I think I have some general confusion about the whole idea of marriage and divorce. Why do people commit to each other in this fashion of relative permanence when there is a very good likelihood that they will get sick of each other and no longer be happy in said committed relationship? Is it for the good of the individual or the good of the tribe? I think it must be for the survival of the tribe. That actually makes sense. Thus, divorce was frowned upon so heavily because one person's happiness could not out weigh the survival of the tribe. That now makes so much more sense.

Another reason (I think) that people commit to marriage is because they desire the idea of security and permanence. Knowing that virtually no matter what, you'll have someone with whom to sit down to dinner and someone with whom to go to bed has a very interesting appeal. The question I must pose then is, what is the cost of security? I'll probably save my ideas on that for later.

So why is the divorce rate up so much? Probably because people find that they are not happy but since their divorce seems unlikely to heavily impact the tribe, it is not frowned upon anywhere near as much as it used to be. Also, individuals seem to be less concerned with what "others" (i.e. the tribe) think and more concerned with pursuing what is right for them. Well, now that I understand that, I can go bed. :-)