Why are more people living alone?

[RB]

RB, read a Jane Austen novel. Imagine life in England in the 19th century.

Living alone is a costly luxury. Heck, a bed is a luxury.

When you are poor anything material is a luxury.

Jane Austen kept most of her female characters starved of affection, austere, dark, private, restrain and always escaping whether it is from relationships, or the need for solitude. However, it was expected that a man take care of the lady and the men they kept to their duty - like took a woman. It would be a difficult life if you are an unmarried lady as in an "old maid" and would have to resort to live with protectors. Whether you are in love or not you in Austen’s time it is dutiful to get married. So, in a sense these folks did not live alone esp. women had a support system. Jane Austen however was never married?

In these contemporary times everything is different. It is acceptable for people never get married, or to live together without commitment, or to get married later in life because of careers and the building of riches, or to openly live other lifestyles etc. Plus now women do not need men as their financial security, and comfort blanket - means a women and men can live separate lives so that they can gain the independence they crave from their parents even if they encounter hardships. Boils down to a price you pay for wanting to be left alone.

This living alone business points to a decay in society in my view. I have many friends that are now older with many regrets of not having children or a longer term partner - as in husband and wife with commitment. The single life is later called the lonely life.

[Guest American Woman]

Judge Judy has roommates bringing cases against each other all the time. Her advice: live in a closet if that's all you can afford on your own, because living in your own in a small space beats living with roommates in a large space. I fail to see why living alone is any sort of "decay in society." One can have close relationships - in separate housing. One need not have the same address to be close - and plenty of people who have the same address don't share anything but the address (ie: there's no closeness at all). I see people being able to make it on their own - as opposed to having to be in a relationship or live with others in order to make it financially - as progress in society. What's better than having choices?

[jacee]

Ya I think the erosion and demise of society idea is way overblown.

It's pretty clear what's happening:

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11441/c-g/c-g004-eng.htm

We-stayed-together-til-the-kids-were-grown ...

Now he's got another wife, and she's going on cruises!

Men remarry. Women don't.

No problem there!

Edited February 6, 2013 by jacee

[August1991]

Jane Austen kept most of her female characters starved of affection, austere, dark, private, restrain and always escaping whether it is from relationships, or the need for solitude.

Jane Austen described a world of educated, poor people. Their clothes were clean. Charles Dickens and Victor Hugo described a world of dirty, poor people.

In the world of Dickens, Hugo or Austen, no one had access to a cellphone, or could take penicillin. Nowadays, RB, even poor women in Africa know about mobile phones, and have heard about antibiotics.

In Austen's time, people lived together because they had no choice. Nowadays, people can choose to live apart - but some choose freely to live together.

The true measure of wealth is the freedom to choose.

This living alone business points to a decay in society in my view. I have many friends that are now older with many regrets of not having children or a longer term partner - as in husband and wife with commitment. The single life is later called the lonely life.

If individuals choose to live alone, is that wrong?

Would you forbid penicillin/cell phones because they open people's choices?

Edited February 6, 2013 by August1991