> Edit: for those that think this is just some personal issue, you should look up divorce stats by number of previous sexual partners. There is a clear rise in divorce rate per increase in partners, and at about 7 it's 50%+.
You should look up divorce stats by age of marriage. This article calls marriages between 20 year olds "starter marriages" because they rarely last[1]. Your parents are an outlier.
That's quite a difficult chart to read and I think you need a bit more context in your quote. The "starter marriage" is for women between 15 and 20.
The image appears to show the best age for women to marry to be early to late twenties and both article and image say late marriages are more likely to end in divorce.
So I think the general point of the comment you are replying to stands and is supported by the article.
Yeah I googled earlier and there seem to be a few studies that pretty much all reckon young (early/mid 20s to 30ish) as the marriage-success-predictor optimum.
Unfortunately those studies seem to be being misrepresented in much of the press which seems to want to accentuate the wait-a-little but are rather more quiet on the but-not-too-long message, presumably for reasons of being more appealing to the demographics they are "summarising" for.
Much like the “children do better in a stable home” studies though, could this not be somewhat tautological?
I.E. marriages among people who choose to marry at those ages may well last the best. Does that mean they someone who would have married earlier or later should change their behaviour if they want a long marriage? Or is it some other quality of couples who do already make that choice that precipitates the outcome?
You should look up divorce stats by age of marriage. This article calls marriages between 20 year olds "starter marriages" because they rarely last[1]. Your parents are an outlier.
[1] https://time.com/4358792/woman-age-married-how-long/