Divorce rates of Homo vs. Hetero couples

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Not as much as your golden boys.

[citation needed]

into the trash

That's what I'm looking for. I'm banging on the web while I post here.

If you consider that cheating is a fairly common reason for divorce, I'd have to imagine more gay relationships are open rather than monogamous. Plus, I doubt many fags even get married. They're very promiscuous.

Good point.

Reported. You don't belong here. Back to reddit.

Easy. What is "marriage" rate? I.e. how many of gays are married?

If only a small fraction of gays is married they are married because of very tight relations.

If OP is serious and didnt immediately realize this

He should propably stop posting for a while

Well for one, gay marriage has only been legalized for a short time now. It was only last year that it became legal in all 50 states of America. Give it some time and the divorce rates will increase.

Two, gays have different values than straights (in most cases). Gays are typically not monogamous; a lot of them have "open relationships", or they are comfortable with being cheated on (or in some cases, they settle a cheating dispute by having a "revenge affair"). What this tells us is that, if a gay couple were so "in love" to get married, getting cheated on or being used won't break them up as easily –which is something that breaks up a lot of heterosexual relationships. A lot of them are willing to settle being married because they can get tax benefits, validation, status signalling, etc. –even though they're being cheated on. Even though they don't love each other enough to remain monogamous. Another less-known statistic is that 2 in every 5 gay relationships suffer from emotional, sexual, and/or physical abuse. If we factor this in as well, we can imagine that there is a number of gays getting married in spite of the abuse they're receiving.

So to your faggot friend, I would say that divorce rates are not representative of quality relationships. Just because gay marriage has a lower divorce rate (for now) doesn't mean that gay marriage is morally righteous. You should have looked at him and said "Hey I know you're gay and all, but I think that our society should operate under Shariah Law. Like, I know you'd get stoned to death for being gay but the divorce rates would drop immensely! I guess women being burned with acid or decapitated for adultery really incentivizes long-lasting marriage rates".

Gay man fags Fuck every thing in a 10mile radius of them & lesbian dike lumberjacks have varry high domestic violence problems more so than any other combinations of cupples.

Sorry for the long time before a reply, but I promise you it's worth it. I did some math.

Going to your point

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_United_States

washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/health-survey-gives-government-its-first-large-scale-data-on-gay-bisexual-population/2014/07/14/2db9f4b0-092f-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html
archive.is/w8xfz

So based on that, a total of 2.5% of the population is a plain ol' faggot. Or 3.8% if you want to lump in all the other faggots who went as far as to mutilate themselves.

census.gov/popclock/

Population of the US is 323,800,000ish as of now.

2.5% of this is 8,095,000 faggots who are the "old fashioned" variety
3.8% of this is 12,304,400 faggots

So we have an estimation of the total faggots in the US based on either gay/lesbian or everything under the umbrella of faggotry.

So now we need the number of those married.

washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/04/28/heres-how-many-gay-marriages-the-supreme-court-could-make-way-for/
archive.is/Sx4DH

As of 1 year ago, approx 390,000
Gay marriage was first allowed in 2004, so we have 35,454 per year average if I just divide by 11, not accounting for this year. I would assume this number has climbed a bit every year as more faggots get out of the closet (we can correct this if I'm wrong), so I will add 1,000 to this year to adjust for that. Adding all that up would be 426,454 gay marriages. Double this and we have 852,909 (approx) faggots with a marriage certificate from some government. Now we know how many have been married. About 10 percent or 7 percent depending on the figure get married.

For the number of divorced, the shitty washington post article is the best one out there that I can find. Following the links leads me to the heart of it all

williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Mallory-Divorce-Terminations-Dec-2014.pdf

No I'm not archiving a fucking white paper. It's kinda shit, so we'll have to do more estimation. It discusses a four year period, when this was just getting started. Again, I'll have to adjust (guess really) to account for more faggots coming out of the closet.

So the raw number is 14,362 in all areas in a four year period starting when it was first legalized. Divide by 4, you get 3,591 per year (rounding). Times 12 is 43,092. The ballpark appears to be roughly 10%, so add 100 do adjust. We get 43,192 annulled gay marriages/partnerships/etc.

So the rate would be 43,192 divorces for 426,454 marriages. This comes out to .101, or 10.1% end in divorce.

This would mean that it's DRASTICALLY higher. Can someone really good at math check this for me?

I doubt you'll find any actual sources as gay marriage hasn't been around long enough for there to be meaningful statistics. This fact is clearly reflected in the desperate nature of the article.

Divorce rates withing the first year? That's the honeymoon phase, any couple that divorces that soon is usually a bunch of kids who made a mistake. Considering the political upheaval around faggots being granted the right to get hitched only recently, why would there be a high first-year divorce rate for them? They're extra motivated to keep their marriages together. Still, within the first year is pretty meaningless because making a marriage work for that long is not really an achievement.

The sample size is questionable. Why only Vemont and New Hampshire? Why not all the places in the US where gay marriage is legal?

Then the kike goes on an extrapolation spree and after many ebin calculations that have no basis in reality ends up with the blanket statement that gay divorce rates are the same if not lower than straight ones.

It's also worth noting that comparing divorce rates to justify gay marriages is pretty fucking low in the first place as straight divorce rates are at an all time high, thanks to kike family law. As for conflating heterosexual monogamous relationships with faggots' idea of """monogamy""" (I accidentally got pozzed while out riding strange dick, how do I tell my partner?), let's not even go there.

But all these things aren't the reason I'm trashing this article. The reason is it's over 1.5 years old therefore not fucking relevant, so learn to read dates faggot.

Sources on this is a pain in the ass to find, which in itself usually means they don't want you to find their dirty laundry. I know it's outdated but it's all I can find for now. I did some estimation here , and if I did it right then they are very BTFO.

yeah I bet pedos diddling little boys are straight as an arrow

Checked and kekked cuz you are tarded.

Fags are 2% of the population or less.
Do you realize the differences in sample size here?

Today, there are about 390,000 - 390 THOUSAND - married same-sex couples in the country, according to Gallup.

Total number of married couples in the US: 60,000,000+, that is, 60 MILLION OR MORE.

SO, a 0.65% sample size shows variation?
Huh. Neat.
That doesn't suggest gay marriage is a good thing.
At all.

Because dykes and sodomites are degenerates.

I know it's autismal and doesn't mean much but if faggots want to hang on it, it needs done in.

the measure of a successful marriage is healthy children turning into successful adults.

First of all the percentage of faggots who actually get married is tiny. Second even if faggots are married doesn't mean they are monogamous they see everything as some kind of sexual kink that they like and have to try. And then there are those who adopt a young boy mhmmmm I wonder why! And when you are talking to a leftist make sure to say "sure there might be a few good fags, but…." It makes them more sympathetic towards you

Here's an article from the "Christian Post" website concerning gay divorce rates in Scandanavia, where gay marriage has been legal for over two decades. It says that a survey of 1, 500 gay couples showed that male couples were 35% more likely to get divorced than hetrosexual couples. The rate for lesbien couples was even worse, at 200%.
Unfortunately, in the article the link to the original study is broken. The study that the article mentioned is called "“Same-Sex Unions and Divorce Risk: Data from Sweden".

Original article:

christianpost.com/news/why-gay-couples-divorce-more-than-straight-couples-122934/

Archive version:

archive.is/LVu08

A seperate study I've found suggests that…" divorce-risk levels are considerably higher in same-sex marriages. The divorce risk for female partnerships is double that for male partnerships."
This reserch paper is "The Demographics of Same-Sex Marriages in Norway and Sweden" by Gunnar Andersson, Turid Noack, Ane Seierstad, Harald Weedon-Fekjær, originally published in the journal
'Demography', Vol. 43, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 79-98.

Link to abstract of this study:

muse.jhu.edu/article/193265

...

Is that 10% per year? Because regular divorce rates are measured in per ten year intervals.

If I'm doing my math correctly, a 10% probability of divorce per year gives a 65% probability of divorce over ten years. I may have messed up on that — I took the probability of staying together (90%) every year and multiplied it over ten years, giving a probability of not divorcing over ten years of 35%.

Love can appear in marriage and make it stronger. This however should not be confused with lust and with current model of marrying with no pressure on the future arrangements of the marriage leads to disappointment once the initial emotional high wears off.

Truly compatible people however will become affectionate for one another and there are plenty of examples in history. the key is thaat these people chose each other well. Other side, that of arranged marriage, is a mixed bag but affection can develop there too, barring personal issues, vices and life calamities.

Keep in mind that regular divorce rates include nonwhites, bumping up the rate significantly, as well as repeat offenders. Though I haven't looked into it, I'd imagine that there's a significant group divorcing and remarrying constantly, driving up the rate and giving a false impression.

That's not marrying for love though. I fully agree with loving who you marry, I just don't believe most people have the mental faculties to seek out a proper partner for themselves, especially when they're blinded by emotions.

Love who you marry vs. marry who you love, you might say.

From what I've seen of statistics arranged marriages are just as happy and successful — or moreso — than their nonarranged counterparts.

I'm of the opinion that so long as you marry a good match for you — a match not decided by feelings — you can and will fall in love with them and be successful, especially when you don't have the option of an eject button.

Yes, per year. If it's over ten years then that would be 1%… I'm still wondering if my original math was right.

...

If I had to make an educated guess, I would imagine it is likely because all faggot marriages are open marriages, whether they admit it or not.

Homosexuals are enormously promiscuous. The average for the number of partners they have in a lifetime is over a thousand, and that's taking into account the shortened lifespans from disease.

It's easy to "stay together" when your definition of "staying together" is merely living in the same space for a tax break.

Show me a study on how monogamous married faggots are, and then I'll concede that there's something we might be missing. Until then, I strongly suspect the reason they "stay together" more is because they're only really "together" in the most superficial sense. They're a joint orgy-seeking unit with a special tax status, not an actual couple.

It's been proven that fags and lesbos are MISERABLE after they marry. They stop fucking and retreat into drug use and alcoholism.

1%? I don't think it works that way, unless there was a 10% divorce rate one year and 0% all nine other years.

Pic related.

Marrying for love is one of the reasons the various white races have been so successful. Semites like Jews and Arabs, as well as the shit-tier Asians, micromanage their whole societies so that no one really marries for love. Whites and Christian societies, on the other hand, have the vast majority of marriages being for love, which increases the couple's investment in caring for their children. Only a vanishingly small minority of white society (the aristocrats) married for things besides love.

Love between spouses was one of the tools we used to survive and thrive as extremophiles in the conditions of the ice age. It gave our offspring a more nurturing environment, which drastically increased their chances of survival.

I fully agree, I just find it sad that modern society does not place value on that anymore. The decline of tight-knit community life and fall in religious observation (more so for its social and cultural reasons) means that people have less advice, less viable choices and dating is a horrible maze of emotions and expectations.

I said nothing about micromanaging, but European marriage has never been about "love" until recently. It was a family business and it didn't matter how "in love" you were if your parents hated the fuck out of them.

Conclusion does not follow from premise. How and why would it do this?

Now that's just not true.

You're conflating two different things. Marrying someone because "you love them" is entirely different from loving your spouse. As I said before, I fully support love between spouses. I just don't support making such a momentous decision as who you'll spend the rest of your life and raise a family with based on sole personal feelings.

That kind of shit is part of why we have such a high divorce rate, because idiots believe that love is a magical thing you discover and that once you find someone "you love" there's no more work involved and everything will be easy, and then when things go to shit because of their laziness they conclude it must not have been "meant to be" or they "weren't really in love" and that they'd better blow up their families and try again. That is cancer and no one has any business supporting it except Jews.

Marry the right person not based on feelings, grow to love them, and raise your family healthily, with the realization that you have to work to keep things golden.

Don't get blinded by the ideals here, all cultures practiced arranged marriages, and romantic ones were allowed with various levels of acceptance everywhere. The key here is to match people well so that people are compatible and can therefore have their happiness from that.

It's because we live in an age where people aren't willing to work and have been sold lies. They don't realize real love or that its something you have to work on and for. They think it's just something that appears with the right person.

It might just be my view, but I think that understanding of love severely cheapens it. If it's merely a matter of smacking the right two people together then how much value does it really have? How much can you really be a loving person when you keep destroying relationships because you just weren't "in love"?

Amen to that. Add all the false expectations in there and you've got a huge fuck-up. I detest the notion of "the one" that preaches promiscuity until your feelings chime in in the correct way.

I don't believe people, at least any social or civilized people, are really meant to abandon or blowup relationships. I haven't seen exact science on it, but I'd be willing to bet money that repeated emotional investment getting destroyed — such as a serial dater — inhibits one's ability to commit and love, and inures people to real attachment and emotion. Same way I'd be willing to bet the most promiscuous have the least satisfying sex.

The left, and the masses they have deluded, don't understand the concept of "too much of a good thing." They think more is always better, and this leads to profound dissatisfaction, I think.

Well, the only way to correct it is to start at home.

I can prove him wrong, right now.

In Legal Terms, Sweden had parallel laws with heterosexual marriage compared to their laws for civil partnerships. This data was able to collect for nearly 20 years.

This article says that divorce rates are lower within gay marriages.

williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Mallory-Divorce-Terminations-Dec-2014.pdf

If you look closer at the Data, it's only collected form 2 states, and was only 4 years old at the time. Doesn't control for many factors either. Vermont for instance, has a lower rate, but right across in New Hampshire, it's higher with their domestic partnerships.

Compare this to Sweden.

"The best study I've seen focused on Scandinavia, where same-sex civil unions - essentially marriages in everything but name - have been legal for about two decades. The authors had access to population-level administrative data that generated a sample size of over 1,500 same-sex unions. After controlling for age, region, country of birth, education, and duration of the partnership, male couples in Sweden were 35 percent more likely to divorce than heterosexual couples, and lesbian partners were over 200 percent more likely to divorce. Whether the couples had children made little difference in the relative rates."

christianpost.com/news/why-gay-couples-divorce-more-than-straight-couples-122934/

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16579209

2nd link is actual study.

This follows another major pattern in two areas as well. Lesbians, almost in every country, have double the divorce rates of gay men.

genderacrossborders.com/2012/02/27/marital-bliss-gender-gaps-in-dutch-same-sex-divorce-rates/

Nearly all cases of Homosexuality in animals, in terms of the LONG TERM, never last.

bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-are-there-any-homosexual-animals

There is a natural link to why gays and lesbians will have higher rates. It's a clear pattern built into our own biology, consistent with nature itself.

Here's hoping.

I wish I had an appropriate feels pic.

A man can't marry a man so the rate of divorce is zero percent.

enjoy being slaughtered in the near future pedo

Given that majority of homosexuals have reported some form of abuse in their early age, there is nothing natural about them in the first place, its simply lust generated by violated individuality and twisted mentality that attempts to reconcile early-age experiences with the wider world and finds no answer because these experiences were wrong to begin with.

Gay pride and the hubbub they create is merely a projection of the desperate acceptance for their identity that is built on broken personality.

As for these studies, they only go to affirm that. Once you throw in child abuse and sex crime statistics in there, the picture is clear - for reasons of nurture or nature, homosexuals are not compatible with the wider society and are a consistent threat to its future.

gays dont divorce because gays fucking around with other people isnt an issue. they do it for the tax benefit. thats it.

No, what I meant was that the pattern of separation amoungst homosexuality in animals, is natural because it's unnatural for them to maintain that relationship.

This. "Gay Marriage" is just a PR term to befuddle christians and conservatives to make them think that gay perverts are just like them. They are not. They are the most hideous perverts and we haven't even seen their final form yet.

It's also a ploy to cheapen and redefine marriage into something as worthless as a government friendship certificate. Any rational definition of marriage would make two of the same sex having it impossible by definition, in just the same way that a "solid gas" is a definitional impossibility.

The only way to make homosexual "marriage" possible is to change the definition to something worthless like "a union of love" — which, incidentally, makes a whole host of ridiculous things possible. Not to mention, if you believe "love is love" then you have to declare nothing wrong with incest, pedophilia, or bestiality.

You like it or not, religious definition of marriage and their aggressive defense of that definition is the last refuge for marriage as a sacred social custom. I am far from being overly religious, but theirs is the definition that most people have in mind when talking about marriage - gays are not welcome.

I am white and asexual, women are natural deceptions don't fall for it

While I never attacked a religious definition or religion, I'm skeptical of any church's ability to defend it nowadays.

I also believe it's possible to have a completely secular definition of marriage which is not discivilizational.

Instruct me on how to reproduce without a white woman.

The first box is a blatant and hilarious lie. Zero human beings in history have ever had more than 1000 sexual partners.
The second box is because of homophobia, so it's a recursive argument.
The third box doesn't effect anyone other than homosexuals, but a long life isn't really a moral virtue. You use a lot of phrasing like "life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men" to mislead the reader into believing falsehoods without bluntly stating them.
Most of the citations in blue don't apply to the points you're attaching them too.

Now fuck off back to >>>/isis/, Muhammad.

It's less known because it isn't true.

In China it is possible to clone humans if you are very rich, you should make your own researches as I am not allowed to give you more infos

0/10

That isn't a counter argument.

Neither was anything you said.

They don't have to deal with Feminism.

"The second box is because of homophobia, so it's a recursive argument." isn't a counter argument? Okay, Muhammad.

It's weightless, since you have no proof.

Now go get in the camp with Abdul so we can cleanse the both of you.

ar•gu•ment (ärˈgyə-mənt) - n. A reason or matter for dispute or contention: "sheath'd their swords for lack of argument” ( Shakespeare).

I could argue the weight of my argument, but regardless of how much weight it has, it's still an argument, Muhammad.

Abdul must not have wanted to go on Jihad?

Why should it matter if fags stay together?

Fag marriages aren't worse because they are more fragile, they are worse because it's NOT A MARRIAGE, it's TWO FAGS BUTTFUCKING EACH OTHER and RAPING LITTLE BOYS.

Their divorce rates are entirely irrelevant.

A useful factoid, maybe, but the core truth is that fag marriage is just two poofs masturbating furiously while they take turns snorting cocaine out of a 10 year old boy's asshole.

THAT is the problem.

Get more mad, .

It's largely a way to prove that homos are not the equal of real partnerships, but I agree that it's not the best way to go about arguing it.

Of course I'm mad, my society is taken over by browns, faggots, weaklings, shrieking shrew-bitch women, kikes and all of their enablers.

I'm mad because my whole fucking country would rather eat burgers and play with plastic than fix any of these problems or even acknowledge that they exist. They won't even acknowledge that Islam is a cancer that needs excision.

I'm mad as fuck because the world around me is nothing like the world I dreamed of as a child, it's ugly, cruel and insane.

Then get the fuck out of Egypt, you stupid sand nigger.
You're an internet tough guy, kek. Your arms are either pudgy or atrophied. You're useless and you aren't white.

I am a white American, I am not sure where your "you are a sand nigger" autism comes from.

Well, maybe the nose knows…

Okay, Jamal/Pedro.

He's one of the low-tier "Only nonwhites/Muslims don't like faggots" baiters.

You're wasting your time.

You ran from an argument because you lost. Consider suicide, Omar.

I figured. Fags are human pollution, only a D&C would insist otherwise.

Marriage for love is a hilariously new concept
It wasn't that long ago that family arranged/dominated marriages were still big in the west

Yeah, don't know why we've been getting "Buttfucking is a white tradition" spam lately. I hesitate to blame summer, but you've got to wonder.

Marriages between men are going to be less likely to end in divorce as the primary instigator of divorce is women.

Gay men often avoid marriage because they want to sleep around. If they decide to be monogamous then they may decide to get married, but it's usually viewed as unlikely.

Lesbians are the opposite. They're always desperate to be in a relationship and it wouldn't be odd to hear of a couple lesbians getting married after 2-3 months of knowing each other. An old joke is "What does a lesbian bring on a second date? A suitcase".

Men just typically will not get into a relationship with someone unless they mean it.

Also it's worth keeping in mind that the Kinsey study that some people bandy about is not entirely accurate for sexual tendencies in real populations. The guy actively sought out sex fiends for research data which would throw off most decent statistical information as it would no longer be relevant for the general population. More recent studies, that did try getting data on the general population, ended up showing that gay guys are typically engaging with 1.5x-2x as many partners a year as straight guys. Still quite a bit more than straight guys will sleep around with, but not quite the insane numbers some idiots toss around suggesting gays sleep with hundreds a year. I'm not sure how it would even become logistically possible to sleep around as much as some dumbasses on Holla Forums might think is possible for gays.

"Love" is emotion.
Emotions come out of primordial part of brain (near brain stem, this is part of brain which is needed for basic body functions like pumping your heart and breathing manually which you are doing right now as you are reading this).
Now, love is emotion just like fear, hate, and any other. These emotions were evolutionary established in your mind to make it more effective in spreading its genes.
So "love" is just an impulse in your head to make you more connected to a mate of opposite sex. To make the bond between you more strong so that family unit can survive and your offspring can therefore survive.

"Love" can't exist out of that context. "Love" in of itself is just an impuls, a means to an end. Gay relationships are simply hedonistic ones. They have no end goal. The genes of these people will die out, and their only goal is to serve this capitalistic system we live in.

Statistics point to male homos still being more likely to divorce than normal couples though.

Perhaps it's just leftists whole like blowing up relationships.

The Greek language distinguishes at least four different ways as to how the word love is used. Ancient Greek has four distinct words for love: agápe, éros, philía, and storgē. However, as with other languages, it has been historically difficult to separate the meanings of these words when used outside of their respective contexts. Nonetheless, the senses in which these words were generally used are as follows:

Agápe (ἀγάπη agápē[1]) means "love: esp. charity; the love of God for man and of man for God."[2] Agape is used in ancient texts to denote feelings for one's children and the feelings for a spouse, and it was also used to refer to a love feast.[3] Agape is used by Christians to express the unconditional love of God for his children.[4] This type of love was further explained by Thomas Aquinas as "to will the good of another."[5]

Éros (ἔρως érōs) means "love, mostly of the sexual passion."[6] The Modern Greek word "erotas" means "intimate love." Plato refined his own definition: Although eros is initially felt for a person, with contemplation it becomes an appreciation of the beauty within that person, or even becomes appreciation of beauty itself. Plato does not talk of physical attraction as a necessary part of love, hence the use of the word platonic to mean, "without physical attraction." In the Symposium, the most famous ancient work on the subject, Plato has Socrates argue that eros helps the soul recall knowledge of beauty, and contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth, the ideal "Form" of youthful beauty that leads us humans to feel erotic desire – thus suggesting that even that sensually based love aspires to the non-corporeal, spiritual plane of existence; that is, finding its truth, just like finding any truth, leads to transcendence.[7] Lovers and philosophers are all inspired to seek truth through the means of eros.

Philia (φιλία philía) means "affectionate regard, friendship," usually "between equals."[8] It is a dispassionate virtuous love, a concept developed by Aristotle.[9] In his best-known work on ethics, Nicomachean Ethics, philia is expressed variously as loyalty to friends (specifically, "brotherly love"), family, and community, and requires virtue, equality, and familiarity. Furthermore, in the same text philos denotes a general type of love, used for love between family, between friends, a desire or enjoyment of an activity, as well as between lovers.

Storge (στοργή storgē) means "love, affection" and "especially of parents and children"[10] It's the common or natural empathy, like that felt by parents for offspring.[11] Rarely used in ancient works, and then almost exclusively as a descriptor of relationships within the family. It is also known to express mere acceptance or putting up with situations, as in "loving" the tyrant. This is also used when referencing the love for ones country or a favorite sports team.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

Therefore a bonding emotion to make family unit stronger and your offspring to have better chances of survival, next

Therefore a bonding emotion to make relationship(and potentially family unit) stronger and your offspring to have better chances of survival, next

Therefore a bonding emotion to make tribe stronger and your offspring to have better chances of survival, next

Therefore a bonding emotion to make family unit stronger and your offspring to have better chances of survival

Because real monogamy is basically non-existent with gays, they get married for long-time relationship and stability, but both know they will fuck around until they die. In pretty much all studies it is shown that gays are happier than straight people, and while being a full degenerate is fucked, I do think straight up monogamy and tieing yourself to one woman for the rest of your life is not natural for humans.

The reason why divorce rates are through the roof is that values have changed - I know for a fact that my grandpa slept around and beat my grandma on numerous occasions, her life was living hell at some points (which also made her daughters and my mom full feminist types) but she still didn't even think of a divorce because tradition, promises etc.

Divorce is a good option to have, the only issue in modern ADHD world is that people don't understand what marriage is about.

[citation needed]

Most degenerates, as far as I can tell, end up killing themselves because they live hollow lives.

It's not, strictly speaking, natural in the same way civilization is not, strictly speaking, natural. Monogamy is necessary for greater civilization, and you can go live in Africa or the Middle East if you think otherwise. On top of that, promiscuity doesn't make you happy, it makes you a hollow hedonist.

No, it isn't. Having a button to blow up your family because of kike lies is absolute cancer.

If that were the case, monogamy would not be one of the main dominant cultural practices among the more developed nations and majority of normal people would not come from those relationships. Personal anecdotes are not valid arguments when comparing last 5000 years of social development and cultural practices that all reinforced monogamy.

As for the value change- that's mostly in the West and it is bringing it down.

But you also have to take into account the lenghtening of our lifespan and actual subjugation of women, plus the turth that men in the past have more prominently slept around while married and gone unpunished, while a woman would have been in the worst case killed for betraying her man.

Everything is not black and white, and this isn't about what I "think", it's just an expression.

Seems like you like the other user justitute personal opinion as fact. As for the studies, you will find numerous with a simple Google search over the past decade or so. As for suicides, it's hard to quantify who has been a degenerate or not.

Simple - find the rate that Heterosexual couples get married (let's say all of 86% of heterosexual couples turn into marriage) and find the rate for homosexual relations turning into marriages - then simply point out the fact that the ones who actually marry a small minority within the gay community, and since it is a small minority who not like the rest of the gay community (i.g. polygamist) they are more likely to stay together.

Basically do per capita.

Look up how long the average actual marriage lasts these days.

Then look up how long it's been since gay marriage was Supreme Courted.

OP is a faggot.

this.

also, since a very large percentage of gays are promiscuous and are aware that their partners are promiscuous too, they just keep fucking around even though they are married.

very few gay couples actually practice monogamy.

even if they get bored of fucking each other, they can still stay married for the benefits, so there is no real reason for them to get divorced.

large gay orgies where everyone just ends up fucking everyone else

I knew a predatory faggot who bullied his 'husband' into suicide because he wanted to keep fucking twinks. Pick your fag friends carefully. (I'm not hack so I'm safe around Milo, and Spencer knows better than to fuck with me).

SHILL THREAD
What the gays are doing is none of our concern.
Constantly obsessing over degeneracy is a trick of the Jew to normalize the idea of said degeneracy.
Let this one sink boys.
Orlando Pulse was a False Flag.

No you

Eat a dick faggot

what gays consider "marriage" is often not what straights consider marriage. A "committed relationship" for a gay couple often involves extramarital sex and one night stands with random people, unlike a committed relationship for a straight couple, which means exactly what any sane person would assume it means. Gays are simply promiscuous degenerates who fuck outside of their marriage/relationship constantly, yet still consider it "committed". If the leading cause of divorce in Straight couples is cheating (which I assume it is) then that simply doesn't apply to faggots, because they're already fucking everyone anyway, even in a supposed "committed relationship".

That's part of what I'm seeing. It's like comparing apples to oranges. This raises another issue - providing a convincing enough argument for normies to get it.

maybe guys marrying guys means it's more stable because women are fickle and get a big payout from divorce.

They just want the marriage thing because it's something to complain and be a victim about.

Fags marry, and what happens? They invite 100 other fags for a fag orgy at their place. Nobody gives a shit because fags are hypersexual anyway.

So there is not really a reason to divorce as there is no benefit to it.

They can, and will, live the same lifestyle before and after "marriage", so nothing changes.

Once everything settles down, they'll find something else to complain about. Think NAMBLA. That's probably the next step.

Fag marriage is great for the kikes to make into an issue everybody should care about so you don't focus on how they expand their greater Israel or try to change laws to take away freedumbs etc…

lesbians probably divorce more than straights

faggots dont divorce because the only ones that get married are the 20 people that arent musical dick hopping sluts that want a relationship