Summary Women expect men to be employed or will divorce them - independent of women's economic independence.
Bloomberg: Don't blame divorce on money. Ask: Did the husband have a job?
Harvard sociologist studies census data (46 years on >6300 married couples) and finds out that since 1975 splitting the housework isn't a factor. Neither is overall income, wife's economic independence, and whether men choose to stay at home with the kids. The main factor was the male's involuntary unemployment (i.e. getting fired). Risk of divorce per year jumped to 3.3% vs. 2.5% for the still employed. (approx 1/3rd greater risk)
What does it mean to get fired? Loss of social proof. We know that loss of social proof causes loss of attraction. For some reason, this seems to have become more important after 1975 than before. Before 1975 women tended to stay married despite unemployment. Question: when were no-fault divorce laws adopted? The first no-fault divorce was adopted in California in 1970 with most states following in the rest of the 70's and early 80's. Hmmm. Could that be the reason for the statistical change?
A female sociology professor is interviewed and you can just hear the hampster spin. "That's surprising." But the study is "very sound" - gotta stick together with your colleague at least publically.
Study's conclusion: The late 1970's were really a time of change in what women expected for their careers, the study's author
hampsters says. The national shift to no-fault divorce during these years is simply incidental. Or in other words, "It just happened."
Social proofing is important for women. Loss of social proofing causes loss of attraction. Unemployment = loss of social proofing.
Men have 1/3 higher rate of divorce when unemployed vs employed. Want to stay married? Have a job.
The inflection point in the study is 1975 which coincides with a rough median timing of a national shift to no-fault divorce.
Don't underestimate the ability of the hampster to spin the data.
I will leave it to the RP Vanguard to expound upon if something happened to men in the 1970's that caused much more of a alpha/beta dichotomy. That's an interesting question in of itself I can't answer.