Chapter 1

Connecting to Democracy 

How has divorce, and the concept of it in relation to gender, come to be accepted in society today? In what ways does feminism, women’s rights, and democracy tie into divorce? Well that requires an exploration of divorce history, U.S. legal history, and the specific implications of divorce in democracy. Democracy has always had implications in how ideas and opinions change and are adopted on a wide scale, and through the democratic spread of ideas so too has an acceptance of divorce spread in America. The thought of a single parent, widows withstanding, was once a shameful thing to the masses. As of now, it is acceptable, yet many still oppose the ideas of divorce based on tradition and ideas rooted in controlling spouses. Still, the vast majority of the United States population has shed that stigma and now welcomes divorce with open arms, both legally and socially. Why this is requires an understanding of the historical context of American marriage laws and feminism going into the modern age. As such, that is what needs to be explored.

The start of divorce is somewhat congruent with the rise of industrialization and the spread of populations from rural farm areas to urban areas. With the increase of urbanization came an increase of women in workforces, which is known to have been true in mill culture in the New England area prior to the Civil War. These women in workforces were instilled with a new sense of independence, an independence that didn’t just affect the wages they now controlled. Women were now becoming an established force in cultures previously dominated by men. Through research, it’s evident that ideas of female independence and suffragette culture spread far beyond urban areas. It’s hard to say whether urban areas simply bred ideologies rather than action, considering statistics show a minor correlation between population density and divorce rates, but it can be said that the spread of these independent women had an effect that certainly reached beyond the clutches of urban sprawl. One such example of this lack of statistical evidence is from a study of divorce patterns in three northern states, “For both 1850 and 1860, the data reveal higher divorce rates for counties classified as “medium” or “high” than for areas with little or no urban population.” This indicates a minor increase in divorce rates with a somewhat “urban” population, but the data also shows that the “medium” concentration areas actually have more rates than the high. This shows that the distribution of population and industrialization is a valid, if somewhat inconsequential, association. As such, it can only be asserted that ideological influences stemmed from urbanization, not statistical proof. 

As such, it isn’t easy to say divorce was on a track to become “normalized” at this point, but it can be seen that divorce was evidently seeping into the culture of marriage that had been established in America. The steady process by which legal methods for divorce also began to shift at this point. It’s not possible to separate the legal and judicial history of divorce from the disruption it caused to “traditional marriage values”. The legal history is just as important as in any social/political movement, and this is no exception. Drawing from the previously analyzed source, here’s a few select quotes that exemplify this. “There is a growing recognition among both sociologists and social historians that the increase in American divorce rates is neither a recent phenomenon nor a post-Civil War development; rather it represents a steady, prolonged process by which more and more spouses have sought a legal remedy for their marital problems.” Marital issues and the rise of divorce are, like most struggles and journeys in America, not a new thing but merely a steady process by which parallels can be drawn  between the other movements of marginalized groups, such as the women’s suffrage movement. It is also evident that legal proceedings to divorce in early American history are notoriously difficult to get through due to a need to prove guilt on one party’s end. “How many contemporary spouses would sue for divorce if they had to file their petitions with the state legislature or state supreme court, prove their own “innocence” and their spouse’s “guilt”, and sustain a considerable burden in terms of court costs and attorney’s fees?” Contemporary freedoms that allow for things such as “No Fault Divorces” and other expedited legal processes have been directly aided in the rise of the average income for the American family unit, seeing how the shift from rural farming based communities led to corporate jobs that pay liveable wages nowadays. 

Now that it’s possible to establish an early perception of divorce from a legal and moral sense, it’s good to move on from the 1800s and get towards the 1900s. Contemporary sources about the suffragette movement are significantly helpful when it came to understanding an early perspective on divorce as well. Landmarks in Woman’s Century is a helpful source in this sense, considering it was written in 1900. “Control of property and wages, and power to will given in Arkansas. Control of wages given in New Jersey… School suffrage granted in Michigan and Minnesota.” State by state legislation was rolled out to allow for women, inside and outside or marriages, to gain control of their assets as individuals. Property ownership and control of land was especially significant in new territories added after the Mexican American war, since land ownership was heavily encouraged to settlers in the ensuing struggles over emancipation vs slavery, northern vs southern industries, and the question of emerging political parties who held views such as temperance. How did these specific political climates prove advantageous to the suffrage movement specifically? Well for one, it provided a landscape that proved turbulent heading into the 1900s. Turbulence in the political landscape was the exact tool needed for women to disrupt societal structures primarily dominated by men, which helped with pushing pro-temperance and pro-suffrage ideologies. By the 1920s, temperance and women’s rights were at the forefront of discussion in politics. This discussion would ultimately result in the passing of the 18th and 19th amendments, which would shape the landscape of divorce and politics going forward. 

Economic independence was, in many ways, a stepping stone for the married woman to seek an outlet for a failed relationship and to pursue other endeavors. Had the labor force not grown significantly prior to the economic depression of the 30s, it’s doubtful if women would have made as much progress as noted in the 20s. Despite continued progress in the sphere of feminism and women’s rights, the actual bureaucratic collection of divorce and census data declined. Federal agencies had, up until the era of WW2, relatively accurately and comprehensively catalogued divorce statistics in an accurate sense to track trends of instability in marriages, but the actual responsibility of this data collection would jump around from federal department to department beginning in the 20s. States themselves were also disinterested in the data. This can be seen in historical analyses and papers, such as “Breaking Up is Hard to Count.” “The Census Bureau gathered data sporadically from 1907 until 1940. In most years, national divorce totals were estimated from state totals provided by a limited subset of states (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1925; National Office of Vital Statistics 1950). After World War II, responsibility for divorce statistics shifted to the newly created National Office of Vital Statistics located in the Public Health Service (Plateris 1973). The new agency focused mainly on health statistics, and divorce was a poor fit; few divorce statistics were published beyond national totals estimated from partialstate data.” 

Progress was made in terms of individual rights and liberties but little was given attention by federal agencies. It wasn’t until 1958 that the Divorce Registration Area was created to provide accurate divorce statistics. By 1958 First Wave Feminism was nearly out and the second wave would lead into the modern age. 

The Modern Age 

Divorce in the modern age still comes with the stigmas that have always plagued it, but societal acceptance of divorce is up within the last 30 years. The perception of divorce is now not limited to negative connotations of broken families but is also seen as a tool for people in vulnerable situations to use as an escape, a way in which people can claim their independence, or a tool to utilize and provide a better life for the divorced spouse themselves and/or their children. Divorce is a tool, not a stigma. “Breaking Up is Hard to Count” has shown through data statistics that divorce has been on a steady rise since 1980, only occasionally dipping in times of recession such as 2008. 

“With 2010 as the standard population, the age-standardized divorce rate rose by 40 % between 1980 and 2008. After a slight dip in 2009 - possibly a result of the Great Recession…” 

Divorce rates and their associated marriage rates have also grown at a consistent rate as the U.S. population grows as well, so the correlation between the two is somewhat consistent. Either way, divorce is now seen as a valid, legal route to end a marriage in which there are problems, spouses are unfaithful, and the divorce would benefit both parties involved. This has, in part, happened due to the evolution of American feminism. 

Conclusion

Democratic processes dictate many things in American society. The freedom of association expressly present in democratic societies has allowed for women and spouses across the country to claim power and control over their lives, a control that is not present in the absence of a legal means by which divorce is accessible. As long as  democracy is upheld in America, ideas such as this will continue to flourish in the face of opposition and tradition. Progress can only be made through the democratic adoption and spread of those progressive ideas, and divorce is just one such example that Americans will continue to observe in their lives. As long as democracy, marriage, and conflict continues to exist, divorce will persist as a solution for some and a tool accessible for all. 

Citations 

Schultz, Martin. “Divorce in Early America: Origins and Patterns in Three North Central States.” The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 4, 1984, pp. 511–25. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4106037. Accessed 18 May 2023.

Landmarks in Woman’s Century. National American Woman Suffrage Association; Ella Strong Denison Library; Claremont Colleges Digital Library, 1900. JSTOR, https://jstor.org/stable/community.31048777. Accessed 18 May 2023.

Cherlin, Andrew J. “The Origins of the Ambivalent Acceptance of Divorce.” Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 71, no. 2, 2009, pp. 226–29. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40262874. Accessed 18 May 2023.

Kennedy, Sheela, and Steven Ruggles. “Breaking Up Is Hard to Count: The Rise of Divorce in the United States, 1980-2010.” Demography, vol. 51, no. 2, 2014, pp. 587–98. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42920014. Accessed 18 May 2023.

Griswold, Robert L. “Law, Sex, Cruelty, and Divorce in Victorian America, 1840-1900.” American Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 5, 1986, pp. 721–45. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2712820. Accessed 18 May 2023.

Freedman, Estelle B. “The New Woman: Changing Views of Women in the 1920s.” The Journal of American History, vol. 61, no. 2, 1974, pp. 372–93. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1903954. Accessed 18 May 2023.