A just-published article claims that people who stay single are headed straight to the grave -- and fast. Faster than people who are currently married.
Among the other perspectives on singlism represented in the book are the personal, political, historical, religious, legal
Time also mentions instability in the section on kids, and it is true that it can be difficult for kids when a parent brings
My question is this: Why should coupled people, but not single people, have greater access to health insurance, employment benefits, or anything else simply because they are coupled?
The Post feature also included a sidebar of tips and resources. Again, Diane Sollee gets her say, and there are two links
Of course, that's not what we hear in the public conversation. But it's official: It's not a marriage penalty, it's a singles penalty.
You may want to skim this list before reading the Washington Post's summary of its story: "Kagan has many achievements, but her world has been relatively narrow."
In his column today, David Brooks writes that, "According to [one study], being married produces a psychic gain equivalent to more than $100,000 a year." What exactly does this mean?
Are you persuaded that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is not gay, and that it should never have mattered anyway? Good, because now we can move on to her next supposed shortcoming.
I have news for Stanley Kurtz: The Case for Marriage was second rate and not worth publishing.
Once upon a time, a reporter for a major magazine declared, in all seriousness, that women should just get married already
I'll highlight some remarkable and conventional-wisdom-defying findings from the report that were published but never headlined.
There's a local television ad that is all about a couple's wedding and their love for each other. Not until the last few