More Americans opting to stay single, data shows

ARIZONA: As the holidays transition to the New Year, singles may face questions from friends and family: “When are you getting serious about dating?

In many families, seasonal festivities draw lines between who’s coupled and who’s not. Romantic partners are invited to holiday meals, included in family photographs and seen as potential life mates – while “mere” friends are not.

These practices draw a line between relationships seen as significant and those which aren’t.

As I’ve argued in my research on the ethics and politics of the family, these practices reflect widespread assumptions. One is that everyone is seeking a romantic relationship.

The second is more value-laden: living in a long-term romantic, sexual partnership is better than living without one. This fuels beliefs that those living solo are less happy or lonelier than couples.

The truth is that more Americans are living unmarried and without a romantic partner. In 2005, the census for the first time recorded a majority of women living outside of marriage although, of course, some of them have romantic partners.

By 2010, married couples became a minority in the United States. The percentage of unmarried adults is at an all-time high, with more young adults choosing to live unmarried and without a romantic partner.

Personal finances likely plays a role in such choices. Millennials are worse off than earlier generations.

There is a proven link between economic resources and marriage rates – what legal scholar Linda McClain calls “the other marriage equality problem”. Lower incomes correlate with lower marriage rates.

But changing family patterns are not simply the result of financial instability. They reflect choices: Not everyone wants a romantic part- nership and many singles see solo life as more conducive to flourishing and autonomy.

As I show in my book Minimizing Marriage, people have many different political or ethical reasons for preferring singlehood.

Some women become single mothers by choice. As sociologist Arlie Hochschild argues, marriage brings extra work for women, making it less attractive for some.

For other people, being single is simply a relationship preference or even an orientation. There are those, referred to as “asexuals” and “aromantics”, who lack interest in sexual and romantic relationships.

Data from a 1994 British survey of over 18,000 people showed one per cent of the respondents to be asexual. Since asexuality is still little known, some asexuals might not identify as such, so it’s possible that the true numbers could be higher.

Asexuals are people who do not feel sexual attraction. Asexuality is not simply the behaviour of abstaining from sex, but an orientation.

Just as straight people feel sexual attraction to members of a different sex, and gays and lesbians feel attracted to members of the same sex, asexuals don’t feel sexual attraction.

Asexuals can have romantic feelings, wanting a life partner to share intimate moments with and even cuddle, but without sexual feelings.

But some asexuals are also aromantic or not interested in romance. Like asexuality, aromanticism is an orientation. Aromantics may have sexual feelings or be asexual, but they do not have romantic feelings.

Asexuals, like aromantics, challenge the expectation that everyone wants a romantic, sexual partnership. They don’t. Nor do they believe they would be better off with one.

Far from the stereotype of the lonely single, lifelong singles are less lonely than other older people, says psychologist Bella DePaulo, the author of Singled Out.

Many singles have close friendships which are just as valuable as romantic partnerships. But assumptions that friendship is less significant than romance hides its value.

Understanding the reasons people have for remaining single might help to handle family stresses.

If you’re single, you could take unwanted questioning as a teachable moment. If you’re the friend or relative of someone who tells you they’re happily single, believe them. — The Conversation/AP

Changing family patterns are not simply the result of financial instability. They reflect choices.