Is It Time To Reconsider a Fairytale Marriage?
When I graduated high school in 1997, I had a quote hanging on my wall that said, "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle." Marriage was not of interest to me back then, even though in my faith marriage and family were highly valued.
It turns out, I was way ahead of the curve of Americans' changing views on marriage. Marriage rates have plummeted, and as of 2024, Americans were less likely to be married than at any point since 1940.
Cinderella and Prince Charming attend The Disney Wish float at the 2022 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade on November 24, 2022, in New York City.
Cinderella and Prince Charming attend The Disney Wish float at the 2022 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade on November 24, 2022, in New York City.And even though recent studies show married women with children are the happiest female demographic, we can't seem to get young people to want to date or marry. In part, young women today are more educated than men their age and have greater focus on professional ambition and individual growth. Women are delaying marriage or avoiding dating and almost half of young women (age 18 to 34) say they don't want kids, believing marriage and family benefits them less than men.
You may have heard all of this but what you likely haven't heard is that the societal shift in U.S. marriage rates happens to match the plummeting marriage rates of Disney princesses.
Starting in 1937, the Classic Disney Princesses spread love and kindness and were always rescued by a prince: Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty all end up married to a prince, saved by true love's kiss.
Then beginning in 1989, the Renaissance Princesses had additional goals like exploring a new world on land, away from their town, castle, or tower—even starting a restaurant, but all ended up happily in a royal marriage: Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Tiana, and Rapunzel. Even Pocahontas and Mulan who have more complicated stories, both end up married in sequels.
Then we have the Modern Era of Princesses—which I would argue starts in 2012, where we see a significant shift as criticisms mount that traditional princesses are portrayed as helpless without a man. In response, more modern princesses began to appear without princes or marriage as part of their storylines. We have Merida in 2012's Brave, the first Disney princess to completely reject marriage against her parent's wishes and focus on self-discovery. Elsa, in Frozen, has no love interest, same with Moana, and Raya. The 2025 live action princess movie, Snow White, falls in love but doesn't get married.
Disney is not the only company reflecting this cultural shift.
In 2023, Barbie rejects the doting man she has been paired with for over 60 years. These subtle shifts accompany more explicit messages like the 2024 book, This American Ex-Wife, claiming that marriage should be rejected as a "commonplace horror" and "violent prison." For the last two years, one of Hulu's top performing unscripted shows features infidelity in marriage and other risqué behavior of MomTok wives, arguably empowered from traditional patriarchy to take back their lives.
We've experienced a marked cultural shift rejecting marriage and family as a desirable life pursuit. Despite the trend against marriage both in princess movies and in our culture, who did America vote for as their favorite princess in 2023? Universally in almost every age group, it was Cinderella! Could it be that we still gravitate to a classic princess romance that ends in marriage? While teaching girls independence, education, and leadership is vital, idealizing a solo life is not ideal for individuals or society.
Yearly Gallup polls confirm that married adults are thriving 20 percent more than those never married and substantially more than domestic partners. Studies show that married adults are healthier, their children thrive, and communities prosper with lower crime where more married couples live.
As a professor, I've had three single Gen Z students this year tell me that their greatest fear is divorce. They didn't realize that despite my disinterest in marriage, I got married young and ended up divorced and a single mom. You would think I would be warning them to wait to get married or have kids, but I'm grateful my failed "happily ever after" didn't deter me from giving marriage another chance. I've been married nearly 10 years, and while I was told I couldn't be taken seriously as a lawyer with more than two kids, I have five and I'm profoundly grateful. Marriage and family life are undeniably messy and imperfect—but they are also deeply meaningful. Just as Cinderella went from an abusive home to find her Prince Charming, we must offer today's young people a vision of lasting love that is worth pursuing. It's time to rewrite the cultural narrative to reflect the enduring benefits of marriage and parenthood—both of which lead to greater fulfillment than the solitary path subtly normalized for our youth.
Shima Baughman is the Woodruff J. Deem professor of law and a distinguished fellow at the Wheatley Institute for Religion, Family and Constitutional Studies.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Blake Lively's Emotional Distress Claims Are DOA, Judge Rules In Win For Justin Baldoni
The trial over Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni's bitter dispute on what really happened on It Ends With Us and in the aftermath of the Sony released film doesn't start until March next year, but sometimes justice picks up the pace in the slow moving and sprawling multi-million dollar battle. As both sides took to the court docket and the media Monday to fight over how Lively would or would not withdraw her intentional emotional distress claims from her New Year's Eve filed suit against Baldoni, his Wayfarer Studios, execs and publicists, the judge shut the whole thing down Tuesday lickety-split with a rebuke of Lively's side. More from Deadline Blake Lively Insists She Is Not Dropping Emotional Distress Claims Against Justin Baldoni, Despite What His Lawyers Say & Her Lawyers Seem To Have Said Disney Layoffs Hit TV Development & Casting Executive Ranks Disney Laying Off Hundreds In TV & Film Entertainment, Corporate Finance 'The motion to compel at …is denied based on Plaintiff's representation that the relevant claims will be withdrawn,' wrote Judge Lewis J, Liman this morning in a fairly brisk order. 'Lively's request that 'because the parties have agreed to dismiss Ms. Lively's tenth and eleventh causes of action… the Court exercise its inherent authority and authority under Rule 15 to dismiss them without prejudice' is denied without prejudice to renewal,' the NYC-based federal official (and brother of director Doug Liman) added. 'The parties shall stipulate to whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or Lively shall renew her request by formal motion.' As a kicker, a day after Lively's lawyers exclaimed their client in not completely abandoning her emotional distress claims, Judge Liman made where he sits on all this perfectly clear: 'For avoidance of doubt, if the claims are not dismissed, the Court will preclude Lively from offering any evidence of emotional distress. SO ORDERED' After all the hoopla of yesterday's letters to the judge and weekend email exchanges between attorneys for Lively and Baldoni, lawyers and representatives for the latter were mum Tuesday, offering a telling 'no comment' on Judge Liman's move in their favor. For Lively, who now has no window to shift strategy and release her requested medical and therapy records, there was a sidestepping of her loss and a repeat of what her team put out on Monday. 'The court denied Wayfarer's motion,' said Lively lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb in a statement Tuesday. 'He told the parties to continue their discussions about the technicalities of how 2 of the 15 claims will be voluntarily dismissed. Ms. Lively has offered to dismiss those claims because they are no longer necessary, and she will continue to pursue emotional distress damages through other claims in her lawsuit, including sexual harassment and retaliation. In addition, the Baldoni-Wayfarer strategy of filing retaliatory claims has exposed them to expansive damages under California law. This is exactly where both parties were before the Baldoni-Wayfarer Parties rushed to file this utterly pointless motion to compel, all searching for yet another press moment.' With whispers of all not being well on the domestic violence themed IEWU, even though the pic scored at the box office, and press tour and premiere snubs, this all went public and wide when Lively on December 20 filed her sexual harassment and retaliation complaint against Baldoni and his inner circle with California's Civil Rights Department. A formal suit by her followed on December 31 with a $400 million defamation and extorsion action from the Jane the Virgin actor against Lively, her hubby Ryan Reynolds and their PR team was not long behind. In the months since, the case has ballooned to around half a dozen lawsuits, everyone trying to get dismissed from the cases and the likes of Taylor Swift, Disney, Marvel, the New York Times and others getting dragged in. Sources on both sides have repeatedly and vehemently insisted to Deadline and the courts that there is no chance of a settlement now, with the high profile Lively and Reynolds hauled way out of their carefully created comfort zone and WME-dumped Baldoni's career now dead in the water in Hollywood. The trial is set to start in NYC on March 9, 2026 in the same courthouse where the Sean 'Diddy' Combs sex-trafficking trial is taking place right now. Best of Deadline 2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Tonys, Emmys, Oscars & More Everything We Know About 'Nobody Wants This' Season 2 So Far List Of Hollywood & Media Layoffs From Paramount To Warner Bros Discovery To CNN & More
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
When does the new live-action ‘Lilo and Stitch' stream on Disney+?
Disney's live-action "Lilo & Stitch" remake is continuing to dominate the global box office after its Memorial Day weekend release. According to ABC News, Disney's live-action has already passed the horror movie 'Sinners' to become the second-highest-grossing movie of the year with $280.1 million in domestic ticket sales and $610.8 million globally. Here's when to look around for it on Disney+, as well as how to celebrate the movie at Florida's Walt Disney World Resort. As of June 2025, the only way to watch "Lilo & Stitch" is in movie theaters. You can check Fandango, Showtimes or AMC's website to find showtimes nearest to you. According to Forbes, the live-action film is expected to arrive on Disney+ approximately three months after its theatrical release, which puts its arrival around late August or early September. In the meantime, fans can still stream the original "Lilo & Stitch" and its sequels on Disney+. Watch 'Lilo & Stitch' with Disney+ Bundle Depending on how much you're willing to put up with ads, Disney+ offers various subscription plans: Disney+ Basic (with ads): $9.99 Disney+ Premium: $15.99 a month or $159.99 annually Duo Basic: Disney+ (with ads) and Hulu (with ads): $10.99 a month. Trio Basic: Disney+ (with ads), Hulu (with ads) and ESPN+ (with ads): $16.99 a month. Duo Premium: Disney+ (ad-free) and Hulu (ad-free): $19.99 a month. Trio Premium: Disney+ (ad-free), Hulu (ad-free) and ESPN+ (with ads): $26.99 a month. And no free password sharing anymore; there are extra fees to add another member to your account starting at $6.99. Before landing on Disney+, the blockbuster will be available to purchase and rent on digital video-on-demand (VOD) platforms, including Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV, and YouTube TV. Forbes puts this happening around July 7, unless studios decide to extend its theatrical run. Beware: Spoilers Below! Similar to the 2002 animated film, "Lilo & Stitch" follows the adventures of a lonely Hawaiian orphan named Lilo as she meets and bonds with Stitch, a dog-like alien who's best known for wreaking havoc on the tropical paradise. See review: New 'Lilo & Stitch' falls short of first film's unhinged brilliance However, there are some major differences from the original, according to USA TODAY. For starters, Nani's character is expanded: Once a star student and athlete, she has now shelved her college dreams of studying marine biology so that she can work and raise Lilo. In the original movie, Jumba (Zach Galifianakis) and Pleakley (Billy Magnussen) don a variety of disguises – glasses, sunhats, dresses ‒ as they covertly track down Stitch, but now the characters assume human form when they arrive on Earth. Some characters have been removed, such as the alien antagonist Gantu. Cobra Bubbles is also only a federal agent in this version and the social worker named Mrs. Kekoa is added. Lastly, the ending is mostly different with a chaotic spacecraft crash and Nani ultimately giving up custody of Lilo to their neighbor, Tūtū, to attend college in California. Oh, and Pudge (the fish that controls the weather, according to Lilo) doesn't eat peanut butter sandwiches. Instead, it's lettuce and tomato sandwiches. The movie is directed by Dean Fleischer Camp and stars: Maia Kealoha as Lilo Chris Sanders as Stitch (who also voiced the original Stitch) Sydney Elizebeth Agudong as Nani Tia Carrere as Mrs. Kekoa Zach Galifianakis as Jumba Billy Magnussen as Pleakley Courtney B. Vance as Cobra Bubbles Hannah Waddingham as Grand Councilwoman Yes! Walt Disney World guests can meet their favorite alien at Magic Kingdom during the nightly DJ dance party at Rocket Tower Plaza Stage. USA TODAY contributed to this report. This article originally appeared on Evening World: Where and when to stream Live-action 'Lilo & Stitch'
Tom's Guide
an hour ago
- Tom's Guide
One of my favorite horror movies just landed on Netflix — and it's already crashed the top 10
When you've seen as many horror movies as I have, it's rare to find one that I can't spot where it's going from a mile away. That doesn't mean I enjoy them any less, of course, but when one defies my expectations — not in a cheap way either, but with genuinely chilling twists — I have to sound the alarm to other horror fans that this is one worth watching. That's the case with "Barbarian," Zack Cregger's haunting horror thriller and first solo directorial debut. "Barbarian" just landed on Netflix this week (June 1) after leaving Hulu, and it's already jumped to the No. 3 spot in the streamer's top 10 movies list. "Black Mirror" actress Georgina Campbell proves her scream queen chops alongside horror veterans Bill Skarsgard and Justin Long in a nightmare twist on a home invasion movie. It's a truly unforgettable and disturbing film that takes such a violently sharp turn midway through, it feels like watching two movies fused together, yet it's somehow the better for it. This is a horror movie made for horror movie fans. It's brilliant how Cregger uses casting choices and genre hallmarks to keep you off balance with each shocking new discovery. I'm not alone in thinking that either: In a rare feat for the genre, "Barbarian" earned a 92% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes. "Barbarian" is one of those horror films you're best going into blind, but if you need a bit of convincing before dedicating your precious streaming time (hey, we get it), then here's all the details you need to know about the latest hit horror movie on Netflix. The premise is deceptively simple: A young woman named Tess Marshall (Campbell) travels to Detroit for a job interview only to find her Airbnb has been double-booked. Its location couldn't be more of a red flag either, surrounded by a decaying, nearly abandoned neighborhood. Her unexpected roommate Keith seems harmless enough, but since he's played by Bill Skarsgård (aka Pennywise in the "It" films), horror fans are bound to eye him with suspicion from the jump. Despite the alarm bells going off in her head, Tess decides to stay the night. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Naturally, things spiral from there. The pair stumble upon a hidden basement passage that leads to a maze of underground tunnels filled with chains on filthy mattresses, surveillance cameras, and blood-streaked walls. As disturbing of a picture that paints, it's the discovery of a monstrous woman lurking in the depths that turns their uneasy stay into a full-blown nightmare. Another big name in horror — Justin Long, best known for "Jeepers Creepers" and "Tusk" — also joins the fray in a way I won't spoil. Let's just say, Keith and Tess realize they're far from the first to uncover the house's horrors. It all builds to some of the most stomach-churning scenes I've ever seen in a horror movie, but "Barbarian" doesn't play it completely straight. Beneath the terror lies a sharp, dark sense of humor and twists on what horror fans expect that make the scares that much more chilling. While "Barbarian" employs plenty of classic horror elements that fans will pick up on, the film flips expectations in clever, unsettling ways that will trigger your flight-or-fight instinct as characters race through claustrophobic halls. It's a sharp, unpredictable film (even if you think you know where it's going, trust me, you don't) that balances suspense and terror with bursts of well-timed humor that keep you engaged. It's not without its flaws, of course. The third act meanders a bit, and one big reveal was so zany I struggled to suspend my disbelief even as the action heated up. But even with those gripes, I can confidently say "Barbarian" earns a spot alongside genre standouts like "Get Out" and "Hereditary" as one of the rare modern horror films that genuinely deserves your attention. Don't just take my word for it, though. "Barbarian" nabbed a 92% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes, though audiences weren't as keen on i,t given its 70% on the Popcornmeter. Slate's Sam Adams called it the "smartest, funniest horror movie in ages" in his glowing review: "'Barbarian's' script thinks through its problems as much as it needs to, and no more: It knows that horror and logic are enemies at heart, and the trick is to make us desire the knowledge of what's behind that door more than we care why it's opened. Its best trick is that there's more than one door. Variety's Peter Debruge said of the director that "the sense of dread he creates is the stuff that the very best horror movies are made of." Not every critic was as sold on Cregger's directorial choices, though. In a review for The Guardian, Benjamin Lee criticized the movie for gesturing at hot-button topics without saying much, describing it as "a defiantly unscary lump of Midnight Madness schlock that gains nothing from showcasing an awareness of the #MeToo reckoning or the damage of gentrification other than box-ticking." Whatever your impression, "Barbarian's" arrival on Netflix couldn't be more perfectly timed. Cregger's next horror film, "Weapons," one of our most anticipated movies of the summer, is set to hit theaters on August 8, so it's the perfect chance to check out the movie that put him on the map. Given that "Barbarian" was both a critical and commercial success, I can't wait to see what twisted tale he's cooked up next. Stream "Barbarian" on Netflix now.
