Common-law relationships

A few days ago, talking to a friend, the Canadian Census came up because a new statistic was released. He suggested that I write about it. He talked me into giving it a read and seeing whether it was the case that could crack me out of my writing limbo.

At first glance, it wasn't all that interesting, to be honest. It said that more and more couples are now living in a common-law relationship: married-like couples who are not, officially and/or legally, married.

It certified that more than half the population in Canada is in a couple, that couples, as the population itself, are getting older, and that young adult like it better to share a bit of life together before considering tying the knot. Nothing special, nothing revolutionary, nothing that shook me out of the block.

But whilst I was reading and trying to figure out how that statistics could be relevant for me and the people who want to read what I have to say, a question rose: "are common-law relationships the result of structural problems? Or are they something else altogether?"

Bear with me.

Are systemic issues like the ageing population, the lack of a young workforce, the difficulties of maintaining the welfare state, the systemic racism that shatters our society's possibility of true stability, and true justice, and the ever-clear climate crisis that affects our productive system the cause for people to choose not a marital relationship?

In a way, yes! When stability is lacking, when problems upon problems show up it is easier (and less scary) to "remain free" of yet another contract. Marriage can feel restricting for some. Even if for others can be the most liberating thing there is.

More than 20% of Canadians feel that is not the case. Or at least, it is not for now. Marriage is not a suitable option for them, for whatever reason. So, they opted for common-law relationships.

And I think that when uncertainty kicks in, perhaps it is reassuring to know that you are not obliged to be married, to be legally recognized as a partner of someone. It's as if you have a bit more freedom and a bit more control over a life that now seems uncontrollable.

One cannot solve by oneself all the structural, difficult, worldwide issues, but one can choose to get married or not. One can choose that it doesn't matter to tie the knot in order to be in a successful relationship. One can choose to choose, at least in those things that are not an obligation. It's not, perhaps, something that gives tangible or greater benefits over marriage, but it helps psychologically.

Moreover, if one doesn't feel financially stable, or maybe one's scared about the future, it feels safer to choose a path that feels less intimidating, more practical, and easier in some way.

Common-law relationships could be the natural consequence and solution of systemic problems that individuals, being unable to control and solve, decide to take.

Or, as I said before, it could be something else altogether.

Something that statistics read well is the fact that society changes. People over time mutate and trace new paths that differ from the old, the traditional, and the ever-has-been.

Common-law relationships and their surge could mean that the institute of matrimony lost its grip in favor of something more fluid, less regulated, new.

And of course, of course, these changes can come from problems and struggles, and economic shifts, and war, and climate, and whatever. In fact, they often are.

Societies adapt themselves and cope with things and while they do so, they begin a slow process of changing habits, reforming the norms, cancel customs. It's not always about the fastest response to something. Common-law relationships could be a fast response to issues on one hand, or it could be a simple shift that is starting to happen and will become the norm over time.

I think it's the latter.

I don't think people are simply scared, or just uncertain, or merely coping.

I think people are changing. Slowly, but perhaps, deeply.

People, Canadians, are starting to challenge the norm and create something new, a new paradigm.

I believe this. People do change. People change societies. People make more inclusive, better customs. With time.

And this, this is what shook me from my limbo. This is the one question that rose and that kindled the will to speak up again. To use my words and be a voice.

The strong and firm belief that, since people change, since things change, it is way better to be an active part of that process.

Those statics didn't inspire me because they were ground-breaking. People did.

The will to believe, once again, that change arrives in many forms.

That new paths can be better for all.?