Verified by 
Key points
- Historically, gender differences in living single were rooted in the roles assigned to men and women in traditional marriages.
- Employers prefer to interview married men over single men, and to want to pay the married men more.
- Many inequities commonly identified as sexism are, in fact, rooted at least as deeply in singlism.
Do men and women experience singlism differently? In this guest post, Craig Wynne and Joan DelFattore discuss how stereotypes of single people and biases against them are different for single women and single men. Joan describes ways that women, but not men, are undermined by singlism, and Craig points to the stereotyping, stigmatizing, and disadvantages that undercut single men more than single women.
When "Woman" Means "Wife" and "Mother"
By Joan DelFattore
Historically, gender differences in living single were rooted in the roles assigned to men and women in traditional marriages. Men, whose principal responsibility was to earn money, had access to professional training, independent travel, and financial credit. Even men who never married retained those opportunities, together with the ability to rent private lodgings.
For a woman, being chosen by a man as a homemaker and mother was her presumed reason for existence. That goal determined how she dressed, spoke, and behaved; the skills she was (or was not) allowed to learn, and even the terms on which she was permitted to leave the house. Such limitations materially—and intentionally—impeded single women from living independently.
By the mid-twentieth century, many legal and institutional restrictions on women had been lifted, even if social pressures remained. In much of the world, women could, for instance, receive professional training, travel alone, work outside the home, and live alone without supervision. And yet, one of the present authors, Joan, graduated from college years before single women in the U.S. had a legal right to contraception (1972) or to credit cards, mortgages, and business loans (1974)—all of which had been readily available to single men. Joan can also remember reading want ads that openly listed two salaries for the same job: higher for men (presumably supporting families), and lower for women (whose proper place was to be supported). The resulting pay gap, which clearly affects the ability to live independently, has yet to be resolved.
The entanglement of women with expectations of domesticity is exacerbated when lawmakers frame public policy in terms of traditional family arrangements rather than in terms of individuals. As an example, Congress's response to the COVID-19 pandemic was originally called simply the Coronavirus Response Act, but by the time it came to the floor, it had become the Families First Coronavirus Response Act even though family status had nothing to do with most of its provisions. Similarly, political candidates, regardless of gender, passionately address issues important to wives and mothers while ignoring the existence of women outside those categories.
Perhaps the most striking evidence that women are still defined in terms of marriage is the continuing use of the honorifics "Mrs." and "Miss." It was not until 1986 that the New York Times accepted the marriage-neutral term "Ms."—and even then, only if a woman's marital status was unknown, or if she explicitly asked to be called "Ms." Even today, women in the Facebook group Community of Single People often report that other people seem reluctant to call them "Ms." (or Doctor, or Professor). Maybe some of those recalcitrants think that addressing a woman as if she is married is a compliment. By contrast, the use of the marriage-neutral term "Mr." for any adult male is automatic and unquestioned. In and of itself, the ongoing struggle over identifying women without reference to marital status illustrates the tenacity of disparate gender expectations.
Without a doubt, living single today is easier than it was 50 years ago. But because equality for women, in general, is so recent and so incomplete, the long shadow of traditional feminine roles continues to loom over women who dare to claim a degree of autonomy and a range of options formerly considered appropriate only for men.
When "Single Man" Means "Mama's Boy," "Slob," or "Stud"
By Craig Wynne
As Joan wrote, living single is difficult for women, and much of the singles' empowerment literature is geared toward women. It makes sense, because oftentimes, women’s desires are subjugated in favor of a male partner. But men face singlism in ways that women do not.
I wrote in my book, How to be a Happy Bachelor, about how singlism and toxic masculinity are often intertwined. Research shows that toxic masculinity is harmful to men, as it can be detrimental to their physical and mental health. Cis hetero men are seen as being “less than masculine” if they don’t have a woman by their side. If they’re not married, they’re assumed to be engaging in casual sex, and if they’re not, then they are regarded as “less than masculine,” which is not meant as a compliment.
Other assumptions and stereotypes abound. As Joan mentioned, women are often expected to be the homemakers, who are good at all those domestic matters. Conversely, single men are assumed to be slovenly and sloppy “Mama’s boys,” completely incompetent in all household tasks. Popular media images of the single man show empty pizza boxes and dirty dishes piled up in the sink as emblematic of the bachelor lifestyle.
Another stereotype is of the playboy or “player.” It’s assumed that when a man is not in a monogamous relationship, he is out “playing the field,” making the rounds at the clubs and sleeping with as many women as possible. Many single men are the envy of their married male friends, who often live vicariously through their single friends, who they see as constantly “hooking up.” Conversely, in some hetero circles, it is assumed that men are gay or feminine if they are not engaging in these activities.
Even more sadly, stereotypes extend into the workplace. For example, a recent study showed that employers prefer to interview married men over single men, and to want to pay the married men more, even when the single and married candidates have the same demographic characteristics and the same qualifications. I know of no studies documenting the same thing for women, that married women are interviewed more often and paid more than single women with the same qualifications. As Joan noted, women generally (averaged across single women and married women) are paid less than men, but when single people are compared to married people, it is the men who have been shown to be disadvantaged.
While women face a great deal of stigma around being single, they still fare better than men when it comes to living single and living alone. One reason could be that women are more apt to create social networks than men are. Men who marry women tend to depend on their wives for their social needs; if and when a marriage ends, they are often at a loss as to how to meet those needs themselves. However, as more people are staying single and living alone, and even those people who do marry are getting to it later in life, men are likely to benefit. During their single years, they will learn to do the kinds of things that previous generations of men expected their wives to cover.
No matter what gender a person checks on forms, singlism, matrimania, and martial status discrimination affects people who identify as single. As rates of marriage continue to decrease, and more people discover other fulfilling ways of living, including singlehood, it will become even more important to understand and address these issues.
Closing Thoughts
By Joan DelFattore and Craig Wynne
To be clear, these reflections are not meant to foment a debate about who suffers more from singlism: men or women. It is not a contest or a team sport. We do not want to play Oppression Olympics. Rather, the aim is to stimulate an open-ended conversation about the impact of traditional gender expectations on the experience of living single. Moreover, because space is limited—as is our own expertise—this essay draws on dominant aspects of U.S. society that may or may not apply to other cultures or to historically marginalized sub-cultures within the U.S. As the emerging discipline of singles studies grows, far more varied perspectives need, and deserve, to be explored with respect to the impact of gender expectations on what it means to live single.
In exploring the nexus between gender and marital status, this essay illustrates that many inequities commonly identified as sexism are, in fact, rooted at least as deeply in singlism. Indeed, much of what is written by scholars in the well-established field of gender studies would fit just as well under the heading of singles studies, since it pertains to inequities where the underlying cause is neither gender alone nor marital status alone, but the interplay and intersection of the two. We cannot effectively seek gender equality without addressing the disproportionate identification of women with marriage and domesticity. Conversely, we cannot fully resolve the social, financial, and political inequities of singlism without acknowledging the impact of gender stereotypes on both men and women. It cannot be one or the other. It must be both.
About the Authors
Craig Wynne is a professor of English at the University of the District of Columbia. He has written several articles on singlehood that have appeared in Psychology Today, Spark: a 4C4 Equality Journal, Revista Feminismos, Dialogue, and Writer's Digest. He also published a book, How to be a Happy Bachelor.
Joan DelFattore is a professor emerita at the University of Delaware. Her articles about living single in a couples-oriented culture have appeared in Psychology Today, the New England Journal of Medicine, the Washington Post, and the Philadelphia Inquirer, among many others.
Facebook image: New Africa/Shutterstock
