Need to know
By the age of 29, the actress and activist Emma Watson had not only starred in one of the world’s most lucrative film franchises, she’d been named a UN Women Goodwill Ambassador, launched the organisation’s campaign HeForShe, and co-founded the Time’s Up UK charity to support victims of sexual harassment. And yet it was Watson’s marital status that most interested the world’s journalists, with numerous articles obsessing over her relationships (or lack thereof).
Watson’s treatment is revealing of society’s wider attitude toward single people. In 2019, she told Vogue that this ‘subliminal messaging’ was so strong that it had seeped into her psyche causing her to feel enormous anxiety about approaching 30 without a partner or a family. She’d only recently learned to overcome those doubts, she told the magazine, and see the merits in being single, which she described as being ‘self-partnered’. She didn’t expect her comment to be controversial, she added later; she just wanted to have new language to talk about the experience of her romantic independence, without the connotations that are attached to being ‘single’.
The resulting ridicule couldn’t have proven Watson’s point more completely. ‘Self-partnering means you can’t get a bloke, right?’ the TV personality Piers Morgan asked his co-presenter, Susanna Reid, on Good Morning Britain, upon hearing the news. ‘Why do we have to put a positive spin?’ he continued. ‘Put negative spins on negatives.’ He doesn’t seem to have considered the possibility that for many people, there need be no ‘spin’: being single can be a genuinely joyous experience.
Morgan is hardly alone in these misperceptions. Our culture is steeped in the idea that long-term romantic relationships are the central ingredient of a happy life. Whether you turn on the radio, fire up Netflix or enter a bookshop, you’ll be confronted with tales of loves lost and loves found – as if our lives must necessarily revolve around a significant other. For a while, even the scientific evidence appeared to support this conclusion. Surveys had shown that married people, in particular, enjoy greater life satisfaction, health and longevity than the rest of the population. Little wonder that so many people have feared being alone.
The reality, however, is more nuanced. Many of the surveys extolling the benefits of marriage had failed to separate the effects of people who were never married from those who’d been divorced or widowed. These are two incredibly stressful events that are bound to have an influence on people’s wellbeing. When those complications are taken into account and the data are divided accordingly, one study found that people who never married show similar levels of happiness to those who were currently married. Moreover, generally speaking, when you chart someone’s happiness over the lifetime, marriage offers only a temporary rise – lasting about two years after the wedding – before it falls back to the baseline. For the average person, marriage won’t be the ‘happily ever after’ that we’ve been led to believe.
Marriage is, admittedly, a rather antiquated way of defining a long-term committed relationship. (Unfortunately, the surveys mentioned above didn’t offer separate data for cohabiting couples.) But the differences remain small when you compare singles with those in any kind of romantic relationship – cohabiting, long-distance, etc. In one survey from 2008, ‘partnered’ people scored 5.78 on an 8-point scale of life satisfaction, while ‘single’ people scored 5.7 – a tiny difference that was considered to be not statistically significant.
This is not to diminish the importance of romance for those who are in love with the idea of being in love, but simply to point out that there are many paths to happiness. And contrary to many people’s assumptions (including Morgan’s), a large number of people reach that destination by flying solo.
‘Not having a romantic partner at the centre of our lives does not limit our lives, it throws the doors wide open,’ Bella DePaulo, a social scientist affiliated with the University of California, Santa Barbara and author of the book Singled Out (2004), told me. ‘Now, instead of prioritising one person by default, we can decide for ourselves who really matters to us, and live accordingly.’
DePaulo uses the term ‘single at heart’ to describe the people who will find their greatest fulfilment and meaning without a romantic partner. ‘The touchstone for people who are single at heart is authenticity,’ she told me. ‘That means that the usual paradigms will not always prevail. Who knows what we will do with our lives once we truly feel free to pursue what is meaningful to us rather than what is socially prescribed.’ For many people, certain activities, such as travelling, political campaigning or artistic creation could provide all the passion of a romantic relationship.
Perhaps you’re single at heart yourself. (You can find out if your attitudes align with DePaulo’s definition of the term by taking her survey here.) Or perhaps you suspect that your single status will be temporary but wish to embrace the experience while it lasts. Maybe – like Renée Zellweger in Down with Love (2003) – you wish to enjoy sex ‘à la carte’ without any of the emotional trappings of a relationship. Or maybe you choose to forgo physical intimacy entirely. There are countless bestselling guides to heteronormative relationships – John Gray’s pseudoscientific Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus (1992) is reported to have sold at least 15 million copies – but there’s comparatively little advice on the best ways for singles to cultivate the perfect self-partnership. Based on my review of the burgeoning scientific study of singlehood and interviews with relevant experts, this Guide aims to redress the balance. Whatever your circumstances and personal decisions, what follows are some practical steps to help you navigate your way through single life’s challenges and to capitalise on its many advantages.