What is your couple’s style?

Five marriage unions, a description of which you will find here, were identified by a group of sociologists from the University of Geneva (Switzerland). This classification is the result of observing 1500 couples of people of different ages who have been living in a legal or civil marriage for at least a year.

The first impression received as a result of the study is curious: never before have the external “decorations” of love been so diverse, and couples so free in choosing relationships.

“It can be argued that the standard model of marriage has come to an end,” sums up Jean Kellerhal, one of the authors of the work. “In our time, creativity and individuality come to the fore in a couple.”

However, among the huge variety of styles of relationships, five main trends can be distinguished, five more or less harmonious (as well as more or less new) models of marriage unions. And, if in one of them you can recognize your own, others will remind you of the families of friends, parents or neighbors.

Why is this classification necessary? First of all, it will allow you to figure out what tasks your union has. What is it based on? How are the roles distributed within the family, does everyone have a personal territory, how do you resolve conflicts. Perhaps this will be a revelation, but it happens that the relationship of the spouses goes beyond love affairs. “In the public mind, there has always been an ideal image of “real, fateful love”, which one day should come down on us and solve all our problems,” the expert states.

Find your model

Joint life does not rest on the mere feeling of endless love. “Relationships need to be worked on,” says Jean Kellerhal. “This structure consists of many floors and looks more like a well-thought-out project than a gift of fate. Agree, even the most romantic natures have to reckon with such unromantic components of relationships as the distribution of power in the family, personal space or common funds.

Perhaps it is the awareness of the versatility of relationships that will allow you, in the event of difficulties, to review and work out some details of your life together, and not give up everything and leave.

How is the model selected on the basis of which the relationships in the marriage union are built? “It largely depends on the age of the partners, on their occupation and their social environment,” explains the sociologist. – If you are young, you both have higher education, you live in the city and strive for personal development and professional success, then most likely your style is a family-association. Whereas your parents’ lives probably followed a more traditional fortress-family pattern.

However, it is quite possible that in your case a certain cocktail has arisen with elements of other relationships or two models of marriage unions at the same time. Be that as it may, a certain style in relationships arises quite quickly. Often it changes due to the appearance of the first child: in this case, the spouses can move from an association family to a family of associates. However, after the birth of the first child, the style will not change. At least, if you do not specifically set yourself such a goal.

Soyuz-fortress: “Both in joy and in sorrow”

Priorities These partners are strongly connected with each other, they experience hardships and joys together, dreaming of “living happily and dying on the same day.” Sharing each other’s tastes, they always try to come to a consensus.

Their identity comes from the word “we”: together they work to ensure that the husband succeeds professionally (the wife often does not work), and they also take care of the education of the children. Partners value consensus, unity of opinion. A good couple, they say, within which there are almost no disagreements.

Distribution of roles. One of the goals of partners is to reduce the number of reasons for dissatisfaction. Their daily life consists of many rituals: there is a place and time for everything, and the roles of each family member are clearly marked. Here, more often than in other unions, responsibilities are distributed depending on the sex of the spouse: it is assumed that the wife takes care of the house, and the husband earns money. Nevertheless, partners make decisions together.

Relations with the world. The wife rarely goes out. She tends to view the influences of the outside world – new ideas and trends – more as a threat. The husband shows more interest in innovations, other ways of being and ways of thinking. He is a kind of “plenipotentiary representative” of the couple, who is responsible for the “external relations” and social integration of the family. The wife is rather focused on “internal matters”: security, care, tenderness. This complementarity increases the dependence of family members on each other.

Advantages and disadvantages. The main trump card of the family-fortress is stability. When partners take on certain responsibilities, life becomes more harmonious. Spouses try to avoid clashes, yielding part of their positions. When solving problems, they prefer traditional, proven methods. Peaceful life in the “fortress” borders on routine. Such relationships can become “hardened” if partners do not start new projects from time to time.

Union-association: “We observe autonomy”

Priorities Paradoxical as it may seem, partners are brought together by the originally agreed desire for autonomy. The family-association believes that life together will benefit if each of the participants remains the master of his own destiny, upholds personal convictions and conducts his own affairs. To sacrifice interests for the benefit of the family is perceived as a defeat – both for the “altar” spouse himself and for the relationship as a whole.

Distribution of roles. Partners strive to be self-sufficient and realize themselves in all areas at the same time: professional, marital, parental, cultural, civil. The distribution of responsibilities according to the gender principle is rejected a priori, the principle “all are equal” reigns here. When communicating, partners do not hide their emotions and interests. If both spouses are set to make common decisions, most likely they will be able to agree: after all, what suits them today can be revised tomorrow.

Relations with the world. Contacts with the outside world are valued as highly as the individual characteristics of the spouses. Going out (together or separately), traveling, inviting parents or friends to visit – all this feeds and enriches the dialogue of partners, allows you to implement joint projects.

The family-association does not tolerate routine well, considering it a source of boredom and anxiety. Such alliances are more often formed in a developed society, where there are economic and cultural prerequisites for satisfying the desires of both. Families-associations usually live in cities where partners can find a business that will allow both personal development and earn enough money.

Advantages and disadvantages. If the spouses know how to manage the situation, they will be able to get everything from life: the joy of living together, and the ability to realize themselves as a person. Flexibility in relationships allows them to deal cards again and again, adapting to the desires and capabilities of each.

Problems usually arise if the personal interests of the spouses diverge, and family life becomes an obstacle to personal development. In order to reach a compromise, members of family associations often have to enter into negotiations. If maintaining the union begins to require too many sacrifices, the spouses usually decide to disperse.

Union-cocoon: “One against all”

Priorities Very tender marital relations reign in the cocoon family. The main goal is to care for and care for each other, entertain and resist the vicissitudes of fate that arise, for example, due to instability in society or away from home.

Partners create an intimate nest and do their best to protect it from the influences of the external environment. As in a family-fortress, a relationship of merging with each other develops between partners. Joint activities and similar tastes give them the necessary sense of security.

Distribution of roles. In a cocoon family, partners have equal responsibilities. They take turns cooking, cleaning, taking care of the children. Depending on the situation, either spouse can go to work. Men especially strive to find refuge from the daily frustrations of the outside world in the family circle, appreciate the comfort of the hearth and all the rituals associated with it.

Relations with the world. Usually, the cocoon family closes in on itself, because it does not feel like a part of the society in which it exists. The couple feel alone in the big city, sometimes lost in front of the power of “others”. However, they are not too interested in the outside world. They perceive social integration or professional achievements as secondary values.

Advantages and disadvantages. The cocoon family is rather helpless in the face of material difficulties. Spouses tend to comfort each other rather than act, often failing to offer adequate assistance. They tend to hush up conflicts, as any disagreement is perceived as an additional threat to their security. The strength of the cocoon family is in the solidarity of spouses. If the surrounding reality is not too harsh on them, partners are able to live quite happily.

Union of Parallel Worlds: “Together for lack of a better”

Priorities This style of relationship is the least similar to the generally accepted image of a happy couple. Here, as in a family-association, each spouse has his own interests, and relations between partners are based on indifference to each other. Each of them is engaged in himself and is not inclined to share emotional experiences with his spouse. In fact, they live together only because there is no other way.

Distribution of roles. In such a family, the responsibilities of partners are extremely differentiated. The wife takes care of the whole house, and in addition to fulfilling the related duties, the husband expects her to provide organizational support for his own undertakings. His work is often hard, he cannot take on any of the functions of his partner – and vice versa. There is not a shadow of sentimentality in their relationship.

Relations with the world. Usually spouses live in real isolation from the outside world, in complete ignorance of what is happening around, and are not too inclined to invite parents or neighbors to visit them. Of course, the reason is not at all to be alone more often … However, if the partners do not find fault with each other too much, they coexist quite calmly.

Advantages and disadvantages. It is difficult to find pluses in such an alliance. Spouses do not expect anything from each other, which is why they are alien to disappointment in a partner. Everyone is clear about what they should do, the rules are set once and for all, which helps to eliminate any differences. In such families, complete order reigns, and all the actions of partners are absolutely predictable. And, although their relationship is not at all like a holiday of the soul, such an alliance can last a lifetime.

Union of Companions: “Common – first of all”

Priorities Like the fortress family, this couple model is designed for the long term. Spouses want to share the same fate, so the life of each of them is consistent with the values ​​on which their family is based. A very close relationship is established between partners, they emphasize their similarities and do not keep secrets from each other. But, unlike a family-fortress or a family-cocoon, it is very important for spouses to participate together and in public life.

Distribution of roles. As in a family association, in accepting responsibilities, setting rules, and inventing rituals, spouses prefer to remain flexible. The daily routine and tasks of each partner change depending on the current tasks. Both are able to manage the household, in addition, one can replace the other – this is the key to the development of the couple.

However, unlike the family-association, where everyone’s personal projects are valued, here common interests come to the fore. For the benefit of the family and society, each of the spouses is ready to make some sacrifices: to move to another city, to leave work for a while for the sake of the other’s career or raising children.

Relations with the world. Partners take an active part in the life of the city, school or charitable organizations. However, despite their openness to the world, they cannot be called “secular lions” – as is often the case in the case of a family-association. Rather, they are an example of a civil couple who seek to contribute to the public good.

Advantages and disadvantages. The superiority of joint interests over personal ones, flexibility in the distribution of roles, openness to the outside world are excellent prerequisites for a long and happy existence. It is in such unions, according to their members, that there are fewer disappointments, they laugh more often, rejoice more at joint achievements and less often part. Information for thought.

The ideal model?

Which of the five marriage unions is closest to the ideal, the “formula of happiness”? “Each style has its pros and cons,” notes Jean Kellerhal. “And although none of them guarantees the desired result for everyone – complete well-being in the family, some models of relationships, according to the respondents, bring more satisfaction than others.”

The family of associates takes first place in the classification. It is in this union that we feel all the power of love, respect and support of a partner, we get more joy from living together and common affairs. But in the family of parallel worlds, the situation sometimes acquires an ominous shade. We easily lose our temper, blame, or (just as badly) ignore each other. In the fortress family and the cocoon family, the sky is also not always cloudless, but on the whole we feel quite satisfied.

As for the family-association, the most widespread model in recent times, the situation here is often quite contradictory. “On the one hand, only in this marriage union is the autonomy and personal life of the partner most fully recognized, which provides great opportunities for personal development,” the sociologist explains. – On the other hand, everyone puts forward their own interests, which leads to constant quarrels and sometimes to divorces. Which is quite obvious, because the main principle of the family-association is leave or compete.

Today it becomes clear that the success of a marital “enterprise” depends not so much on its form, but on its content. Whatever your style, all challenges must be willing—and able—to overcome together.

Difficult, but possible

An increase in the number of divorces, free relationships in the family, disintegrating and re-creating alliances – all this suggests that any love story is ephemeral.

“The general trend can be alarming,” says Jean Kellerhal. “We no longer know to what extent you can invest in family relationships, so as not to end up with nothing. Before moving on to a deeper level of trust, we carefully weigh all the pros and cons, discuss the rights, obligations, and contribution of each of the partners to the common cause. It happens that excessive foresight extinguishes relations in the bud.

Yes, today living together has become a difficult adventure, but this does not mean that success in it is unattainable. Unless, of course, we care about coming to him together.

Jean Kellerhal is a Swiss sociologist, one of the co-authors of the work “Mesure and its absence in a couple” (“Mesure et demesure du couple”, Payot, 2004).