EnglishWith all the stimulus ready to go into more broadband, bigger tax cuts and infrastructure, some of America’s most expensive societal investments are also on the decline and in need of a bailout — getting married.
Marriage in America is on the rocks. People skirt the issue, talking about how career women delay marriage until it’s too late, or about how men marry younger the second time around. But the truth is, except for the highest-income Americans among us, fewer and fewer of us are getting married at all.
Married couples with children now make up fewer than one in four U.S. households. That’s half the rate of 1960. Married households of any type have been in the minority since 2005.
It’s not that people are suddenly more promiscuous, or more celibate. Americans are pairing off and staying together just as much as ever, but now it’s without the rings, gowns and expensive photographers. They are America’s committed cohabiters, and theirs is the fastest-growing kind of U.S. household. According to the Census, there are 5.2 million such cohabiting couples, and they are raising 2.2 million children.
Committed cohabiters are more downscale than married parents — they have lower incomes, lower education levels and lower rates of home ownership. There is now a great and growing marital divide between the rich who can afford it and the downscale, who are living more and more without it.
But today it’s not just the young who are living in what just a generation ago was called living in sin — their parents have adapted and are living that way too. The fastest growth in cohabitation is among the over-50 set. Oftentimes, widows, widowers and divorced Americans over 50 — who now total 25 million people — don’t want to complicate inheritances (or burial plans) with a second marriage, but they are committing to each other with devotion just as tender as young people experience, and they are counting very much on the other’s being there at the end.
Society values marriage and monogamy, though, so why isn’t it doing anything about it? There are two options: make marriage economically and socially more attractive, or go with the flow and expand the privileges and obligations of “common law” couples. Right now we are letting the chips fall where they may — a tactic which is currently causing marriage to continue to wither away as an institution. The word “partner” is increasingly replacing the word “spouse.”
If we wanted to increase the number of marriages, we have a number of ideas readily at hand. Tax breaks, instead of tax penalties. Yes-fault divorce. A push for religious leaders to stop spending so much time decrying some marriages (e.g., gay ones, interracial ones), and instead focus on encouraging marriage in the first place. Maybe a national “Spouse Day,” to go along with Mother’s Day and Father’s Day.
How about revisiting those traditional anniversary gifts? Forget the paper in year one and the wood in year five — let’s upgrade the scale. Call 10 years the “silver” anniversary, to celebrate more lavishly those who make it there. Make 25 the “golden” one. And for those who make it to 50 years, hell, give them the Hope Diamond.
Alternatively, we could expand the rights and obligations of committed cohabiters. Every legal arrangement in society — from child custody to survivors’ benefits to next-of-kin decision-making — is affected by this new living arrangement. And so is every institution that gears its benefits around families. Can an unmarried significant other, even a longstanding one, skip the waiting list at the country club because his “friend” already belongs? Can a widowed life partner keep her beloved’s rent-controlled apartment? Can you still get the family rate at Disneyland if the adults in your group are unrelated by either blood or marriage?
Marketers, too, have yet to recognize committed cohabiters as a class and start offering products that acknowledge their unique status. Towels with his and her initials, but separately designed. Address labels that can actually handle two full names. How about a legal and will kit that allows cohabiters to choose just how separate-and-apart they want to be in death, as in life? And if Hallmark is missing out on all those wedding anniversary cards, maybe it’s time to celebrate when we moved in together.
In a sense, relationships at home are increasingly paralleling relationships at work with employers. Whereas 50 years ago, people expected to have one or two jobs for life, now some estimates say they expect six or seven. If marriage was meant to be “’til death do us part,” cohabitation is a little more like “’til life drives us apart.”
At home as at work, Americans are signing on, but without all the trappings that might make progression to the next stage too difficult. And social planners better catch up. They have fallen behind on what could be the most basic of trends — how to accommodate people navigating the middle ground between uncommitted hook-ups, and the “institution” of marriage. And with the financial crisis hitting the downscale the hardest, it may lead to even more cohabitation without marriage, accelerating this microtrend into something bigger.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
中文在寬帶互聯網投資、大規模減稅、基礎設施建設等各式經濟刺激措施呼之欲出的同時﹐美國一些最昂貴的社會投資卻在降溫﹐並且急需得到救助﹐那就是﹕結婚。
美國的婚姻狀況並不理想。人們總是回避這個問題﹐說什麼職業女性不到年齡真的大了就一直耗著不結婚﹐要麼就是談論男人如何在再婚時娶到年輕太太。不過﹐實際情況是﹐除了那些最有錢的人﹐越來越多的美國人壓根儿就不結婚。
目前﹐美國家庭中有子女的已婚家庭比例尚不足四分之一﹐這一比率只是1960年時的一半。從2005年開始﹐已婚家庭（不論其類型）已經成為美國社會中的少數群体。
這並不是說美國人突然變得喜歡沾花惹草、或一下子轉而崇尚獨身主義了。美國人依然出雙入對﹐願意與戀人長相廝守﹐只是現在沒有了戒指、婚紗和重金聘來的攝影師。他們選擇以負責任的態度同居﹐而且這已成為了美國增長最快的家庭模式。人口普查局(Census)的數據顯示﹐美國目前有520萬對非婚同居伴侶﹐共生育了220萬名子女。
與已婚夫婦相比﹐非婚同居伴侶的社會階層較低﹐他們收入少、教育水平低、住房擁有率也低。就婚姻問題而言﹐富人和低收入群體之間儼然已形成了一道越來越寬的鴻溝﹕前者能夠負擔得起婚姻﹐後者中越來越多的人則過著沒有一紙婚書的婚姻生活。
不過如今﹐不僅是年輕人過著被上一代稱做傷風敗俗的非婚同居生活﹐就連他們的父母也開始習慣並選擇這樣的生活方式。50歲以上的人口是增長最快的非婚同居人群。美國現有2,500萬50歲以上的喪偶、離婚人士﹐他們不願因為再婚而讓遺產（或喪葬）情況複雜化﹐但他們也像年輕人一樣溫柔地愛著自己的戀人﹐並且希望戀人能陪伴自己走完人生的旅程。
不過社會提倡的是婚姻和一夫一妻制﹐那麼為什麼採取行動來改變現狀呢﹖現在有兩個選擇﹕讓婚姻在經濟和社會層面上變得更有吸引力﹔或者遵從大眾意見﹐擴充事實婚姻伴侶的權利和義務。現在的情況是我們對一切放任自流﹐其結果便是讓婚姻作為一種制度繼續破滅。”配偶”這個詞正在越來越多地被”伴侶”代替。
如果要鼓勵人們結婚﹐這裡有一些現成的辦法﹕進行減稅而不是稅務罰款﹔對過錯離婚不去窮追猛打﹔敦促宗教人士不要再花那麼多的時間來抨擊某些婚姻（如同性婚姻、異族通婚等）﹐而應該把首要精力放在鼓勵人們結婚上﹔或許在”母親節”和”父親節”之外再設立一個”配偶節”。
再在結婚週年禮物上動動心思怎樣﹖先不考慮1週年”紙婚”和5週年”木婚”﹐讓我們看得遠一些。我們可以把結婚10週年升級為”銀婚”﹐婚姻的路上走這麼久不容易﹐值得人們多花些錢來慶祝﹔25週年應該被稱做”金婚”﹔至於50週年嘛﹐天哪﹐那可以被稱為”希望鑽石婚”了﹗
我們面臨的另一種選擇是去豐富非婚同居人群的權利和義務。這種新的生活方式影響著從子女監護、到遺產贈與、再到近親繼承等各種社會法律﹐以及每一項與家庭福利相關的規章制度。是不是可以讓某位鄉村俱樂部會員的”未婚重要友人”無須等候直接入會﹖讓某位逝者的人生伴侶能夠繼續保留她愛人租住的公寓﹖讓同游隊伍不因其中某些成年人沒有血緣或婚姻關係而享受不了迪斯尼家庭套票﹖
同樣﹐商人們也應該認識到社會上存在著非婚同居者這樣一個群體﹐併提供符合他們特殊情況的產品﹕有”他”或”她”名字首字母的毛巾﹐不過要分別設計﹔能夠寫下兩人全名的地址簽﹔還有讓非婚同居夫婦選擇分頭或一起安排身後事的遺囑文件包。如果所有結婚週年紀念卡上都少了”結婚”二字﹐那麼讓我們開始為同居生活慶賀吧﹗
在某種意義上﹐家庭中的夫妻關係與工作中雇員與老板的關係越來越像。50年前﹐人們預計一生中不會換工作或者只會換上一次工作﹐而如今一些人估計他們要換上五六次工作。如果婚姻意味著”直到死亡將彼此分離”﹐那麼同居就有那麼點”直到生活將彼此分離”的意思。
家庭生活就如工作一樣﹐人們在合同上簽名﹐但也不想讓自己背上太過沉重的負擔﹐以致於難以展開一段新的旅程。所以社會規劃者們最好跟上時代潮流﹐他們已經落後於這一可能是最基本的趨勢──如何接納在非正式婚姻和婚姻制度之間生存的中間人群。金融危機給底層人群帶來了最沉重的打擊﹐這可能導致更多非婚同居現象的出現﹐並最終把這個少數群體變成多數群體。
資料來源：華爾街日報
With housing prices down significantly and interest rates low, it may be an affordable time to buy that first home.
