The Past and Future of Marriage 58%

6/2/2026, 7:23:14 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 9 faulty reasoning types, including Fundamental Attribution Error, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 39.2% saturation with 65 hits. Analysis detected 224 faulty-reasoning hits from 166 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.8% and a BS Rank of 58% (9,220 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.90% of the article peer group.

Coontz is an expert on family and gender, and she’s written about marriage before, so she’s well-placed to explain why marriage rates have fallen  even as most people still think of it as a profoundly important commitment. 
Women today are less certain than men about wanting to get married in the first place. 
And divorce rates among those who do tie the knot are the lowest they’ve been in decades. 
Coontz says the changes are because of a complicated mix of shifting expectations, gender roles and sexual norms that have resulted in today’s confused understanding of marriage. 
She’s joining us to talk about how to chart a course forward. 
GUEST  
Stephanie Coontz | She’s the director of research and public education for the council on contemporary families. 
She’s also a professor emeritus at The Evergreen State College. 
Her latest book is called “For Better and Worse: The Complicated Past and Challenging Future of Marriage.” 
Airdate: June 3, 2026 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
9.6%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
10.2%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
16.3%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
10.2%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
39.2%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
9.6%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
16.3%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
16.3%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
7.2%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

166 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.