Cohabitation Nation

"When you first move in together, you're not just in love, you're on the threshold of a new life, and a new way of living." -Ikea | Posted 12:13 AM

Thanksgiving wrap-up:

Congrats to David Micah Greenberg on the publication of a very kuhl book of poetry, Planned Solstice.

Congrats to JA and RS on their engagement.

Congrats to Pariah and Strawberry Blonde on their cohabitation. I don't know either of them personally, but they turned up in my search for "thanksgiving cohabitation."

How many people will tell their parents they are planning to live together over the Thanksgiving dinner table this year? If anyone has tales to report, send them my way.

This Friday would be a good time to go shopping at Ikea or Buy Nothing. Your choice.

Massachusetts High Court: Same-sex couples are legally entitled to wed! | Posted 10:36 AM

Associated Press story. GLAD.
Massachusetts Freedom to Marry.

You can't be 29. Only 30. | Posted 12:35 PM

G. writes in response to this post: "Soon after turning 29, I grew so weary of trying to convince people that I was 29, no really, 29, that I just gave up and told everybody I was 30. It was worth being 30 for 22 months to avoid that obnoxious nudge-nudge, wink-wink men give women about saying they are 29."

Cohabitation Nation Sparks Discursive Explosion | Posted 5:51 PM

Speaking of phrases in google, I introduced the phrase "discursive explosion" in a September 2 post. LS, who probably didn't read The History of Sexuality, Volume I in his undergraduate days at Brown, but surely reads Cohabitation Nation now, incorporates it on 9/12 and again on 11/4.

Who ranks #1 in google for the phrase now? The late Michel Foucault? Me? No, LS of course, although this post might change the results.

"Epic," we might say, although is a word that's unlikely to cause a discursive explosion anytime soon.

Agitation of cohabitation | Posted 7:57 PM

A clever San Francisco Chronicle headline writer coins a new phrase, which has never before appeared in google: "the agitation of cohabitation."

Would you rather be asked your age or your cohabitation status? | Posted 12:05 PM

While I am not a smoker, 26% of my fellow thirty and almost-thirty somethings are. This fact, combined with New York City's smoking ban, allowed for plenty of opportunity to spend quality time on the sidewalks of the East Village at last night's Book of Ages launch party. Conclusion: Asking random passerby, "Are you 30?" is a great way to sell books, but be sure you have books to sell.

First guerilla marketing, soon guerrilla book signings-- what could possibly be next? Marriage? "Bring a wife home to your house when you are of the right age, not far short of 30 years, nor much above; this is the right time for marriage." -- Hesiod, c. 8th century B.C. [Quote and smoke stat from the book].

"The convoluted logic of marriage protection" | Posted 12:46 PM

Thomas Lang on Rick Santorum in The American Prospect.

Cohabitation at 30 | Posted 10:56 AM

The Book of Ages is available now. It promises not just to be a great birthday gift and amusing guide for the aspiring thirtysomething*, but could also spark a discursive explosion akin to the coining of the term Generation X. Stay tuned!

*A person conducting telephone surveys called our home last year, and Dorian fielded the call. During the survey, he asked how old she was. She said, "29." He laughed, and said, "Yeah, right. That is what everyone says. How old are you really?"

Cohabitation in Youngstown, OH | Posted 3:31 PM

Welcome to listeners of the Saturday with Morris Ray show on WKBN 570 in Youngstown, Ohio, who heard about Cohabitation Nation on the air today.

Cohabitation Nation, indeed | Posted 2:43 PM

Business Week reports on Unmarried America:

But just because matrimony is good for society doesn't mean that outmoded social benefits are -- especially when so many kids are not living in the kinds of traditional households that current social policies favor. As more and more companies begin to loosen the connection between benefits and marriage -- and partners who act like they are married are treated as if they are -- it's likely that there may be even higher rates of cohabitation and even lower rates of marriage, as has already happened in Europe. The difference, though, is that European countries have stronger social safety nets in the form of long, subsidized maternity leave policies; good part-time jobs for mothers; and tight-knit extended families, who help care for children born to single parents.

Divorce and girls | Posted 11:35 AM

Steven E. Landsburg at Slate.com pens a piece about the Gordon Dahl and Enrico Moretti research addressing the provocative question, "Do daughters cause divorce?"

Dorian enters the fray and hypothesizes that perhaps "divorce causes girls."

Over the top cohabitation quote of the day | Posted 7:21 PM

"Getting married, to me, is a huge commitment -- way bigger than buying a house... Getting married costs a lot of money, and you don't get a lot of payback." [From dailycamera.com]

On the road | Posted 10:12 PM

Back from a whirlwind trip which included my 11th* high school reunion, an Alternatives to Marriage Project houseparty fundraiser and board meeting, and lots of hours in the car with D.

Popular topics of discussion at the reunion: Cohabitation, marriage, kids.

At the party: Cohabitation, marriage, kids.

At the board meeting: Cohabitation, marriage, kids.

In the car: The striking improvements to bathroom quality at gas stations since our youth. What cause this upgrade was fodder for a good 45 minutes... apparently we're not alone in noticing things like this. Could it be legislative action? Indeed, what could be next for "big oil"?

Dinner tonight on the way home at Cafe Zog in Providence, which has a copy of a Jason Tanz NYT article on "36 hours in Providence" on its wall and makes a really good veggie reuben.

--
* our class didn't get it organized for the 10th; better late than never.

Cohabitation By Location | Posted 9:52 PM

Epic! Google Labs unveils the location search, and within hours, excited web users report that we rank #1 (or letter A, as the case may be) for cohabitation in Portland, Oregon.

I predict it will be awhile before this service makes its way to the google homepage, though. A search for "Lockhart Steele" and "New York" reveals a map of... Brooklyn.

Cohabitation & kids | Posted 10:33 PM

USA Today on unmarried stepfamilies.

Unmarriage Certificate | Posted 9:58 PM

I'm getting a ton of web traffic from people searching for "unmarriage certificate." Anyone know what caused the discursive explosion? One reader reports seeing an MSN ad displaying the phrase.

First comes cohabitation, then comes marriage | Posted 11:38 AM

It's the summer of weddings! This weekend, D and I attended the Exeter, Rhode Island wedding of our friends M and D (no relation), and last weekend we were in Denver for the wedding of T and E. Two great couples, two fun weddings. I am biased, of course, but I can't help but think as these couples walk down the aisle that they seem so right for each other in part because they know they are-- they've already been living together for nine years and four years, respectively. It seems so clear that more years of happiness will surely follow.

No trip to Colorado would be complete without a visit to the Focus on the Family welcome center in Colorado Springs. A quick flip through their Citizen magazine and it's clear that I disagree with them on just about all the hot topics of the day: cohabitation, of course, along with abortion, same-sex marriage, sex education, even, say, what magazines Wal-Mart carries in its checkout lines.

Yet, in spending three hours on their "campus" (several buildings house 1,350 staffers), I am left with a feeling akin to "hate the sin, love the sinner". The best description of it might be "disagree the views, admire the approach." They are incredibly effective at what they do, and there's a lot to learn from watching. A few key areas to appreciate: (1) a strong sense of mission (which the tour guides could recite from memory); (2) a commitment to addressing constituent needs (an entire room of staff cubicles whose sole job it is to reply to letters written to the ministry); (3) a focus on media and publications (Focus on the Family radio airs on something like 3,000 worldwide and there's an entire building devoted to printing and shipping their publications); and (4) dedication to raising the next generation of leaders (an entire semester's worth of college classes can be taken at their offices).

Crossing the threshold into The Land of Cohabitation | Posted 9:23 PM

Sources say this was the most emailed story in Thursday's Globe. As of Sunday night, baseball wins the week.

More unmarriage | Posted 9:20 PM

Lifetimetv.com reports on "The Un-Marriage Certificate: Why more and more couples are creating cohabitation contracts."

Would you buy a home with someone you've never kissed? | Posted 10:18 AM

According the way most people think of dating and marriage in decades past, the typical pattern was this:
Dating -> Marriage -> Sex -> Joint Home Ownership -> Cohabitation -> Children

In reality, since the early 1900s, the majority of people have had sex before marriage:
Dating -> Sex -> Marriage -> Cohabitation -> Joint Home Ownership -> Children

Nowadays, with most couples living together before marriage, the typical pattern is more like this:
Dating -> Sex -> Cohabitation -> Marriage -> Joint Home Ownership -> Children

But, increasingly I am seeing this among people in my generation:
Dating -> Sex -> Cohabitation -> Joint Home Ownership -> Marriage -> Children

One couple has such a different approach to this pattern that it was worthy of a Seattle Times story.

More Cohabitation-Related Media | Posted 7:28 PM

Financial issues:
Dayana Yochim 's column [Fool.com]

More finances:
Exclusionary costs: Legal marriage could ease gay couples' financial inequities [Boston Globe]

A potential barrier to cohabitation I hadn't thought of:
Research, seminars can cure shy-bladder phobia [Boston Globe]

Media Roundup | Posted 8:32 PM

Non-Traditional Families More Common [Associated Press]

A First at Bride's Magazine: A Report on Same-Sex Unions [NYT]

Vatican Seeks to Stop OKs for Gay Unions [AP]

Should clergy endorse cohabitation? | Posted 9:47 AM

Rabbi Gerald L. Zelizer writes in USA Today:

Cohabitation is here to stay and on the increase, whether we like it or not.

Clergy members, therefore, should move beyond the moral condemnation of cohabitation to more practical approaches. We should encourage those who choose cohabitation to restrict their relationship to someone they intend to marry. That will maximize their chance for an eventual, successful marriage.

At the same time, clergy members should build on the many existing programs in churches and synagogues designed to deepen the stability of marriage. This would allow us to adjust to the reality of cohabitation before marriage in a manner that will fortify fidelity and stability in marriage.

Marriage promotion billboards? | Posted 11:31 PM

Speaking of both advertising and marriage promotion, I've been wondering what, if any, of the $300 million in marriage promotion dollars will be used for billboards. Billboards have long been used in various was to advocate abstinence (one interesting example here), and it seems a marriage campaign isn't out of the question.

Curious, my google searches for billboards, marriage, etc. turned up some disturbing results. I'll resist commenting on this article, and instead turn your attention to this one:

Also taking advantage of the outdoor advertising phenomenon is divorce attorney Paul Wailer, who after years of struggling just to keep his Lackawanna office open now has a team of ten full time lawyers with months of back logged cases. "It's been the most incredible thing," says Wailer. "Within a few days of my billboard going up on the 190 South the phone was ringing off the hook."

Katrina Clossen, from Orchard Park is a 29yr old mother of one says Wailer's billboard was instrumental in ending her 6year marriage. "You know," said a smiling Clossen, "the idea of divorce was always in the back of my mind I suppose, but it was seeing those big white letters on the billboard spelling out "DIVORCE" everyday on my way home from work that really motivated me to do something. It was a reminder that I didn't have to put up with that bastard who was going to start bitching at me the second I walked through the door about his dinner or some other shit. I called Wailer and found out I was entitled to everything, including my husband's dignity. It was amazing. I got the house, the cars, half his salary, half his pension- everything except his golf clubs, but even that has a silver lining because he's so broke he can't afford green fees. The one thing I'm not so thrilled about is that my daughter has to spend every other weekend in his trailer park and has to sleep on the floor in a sleeping bag. The upside is that it affords me the chance to party and pursue other men. Right now I'm transitioning out of my Latino phase and think I'm going to go into a boy band phase, but I'm not really sure."

Postscript: The site is actually an Onion takeoff. Other news includes "A French Foreign Aid Worker Gave Me the Crabs" and "Area Feminist Won't be Burning Anymore Bras."

Ad creep | Posted 7:35 PM

Back in the summer '95, I got LS reading Adbusters, which along with the nascent and upwardly-mobile Wired magazine that LS introduced me to, provided ample fodder for conversation during our lunch hour. One subject for lively debate was the frequently cited stat by Adbusters that the average American is exposed to 3000 advertisements a day. The debate centered on whether if one saw the golden arches, or the Nike swish on a shoe, was that an advertisement or simply a logo, and were such images included in the count.

Neither of us could have predicted, I think, although in retrospect it was obvious (in the way that most things are obvious in retrospect), the proliferation of ads on the Internet, surely boosting our daily ad count to far beyond 3,000. I do my part to reduce your ad count by dutifully paying my $5 per month to blogspot for ad free living, but it appears ads are creeping into the archive pages of Cohabitation Nation. An accident? A conspiracy? Only time will tell, as even the disappearing archives came back eventually. If you know a fix, drop me a line.

Abstinence education for the divorced | Posted 10:49 PM

Thanks to $200 million in marriage promotion money coming states' way [Read more in this AP article, or our response], Texas is eager to put your federal tax dollars to work promoting ~~marriage~~ "abstinence for all unmarried persons, including abstinence for persons who have previously been married."

The relevant section of the Texas legislation is below, or check it out for yourself by going to the state's website; clicking "Quick Bill Status"; selecting "78th Regular Session"; and typing in "HB2292" and flipping to pages 195-196. According to Tim Casey, of the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, "The legislation instructs the welfare department to develop rules for the program. It is not clear whether those rules will sanction recipients who fail to abstain from sex."

Sec.A31.015. HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

(a) Subject to available federal funding, the department shall develop and implement a healthy marriage development program for recipients of financial assistance under this chapter.

(b) The healthy marriage development program shall promote and provide three instructional courses on the following topics:

(1) premarital counseling for engaged couples and marriage counseling for married couples that includes skill development for:

(A) anger resolution;
(B) family violence prevention;
(C) communication;
(D) honoring your spouse; and
(E) managing a budget;

(2) physical fitness and active lifestyles and nutrition and cooking, including:

(A) abstinence for all unmarried persons, including abstinence for persons who have previously been married; and

(B) nutrition on a budget; and

(3) parenting skills, including parenting skills for character development, academic success, and stepchildren.

(c) The department shall provide to a recipient of financial assistance under this chapter additional financial assistance of not more than $20 for the recipient’s participation in a course offered through the healthy marriage development program up to a maximum payment of $60 a month.

(d) The department may provide the courses or may contract with any person, including a community or faith-based organization, for the provision of the courses. The department must provide all
participants with an option of attending courses in a non-faith-based organization.

(e) The department shall develop rules as necessary for the administration of the healthy marriage development program.

(f) The department must ensure that the courses provided by the department and courses provided through contracts with other organizations will be sensitive to the needs of individuals from different religions, races, and genders.

What's particularly unfortunate about this is that many of the above topics -- communication, violence prevention, parenting skills, heck, even "nutrition on a budget" -- are perfectly reasonable. And they're even willing to account for diversity in terms of religion, race, and gender. So why the need to insist on teaching abstinence for the unmarried? And what exactly will "honoring your spouse" look like in the classrooms of rural Texas?

Celebrating Freedom | Posted 9:59 AM

Devoted Cohabitation Nation fans have asked why I haven't provided commentary on the latest string of events. I'm so busy trying to keep up with the news myself that blogging has fallen behind. First Ontario legalizes same sex-marriage; then the Supreme Court delivers good news in Lawrence v. Texas; then the nation's largest private employer says it won't discriminate; and now the media is abuzz with daily commentary on the cultural changes that underway. My gosh! What could be next? Abolishing legal marriage altogether?

If you read nothing else, though, I recommend Wednesday's Wall Street Journal article on the World Wife Carrying Championship. Available online only to WSJ subscribers, you can at least get a sense of what it's all about here and here. I think I'll give it a try this holiday weekend-- a little domestic partner carrying, if Dorian is game.

Screening in... | Posted 11:39 PM

One of the problems with this information age society is that it allows people to gather information that they don't need. A case in point is caller ID, which is a useful device, I suppose, for screening out telemarketers and for being able to know who is on the other end of the line two seconds before they tell you who they are.

What I'm finding amusing of late is the use of caller ID not as a device to screen people out (i.e. not answer the phone if you don't recongize the number), but to screen pepole in. There are some who once they see a phone number of a friend or a relative on their caller ID box, but no voicemail message, they nearly die of curiousity until they've had the chance to call back, all the while itching with the question: "Why did you call?"

Today, I encountered an entirely new and troubling version of this. I misdialed a number I call frequently (messing up the area code -- a problem in ten digit dialing cities like New York and Boston when you intend to dial 646-XXX-XXXX and I actually dial 212-XXX-XXXX.) First I received a call back from a man, with a series of questions for me, "Who are you? Why did you call my cell phone? Etc." I responded by saying that if there was no message, no need to call back. Apparently, this was not satisfactory, as 20 minutes later a woman (his wife? domestic partner? mother?) calls back, asking the same questions. "It was a wrong number," I pleaded. "Don't call again," she said. "I'll try, I really didn't mean to," I said again. "Wrong numbers happen sometimes."

Add this to the list of topics for any couple considering cohabitation should discuss: whether or not you'll block caller ID on your household phone. And, more importantly, if you have caller ID, whether or not your partner screens out, or screens in.

"Cohabitation ... becoming the norm in Hungary" | Posted 7:39 PM

Like much of the rest of the world, marriage rates are falling in Eastern Europe:

Ambitious and free-thinking, East European youths are spurning the age-old institution of marriage to the point where the formerly communist region now has one of the lowest marriage rates in the world.

"You can't rely on relationships to make you happy," said Judit, a 24-year-old, curly haired lawyer working at a multinational firm in Budapest. "You have to be happy with yourself, that's the most important thing."

More and more young people share Judit's views in Hungary and the region, where the transition to democracy and a market economy has brought about a noticeable shift in the way younger generations view life and relationships.

During communist times in Hungary, most young people still married to conform with social norms, even though divorce rates were high.

But in a new world that places more emphasis on individualism, social norms seem to be the last thing on young people's minds. A focus on working hard to get ahead and a preoccupation with having fun during free time can be deadly to traditional relationships, sociologists say.

"Old and new values are colliding after the transition," said Zsolt Speder, director of the Population Research Institute at the Central Statistics Office (KSH) in Budapest. "The new capitalist system has brought about a largely self-centered society where the compromise needed in any marriage is shunned."

According to KSH, the number of new marriages in Hungary last year was less than those in 1970, and the country now has at 4.3 marriages per 1,000 residents one of the lowest marriage rates in Europe, lower than in the Scandinavian countries, which are know for their permissiveness.

The pattern is the same in many of the East European nations, eight of which -- the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia -- are due to join the EU next year.

Lithuania and Latvia have had spectacular declines in marriage rates since the fall of communism 14 years ago, from over 10 marriages per 1,000 people in 1989 to 4.5 and 3.9 respectively last year.

In Slovenia, marriage rates dropped by 20 percent over the decade of the 1990s.

In strongly Catholic Poland and traditionally minded Romania, however, marriage rates are higher, over five per 1,000 residents.

Magdalena Picsova, of the Slovakian Academy of Sciences, said that under centrally planned communist economies many were motivated to marry so that authorities would give them easier access to a new apartment.

But now some couples shy away from marriage since apartments are too expensive.

Many couples do live together, of course, but still choose not to get married.

Sociologist Agnes Utasi of the University of Szeged in southern Hungary said that cohabitation rather than marriage was becoming the norm in Hungary, a mostly Catholic country where the Church's influence nonetheless is limited.

"Society has grown much more accepting of this," Utasi said of couples living together without getting married. "It seems to better suit the faster pace of life where everything, including relationships, is uncertain."

Some couples decline to tie the knot, even when they have children.

In Bulgaria, the number of children born out of wedlock has quadrupled since the fall of communism, "from 10-12 percent before 1990 to 44 percent" last year, Yordan Kaltchev, a demography expert at the Bulgarian Statistics Institute, said.

The trend has also shown up in Hungary.

Bori has lived with her boyfriend for seven years and now they have a two-year old child, said the 27-year-old media researcher in Budapest, who did not want to give her last name.

"There are a lot of negative stereotypes about marriages, that most of them end in divorce," she said.

"Instead of legally chaining myself to somebody, as a modern woman I want to prove that with a career and a family, I can be happy in a relationship."

Fornication Nation? | Posted 9:53 AM

The readers of the Memphis Commercial-Appeal weigh in on the state of the Cohabitation Nation.

Good news in Loyoza v. Sanchez | Posted 9:39 AM

"A win for unmarried couples," reports Leonard Post at the National Law Journal. "Breaking new ground, the New Mexico Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that a claim for the loss of companionship of a partner is not limited to married couples," he writes.

You may now kiss the ass | Posted 2:59 PM

Here's an amusing dispatch on this rainy day:

Residents of India's southern city of Bangalore have married off two donkeys, in the hope that the ancient ritual will usher in good monsoon rains.

Though monsoons have hit southern India, Bangalore is still waiting for its first showers and residents decided to invoke the ritual - detailed in Hindu scriptures - after their prayers failed to deliver.

Two donkeys - the bride Ganga and the groom Varuna - tied the knot at a temple on the city outskirts to loud cheers of about 100 guests, who attended the ceremony.

Rains are crucial in India, as the majority of the country's population of over 1 billion depends on agriculture and farming.

The happy couple - who wagged their tails, oblivious to the commotion - were married off in a traditional Hindu ceremony, with the bride clad in a green silk sari with gold zari.

'Praying for rain'

Great attention was also paid to ritualistic details such as the perfect invitation card, the right wedding attire and the freshest flowers.

A traditional band entertained the guests, who sprinkled the newlyweds with flowers.

"We are praying for rains. We need rains, hope gods are pleased and it rains in Bangalore today," Manjual, one of the guests, told Reuters news agency.

Only at one point did the groom get restless: when his attendant tied the holy threads around his hind and fore legs.

The guests, each of whom contributed to the marriage expenses, were later treated to a traditional meal at the temple.

Before leaving the ceremony, everybody was hopeful it would start raining soon.

Meanwhile, the BBC's weather forecast suggested unbroken sunshine in Bangalore until Sunday at the earliest.

"I am living in sin. I admit it. My fiance and I live together..." | Posted 8:29 AM

My offer to Craig Newmark still stands, as his list continues to rock on. Yesterday I replaced our fax machine with one found on Craigslist. Total cost: $10.

Meanwhile, Abbie Ohanian, a complimentary copy of Unmarried to Each Other is in order for you, too. Read Abby's recent column in the Evansville Courier & Press.

New York Times Blog Beat | Posted 11:30 PM

I don't know how it's possible, but it's true. Mr. Jonathan Van Gieson is neither quoted nor cited in this New York Times story about blogs. You may or may not, however, find that he has been photographed at important blog society functions.

State of Our Unions report | Posted 11:02 PM

The National Marriage Project is out with their latest report. Here's the USA Today story.

Living Together Lyrics: Part II | Posted 9:00 AM

In honor of music blogger Mike Palmer, we continue with our series of song lyrics about cohabitation. Today, Johnny's Room, by The Bobs:

There are two things I can't stand
And one of them is your mom
What is just as bad is your dad
Why did we have to come?
This is the Eighties, it should be understood
That we sleep together

We've been together for a month now
Why are they so uptight?
When they invited us to dinner
I didn't know it meant "spend the night"
I helped with dishes
Your mother told me all about when you were small
And then she said:

Before it gets too late I'll show you where
you'll sleep tonight
You'll share a room with Johnny
(Repeat)

Over B and B, we watched TV
Me and you and your mom and dad
When the news came on, your dad yawned
And said "Come on, dear, let's go to bed"
We stayed on the couch there
And then your dad came downstairs and said
"Hey, kids, let's go!"

I bumped my head getting into bed
In Johnny's lower bunk
I couldn't sleep, 'cause the little creep
Snored and his tennis shoes stunk
I listened to this fish tank
And the bubbles seemed to be saying to me:

Before it gets too late I'll show you where
you'll sleep tonight
You'll share a room with Johnny
(Repeat)

At two a.m. I couldn't help myself
I tiptoed down the hall to your door
But then your dad came out and said
"Where are you going?"
"I guess I lost my way to the bathroom"

Before it gets too late I'll show you where
you'll sleep tonight
You'll share a room with Johnny
(Repeat)

[Previous installments in this series: Let's Live Together, by Robbie Fulks.]

The mention of cohabitation | Posted 9:02 PM

If it wasn't for Lockhart Steele, I wouldn't be reading things like this, which inspire me to do things like this, which lead me to find cool things like this. Best entry:

More [marriage] prep lessons

* Mortgaging your future to pay for a wedding is not considered
abnormal (but what people spend in Chicago is ridiculous!)

* The mention of pre-marital sex, contraception and cohabitation
makes some couples/individuals shift around uncomfortably in their
seats.

A well planned life | Posted 11:22 PM

Not sure what to make of this joke floating around the internet:

> Two women met for the first time since graduating from high
> school. One asked the other, "You were always so organized in
> school, did you manage to live a well planned life?" "Oh
> yes," said her friend. "My first marriage was to a
> millionaire; my second marriage was to an actor; my third
> marriage was to a preacher; and now I'm married to an
> undertaker." Her friend asked, "What do those marriages have
> to do with a well planned life?" "One for the money, two for
> the show, three to get ready, and four to go."

"The phrase has a kind of understated poetry" | Posted 1:02 AM

Two interesting pieces online: "Why Marriage? The tie that binds need not be legal" by Richard Taylor and "The institution of marriage is under attack? That's fine with me" by Ed Weathers. Weathers writes:

I live with a woman who is not my wife. Her name is Gail. We share the same bed, and occasionally we make love to each other. We have been doing this for 17 years. At least once a week, Gail and I look at each other, shake our heads, reach out to hold hands, smile and say how lucky we are to be living such a pleasant life. Honestly. We do. You can ask her.

People use different terms for the way Gail and I live: cohabitation, living in sin, fornication. I call it simply “living together,” because that’s what it is, and the phrase has a kind of understated poetry: We live, and we get to do it together.

"The marriage revolution is already underway" | Posted 2:53 PM

E.J. Graff writes in The Boston Globe:

[P]olls show that Americans increasingly believe that it's only fair to give same-sex partners the legal tools to care for one another. That's true in no small part because, for all the apocalyptic rhetoric employed against same-sex unions, lesbian and gay couples fit easily into the contemporary Western philosophy of marriage that has evolved over the last century.

In 1965, contraception became legal nationwide, after 75 years of ferocious opposition by forces ranging from the Catholic church (which called it ''the crime against nature'') to Theodore Roosevelt (who declared it the equivalent of polygamy). Today, Americans have come to see the purpose of sex as intimacy, not just making babies. And after even nastier battles over laws governing divorce and remarriage, most of us now believe that shared love rather than joint labor is what makes and unmakes a marriage. Finally, our laws now consider men and women to be formally equal in marriage. This last point raises a powerful question: If gender discrimination has no place within marriage, why should it exist at marriage's entryway?

When full marriage rights for same-sex couples arrive here in the United States, it will be just another incremental step in the ongoing transformation of marriage into an egalitarian institution based on love. Or to put it another way, same-sex couples are following, not leading, changes in our marriage law.

.... No one knows if such victories would provoke ''the mother of all cultural battles,'' as Stanley Kurtz put it recently in The National Review Online, or whether most people will yawn and keep watching ''Will and Grace.'' Either way, the most important result of gender-neutralizing marriage law, the activists like to say, is ''that the sky will not fall''-and heterosexual couples will see that their marriages are not mysteriously drained of force because the two girls next door are married too.

Don't give the North Dakota lawmakers any ideas | Posted 9:40 PM

In Malaysia, you can be fined for holding hands with your partner.

"Clearing the air on cohabitation" | Posted 7:18 PM

For the record, Ryan Bakken is neither in favor of cohabitation nor opposed to it. He's simply a really funny writer who knows a great topic when he sees one.

Clarification of purpose | Posted 11:14 PM

What's a cohabiting blogger to do when his blog gets more traffic from people searching for information about "nude weddings" than cohabitation? For the record, we don't provide information on bikini waxing in Marin County either.

William Bennett | Posted 8:34 PM

I don't need to tell you what Bill Bennett thinks of cohabitation. Here's Katha Pollitt's take on his gambling problem:

Bennett's defenders make much of the fact that he never condemned gambling and so was not actually a hypocrite. Leaving your own pet vice off a long, long list of sins, and then, when you are found out, exempting that vice as practiced by you but not as practiced by others--that's not exculpation from charges of hypocrisy, that's what hypocrisy is.

If Bennett were a jolly, modest fellow, full of love for fallen humanity and the first to admit he was just another sinner like the rest of us--if he were less quick to impute the worst motives to perfectly ordinary behavior, like having two kids; if he spent less time promoting rigid, puritanical morals and more time promoting, oh, kindness and tolerance and looking into your own heart and cutting other people some slack because you never really know what demons they're contending with--no one would be piling on now.

But then, with a message like that, no one would have heard of him in the first place. You don't get to play Christian on TV, or amass real political power along with your millions, by urging people not to throw the first stone, especially if they live in a glass house. Jesus tried that, and look what happened to him.

Ouch! | Posted 8:20 PM

A couple should be able to live together or marry in peace.

"He opened the door ... and this unmarried couple was cohabitating, right there on the floor." | Posted 8:48 PM

Grand Forks Herald columnist Ryan Bakken is on a roll! First this, now this:

Sshhhhh. The cohab law isn't being enforced

A scandal of epic proportions threatens North Dakota law enforcement.

Weeks after the Legislature has adjourned, the state still has no arrests - none!!! - for cohabitation. And we do know cohabitators are out there, don't we?

Other than the crucial bikini waxing legislation, keeping the law forbidding unmarried couples to live together was the hallmark of the legislative session. The 2003 Legislature - Motto: "Let's Live the 20th Century Over Again, Starting at the Beginning" - demanded that this act remain verboten.

Yet, law enforcement is spitting in the eyes of our state's leaders by not making a single arrest.

Grand Forks Police Chief John Packett and Grand Forks County Sheriff Dan Hill offer a lame excuse for this slipshod enforcement of the law. "We haven't had any complaints," each one said, obviously having collaborated beforehand on their alibi.

"Since I haven't had any complaints, I think you can make the assumption that it's not a concern to the community," Packett said. "We have to make sure laws are compatible with the community standards."

So, if I ratted out an unmarried couple, demanding they be hauled away in handcuffs and chains, what would you do?

"Then it gets into the realm of if it's good public policy," Packett said. "Is the peace being disturbed? Are people's welfare in jeopardy? Is there a concern over property? If you can't answer those questions with an affirmative to yourself, it's probably a question you shouldn't be asking."

That sounded like a "no," didn't it? So there you have it: Defiance of the very laws he's sworn to keep.

Hill wasn't defiant, but he was squirming under the hot lights of my interrogation.

"We're just not out there seeking those people," he said. "We'd have to catch them at it. We'd have to witness it. And it's only a misdemeanor."

What, no hidden listening devices implanted in the bedside lamp in search of the tell-tale sounds of cohabitation? No undercover operation under the covers? For shame.

It would be a waste of time, Hill said. "I really can't see the courts coming down very hard on anyone charged for something like that," he said.

So the judicial system is part of the scandal, too? Wow. I envision a Pulitzer for this expose.

Probably in a futile attempt to avoid impeachment, Hill told how he once did make an arrest for a similar offense about 25 years ago. He opened the door to an otherwise vacant apartment and this unmarried couple was cohabitating, right there on the floor. They were charged with trespassing and some other charge.

"I can't remember the specific charge for what they were doing; it might have been the cohabitation law," Hill said. "Anyway, the charges were dropped when they told the judge they were going to be married soon."

Agreeing to marriage? That's what you'd call a plea bargain.

So, I went to the highest law official in the state - yes, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem - demanding answers. "I'm clean on this," he said. "Prosecution is the county state's attorneys' responsibility."

Stenehjem even sounded like a cohabitators' sympathizer. "One of our chief justices - and I can't remember which one - once said that the best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it," he said.

Anyway, I apologized to him, Packett and Hill for taking their valuable time. Packett said there was no need to apologize.

"That's OK," Packett said graciously. "It's a timely subject. It's probably something that people will enjoy reading."

His tune will likely change when he reads this. I anticipate an outraged public storming police headquarters over this blatant dereliction of duty.

If we let this go, what's next? Serial jaywalking? Sidewalks covered in spit?

First on my 2006 reading list | Posted 11:11 PM

Rebecca Mead's article is on its way to becoming a book about the American wedding industry and "the intersection of love and marriage with the marketplace in contemporary American culture," to be published by Penguin in 2006. [From Publishers Lunch via LS]

Pure coincidence or trend? | Posted 7:58 PM

In all the U.S. newspapers indexed by Lexis-Nexis, there hasn't been a single use of the phrase "cohabitation nation" in the last ten years. Yet both the Commercial Appeal and the Sacramento Bee use it as a headline in the same weekend?

Memorial Day | Posted 7:54 PM

Back from the wonderful Baltimore wedding of S. and D. Prior to the wedding, Dorian and I grabbed a bite to eat at a Mexican restaurant. Amusingly, the small restuarant was tightly packed, and we ended up sitting within close earshot of a couple in the middle of a deep discussion about whether or not to cohabit. They ultimately decided against, for now.

"The practice is still controversial and not something Mid-Southerners are quick to talk about openly." | Posted 7:03 PM

An article on unmarried couples appears in the Memphis Commercial Appeal today. What's the headline? "Cohabitation Nation."

Fully informed cohabitation | Posted 4:22 PM

People unfamiliar with my work incorrectly assume that I'm pro-cohabitation and anti-marriage. At heart, I'm a fan of responsible, informed, supported choices. I'm against marital status discrimination and the pressure to marry. But I'm also in favor of same-sex marriage and don't believe married people should pay more taxes than unmarried ones.

Case in point: JF sold a copy of Unmarried to Each Other to her co-worker, who gave it to a friend, who was preparing to move in with her boyfriend. As she read through the book, she started asking him more questions and thinking about whether or not she was ready to move in with him. By helping her to examine her choices, it made her realize that something wasn't quite right. Indeed, she was on to something: she spontaneously called him late one night, and another woman answered his phone... Needless to say, she called off the cohabitation.

Friendster, Day 2 | Posted 10:11 PM

My friend network has now grown to 1317 people, mostly thanks to the daylong outreach efforts of a least one enthusiastic blogger. However, as he becomes more familiar with the network, he's also realizing its limitations. "Male-female ratio precisely that of an undergraduate engineering program," he emails. Nonetheless, the gang moves forward.

Progress so far:
Dates: None.
Serious relationships: None.
Cohabitations: None.

Friend-of-a-friend networking for dates, possible future cohabitation | Posted 10:14 PM

The gang is all signing up for friendster, hoping that it will result in dates, serious relationships, and maybe even cohabitation. We'll see. I'll do my best to play matchmaker.

"We want to hire the best employees available." | Posted 12:45 PM

This article speaks to some of the absurd rhetoric that surronds something as straightforward as a private company offering domestic partner benefits to attract and retain the best employees. My favorite quote: "The family has been the foundation of society, and any endorsement of these other relationships undermines the family." The reality, of course, is just the opposite: DP benefits support and strengthen families who otherwise might not have health insurance.

Epic individuals | Posted 12:51 PM

Looky, looky, thanks to a tip from MOP, it is now public knowledge that certain epic individuals' blogs will grace the fashion pages of the NY Times tomorrow. Kudos to the gang! I've got to hand it to JVG, in particular, for starting his blog for this reason, and not six months later getting his URL mentioned not once, but twice in the paper of record.

Freedom to Read Protection Act | Posted 7:41 PM

U.S. Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) wants to protect your right to read, The Valley Advocate reports:

A great writer is, so to speak, a second government in his country. And for that reason no regime has ever loved great writers, only minor ones. -- Alexander Solzhenitsyn

That was the quote of the day March 7 on the website for Food for Thought Books, and it's a clue to the types of books that are the stock in trade in this Amherst store. Look in Food for Thought's window and you'll see the latest in critical, avant-garde, world-conscious writing: titles like Unmarried to Each Other: The Essential Guide to Living Together and Staying Together or Fugitive Days: A Memoir, by Bill Ayers, community activist and founder of the Weather Underground.

At the moment, the owners of Food for Thought and other bookstores throughout the country are wondering if someone besides a prospective customer is looking in their windows. The Patriot Act, passed in reaction to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, gives the FBI and other federal agencies broad new powers to track down suspected terrorists by demanding records of books sold from bookshops and borrowed from libraries. Federal agents with court orders could always ask for records of books purchased or borrowed by a certain person believed to be a security risk; now they can made broader requests for customer lists and other records that show who's reading what.

Throughout the nation, this provision of the Patriot Act has started up a bookseller revolt, as store owners tear up receipts to keep from being asked to hand them over. Riding to their rescue on Capitol Hill last week was U.S. Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Sanders filed a bill, the Freedom to Read Protection Act, that would roll back the provisions of the Patriot Act relating to bookstores and libraries to the previous status quo. Sanders' bill would also require government agencies to report to Congress regularly on how many bookstores and libraries have been subjected to searches for records and what the searches have yielded that has actually reduced the threat of terrorism.

The Pros and Cons of Shacking Up | Posted 5:08 PM

If you're a Comcast cable subscriber, you can watch Dorian debate "The Pros and Cons of Shacking Up" on Real Life with Mary Amoroso tonight at 6:30 p.m.

Epic | Posted 9:02 PM

JVG has written "Buddy" Cianci: the musical.

Mother's Day | Posted 8:53 PM

Modern mothers travel with cell phones, but technology hasn't caught up with demand. Both Dorian and I lost our connections to our mobile mothers at least twice during our "Happy Mother's Day" calls today.

2nd printing | Posted 9:40 PM

It's official! Unmarried to Each Other is now in its second printing.

Trendwatch | Posted 10:22 PM

Karen emails: "For those fast-food-equivalent relationships: marriage in an inflatable church, divorce on the divorce bus."

Courage | Posted 8:23 PM

Just returned from bicycling 42 miles with my father around New York's five boroughs as part of Bike New York. With 30,000 riders, Bike New York is the largest group cycling event in the world, and even more memorable than New York's skyline and diverse neighborhoods are the numerous accidents that invariably happen from so many bikes being on the road at once. To start the ride, all one needs is a sense of adventure. By the time you've witnessed your third accident, courage is the driving force to complete it.

Meanwhile, in North Dakota, Ryan Bakken is right on target:

The North Dakota Legislature's regular session is over, with legislators having fulfilled their apparent biennial purpose: Provide ample fodder for Jay Leno's monologues.

Now, with a special session looming, there's the opportunity for even more silliness.

During the regular session, Leno was handed several nights' worth of material after the Legislature voted to retain the law against cohabitation. And he was blessed with more comedy content with the bikini-waxing legislation....

Back to the cohabitation vote. It didn't divide legislators into camps of those who had high morals and those who didn't. It divided them into two different categories - the brave and the cowardly.

The brave would be those who stuck their political necks on the line by voting to drop the cohabitation law. The cowardly would be those who voted to keep it. They feared that a different vote would paint them as cohabitation supporters and thus immoral.

Power Lunch | Posted 10:00 PM

Big media day: I was in New York on CNBC's Power Lunch talking about financial issues for unmarried couples. Dorian is quoted in a Seattle-PI article, "More moms and dads aren't tying the knot," which is one of the best pieces of I've seen on the issue.

On the way back to Penn Station from CNBC studios, I had the last minute inspiration see if LS and JA were available for our own power lunch, but alas time constraints only allowed for a power talk via cell phone with LS while standing in line at the Amtrak ticket counter. What did we talk about? Blogging. LS has switched to movable type.

G. says blogs are the male equivalent of a diary. If I had movable type, like LS, I'd ask you to post your opinion on this issue. Since I don't, email me instead.

Thanks to Craig Newmark | Posted 10:40 PM

There's no question Craigslist.org is one of the coolest and most useful things on the Internet right now. Thanks to Craig Newmark, I've sold a car, hired an assistant, and found a web designer. Anybody know Craig's relationship status? Craig, if you're living with someone or considering cohabitation, drop me a line and I'll send you a complimentary copy of Unmarried to Each Other.

Does a Ring Bring Happiness, or Vice Versa? | Posted 9:32 AM

Dorian is quoted in an article in today's Washington Post about the marriage and happiness study.

Rebecca Mead on the wedding industry | Posted 11:19 AM

It's always a treat when really talented writers apply their pens to topics in which I'm personally interested. Five months ago Rebecca Mead brilliantly coined the term "unmarriage" in her Talk of the Town piece, and that word has now worked its way into the cultural lexicon (see here, here, and here for a few examples).

This week Mead turns her attention to the wedding industry, and in particular, the business of selling wedding gowns. "You're Getting Married: The Wal-Martization of the Bridal Business" appears in the April 21 & 28 issue of The New Yorker. It isn't available online, but is well worth $3.95 if you're not already a subscriber. She attends a "Winning Bridal Strategies" seminar for bridal boutique owners in Las Vegas, and captures the scene quite well. A few highlights:

Many independent [bridal] retailers have decided that their only hope for survival is to emphasize their specialized knowledge, and to persuade each bride-to-be that dressing herself for her wedding is a project that she is about as well equipped to undertake as she is to remove her own appendix....

Faced with [chain bridal store] competition, independent bridal-store owners have been obliged to be imaginative about new marketing possibilities. In particular, they are looking for was to appeal to the so-called nontraditional bride: divorced brides, older brides, and brides with offspring. To the independent retailer, such customers present a challenge, but one that should be greeted enthusiastically. Vows' tipoffs for recognizing that the nontraditional bride included the fact that "these women won't change their wedding dates to accommodate dress orders," and that they are dangerously apt to "forget the wedding and prepare for marriage."

As I write here, the wedding industry provides a fascinating glimpse into the intersection of a capitalist economy and marriage. While unquestionably pro-marriage, the industry also poses some challenges to more traditional marriage advocates. As weddings become more expensive, they also become less attainable -- something a couple is likely to wait to save up enough money to "do it right." Because growing numbers of couples can't yet afford the wedding, they are less likely to see a need for a liscense in the meantime.

What the American Law Institute report actually says | Posted 11:19 PM

Case for Marriage author Maggie Gallagher disses the American Law Institute's Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution in her column. Yet she doesn't have her facts right, as Dorian details:

In order to be considered eligible for any consideration at the end of a relationship based on the ALI's recommendations, a couple must have "shared a primary residence." The recommendations even say (p. 919):

"The residence must be the primary abode of both parties. The purpose [of this requirement] is to exclude casual and occasional relationships, as well as extramarital relationships conducted by married persons who continue to reside with a spouse."

They go on to give this hypothetical example (p. 920), which is remarkably similar to the one Maggie describes:

"Ronald, a successful artist, is married to Minnie, with whome he has three grown children. Ten years ago, Ronald began an intimate relationship with Carlotta, for whom he purchased an apartment that she occupies as her primary residence. Ronald resides with Minnie, and visits Carlotta several times a week. Carlotta and Ronald are not domestic partners [and therefore not eligible for consideration using the guidelines of the Principles of Family Dissolution] because they do not share a primary residence."

In order to be a considered de facto parent, someone must (p. 108):

"(A) regularly perform a majority of the caretaking functions for the child, or (B) regularly perform a share of caretaking functions at least as great as that of the parent with whom the child primarily lived."

In Maggie's scenario, under the ALI recommendations, Kenny would neither have financial obligations toward Jeanette nor be considered a de facto parent to her child.

Fargo Forum: What has changed since 1938? | Posted 10:41 AM

Alternatives to Marriage Project board member Sarah Wright's op-ed appears in today's Fargo Forum in response to the North Dakota's failure to repeal its anti-cohabitation law.

PA High Court Hears Cohabitation Alimony Case | Posted 10:32 AM

Joann Loviglio of the Associated Press reports from Philadelphia:

The state Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday over whether a man can stop paying alimony to his ex-wife because she's living with another woman.

Anthony Kripp is appealing a lower-court ruling that said Pennsylvania case law has consistently regarded cohabitation as involving two members of the opposite sex living together as husband and wife.

Anthony Kripp stopped paying Robin Kripp alimony two years after their 1998 divorce because she had been living with a woman in Kentucky. He contends they had agreed that the $1,000-per-month payments would stop after two years if she were to "cohabitate."

Justice Ronald Castille asked whether the Kripps had defined "cohabitate," saying, "In the 1900s, it meant one thing. In the 2000s, it means something different."

NYC | Posted 10:30 AM

Back from a trip to NYC, which included dinner with JA and the annual conference of the Council on Contemporary Families.

Sound Money | Posted 8:15 PM

Dorian was interviewed on NPR's Sound Money. Listen to it here.

Couple marries after 78 years of cohabitation | Posted 4:11 PM

Reuters reports (thanks to LS for the news tip):

Zyness O'Haver may have suffered from one of the worst cases of cold feet in the history of marriage.

After almost 78 years of living with Sallie Warren, he finally decided to pop the question and the Oklahoma City couple became husband and wife on Wednesday.

O'Haver 95, told reporters, "It was about time I made an honest woman" out of his new wife, who is 94.

With three of their grandchildren on hand, the two were wed in the Oklahoma County Courthouse. The grandchildren pushed for the wedding, saying it was about time the two tied the knot.

An anxious O'Haver jumped the gun during the ceremony however, saying "I sure do," well before Judge D. Fred Doak asked the couple to exchange wedding vows.

In response to the positive answer from her groom-to-be, Warren, dressed in an ivory colored dress, gave O'Haver a premature kiss, normally given after a couple is pronounced man and wife.

Cohabitation still a crime in North Dakota | Posted 7:23 PM

At times I worry that some lawmakers are hopelessly out of touch with the today's world. More frequently than not, my suspicions are confirmed. For at least one North Dakota state senator, keeping cohabitation illegal is simply "a reminder that there is right, and there is wrong."

Wedding Advice | Posted 9:42 PM

Unexpected entertainment: I'm officially listed on cinema.com. Click here for a list of my recent roles on the big screen.

Wedding Advice will be shown at the Black Point Film Festival in the resort town of Lake Geneva, Wisconsin on April 24.

Naked Weddings | Posted 12:29 PM

When I blogged the trendwatch of nude wedding photos, I had no idea the degree of interest in actual nude weddings. Search engines are sending my way a steady stream of people looking for "nude brides" and "nude weddings" and so on. Some further research does pointpoint a definite trend. First, a Salon.com article in 2001:

It won't be difficult to locate the wedding rings this Valentine's Day when eight couples tie the knot in the nude at Jamaica's Runaway Bay. This historic celebration, billed as the world's largest nude wedding, is being hosted by the racy Hedonism III resort -- famous for its four-story transparent water slide that cuts through the middle of a disco.

The Jamaican government, however, is not pleased with the marriage marketing scheme, calling it inappropriate and indecent. Portia Simpson Miller, minister of tourism and sport, released an official statement that said: "This type of activity is not in keeping with our marketing strategy for Jamaica."

Then, a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article from this year, which reports that the number of couples involved has now jumped to 47:

Like any bride-to-be, Sherry Olson has a million details to worry about before her big day. But even though she's getting married in three weeks, one thing she isn't obsessing about is the wedding dress.

In fact, she won't be wearing anything.

Olson and her fiance, Joe Folz, will travel to Jamaica for a Valentine's Day wedding, where the pair from Centuria will join 47 other couples who plan to get hitched without wearing a stitch in what's being billed as the world's largest nude wedding.

All this talk of nude weddings reminds me of the Commentary piece I discussed here. There's no question about it, naked commitment ceremony just doesn't have the same ring to it as naked wedding.

Does one need to go to Jamaica and cause marketing department angst in order to have a nude wedding? Could this this become a trend in New York or a Los Angeles? Personally, I'd put my money on Marin County.

Hamptons Update | Posted 9:05 AM

The domestic partner registry is underway in Southhampton, NY:

Couples wishing to register under the Town of Southampton’s new Domestic Partnership law may do so at the Town Clerk’s office at Town Hall on Hampton Road beginning next Monday.

The Southampton Town Board approved the registry earlier this month to recognize domestic partnerships whose members cannot or choose not to marry as a family unit. Couples may make an official record of their union by completing, signing, and submitting to the Town Clerk a partnership statement.

Yet another reason to love Philly | Posted 9:00 AM

The Philadelphia Business Journal reports:

A group determined to attract young people to Philadelphia is about to make a serious investment in the city's future.

Next month, the Knowledge Industry Partnership will launch a three-year, $8 million advertising-and-marketing campaign to attract college students, engage them while they are here and then keep them here after graduation.

Much of the campaign is built around what the city can offer as a destination for the arts, culture and nightlife. ...

The Museum of Art expanded its live music from Wednesday night to Friday as well. Its Young Friends program holds an annual Winter Gala at the museum, the annual Rodin Party held at the Rodin Museum, private tours of the galleries and monthly "First Friday" happy hours at Old City locations. Young Friends has grown from 200 members four years ago to 400, said museum Marketing Manager Charles Croce. The museum also recently introduced a $75, "duel partnership" membership for unmarried couples. (emphasis added)

Marriage Promotion in Vietnam: Mobile Licensing and Propaganda Campaigns | Posted 9:10 PM

Reuters reports:

HANOI, Vietnam - Communist and conservative Vietnam, alarmed by nearly a million unmarried cohabiting couples, is offering wedding licenses door to door to make it easier for people to tie the knot.

Vietnam, with a population of 80 million, had an estimated 929,319 unmarried couples living together last year, according to a nationwide survey.

So far this year, the ``fast-track'' mobile licensing and propaganda campaigns had persuaded 420,982 couples to get hitched, state media reported.

``Cohabitation before marriage is totally unacceptable now and always will be,'' said Pham Thi Thuy Huong, from the non-government Vietnam Family Planning Association.

Philadelphia | Posted 11:32 AM

Cohabitation Nation earns its first reference on the printed page in the Vows supplement to the Philadelphia City Paper. It seems the city of brotherly love can't stop talking about Unmarried to Each Other. A Philly Metro columnist offers his opinion in yesterday's issue (click on U.S., download 3/26/03 pdf file). Does the Metro find it too much to ask its columnists to actually read the books they criticize, or is simply reading the Philadelphia Inquirer enough?

Where there's smoke there's ire | Posted 11:10 AM

Miss Manners weighs in on Mom's disapproval of the smoking boyfriend:

Oh, Miss Manners is only thinking how little the world changes. The same scene could have taken place 50 years ago, except that your mother would not have dared criticize an adult's smoking, and would have instead poured that emotion into the issue of cohabitation. Whatever upsets her, she should not be invoking that clause about suspending manners in an emergency, which only applies to immediate emergencies. For example, if Greg were to set the house on fire, she could override the rule against shouting orders and scream, "Get out!"

Group Dynamics | Posted 9:36 PM

If successful tandem bicycling is the equivalent of successful cohabitation or successful roommate relations, then this bike surely brings back memories of living in a big house with Dorian and seven other classmates in our senior year of college.

Will we be seeing one of these on the streets of the Lower East Side anytime soon? No doubt the Lightmobile made an appearance in its day.

94-year-old Chinese man seeks cohabitation, says he's not ready for marriage | Posted 11:42 PM

Orange Today reports:

A 94-year-old Chinese man is using a dating agency to find a lover but says he's not ready to get married.

The man, named simply as Mr Zhang by the Nanguo City News, said he doesn't want to be tied down yet.

He is looking for a good-looking, financially stable woman who is less then 60 years old and "willing to turn a blind eye to the law".

It is illegal for unmarried couples to live together in China, although the law is very rarely enforced, reports the South China Morning Post.

The matchmaking company said they had not received many responses to Mr Zhang's advertisement.

Cohabitation leads to marriage most of the time | Posted 11:10 PM

Of all the problems with this anti-cohabitation column, by Mona Charen, there's one in particular worth noting here. Charen writes: "As Kay Hymowitz reports in the March issue of Commentary, only one-sixth of cohabiting couples remain together for three years, and only a tenth for 10 years." Actually, what Hymowitz writes is: "Only a sixth of couples who live together so do for at least three years, and only a tenth for five years."

Catch the difference between "remain together" and "live together"? Charen implies that only one-sixth of the couples are still together after three years, and that the rest have broken up. But to the contrary, sociologists Larry Bumpass and Hsien-Hen Lu, in one of the most cited research articles on cohabitation, report that within five years of living together, about 53 percent of different sex couples convert their cohabitations into marriages. I'd call that "remaining together" for sure.

Hymowitz presumably knows the truth, whereas Charen clearly misses the point. The majority of couples who live together go on to get married, not break up -- but you'd never know that from reading the column.

Study: Marriage won't guarantee happiness | Posted 7:35 PM

One of the mantras of marriage proponents has been that "marriage makes people happier." This new study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology says it might not be so simple. From the United Press International article:

The findings indicate although a person can enjoy a happy boost from marriage, the person tends to return to his or her prior level of happiness, whatever that level might have been before saying "I do," researchers said.

"Married people are happier than these other groups, but they were happy when they were single," Lucas told United Press International. "It's not that everybody who gets married has a big positive change that happens after marriage."

As reported in the March issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, the results also showed marriage or divorce does not have the same implications for everyone. A person who was lonely before marriage can gain much from a marriage, while a happily married person whose spouse dies can lose a great deal, and someone who had been unhappily married and then goes through a divorce might not feel much of a loss.

"These levels of happiness do tend to be steady over time even in the face of change of life circumstances," Lucas added.

Based on the findings, people appear to have a core level of happiness and although that level can fluctuate over time, people typically return to it, he continued. So if a person was grossly unhappy with his or her life prior to marriage, wedding bells are unlikely to alter that person's sense of satisfaction.

Trendwatch: Nude Wedding Photos | Posted 10:31 AM

The Straits Times in Asia reports on the "Bare facts about bridal shots":

IN THEIR wedding album are four steamy shots of the happy couple - naked from the waist up.

Newlyweds Mei and Ming, who declined to give their full names, decided to go bare for their wedding photo shoot last December, and are proud of it.

'The idea was to do something natural and playful, but we didn't want full nudity,' says Mei, a 27-year-old software engineer....

The shoot, which took all of five minutes, was also done tastefully, she says.

Her husband, Ming, 28, a freelance writer, says: 'We'd seen really cheap-looking, provocative shots at bridal shops which looked really sleazy.

'There was this morning-after look in bed and the guy looked like he'd just had a prostitute. We didn't want that.'

Out of 10 photographers Sunday Life! checked with, six say they offer nude wedding photography, but on the quiet. They do not advertise the services and only offer them on request.

Mr Travis Ong, 38, the owner of Utopia Photography, worked on Mei and Ming's nude wedding photos. He says he has had only three similar requests in the last three years.

But Attitude Photography's Eric Er, in his mid-40s, spots a slow but definite trend.

In the last six months, four about-to-be-married couples - all in their late 20s and early 30s - have asked to be photographed in the nude.

"Lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed and cohabit together" | Posted 9:14 AM

An 1805 North Carolina law is cited as a reason not to implement domestic partner benefits:

The nearly 200-year-old state law Durham County evoked to block health benefits to employees’ domestic partners is a "smoke screen" for lack of political will, said critics of the county’s position.

Employees for Domestic Partners Benefits has requested a benefit policy similar to one adopted by the city, which began enrolling city employees’ heterosexual and homosexual domestic partners in its health and dental plans on Jan. 1.

But earlier this week, County Manager Mike Ruffin told employees the county could not follow suit because it is against the law in North Carolina for a man and woman to live together as a couple.

Since the county commissioners swear to uphold state laws, County Attorney Chuck Kitchen has advised them they would be violating their oath of office if they voted for domestic-partner benefits, Ruffin has said.

The 1805 fornication and adultery law reads, "if any man and woman, not being married to each other, shall lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed and cohabit together, they shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor."

According to the Administrative Office of the Courts, eight charges based upon the fornication and adultery law were brought up in North Carolina courts in 2002, resulting in five convictions.

It was not immediately clear Friday which counties the convictions occurred in, or whether the 1805 statute had been the sole basis for conviction.

But for Jo Wyrick, executive director of Equality NC, a gay rights advocacy group, the county is hiding behind an antiquated law to refuse to discuss the real issue, which she believes is discrimination against unmarried same-sex and heterosexual couples.

Alabama considers raising marriage age | Posted 1:05 PM

This page is an amusing collage of information:
There's the brief article about raising the marriage age.
The advertisement for match.com (note that the youngest age for a match is 18, but the oldest is 120).
And, of course, the survey with 87% saying "over 18."
Incidentally, one of the best predictors of divorce is age of first marriage. People who marry in their teens and early twenties are more likely to divorce than those who marry later.

Cohabitation in Delaware | Posted 9:09 PM

State sees more unwed couples, says the News-Journal.

The sin issue | Posted 8:15 PM

After a big media day, the fan mail starts rolling in. Apparently, someone by the name of "GOD" took the time to fill out our stay in touch form:

I DO NOT SEE YOU ADDRESS THE SIN ISSUE, LIKE SEX OUTSIDE MARRIAGE.
SETTING A BAD EXAMPLE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE.
FAILURE TO MAKE A COMMITMENT.
NOT FACING YOUR OWN ETERNAL LIFE.
TRY READING MY INSTRUCTIONS FOR LIFE: ALSO KNOWN AS "BIBLE"!
IT IS NEVER TO LATE TO TURN TO ME, THROUGH MY SON, JESUS CHRIST.

Actually, we do address the the "sin issue" in third chapter of Unmarried to Each Other. As one minister we quoted said so eloquently, "What makes a relationship holy... is how the two individuals within the relationship honor each other and themselves with their actions and words. Honesty, trust, constancy through difficult and easy times, and giving mutual support are far more the landmarks to commitment, love and intimacy than whether or not a union has religious or legal sanction."

Top ten places for cohabitation | Posted 6:19 PM

Another interesting tidbit from today's Census report was a list of the ten places with the highest precentage unmarried partners. Dorian and I calculated a similiar list for Unmarried to Each Other and came up with slightly different findings because we looked at same-sex and different-sex couples combined, and focused on the 50 largest cities, instead of places with more than 100,000 people.

The Census list, from the report:

Different-sex partners:

1. Paterson, NJ
2. Manchester, NH
3. Rochester, NY
4. Sunrise Manor, NV
5. Allentown, PA
6. San Bernardino, CA
7. Spring Valley, NV
8. Harford, CT
9. Lansing, MI
10. Green Bay, WI

Same-sex partners:
1. San Francisco, CA
2. Fort Lauderdale, FL
3. Seattle, WA
4. Oakland, CA
5. Berkeley, CA
6. Atlanta, GA
7. Minnaepolis, MN
8. Washington, DC
9. Long Beach, CA
10. Portland, OR

Here's the Las Vegas Review-Journal's take on the trend.

US Census releases groundbreaking report today | Posted 12:28 AM

Census: Unmarried Couples More Diverse (Associated Press)
More couples live together, roiling debate on family (Christian Science Monitor)

If one of us is gone for the weekend, is it okay to have someone stay over and sleep in our bed? | Posted 10:30 PM

From "Getting Along" at New Mexico State University:

Like all other relationships, getting along with your roommate is going to require patience, good communication and compromise...

ROOMMATE STARTER KIT

We suggest the following as topics of discussion for you and your roommate early in the semester.

Where is my roommate from? ...
How much messiness is too much? What will we do if one of us does not equally share in the responsibility of cleaning the room/bathroom?
When is it okay to have guests of the same sex visit? What about guests of the opposite sex? At what time(s) of the day/night?
If one of us is gone for the weekend, is it okay to have someone stay over and sleep in our bed?
Under what conditions and at what time of the day or night do we each study best?
At what times of the day do we each function best?
How do pressure and stress affect each of us?
How do we each react when we’re “stressed out?”
What about borrowing/using each other’s belongings?
What are our individual needs for privacy?
How will we handle payment on shared items like the refrigerator, toilet paper, and bath soap?
How much sleep do we each need? What can we each sleep through and what keeps us awake?
How will disagreements be handled? How do we each react when we’re angry?
In what ways are we alike? In what ways are we different? How will these similarities and differences impact on our relationship?
Do any of us have a health problem that the others may need to be aware of?
What are our individual thoughts and beliefs concerning the use of alcohol?
What part does religion or personal value systems play in each of our lives and what effect will this have on our living situation?

Patience | Posted 9:54 AM

Back home from a trip to NYC, which included dinner with LS, my blogosphere mentor, and the taping of a segment for ABC. LS says the key to successful blogging is patience. He's right, all good things in life take time; patience makes for successful cohabitation as well.

Pending Approval | Posted 9:53 AM

Days since I placed my pyrad order: 7
Impressions delivered: 0
Status of order: "Pending rad approval."

North Dakota Update | Posted 9:54 AM

The debate over North Dakota's anti-cohabitation law continues.

My Big Fat | Posted 8:51 AM

From the March 2003 issue of Commentary: "For further proof that Americans remain devoted to the ideal of marriage, one can also turn to popular culture... last summer millions of Americans filled movie theaters to make a suprise hit of My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Does anyone think they would have flocked to My Big Fat Greek Commitment Ceremony?"

From the front-page teaser to an article inside yesterday's Wall Street Journal: "My Big Fat Live-In Arrangement: As more people from college grads to grandparents are living together without getting married, they're starting to benefit from an increasing array of perks and protections."

Other uses of my big fat.

Welcome to my big fat blog. Incidentally, my book is bigger and fatter than many people expect it to be. Many people, when handed an actual hard copy of it, remark with honest surprise, "it's so big!"

Cohabitation Nation Enters the Marketplace | Posted 10:05 AM

When signing up for Blogger Pro nearly two months ago, I was offered a coupon for a free pyRad. With the expiration date looming, I decided today it was time to cash in. My "rad" is now "pending approval," but here's an early welcome to the future visitors. In addition to this blog, you might want to check out Unmarried to Each Other: The Essential Guide to Living Together as an Unmarried Couple and the Alternatives to Marriage Project.

'I try to avoid calling him when I'm crying.' | Posted 9:42 AM

Donna Jackel writes movingly in the Democrat and Chronicle about an unmarried couple coping with deployment:

The couple shared the rent and other household expenses. Because they are not married, Bonilla does not receive any military benefits. As is the case with many unmarried military couples, Vega assigned Bonilla power of attorney and gave her access to his bank account so she can make ends meet.

For Bonilla, the worst part of Vega’s absence is the loneliness.

’’I try to avoid calling him when I’m crying,’’ she said. ‘’I have no appetite. I lost 13 pounds the first week he left.’’ Even the couple’s two cats -- Patience and Precious -- stopped eating for a few days.

Will a Panopticon prevent cohabitation at Vanderbilt? | Posted 9:03 AM

Vanderbilt University considers installing cameras at the entrances to dorms:

At the Interhall meeting, however, several voiced their concerns regarding the tapes being used to get students in trouble for violating university alcohol or cohabitation policies.

"We have a lot of other things we could be doing than seeing if someone was spending the night in someone else's dorm," Atwood said.

However, Assistant Vice Chancellor Mark Bandas said that if a tape were pulled due to a reported crime, and a student was seen violating a university policy, action would have to be taken against him.

"When we go back and review the tapes, we see what we see," Bandas said. "If Vanderbilt students are doing something wrong, it will be pursued."

Suggested reading for Vanderbilt students, a favorite from my college days, Foucault's Discipline and Punish:

Hence the major effect of the Panopticon: to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power. So to arrange things that the surveillance is permanent in its effects, even if it is discontinuous in its action; that the perfection of power should tend to render its actual exercise unnecessary; that this architectural apparatus should be a machine for creating and sustaining a power relation independent of the person who exercises it; in short, that the inmates should be caught up in a power situation of which they are themselves the bearers...

Similarly, it does not matter what motive animates him: the curiosity of the indiscreet, the malice of a child, the thirst for knowledge of a philosopher who wishes to visit this museum of human nature, or the perversity of those who take pleasure in spying and punishing. The more numerous those anonymous and temporary observers are, the greater the risk for the inmate of being surprised and the greater his anxious awareness of being observed. The Panopticon is a marvellous machine which, whatever use one may wish to put it to, produces homogeneous effects of power.

In other words, Vanderbilt students must live with the knowledge that video cameras will film them if they enter their significant other's dorm, yet they don't know if the tapes will ever be watched. Yet the possiblity of being caught is something they take that into account every time they consider cohabitation. Suggested alternative: unitcest.

On the front lines in Des Moines | Posted 9:40 PM

The article on legislation in Iowa speaks to lengths opponents of cohabitation will go.

Honorarily British | Posted 9:20 AM

The Times of London article appears to have been reprinted in The Halifax Herald Limited with the headline, "British couple pens book to show how happily unmarried people can be." Honored to be British for a day.

"Welfare reform must be Washington's idea of reality programming" | Posted 9:07 AM

Syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman writes:

Just as we recover from the abject humiliation of "Joe Millionaire," along come our friends from Fox with another variation on the theme.

The new, slightly more democratic offering invites the public to do the matchmaking. Under the banner, "You Watch, You Vote, They Marry," we are asked to pair up five couples. These daring duos will meet for the first time on their engagement day and go off on a journey to marriage "in hopes they have found their one true love."

This show is dubbed, "Married By America." But it is by no means the only, or even the most official way to be married by America this year. In Washington, Congress is ready to turn itself into a hitching post.

On the eve of Valentine's Day, the House passed a bill that would allot $1.5 billion over five years to promote marriage as part of welfare reform. The Senate version would raise the federal dowry another $50 million a year.

If only we can get the Fox News Channel -- otherwise known as the official broadcasting station of the Bush administration -- to sign on, we could have a prime-time show matching poor single mothers on welfare with the men of our dreams. ...

"The significant-other rule" | Posted 9:28 PM

Marcia Chambers of Golf Digest asks "What's a family?":

The bedrock of country club life in America is marriage and the family. It is the unit upon which club policies are built in every area: membership, voting rights, inheritance, access to the golf course. But lifestyles have changed. How couples live today is vastly different than how they lived when country clubs took form more than a hundred years ago.

Twenty years ago, no country club in the nation would give a member's steady girlfriend the same rights as a spouse. These days, some clubs have adopted a policy, known typically as "the significant-other rule," that permits full golf rights, some even permitting a new person to be named on a yearly or less than yearly basis.

But what if the couple is of the same sex? In a lawsuit believed to be the first of its kind in the nation, a gay couple has asserted discriminatory practices at a country club....

To bed but not to wed | Posted 11:45 PM

The Times of London article.

Unmarried In The News | Posted 4:38 PM

The Associated Press reports:

It used to be that love and marriage went together. These days, that's not necessarily the case.

The 2000 U.S. Census found that nearly 5.5 million households, or about one in 20, consisted of unmarried partners. They range from young couples living together before marriage to elderly couples living together for convenience, and about 10 percent are gay couples.

While state and federal laws include many financial protections for traditional couples, such as estate tax exemptions, there are often no such provisions for unmarried couples. That makes it imperative that they take steps to ensure their joint financial security, financial advisers say.

Would you this marry this man? | Posted 7:40 PM

"Sandy Grossman is serious about finding a bride by Valentine's Day, and drives around in a 1959 Cadillac ambulance topped with a billboard advertisement for a bride.

The electric sign promises 'Free Sports Car With Marriage' and lists his e-mail address, photo and vital stats: "43, 5'11, 175 pounds and NEVER MARRIED.'"

Gawker Party Update | Posted 7:33 PM

LS recounts his conversation with RM.

Will cohabitation bring the downfall of Yale? | Posted 8:52 PM

The nation's oldest collegiate daily editorializes about cohabitation, and one alum warns that nothing less than the school's reputation is at stake:

I care as much about Yale as anyone. And I know that this policy appeals to many students. And I know these students care about Yale as much as I do. But as a mother, a liberal, and an alum I have to voice a concern that I think should be heard... Please don't take Yale out of the mainstream by changing this policy - one word: dads. As backward as they may be, most dads don't want their daughters shacking up with university approval. I know it's going to happen, but let's not advertise it. It's hard enough to send your daughter off to school at seventeen, let alone send her off to co-habitate with some guy she'll break up with and then have to endure his bringing other women home to their suite. In short, Yale will lose good kids because of this policy, a policy which symbolically hurts Yale while pragmatically changing nothing - if some students insist on sharing a lease (rather than just sleeping together like we did), they are free to move off campus.

In the larger sense, this liberalization of the housing policy will indeed make Yale more like Oberlin, Brandies, and Swarthmore. Is this really what we want? These schools are way out in left field and are basically meaningless in the national landscape - degrees from these schools are worthless compared to Yale's. And it's because they attract the kind of people who approve of policies like this - people who do not succeed in the real world. Let's all do what's best for Yale's reputation, and thus our degrees, and thus what's best for us, and keep the policy we have.

[To read other comments, scroll to the bottom of the editorial and click on "discuss this article."]

Dating In America, continued | Posted 12:03 PM

G. writes with update on her date last night:

OK, so I am officially "in like", and totally laughing at myself for not being able to tell if our post-show coffee date was a success or not because we didn't kiss or anything. Laughing at myself because that is quite normal behavior -- to not kiss -- the first time a man and woman meet. Oh yeah. I forgot.

And now I am in the girl position of ihopehecalls. Eeek...I'm going to bed now...

The purpose of dating is to have fun. | Posted 10:14 AM

Voice of America, which is funded by U.S. government and broadcast worldwide, chose dating in America as a topic for a pre-Valentine's Day feature:

There are a number of ways to find someone to date. Some people meet at work. Others meet by chance in a public place. Still others visit places where other single people go. Or they can use businesses that help organize dates. Many men and women find dates through services they find on the Internet computer system.

The purpose of dating is to have fun. Sometimes people who date develop a close relationship. Some people decide to live together, yet remain unmarried. Others decide to get married.

In the past, young people in America usually lived with their parents until they got married. Today, some still do. Yet most young people live a more independent life. They have a job. They travel. They rent or own their own apartment or house. They wait longer to get married. While waiting, they date....

Often a friend will plan a meeting between two unmarried people who do not know each other. The friend thinks the two people will like each other. This is called a “blind date.” The people involved are not blind. They just have never seen each other. However, most unmarried people have to find their own dates. Many go to public eating, drinking or dancing places. Every city in America has them. Some places are popular with young people. Others are for older people....

When single people finally get together, what do they do on a date? People of all ages like to do many of the same things. They go to restaurants or night clubs. They go to movies, museums and concerts. They watch sporting events, or play sports themselves.

Dating in America can be fun. It is also a serious business. Why? One woman gave this answer: "People are always looking for the perfect relationship," she says. "No matter how old they are, they are always looking for this thing called 'love'. And love is sometimes hard to find."