A staggering statistic has defined relationships for the better part of two decades: a 70% divorce rate. This isn't just a temporary spike; it's a stable, consistent figure. To put this in perspective, imagine any other system in our lives failing seven out of ten times. If your car failed to start on seven out of ten mornings, or your refrigerator stopped working for 70% of the week, it would be deemed a crisis. Engineers and designers would be summoned to overhaul the broken mechanism immediately. Yet, when it comes to marriage, we seem to accept this monumental failure rate as a fact of modern life.

Interestingly, it is the woman who initiates the end of the relationship in eight out of ten cases. She is the one who more often concludes that her satisfaction has fallen below an acceptable threshold and makes the decisive move. But what leads to this point? Why do the majority of modern marriages crumble? If we gathered the world's greatest sociologists, psychologists, and philosophers to solve this "breakdown," they would likely fail. The problem isn't with the people; it's that the very foundation and purpose of marriage have fundamentally changed.

The Ascent on Maslow's Pyramid

The core of the issue is this: marriage is no longer about survival. For centuries, marriage was an institution firmly planted at the base of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It was a practical arrangement for security, shelter, and stability. A person, especially a woman, often needed a partner to ensure basic survival.

That era is over. Over the past 70 years, society has restructured itself to support the individual. A single person can now independently secure a home, a career, and personal safety. As a result, our expectations for relationships have climbed Maslow's pyramid. We no longer seek a partner for survival; we seek one for self-actualization, respect, recognition, and even aesthetic fulfillment.

One might overhear a person admiring a stylish couple and thinking, "I want a marriage so I can have a life that looks that beautiful." The motivation is no longer pragmatic but romantic and aspirational. This shift is profound. Fifty years ago, a man might have been denied a promotion for being unmarried, the logic being, "If he can't manage a family, how can he manage a team?" Today, such a notion is absurd. An employer might even quietly prefer a single, childless employee who can dedicate more energy to corporate goals. The individual, not the family unit, has become the primary engine of society.

The Inevitable Conflict: Individual Happiness vs. The Couple

Herein lies the central conflict of modern love. Society champions the individual's pursuit of happiness as the ultimate goal. Our culture, technology, and economy are all built to serve the self. Yet, a marriage is, by definition, a unit of two. It requires compromise, navigating conflict, and sometimes placing the couple's well-being above one's immediate desires.

These two forces—the drive for personal fulfillment and the demands of a partnership—are in a constant state of tension. The moment a marriage ceases to feel like a contributor to one's personal path to happiness, it is perceived as an obstacle. When the relationship no longer aligns with the narrative of self-actualization, the modern solution is simple: leave.

Why She Leaves: The Collapse of Old Barriers

The fact that women initiate divorce far more often is not an indictment, but rather a reflection of seismic social shifts. In the past, powerful factors acted as a kind of glue, holding even unhappy marriages together. These factors have now all but disappeared.

1. The Social Factor: There was once a heavy stigma attached to being a divorced woman. She was often seen as having failed in her primary role. Today, this judgment has largely evaporated. A person's marital status is no longer a primary measure of their worth or success.
2. The Economic Factor: Previously, a woman's economic survival was often tied directly to her husband. While a gender pay gap still exists—largely due to differences in career progression rather than unequal pay for the same job—a woman is now perfectly capable of supporting herself financially. The economic chains have been broken.
3. The Household Factor: In decades past, running a household was a two-person survival strategy. One person might spend hours in a queue for groceries while the other handled other demanding chores. The service industry was undeveloped. Now, with food delivery, cleaning services, and modern appliances, the logistical necessity of a partner has vanished. The departure of a spouse no longer plunges the other into a domestic crisis.

With these barriers removed, a person who feels unfulfilled in a relationship is free to leave without facing social ruin, economic collapse, or household chaos.

A Framework for Clarity: Are You Truly Satisfied?

This new freedom creates its own form of anxiety. Without clear external pressures, the decision to stay or leave becomes a deeply personal, and often confusing, internal debate. Am I happy enough? Is this relationship truly fulfilling me? How do I even measure that? This constant self-interrogation can be paralyzing.

People often struggle to gauge their own satisfaction. Emotions fluctuate—love one day, frustration the next. External pressure from seeing friends divorce can create a sense of unease: "Everyone else is moving on to something better. Am I settling by staying with John or Mary?"

To cut through this confusion, there is a simple but powerful diagnostic tool that can help anyone assess their relationship from a more objective standpoint. It’s a three-part concept known as S + B + C: Sex, Daily Life (from the Slavic concept of byt), and Values.

Each area is evaluated on a scale from 0 to 10.

• S - Sex: This scale measures sexual satisfaction. A score of 0 means a complete absence of intimacy, while 3 might be "so-so," 5 is "satisfactory," and 7-8 is considered very good for a long-term relationship. A perfect 10 is rare and represents a peak level of connection.
• B - Daily Life (Byt): This covers the practical and logistical aspects of living together. Are you comfortable with the division of chores? How are finances handled? Do you respect each other's personal space and habits? A 0 means it's unbearable to live with your partner, while a 10 signifies incredible domestic harmony.
• C - Values: This is about your fundamental compatibility. Can you share standards for evaluating the world? When something happens, do you generally agree on whether it is good or bad? Or do most conversations end in a deadlock of opposing views? A 0 represents a total lack of common ground, while a 10 signifies a deep, spiritual unity.

After scoring each area from 0 to 10, you add the numbers to get a total score. This final number provides a surprisingly clear snapshot of the relationship's health:

• 16 points and below: The relationship is likely in a terminal stage. Staying together at this point may be a waste of time, as the core foundation has eroded.
• 17 to 22 points: The relationship is in a crisis, but it is salvageable. This score indicates that while there are significant issues, there's enough of a foundation to work on the areas that are failing.
• 22 to 26 points: This is the corridor for a satisfactory, healthy, and harmonious relationship. Partners in this range generally feel good about their connection.
• 27 to 30 points: This is an exceptionally high score, often seen only in the "honeymoon" phase of a relationship. It is wonderful but often temporary.

This framework is useful not just for its final score, but because it reveals where the problems lie. Perhaps your Daily Life and Values are strong, but the sexual connection has faded. This tells you what you can lean on while you work to fix what's broken. By looking at the relationship with this clarity, you can move from a state of anxious confusion to one of empowered understanding.

References

• Finkel, E. J. (2017). The All-or-Nothing Marriage: How the Best Marriages Work. Dutton.
  This book directly supports the article's central thesis. Finkel argues that modern marriage has become an "all-or-nothing" proposition. He uses a model similar to Maslow's hierarchy to explain that as our basic needs are met by society, we now expect marriage to fulfill our highest needs for self-expression and personal growth. He posits that the best marriages today are better than ever before, but the average marriage is struggling, leading to higher dissatisfaction and divorce rates. (See especially Chapters 1 and 2 for the historical shift and the "climbing Mount Maslow" concept).
• Coontz, S. (2005). Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage. Viking Penguin.
  This work provides the historical and sociological backbone for the article's claims about the changing purpose of marriage. Coontz details how, for most of human history, marriage was primarily an economic and political institution for forging alliances and organizing labor, rather than a vehicle for love and personal fulfillment. Her research confirms that the move toward love-based, individualized marriage is a very recent historical development, explaining why the institution is currently under so much pressure. (See particularly the later chapters on the 20th-century transformations).
• Rosenfeld, M. J. (2014). "Couple Longevity and Household Formation in the United States." Demographic Research, 31, 791-820.
  This academic article provides data-driven insights into relationship stability. Rosenfeld's research touches upon the factors that hold couples together and why certain types of relationships dissolve. While not a direct match for the 70% figure (which can vary by cohort and region), his work explores the social and economic variables—like women's economic independence—that have changed the landscape of long-term partnerships, providing statistical weight to the arguments made about the collapse of old barriers to divorce.