Marriage rates in the United States have reached historic lows. To compound matters, about one-third of Americans who say “I do” file for divorce. Watching this crisis unfold is depressing enough. Watching corporate marketers turn family dissolution into a luxury consumer category makes it darker still.

Let me be extremely clear: Some marriages are absolute disasters, full of physical violence and emotional cruelty. Escaping a truly toxic partner is a matter of self-preservation, and some people need guidance in finding the best way out.

Transforming the end of a supposedly sacred union into a curated social media event makes something solemn feel frivolous.

The problem begins when divorce itself becomes a product to brand, package, and sell, a disturbing transformation now taking hold in America and beyond.

Splitsville

A painful family breakdown now functions as online content. Unhappy spouses transform personal misery into podcasts and book deals. Sponsored Instagram posts and paid Substack subscriptions follow. What used to be a private nightmare quickly becomes a lucrative career pivot.

When a 20-year marriage ends after months of screaming matches over unpaid bills, social media feeds instantly reframe the wreckage as a fabulous spiritual awakening. Deep personal isolation gets repackaged as radical independence. Selling the family home to pay legal retainers becomes a chic minimalist aesthetic. The destruction of a household becomes definitive proof of personal growth. It’s gross, but not entirely unexpected.

In 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce bill, intending to eliminate perjury and blackmail from courtroom proceedings. He later called it one of his greatest political regrets, having failed to foresee how a legal tweak would morph into a multibillion-dollar lifestyle industry. Reagan meant well, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Eliminating the legal stigma of divorce was a much-needed civil reform. Nobody should be forced to endure flying fists or endless tongue-lashings just to satisfy a local pastor. Financial autonomy and genuine safety are good things. Eliminating the seriousness of divorce is an entirely different matter.

The stakes change completely when children enter the legal equation.

RELATED: Matthew Perry, child of divorce

Mike Pont/Getty Images

Kids suffer most

For a 35-year-old spouse, signing divorce papers might feel like being rescued from an active war zone. For a 6-year-old, it means packed suitcases, split holidays, and perpetual background noise from two stressed-out parents arguing over child support checks.

Longitudinal studies show that children raised in divorced households are less likely to graduate from high school and score lower on academic exams. They also show higher rates of anxiety and greater risk of suicide. Girls from broken homes also have an increased risk of teenage pregnancy, and boys are more likely to be incarcerated. Many children are resilient, that is for sure. But resilience comes from necessity, not necessarily choice. Barely keeping your head above water while running on pure adrenaline is no way to spend your formative years.

These realities make the current commercialization of family breakups feel utterly revolting. Divorce parties are at an all-time high, with Las Vegas leading the global trend for customized “single again” weekend packages complete with tailored cakes and bottle service.

Everyone remains free to live as they wish, and walking away from a destructive marriage may well justify popping champagne. The problem lies with the public broadcasting and the celebration of failure. Transforming the end of a supposedly sacred union into a curated social media event makes something solemn feel frivolous. When a major domestic tragedy becomes photogenic fodder for online engagement, it’s perfectly reasonable to raise an eyebrow (rather than a glass of bubbly).

Nothing to celebrate

We must be able to hold two simple facts in mind at the very same time. Divorce can be an essential escape route from abuse. Divorce also inflicts massive emotional and economic costs on everyone involved. Defending a person’s legal freedom to walk away from a contract doesn’t require pretending that breaking up a family is a triumph.

The fundamental flaw in the modern divorce economy is not that professionals are paid to help people sort out the practical consequences when a marriage ends. Human misery has created administrative employment since ancient Rome. The problem is watching tech platforms and marketing agencies incentivize people to treat marital separation as a desirable milestone.

When a bitter custody battle goes viral on TikTok, content creators have a financial incentive to escalate the drama for their audience. Influencers build subscriber bases on continuous conflict. They turn private litigation into serialized public theater. Millions of viewers tune in every day, gradually coming to believe that ending a marriage is no different from ending a job.

This dynamic reveals a deep sickness, and the explosion of the breakup market reflects an increasingly broken society.

Marriage is far from perfect, and pretending otherwise is delusional and disingenuous. Nevertheless, it remains a vital human institution built on sacrifice and mutual duty. A husband and wife separating, even if they come to hate each other, represents a genuine tragedy. The end of a marriage calls for introspection and self-reflection, not a shameless victory lap for strangers on the internet.

​Divorce, Influencers, Marriage rates, United states, Content creators, Love and marriage, Children, Big tech, Divorce parties, Lifestyle 

Former students of a performing arts teacher in Warren, Michigan, are saying that he had regularly crossed boundaries with his students after his arrest on Aug. 18.

37-year-old Mark Michael Sharrow is a teacher at the Warren Consolidated School of Performing Arts, which is a nationally recognized magnet school for students in grades 9 through 12.

Investigators allegedly found sexually explicit videos of children on Sharrow’s phone.

He was initially arrested for a charge of third-degree criminal sexual conduct from Houton Lake, according to the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office.

“What we had uncovered in the course of our investigation was accusations that involved former students after they had graduated,” said John Bernia, a school superintendent.

Sharrow’s home and phone were searched following his arrest. Investigators allegedly found sexually explicit videos of children on Sharrow’s phone and also discovered methamphetamine and LSD at his house.

He was charged with five counts of aggravated possession of child sexually abusive material, five counts of using a computer to commit a crime, one count of possession of methamphetamine, and one count of possession of a Schedule 5 controlled substance and LSD.

A judge set Sharrow’s bond at $1 million cash or surety during his arraignment hearing on Wednesday.

Warren Consolidated Schools released a letter to parents and staff about the arrest and indicated that Sharrow was on administrative leave when he was arrested.

“I want to thank the young people who reported difficult information to members of our staff. It is never easy to bring forward serious information, and the bravery of these individuals is commendable,” the letter stated.

“As always, we cooperate fully and work closely with law enforcement and the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office,” the letter continued.

RELATED: Police find hundreds of thousands of child porn files after man drops memory card at store

A former student of the school told WXYZ-TV that the arrest was not surprising because Sharrow’s behavior with the students had raised red flags.

“I wasn’t fully shocked. We all thought he was weird with students,” said Mary Bonkowski, who graduated just a few months ago from the school.

She said she was glad that officials took the accusations seriously.

“I’m very glad that they had the courage to say something, because that’s extremely difficult, especially because you don’t know if you’re going to be believed,” she said. “I mean, historically, a lot of these things have been swept under the rug, so I’m glad that they finally listened and that it was taken seriously.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Child porn, Methamphetamine, Performing arts, Teacher, Crime 

By now, most Americans have figured out that the push for the SAVE America Act is performative — perhaps even more than the usual Washington standards.

Republicans have a closing window of unified control of the House, Senate, and White House. Yet the structural advantages Democrats spent decades building remain largely untouched outside temporary executive action. The SAVE America Act is one way to answer that problem with basic election rules such as voter ID and limits on mail-in voting.

John Thune understands leverage perfectly well. It is time for Republicans who say they want this bill to pass to prove they do, too.

Elections remain vulnerable to the same disputes over identification, mail voting, and administration that Republicans have spent years denouncing, while other institutional fights — immigration enforcement and reform of the FBI among them — remain unfinished. If Republicans lose unified control without locking in durable changes, a future Democrat administration can reverse much of what has been done by executive order.

Despite what the D.C. consultant class says, Republican success in the midterms will hinge on base motivation. Voters need something to vote for. Democrats are already portraying Republicans as the party of their own DEI: data centers, the Epstein class, and the Iran war.

Fair or not, those are political anchors. Without a positive agenda, the charge will stick.

The consultant class responds with the usual sermon about unity, which in practice means: Get in line and do what leadership says. But voters do not want WWE. They want UFC.

The Republican Party is already in an internal fight over what it will become after Trump, and only one side seems willing to use leverage. Some will call that destructive infighting. But the fight is already happening, and it will shape the party for decades. The question is not whether Republicans should have an internal struggle. It’s whether conservatives intend to participate in it as effectively as the senators and institutions working against them.

Recent Senate fights make the point. Republicans have held up ICE funding to block an Anti-Weaponization Fund and delayed Attorney General Todd Blanche’s confirmation. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) used leverage to extract millions for Alaska nonprofits.

Politics is, at bottom, the acquisition and use of leverage. The Senate’s left-wing Republicans understand that. The right too often makes threats it will not carry out — and loses.

The real show is not on the Senate floor. It is in the bank accounts.

The money controlled by Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, led by Tim Scott (R-S.C.), explains more than another ideological taxonomy ever could. Hundreds of millions of dollars flow through leadership-aligned committees and outside groups from interests that want something from Washington. That money becomes both carrot and stick: protect friendly incumbents, discipline troublesome ones, and keep conservative senators talking rather than acting.

RELATED: Drain the swamp? Meet the refill.

Sam Wolfe/Bloomberg via Getty Images

That’s how Thune and Scott can go on television praising the SAVE America Act while the leadership machine supports senators who stand in its way. My friends and I call this the head pat: Give conservatives a little rhetorical affection while making sure nothing they want actually happens. And it works. All the time.

The same network is lining up behind Senator Darline Graham Nordone (R-S.C.), rather than original SAVE America Act co-sponsor Ralph Norman. The scale is enormous. As of June 30, the Thune-aligned Senate Leadership Fund reported $238 million cash on hand, while its allied network, including One Nation, said it had raised more than half a billion dollars for the midterms. Those are obscene sums for a party that increasingly presents itself as the vehicle of working-class voters.

More important, the money is not politically neutral. It is a mechanism for deciding which senators get protected, which challengers get starved, and which legislative priorities receive serious attention.

Some of that war chest will protect senators most resistant to the SAVE America Act. Leadership gives them money and political lifelines while they deny the bill a vote. Those dollars do not come with strings attached for Republican voters. They come from donors and industries that need things from the Senate.

That is the leverage SAVE America Act supporters have ignored. If leadership can use money and floor time to reward compliance, conservatives can make leadership pay a price for blocking their priorities. Until they do, they have not begun to fight.

The absence of pressure is itself revealing. If leadership truly regarded passage of the SAVE America Act as a must-have priority, it would be using every institutional tool at its disposal to find votes and impose costs on holdouts. It is not.

The Senate made the problem obvious on August 8. Instead of forcing a vote on the full SAVE America Act, it took up a narrower photo-ID bill from Senator Jon Husted (R-Ohio). It failed 52-46. Then, that same morning, Thune filed cloture on the CLARITY Act crypto bill — a leadership priority that could consume much of the Senate’s limited September floor time before the midterm campaign takes over.

Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), one of four Republicans who refuses to back the SAVE America Act, said the quiet part out loud: Unless its supporters find 60 votes, “they know it’s dead, and so all this is theater.” Thune says the Senate is “bound by arithmetic.” But arithmetic is not an alibi. Leadership chooses where to spend its money, floor time, and pressure.

So stop asking nicely.

RELATED: How Kamala Harris accidentally sold the SAVE America Act

Christian Bruna/Getty Images

Senate leadership routinely holds unrelated priorities hostage to get what it wants. Republicans who actually want the SAVE America Act should do the same. When the Senate returns in September, it will face a college sports bill, Thune’s CLARITY Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act. Those are leverage points.

A team sport works only if everyone is playing the same sport, wearing the same jersey, on the same field. Senate leadership is not behaving like it is on your team. Treating it as though it is only guarantees another round of speeches, cable hits, and failure.

The base needs to see a cage fight. Give the people what they want.

Refuse to hand leadership what it wants until the SAVE America Act gets an up-or-down vote at a 51-vote threshold. That is the same kind of hostage-taking the Senate’s left flank uses successfully. Thune understands leverage perfectly well. It is time for Republicans who say they want this bill to pass to prove they do, too.

​Attorney general, Ice, John thune, Lisa murkowski, Majority leader, Midterms, Save america act, Senate, Ice funding, Immigration, Thom tillis, Opinion & analysis 

America may be entering a period of extraordinary economic opportunity. Artificial intelligence could drive a wave of investment, construction, productivity, and growth. The question is whether ordinary Americans will own enough of that growth to benefit from it.

That makes tax policy about more than rates and revenue. If Washington wants Americans to build wealth, it should make it easier to own appreciating assets — stocks, funds, homes, and businesses — and keep more of the gains they earn over time.

Building wealth requires more than rising wages. Americans need the ability to acquire assets, hold them, and benefit from compounding over decades.

President Donald Trump is reportedly looking for new policy wins ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, including capital gains reform. The White House and congressional allies are considering indexing capital gains for inflation and creating a new exemption for certain home sales, reportedly including homes worth $2 million or less.

Both ideas move in the right direction. They would let Americans keep more of the returns on investments they have held for years and reduce tax penalties that can discourage people from selling appreciated assets.

The usual objection is that capital gains reform is a giveaway to the rich. But IRS data cited by Americans for Tax Reform show that 74% of tax returns reporting capital gains come from households with incomes below $200,000. Millions of Americans own stocks through brokerage accounts, mutual funds, and retirement plans. The tax code should not treat long-term wealth building as something reserved for the affluent.

Inflation makes the problem worse. A taxpayer can owe capital gains tax even when part of the apparent gain simply reflects a dollar that has lost purchasing power. Indexing gains for inflation would make the tax apply more closely to real economic profit rather than paper gains created by rising prices.

Housing presents a second opportunity. Expanding or exempting capital gains treatment for certain home sales could encourage more owners to put appreciated properties on the market. Many older Americans remain in homes that no longer fit their needs, in part because selling can result in a sizable tax bill.

RELATED: Big Tech gets the network. You get the bill.

Baona/Getty Images

Reducing that penalty could make downsizing more attractive and free larger homes for younger families. It wouldn’t solve the housing shortage — America still needs to build more homes — but it could help the existing housing stock move to people who need it.

The broader principle is more important than either proposal. Building wealth requires more than rising wages. Americans need the ability to acquire assets, hold them, and benefit from compounding over decades. Ownership is how economic growth becomes personal.

The White House should therefore think bigger than a handful of tax tweaks. The next phase of Trump’s economic agenda should aim to turn more Americans into owners.

A serious capital gains overhaul could encourage people to invest, save, start businesses, sell homes when it makes sense, and accumulate wealth over time. If the coming AI boom creates enormous new fortunes, ordinary Americans should have a better chance to own a piece of it — not merely watch Sam Altman get richer.

​America, Artificial intelligence, Economic growth, Tax code, Tax policy, Wages, Investments, Economy, Housing crisis, Opinion & analysis, Donald trump 

A recent picnic in the park turned violent when a child allegedly called a transgender-identifying person named Leanne Lawson a name he didn’t like — and he reacted by allegedly hitting the child.

Rather than expressing regret, he doubled down in multiple follow-up TikTok videos, arguing that anyone who uses certain language toward him should expect a violent response.

“So I was just minding my business here in Lewis Park, just having a little picnic, you know, just minding my own business, having a picnic. And then this group of kids came up and started hassling me,” Lawson began in the first video.

“Talking s**t to me, calling me a t*****,” he explained.

“They used words they weren’t supposed to, and I smacked one of them upside the head. And yeah, they didn’t like that,” he added.

In a second video, he continued, saying, “I smacked a couple kids upside the head for saying words they shouldn’t be saying.”

“But I’m going to be honest with you: It wouldn’t have mattered if they were kids. Anybody talks to me like that now, and I’m going to react like that. Any person that starts using language that requires me to justify my existence for just sitting there, eating some charcuterie in the f**king park,” he said.

“I’m going to smack them upside the head,” he added.

“Sir … are you denying that you are a t*****?” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments.

“You’re not fooling anyone,” she adds.

Lawson even posted a follow-up video, explaining that the “kid’s mom came up and apologized” to him.

“This kid’s mom came up and like, ‘I’m so sorry about my son,’ and I was just like, ‘Yo, your son better not talk crazy like that or he’s going to get his head knocked off.’ Like, I didn’t lie about what I did,” he said.

“Who could have predicted that maybe trans and mentally ill people could be violent, right?” Gonzales asks. “Like, boy, we’ve never seen that happen before.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sara gonzales, Leanne lawson, Transgender, Tiktok, Trans, Woman, Mental illness, Violence, Blazetv show