Most Helpful Guy
I don't know if that's an accurate statement.
The "total number of divorces" in 2014 is not that substantially higher than the total number of divorces in 2004.
The "divorce rate" in 2014 is somewhat statistically significantly higher than the "divorce rate" in 2004 (e. g., divorces per married couples, as opposed to "total number of divorces").
One factor that is in play is "population growth." Despite unemployment, despite an increasing cost of living and flat wages, governments (supposedly with the best interest of its population at heart) are still pushing for populations to continue to grow (cough... because it cheapens the cost of labor and helps businesses remain profitable at the workers' expense notwithstanding a flat GDP growth... cough).
Nevertheless, despite the population growing, less and less people are actually getting married. The two social trends that have governments worried right now are: (a) people delaying having children or choosing to not have children at all, and (b) people delaying getting married or choosing to not get married at all. "Atheism" has sort of lost significance, because the decline in population growth from a dwindling birth rate, and the decline of "privatized social welfare" from a decline in marriage rates has a direct impact on a government's finances.
Marriage is just a contract. That's all it is. And men are giving the female subcommunication script of "love" the finger as they politely (or not so politely) decline the cries and pleas for marriage. The State ends up crying, because one of the key terms in the marriage contract for all states is the "legal obligation to support one's spouse during marriage, and AFTER MARRIAGE if there is a risk that the former spouse will become a public charge (i. e., go on welfare, medicare, medicaid, receive food stamps, subsidized housing, and other public assistance or social benefits)." In other words, the reason the State is so interested in "marriage" is because it would rather have private individuals paying for private individuals, rather than the government paying for private individuals.
People are like clown fish. Social poison might work for the first 200 years, but eventually they become immune. So, rather than contract a pre-nupt to void "some but not all" of the terms of the marriage contract, people just don't expose themselves to ANY legal/financial risk to begin with and don't get married all together.0
Most Helpful Girl
Women became a strong presence in the workforce. They no longer depended on their husbands to support them. This independence allowed them to leave an unhappy marriage and still provide for themselves.
Divorce also became more acceptable. The guilt and fault of the old divorce laws were gone. As more couples separated, divorce gradually became a normal part of life.
In short, many couples that would have previously remained married now chose divorce.0