The demographer explained how “informal marriage” harms society

It is men who, in most cases, are the initiators of “to live for a start without a stamp.” It is they who want everyone, and above all their companion, to convince that “some kind of stupid stamp” does not affect the “strength of their feelings” in any way. And the stamp, on the contrary, can destroy everything …

“I have been living with my boyfriend for three years now, and he is in no hurry to get to the registry office,” says 25-year-old Anastasia from St. Petersburg. – Although my relatives express dissatisfaction with this situation and are looking forward to our wedding! I think that some men are delaying the wedding, because it is more convenient for them to live without painting. For painting, as my boyfriend says, you need a good reason: a mortgage or pregnancy. He also told me that he was afraid that after formalizing the relationship he would lose his freedom …

But the opinion of the opposite side, the girl’s boyfriend:

– An official marriage is needed to legitimize relations. It makes sense, if only the relationship goes to a new level, – he voiced his position. – That is, by a new level, I mean, firstly, the very word “Seven I” (this is when there are children), and, secondly, the planning of any joint acquisitions (movable and immovable property). In the meantime, we live with my girlfriend for our pleasure …

However, our interlocutor, Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Institute of Demography, Migration and Regional Development, Yuri Krupnov, opposes such a position. He calls the cohabitation of a man and a woman “a stone thrown into the fragile institution of the family.” “Yes, cobblestone! But as a weapon not of the proletariat, but of that global subject who, speaking out against marriage, wants the extinction of our country and all of humanity.”

First of all, the demographer pointed out the confusion in terminology. Recall that a civil marriage is precisely the union of a man and a woman registered by the state. But everyone is used to talking like that about the couple’s life together without painting. Therefore, experts urge to speak in such cases of “cohabitation”, this is a more accurate term.

Yuri Krupnov is convinced that cohabitation without a registry office stamp is a bomb under the institution of the family. And here’s how he explains it:

– Official marriage is a prerequisite for creating a full-fledged family. Or, if a person is churched and considers himself somehow separated from the state, then the union must be legalized by the church. An unregistered cohabitation cannot be called a marriage, neither “civil”, nor any other. This is such a Jesuit trick to “hack” the institution of the family, this is a substitution of concepts …

Couples who do not register relationships, according to the demographer, do not plan to live together for a long time, especially for the rest of their lives. How things will work out for the couple is another question. But the beginning of a family is marriage.

“This is the determination of people to make their relationship public, not secretive,” the expert continues. – No one marries “for three years”, after all, they marry forever.

– What is the disadvantage of cohabitation without painting?

– The tragedy of pseudo-marriage, also called “civil”, is that, in fact, it is “loneliness together.” People simply do not trust each other, no matter what they say at the same time. Even if a child is born in such a union, tomorrow they will scatter, and that’s all …

– But after all, many couples, after a woman becomes pregnant, just go to the registry office … That is, does this harm demography?

– Statistics is a stubborn thing: 70% more children are born in official marriages, even with the low birth rate that we are seeing today. A woman who lives with a man without formalizing a relationship cannot be 100% sure of her partner, and therefore postpones the birth of a child. All reasonable people understand that such relationships, no matter what those who live outside of marriage may say, are not reliable.

– More often men do not want to go to the registry office …

– The question is primarily in the uncertainty of a man in himself and his woman. They come up with a lot of different excuses so as not to sign – about the “trial marriage”, about the “test of feelings by time.” All their fantasies cannot be counted.

Today, I think there are two problems with men. The first is infantilism and irresponsibility. And the second trouble is that a married man finds himself in an unequal legal position with a woman. All government decrees, for example, speak of supporting motherhood and childhood. “Fatherhood” is nowhere to be found. Initially, we had “maternity capital”, only now they write “family capital” in brackets. Women-mothers, of course, are justifiably exalted in our country, but the role of fathers is belittled. And this should not be. Only 5-7% of children remain with their fathers after a divorce. Hunting for alimony has become a truly national idea.

On the other hand, masculinity (the totality of bodily, mental and behavioral characteristics considered as male. – Auth.) We have seriously fallen in the last half century. Along with masculinity, the responsibility of men and their willingness to become the backbone of the family also decreased. This also affects the fact that the male sex is in no hurry to formalize relationships, not wanting to harness themselves into unequal legal formats. The state in this regard is “asleep”, does not rectify the situation in any way, that is, it is also its fault that extramarital cohabitation exists.

– When did “pseudo-marriage” without painting become widespread?

– In our country, this is the late Soviet period, and then the trend began to accelerate on the rise. This was due to the rapid disintegration of the traditional multi-generational family. At the beginning of the last century, we had a predominance of peasant families (75%). And by the 70s, everything turned upside down and became 25%. Living conditions have changed dramatically: social “atomization” has taken place, people began to live in apartment buildings like social atoms … And, of course, the growth of consumerism in society played its role, when the official family is simply of little interest to retail chains and banks (they do not need a family, and “atomized” consumer). Cohabitation not only undermines the institution of the family and, thus, society and the country, but also devalues ​​love and initially puts children in an extremely uncertain position – it is no coincidence that they were directly called “illegitimate” before. Therefore, no matter how paradoxical it may sound, it is time to declare a fight for marriage in the country.