For the first time, married households no longer the majority

Yahoo News says that marriage is losing its edge. A new survey has shown that traditional marriage has ceased to be the preferred living arrangement in the majority of US households. The findings were released in August. Nearly 55.8 million American family households, or 50.2%, were unmarried.

  • More than 14 million single women
  • 5 million single men
  • 36.7 million “nonfamily households”
    • Experts said this referred primarily to gay or heterosexual couples cohabiting out of formal wedlock

It’s a sad state of affairs, but not surprising. (In fact, I was a bit surprised to learn that this wasn’t already the case– that up until now, married households were in the majority.) But keep in mind that this is “family households” only. There are additioanlly more than 30 million unmarried men and women living alone. The above households have others living with them.

“By comparison, the number of traditional households with married couples at their core stood at slightly more than 55.2 million, or 49.8 percent of the total.” The article goes on to say that President Bush and allies have tried to support traditional marriage, and that it doesn’t seem to be working. I think that’s only tangentially related, but I guess it goes to show that we should look deeper. What’s the root of the problem?

I don’t know.

3 Responses to “For the first time, married households no longer the majority”

  1. mondine says:

    I suppose it depends upon how you look at it.
    I don’t find it either “sad”, or “a problem” that people choose to define their own relationships without the imposition of an indoctrinated, hierarchical structure.

    The failure rate of ‘traditional’ marriage has passed the 50% mark long ago, never to look back. The best reason for not doing something is because it doesn’t work.

  2. katy says:

    Root of the problem? One cause is the breakdown of morals and absolute standards. It’s all relative, they say. Everyone can do whatever he thinks is right in his own eyes, without regard for consequences or how it affects other people. Children not brought up in a stable home in turn bring baggage into their relationships and so goes the cycle.
    Maintaining a good marriage is not easy. It takes work, perserverance, unselfishness, patience, kindness, maturity, etc. etc. If people just want to be happy with a short term view, they miss out on the long term happiness and satisfaction of a lasting marriage and stable family.

  3. Michael says:

    The chaos generated by the loss of identity and shift in values leads to further deterioration.

    What does that mean???

    Neither popular culture (as define by our mass media) nor “politically correct” positions, present the traditional family structure and gender-roles as desireable ideas. “Traditional” has been redefined as old fashion and unworkable, while all other “non-traditional” structures or groupings are shown as normal and common.

    How strong must you be to … endure the denigration of the idea that a man should be a loving and faithful husband, a provider, protector and strong father? …And the idea that a woman should be a loving and faithful wife, an industrious, nurturing home maker and loving mother?

    Even a good man and woman are not perfect, nor are they prepared to raise a family when they first marry. But when given an clear ideal to aim at, they can make progress in the right direction and grow together. The way is not easy, but love, respect and a solid stable family life are its rewards.

    It’s so much easier to take the route extolled in the entertainment media; to live for the moment, only for your own pleasure and eschew responsibility. By taking this route, many in prior generations have raised (or “not raised”) their kids in choatic homes, rife with multiple divorces/re-marriages, shack-ups and more. All leading up to future generations, growing up, knowing that marriage doesn’t work. After all, they never saw a good marriage, so they must not exist.

Leave a Reply to Michael Cancel reply