A decade ago, I wrote a post for this Living Single blog titled, “Singlism: What It Is and Is Not, and Why It Should Be in the Dictionary.” The part about the dictionary was fanciful; I didn’t really think it would happen. Only it just did. The word “singlism” has been added to the Cambridge English Dictionary.
What Does Singlism Mean?
For a quick definition of singlism, I typically use something like:
Singlism is the stereotyping and stigmatizing of people who are single, and discrimination against them.
The first time I used the word singlism in a published paper was in an article I wrote with Wendy Morris, "Singles in society and in science." It was the target article in the journal Psychological Inquiry in 2005, in a special issue featuring 10 commentaries on our article and our response to the commentaries. Here's what we said on p. 60:
"One of the most important implications of the Ideology of Marriage and Family is that adults who are single in contemporary American society are a stigmatized group. As such, they are targets of negative stereotyping, interpersonal rejection, economic disadvantage, and discrimination (Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998). We refer to this antisingles sentiment as singlism."
In my book, Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After, first published in hardcover in 2006, I said this on page 2:
"People who do not have a serious coupled relationship (my definition, for now, of single people) are stereotyped, discriminated against, and treated dismissively. This stigmatization of people who are single — whether divorced, widowed, or ever single — is the twenty-first-century problem that has no name. I'll call it singlism."
In 2006, Current Directions in Psychological Science invited me and Wendy Morris to write a brief article on singlism. (It is just four pages, so it is a good starting point if you want to offer students or others a quick introduction.) Here's what we said in the first paragraph of our paper (p. 251):
"For years, we have been studying what we call singlism, the stigmatizing of adults who are single. We have found evidence of singlism in the negative stereotypes and discrimination faced by singles (DePaulo, 2006; DePaulo & Morris, 2005a; DePaulo & Morris, 2005b). Although singlism is a nonviolent, softer form of bigotry than what is often faced by other stigmatized groups such as African Americans or gay men and lesbians, the impact of singlism is far ranging. Unlike more familiar isms such as racism, sexism, or heterosexism, singlism is not often recognized, and when it is pointed out, it is often regarded as legitimate."
The Analogy to Isms Such as Racism and Sexism
The word singlism is analogous to terms such as racism and sexism. If it were totally comparable, it would play on the phrase "marital status." The term “sexism” does not refer specifically to women and “racism” does not name a particular race. So “singlism,” to be comparable, would not name single people. But you see the problem: "marital-statusism" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue or lodge in the mind. So I named the particular marital status that was the target of the stereotyping and discrimination – single. Single people are the ones getting penalized by singlism.
What Singlism Does Not Mean
After I first introduced the term singlism, I sometimes saw it used in very wrong ways, often to mean being single. My least favorite example: “Thank you Jesus for the wonderful gift of singlism." No one thanks Jesus or anyone else for getting stereotyped or stigmatized or discriminated against. I do, however, wholeheartedly endorse expressions of gratitude by people who are happy to be single.
Related Constructs
Singlism is related to, but not exactly the same as, other constructs. I defined and discussed singlism, as well as matrimania, marital status discrimination, and marital privilege, in my 2019 post, “The Definitive Guide to Singlism, Matrimania, and Related Biases.”
Where the Term Singlism Appears
When I published my plea for singlism to be added to the dictionary back in 2010, it had already appeared in many of the leading newspapers, as well on TV shows and in textbooks, other academic books, and scholarly journals (listed here). By now, the term is even more commonplace. I especially appreciate the attention it got on the TED Ideas Blog.
The first time the term singlism appeared in a particularly prestigious nonacademic publication was in 2008, when Gail Collins used it in the op-ed column she writes for the New York Times. After that, mentions of singlism in the media multiplied. It didn’t hurt that the instance Collins was describing was so ripe for sharing. President Barack Obama had just nominated a single woman, Janet Napolitano, to be the Secretary of Homeland Security. Upon hearing of the nomination, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell weighed in, in all seriousness, with the remark, “Janet’s perfect for the job. Because for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19, 20 hours a day to it.”
Why Singlism Is Important
Naming a phenomenon can be an important first step to understanding it and ultimately addressing it. Once there is a term for the ways in which single people are treated as “lesser than,” sensitivity to relevant instances is heightened, more such instances are appropriately recognized and labeled, and the importance of redressing injustices becomes more apparent.
Early on, reactions to the construct of singlism were often dismissive, even among academics and activists who were devoted to the study or eradication of other isms. Disappointingly, I still hear a lot of disparagement of the concept, even today.
People typically complain that singlism doesn’t really happen (it does), or that it is of little consequence, especially in comparison to other isms.
In Singled Out, I acknowledged the issue of relative seriousness:
“In many important ways, singles are simply not in the same category as the most brutally stigmatized groups. So far as I know, no persons have ever been dragged to their death at the back of a pick-up truck simply because they were single. There are no “marrieds only” drinking fountains and there never were. The pity that singles put up with is just not in the same league as the outright hatred conveyed to Blacks by shameless racists or the unbridled disgust heaped upon gay men or lesbians by homophobes.”
In the 14 years since I published those words, new research and writings have underscored the ways in which singlism actually can be lethal. For example, Joan DelFattore made the case that stereotypes of single people can result in devastating undertreatment of cancer patients. Satia A. Marotta and Keren Ladin documented biases against divorced people in judgments about who is worthy of a life-saving transplant. That research became the impetus for a forum in The American Journal of Bioethics on the proper grounds for transplant decisions, with a target article by Ladin and two of her colleagues, an editorial, and 11 commentaries.
It is true, nonetheless, that many instances of singlism are relatively minor. They are the microaggressions of single life. I think I used to feel defensive about calling attention to them. Not anymore. I’ve recently discussed, without apology, the meanings behind those microaggressions, the costs of speaking up about them, and whether and how to do so.
Another psychological significant issue is why the topic of singlism disturbs some people. They deny that it exists and get mad at you for pointing it out. I guess they had better get used to it. Now that it is in the dictionary, it is unlikely to go away anytime soon.
