What boggles my mind is that I've been on white boards where someone starts a whole thread about black people and why they do this or that. Nobody ever comes in and starts talking about white people and what they do wrong. The information is presented, and then they discuss it.

I posted this information and everyone comes out of the woodwork to talk about black women and how we suck more than white women, and the reasons why.

I just find that interesting.

I have more thoughts, but I'll be back when I can better articulate them.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

OK, I missed that, thanks.

What boggles my mind is that I've been on white boards where someone starts a whole thread about black people and why they do this or that. Nobody ever comes in and starts talking about white people and what they do wrong. The information is presented, and then they discuss it.

I posted this information and everyone comes out of the woodwork to talk about black women and how we suck more than white women, and the reasons why.

I just find that interesting.

I have more thoughts, but I'll be back when I can better articulate them.

You know what? I haven't had that experience online, but I've definitely been in classes sitting amongst white people, discussing the stats pertaining to Black folks. I've gotten defensive too. I've offered alternative explanations and theories (which are needed, but there are far too few Black people even in these types of arenas, so even that is a luxury). But then I always come to the same conclusion - to some extent, if the truth hurts, then OUCH.

I'm not gonna say research is criticism-free or error-free because it is not. The average person doesn't learn to how really read, analyze, and critically thinking about these things. That's become amazingly clear to me. And when these discussions come up on this board, it lightweight perplexes me. I understand hearing the onslaught of negative stats hurts, but it's not too far off the mark from the *truth,* in my opinion. Even if it's not you, I firmly believe the majority of Black folks are about 2 degrees of separation from EXACTLY what these studies are talking about, so it can't all be false.

And on another note, this is another argument for why we need more Black people doing research. There are far too many Black folks at this level of "influence," so to speak, to challenge some of the interpretations, or even to generate any positive stats for the media to pick up on in the first place (if it gets published, but that's another story ).

As a researcher, I have a study coming out debunking quite a few prevalent myths about the media's influence on Black & White children. It almost didn't get published. We do what we can, but we are an EXTREMELY SMALL NUMBER. There is too much work to go around. And while we do what we can, closing one's eyes to the "truth," discounting every study because you don't like the conclusions, ain't helping Black folks not one bit - especially when we talk about these issues all day every day on this board. Clearly it's an issue. Everyone ain't making this stuff up. That's my position on it.

 

[winterinatl]

OK, I missed that, thanks.

What boggles my mind is that I've been on white boards where someone starts a whole thread about black people and why they do this or that. Nobody ever comes in and starts talking about white people and what they do wrong. The information is presented, and then they discuss it.

I posted this information and everyone comes out of the woodwork to talk about black women and how we suck more than white women, and the reasons why.

I just find that interesting.

I have more thoughts, but I'll be back when I can better articulate them.

I personally took the whole post as a "look, they are messed up too" type post....with the main tenet being erroneous. Like, they can't even keep a man. But then to be fair, we as black women aren't even getting married. It is what it is.

 

[Mortons]

To be fair, there are others studies that we have posted that say the opposite of this, so I think its healthy to hold a little suspicion, cause obviously both of them cant be right.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

To be fair, there are others studies that we have posted that say the opposite of this, so I think its healthy to hold a little suspicion, cause obviously both of them cant be right.

If you've been reading, I've already addressed how they can *both* be true, if you take into account context and inequivalent levels of analysis.

And I think people are "suspicious" because they don't know how to interpret these studies and because they are tired of seeing negative stats (not that they aren't true). If that's what it is, then just be straight up and say that's what it is.

I just don't get how AS A BOARD we can come on here foaming at the mouth about OOW children, but then a research study confirms the same exact thing, and it's wrong. I mean, does that even make any sense?

I guess as long as it comes out of someone who is Black's mouth and is kept within the community, rather than airing dirty laundry, it's ok.

 

[FelaShrine]

You know what? I haven't had that experience online, but I've definitely been in classes sitting amongst white people, discussing the stats pertaining to Black folks. I've gotten defensive too. I've offered alternative explanations and theories (which are needed, but there are far too few Black people even in these types of arenas, so even that is a luxury). But then I always come to the same conclusion - to some extent, if the truth hurts, then OUCH.

I'm not gonna say research is criticism-free or error-free because it is not. The average person doesn't learn to how really read, analyze, and critically thinking about these things. That's become amazingly clear to me. And when these discussions come up on this board, it lightweight perplexes me. I understand hearing the onslaught of negative stats hurts, but it's not too far off the mark from the *truth,* in my opinion. Even if it's not you, I firmly believe the majority of Black folks are about 2 degrees of separation from EXACTLY what these studies are talking about, so it can't all be false.

And on another note, this is another argument for why we need more Black people doing research. There are far too many Black folks at this level of "influence," so to speak, to challenge some of the interpretations, or even to generate any positive stats for the media to pick up on in the first place (if it gets published, but that's another story ).

As a researcher, I have a study coming out debunking quite a few prevalent myths about the media's influence on Black & White children. It almost didn't get published. We do what we can, but we are an EXTREMELY SMALL NUMBER. There is too much work to go around. And while we do what we can, closing one's eyes to the "truth," discounting every study because you don't like the conclusions, ain't helping Black folks not one bit - especially when we talk about these issues all day every day on this board. Clearly it's an issue. Everyone ain't making this stuff up. That's my position on it.

Thanks wasn't enough for this post.

Stuff like this is why I can't wait to get into research.

 

[cutiebe2]

I think in the end it shows that you cannot get tripped up in statistics. I don't think anyone here is denying that the black community has a problem with marriage and OOW birth rates, but this also shows that the idea that black women walk around alone and single for all of their days is also false. Plus the way statistics are presented are very interesting. While I have seen tons of stats digging deep into the rates of black births and marriages, IR or white statistics are not as frequent. You can't just have one stat and discuss it by itself. These other figures of different relationship give some comparison.

 

[sunshinebeautiful]

I personally took the whole post as a "look, they are messed up too" type post....with the main tenet being erroneous. Like, they can't even keep a man. But then to be fair, we as black women aren't even getting married. It is what it is.

Being "tit for tat" in the "see, they messed up too" game ain't doing NOTHING to fix what's wrong in OUR communities.

 

[anon123]

We're not talking raw numbers though. We're talking percentages.

Their rate proportional to their numbers is higher than our rate proportional to our numbers. Their rate is 25%, ours is 20%. Out of 100 ww, 25 of them will divorce. Out of 100 bw, 20 will divorce.

If I'm reading it correctly, we're talking about the percentage of people out of the whole population who have been divorced, not the percentage of people out of the married population who have been divorced. So if I'm getting it right, out of 100 ww, 97 will marry, 25% of all ww (incl not married) will get divorced, so about 26% of married ww will get divorced. Out of 100 bw, 91 will marry, about 20% of all bw (incl not married) of them will get divorced, so a divorce rate of 22%. The overall results are the same, but those are the numbers that seem more relevant. Do others agree?

now does anyone want to help me understand how this relates to the often quoted 50% divorce rate?

 

[winterinatl]

I think people in general from all walks of life really need to learn about how statistcs are obtained, what consists of good studies, what consists of poor studies. People need to know this so they don't get all up in arms off of a minor coorelational study ("Study shows Light Skinned Black women more likely to marry!") that might have been published for filler for a magazine or something. People have died over stupid and poorly run/reported studies.

Take a statistics 101 course. Learn about how a researcher can choose who he places in his studies to throw the results from the beginning. Or how margin of error makes a difference. Or how people will take a study with no control group and say something was effective when it may not have been.

ETA this was not directed at anyone in particular, just a public service announcement.

 

[anon123]

What some of the interpretations of the data are really speak to me. It's like, if our divorce rate was higher, it would be because we aren't committed to marriage and we don't make good judgment in partners marrying Tyrone 'nem. If our divorce rate was lower, it's because we feel we don't have any other options and stay in bad marriages. It's like people have already started with the conclusion that we're more screwed up in all possible ways, so no matter what the stats say, we'll find the most negative way to interpret them. Negative for us, that is.

 

[cutiebe2]

I think people in general from all walks of life really need to learn about how statistcs are obtained, what consists of good studies, what consists of poor studies. People need to know this so they don't get all up in arms off of a minor coorelational study ("Study shows Light Skinned Black women more likely to marry!") that might have been published for filler for a magazine or something. People have died over stupid and poorly run/reported studies.

Take a statistics 101 course. Learn about how a researcher can choose who he places in his studies to through the results from the beginning. Or how margin of error makes a difference. Or how people will take a study with no control group and say something was effective when it may not have been.

The one thing I was surprised about is the data collection of this study. Apparently its a survey but I would suspect a better method of collection would be the national records (marriage certificates, divorce certificates)

 

[Southernbella.]

You know what? I haven't had that experience online, but I've definitely been in classes sitting amongst white people, discussing the stats pertaining to Black folks. I've gotten defensive too. I've offered alternative explanations and theories (which are needed, but there are far too few Black people even in these types of arenas, so even that is a luxury). But then I always come to the same conclusion - to some extent, if the truth hurts, then OUCH.

But here's my problem with that...the truth definitely hurts, but black folks already know the truth about ourselves. We've been hearing someone's version of the truth ever since we got to this country. What about others' truths? It's odd to me that even when hearing others' truths, some of us will come in and start talking about black people. The truth is that black teenagers are less likely to engage in risky behavior than any other race. Well, many of us refused to even believe that. I don't generally get defensive when talking about us and our problems, but it does bother me when we can't even discuss other races without shouting, "But we're worse! Don't get too happy, because black people are still the scum of the earth!"

I'm not gonna say research is criticism-free or error-free because it is not. The average person doesn't learn to how really read, analyze, and critically thinking about these things. That's become amazingly clear to me. And when these discussions come up on this board, it lightweight perplexes me. I understand hearing the onslaught of negative stats hurts, but it's not too far off the mark from the *truth,* in my opinion. Even if it's not you, I firmly believe the majority of Black folks are about 2 degrees of separation from EXACTLY what these studies are talking about, so it can't all be false.

I agree that most people don't know how to analyze numbers like this. I admitted from the beginning that I wanted someone more experienced to weigh in because I knew I was probably missing something.

And on another note, this is another argument for why we need more Black people doing research. There are far too many Black folks at this level of "influence," so to speak, to challenge some of the interpretations, or even to generate any positive stats for the media to pick up on in the first place (if it gets published, but that's another story ).

I agree. You can interpret these things any way you want. I was talking to a black guy on another forum. He told me, definitively, that black people commit more crime than any other race. Well, here's my problem with that; the people who say this are generally only thinking about certain crimes. Do black people commit more murders? Yes. Arson? No. Sex crimes? No. Fraud? No. DUI? No. Drug crimes (both selling & using)? No.

The media has always been able to put their own spin on the numbers and report whatever they want, unchecked and unchallenged, and that's a big problem.

As a researcher, I have a study coming out debunking quite a few prevalent myths about the media's influence on Black & White children. It almost didn't get published. We do what we can, but we are an EXTREMELY SMALL NUMBER. There is too much work to go around. And while we do what we can, closing one's eyes to the "truth," discounting every study because you don't like the conclusions, ain't helping Black folks not one bit - especially when we talk about these issues all day every day on this board. Clearly it's an issue. Everyone ain't making this stuff up. That's my position on it.

I can't wait for your book to come out.

I am all for accepting the truth, but again, whose truth? Whose spin? I've never seen an unbiased study when it comes to what is said about black folks. When I posted "What's good for the goose is good for the gander", I meant that if we accept the studies about us as truth, why do we then turn around and holler "Bias!" when it comes to other races?

 

[DragonPearl]

I already did. http://www.longhaircareforum.com/showpost.php?p=7394433&postcount=96

Even taking this study into account, all of these other studies that people like to discount/disbelieve can *still* be accurate.

This study was taken from a Census Bureau dataset, which, of course, includes ALL living Black Americans in the United States. To me, it's like well, alright, we already KNEW our parents and grandparents were marrying and staying married. That's no surprise. They numerically outnumber this *new* dysfunction that it going on re: marriage/OOW-children in the under-35 set, so of course, the numbers present a different story. It skews the data.

Re: Other studies that people are referencing, people need to read all the qualifiers about marriage/OOW-kids before they draw wide-sweeping conclusions. They tend to reference a specific age demographic. You can't compare apples with oranges.

The bolded is what I think people don't seem to understand.

 

[Southernbella.]

What some of the interpretations of the data are really speak to me. It's like, if our divorce rate was higher, it would be because we aren't committed to marriage and we don't make good judgment in partners marrying Tyrone 'nem. If our divorce rate was lower, it's because we feel we don't have any other options and stay in bad marriages. It's like people have already started with the conclusion that we're more screwed up in all possible ways, so no matter what the stats say, we'll find the most negative way to interpret them. Negative for us, that is.

EXACTLY!

When that AIDS study was posted a few weeks ago, the people who questioned the methods and biases in the study were accused of not wanting to hear the truth. When people questioned this study, they apparently know the truth and we're the ones in denial for believing it.