On Not Living with a Partner: Unpicking Coupledom and Cohabitation

Abstract

The contemporary normative model of sexual/ love relationships assumes a teleology in which some time after getting together two people instantiate their state of coupledom by moving in together. As a consequence, those who do not cohabit with a partner are generally thought not to be coupled. Social researchers have largely shared this understanding of intimate relationships, operating with a tripartite model of relationships in which people are single, cohabiting or married. This paper seeks to unpick the assumed contiguity of coupledom and cohabitation, and to deconstruct the category of ‘single’. It draws on data from an intensive investigation of the relationship experiences, practices and values of people who are not living with a partner. It starts with a discussion of the prevalence of not living with a partner, offering a commentary on recent demographic data and quantitative research. It then sets out the methodology used in research, and describes the sample, before exploring the diverse practices of partnership and orientations towards (non) cohabitation of those interviewees who were in non-residential couple relationships. Three main orientations are identified amongst the partnered (living apart together, or LAT) interviewees: living apart regretfully; living apart gladly and living apart undecidedly. The individual and relational contexts of these orientations are then discussed.

Families as roommates: Changes in U.S. household size from 1850 to 2000

“…1 On the other hand, there are also happily married couples who choose to live apart because they can afford to do so. Sociological and demographic research has studied the rise of living apart together (LAT) relationships-couples who identify their relationships as stable but choose not to live together (Roseneil (2006), Strohm, Seltzer, Cochran, and Mays (2009)). …”

Not truly partnerless: Non-residential partnerships and retreat from marriage in Spain

“…However, the definition of singleness is problematic because of its conflation of partnership and co-residence (Roseneil 2006). Since not sharing the same living quarters does not mean not having a partner, the trend toward fewer and later marriages does not necessarily imply an increase in unpartnered persons.…”

Living Apart Together (LAT) and Law

“…This analysis sheds some light on whether LAT is seen as a transitional state leading to cohabitation or an alternative to cohabitation. In order to categorize our interviewees on grounds of their relationship expectations, we draw upon the LAT typologies of Levin (2004) and Roseneil (2006) (Table 1).…”

“…(Jolanda, 71 years old, divorced, 27 years LAT) Permanent LAT. This group of 'willing' LAT individuals (De Jong Gierveld, 2004a;Levin, 2004;Roseneil, 2006) consists of two subgroups of which the first experienced the end of their previous marriage due to the death of their partner. These widowed men and women have no intention of investing in a joint life and regard their relationship as companionship rather than real partnership.…”