Living Together.

Popularity is an understatement when it comes to the trend of living together.

According to Rutgers University’s “The State of Our Unions 2009” study, living together is on the rise nationally. In 1960, there were 439,000 couples living together. This statistic shot up to 3.82 million couples cohabitating by 2000, and increased even more in 2007 with a staggering final count of 6.445 million couples. That is an increase of 6 million couples over the course of four decades.

But that isn’t the case in all parts of the nation. Eight months out of the year, I live in the Dutch bubble town of Sioux Center, a place where living together is synonymous with “living in sin.” Few people do it, and the community will most likely turn a blind eye to the “immoral” behavior of those who do.

It is the conventional family lifestyle that comes first here, and that flows into the lives of Dordt students (of whom 10 per cent are married). The “senior year scramble” does not lead to cohabitation, by any means. These Dutchies are in it for the ring and for the long haul, ‘til death do they part.

I see the opposite in my hometown of Godfrey. When my high school friends move in with their boyfriends, I am no longer shocked. Most people my age currently live with or have lived with other people. One friend moved several states away to be with her boyfriend. Another lived with her boyfriend because she thought that it would save on rent.

“I’m too young to get married!” one friend said. “I’m only eighteen. I don’t want to get tied down yet.”

Besides that, Hollywood romanticizes it. I watched “License to Wed” while I was in Florida and got a dose of what Hollywood thinks of as the progression of a relationship. Boy meets girl in a casual location—in this case, a coffee shop. Boy and girl sleep together after the third or fourth date, and then he asks her to move in with him. Eventually—after they give it a go and see that things might work out—he proposes to marry her. And then they all live happily ever after.

But, as the movie seemingly advocates, wouldn’t it be better to stop at the second step and not marry at all? She’s already washing his windows, and he’s already doing the taxes. Why not keep playing house until they tire of one another and can call it quits without anyone getting too hurt? No lawsuits, no nasty child custody battles. It’s a much cleaner cut when there’s no marriage involved.

And this is where I get nervous.

I’ve never been that girl who has her wedding completely finalized and is now on a rampage for the groom. The most planning I’ve done for my wedding is consider having my two best friends and my two sisters as my bridesmaids; that’s it.

But I do want to get married someday; I want to have a family. I want to have a fight with my husband and know that, no matter what the outcome, he’s in it for the long haul.

I think that the growing trend of living together runs the risk of inhibiting many from having this classic family structure. Divorce may plague 50 per cent of marriages today, but does that mean that marriage should be written off altogether? It may seem old-fashioned, but I think that marriage still has a place in this world. Commitment is the greatest gift that one individual can give to another, and marriage is a sign of that.

Someday I might be faced with the prospect of moving in with a boyfriend, and I won’t do it. Not that it doesn’t work for other people—I just know that it wouldn’t work for me. I just don’t think I could move in with someone and be blissfully happy. Perhaps I’ll become an old maid because I’m not willing to compromise on this fact, but that’s a risk I’m willing to take right now.

I’ll commit once that wedding band is weighing down my left hand. Three years in a town built on traditional convention has taught me that much.