[BeaverFever]

andyt andyt:

raydan raydan:

We use "conjoint" in French, which also translates to "spouse", but that word also has a masculine and feminine form... "conjoint" and "conjointe".

"Conjoint de fait" would be "common law spouse".


Can't say that I've heard a lot of this "PC non-gender bullshit" around here. Maybe the language doesn't lend itself to it.

We need to become like Eskimos with snow

A good start would be not calling them Eskimos

[andyt]

$1:

The claim that Eskimo languages have an unusually large number of words for snow is a widespread idea first voiced by Franz Boas and has become a cliché; it is often used to illustrate the way in which language embodies different local concerns in different parts of the world. In fact, the Eskimo–Aleut languages have about the same number of distinct word roots referring to snow as English does, but the structure of these languages tends to allow more variety as to how those roots can be modified in forming a single word.[1][2] A good deal of the ongoing debate thus depends on how one defines "word", and perhaps even "word root"...
There is no one Eskimo language. A number of cultures are referred to as Eskimo, and a number of different languages are termed Eskimo–Aleut languages. These languages may have more or fewer words for "snow", or perhaps more importantly, more or fewer words that are commonly applied to snow, depending on which language is considered.
Three distinct word roots with the meaning "snow" are reconstructed for the Proto-Eskimo language[15] *qaniɣ 'falling snow', *aniɣu 'fallen snow', and *apun 'snow on the ground'. These three stems are found in all Inuit languages and dialects—except for West Greenlandic, which lacks aniɣu.[16] The Alaskan and Siberian Yupik people (among others) however, are not Inuit peoples, nor are their languages Inuit or Inupiaq, but all are classifiable as Eskimos, lending further ambiguity to the "Eskimo Words for Snow" debate.

wiki

[Tyler_1]

Soul Mate.
or
Ball and Chain.

[Vamp018]

Hell I've been sentenced to the Jar-Head Ball and Chain for 14 years.

[Jabberwalker]

Vamp018 Vamp018:

Hell I've been sentenced to the Jar-Head Ball and Chain for 14 years.

Is your Marine "partner" a girl?

Are YOU a girl?

[Vamp018]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Vamp018 Vamp018:

Hell I've been sentenced to the Jar-Head Ball and Chain for 14 years.

Is your Marine "partner" a girl?

Are YOU a girl?

She'll turn you into a Cali-BC Fruit-loop for asking lol and make you live in San Fran's famous Castro Dist.

[sandorski]

Even in Male/Female marriage, using "Spouse" simplifies things. This is just people whining for the sake of whining.

[Brenda]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I don't hear "partner" used often in plain speak, i.e you wouldn't ask a friend how their partner is.

But if you're talking to a mixed group of people "partner" is easier than saying "your husband or your wife ir your girlfriend or your boyfriend". And this whole "war on words" thing is just nothing more latter.

Of note, It will also probably benefit heterosexual couples, for example where old laws assume a stay-at-home spouse is a "wife", etc. and otherwise refer to workers, citizens etc as "him".

I actually find 'partner' fine for an adult relationship. Im not a girl, so not a girl friend either...

[PluggyRug]

"Her indoors" (wife)...... cockney slang.

[Caelon]

Brenda Brenda:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I don't hear "partner" used often in plain speak, i.e you wouldn't ask a friend how their partner is.

But if you're talking to a mixed group of people "partner" is easier than saying "your husband or your wife ir your girlfriend or your boyfriend". And this whole "war on words" thing is just nothing more latter.

Of note, It will also probably benefit heterosexual couples, for example where old laws assume a stay-at-home spouse is a "wife", etc. and otherwise refer to workers, citizens etc as "him".

I actually find 'partner' fine for an adult relationship. Im not a girl, so not a girl friend either...

I have heard the term 'girl' used with 50 year old women. The intonation and context take it away from the usual juvenile interpretation.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

It just never ends does it?

Everyone is either outraged or offended about something, so much so that we're all immediately expected to change our personal thoughts, morals and beliefs to suit their agendas and politically correct crusades.

When will these social justice warriors learn that taking a flag down won't fix racism, renaming the people in a heterosexual union won't fix homophobia and demanding the world cave to their views and demands won't fix their personal self loathing and need for self flagellation.

They can all go fuck themselves and the jackass they rode in on.

Read Caelon's post. Then realize that the reactionaries are just as offended or outraged. So much so that nobody should be expected to change their personal thoughts, morals and beliefs to suit their agenda. Funny how the reactionaries think it has a lock on being reasonable while the progressives are always called ideological.

"I mean, discrimination against gays, how can we be expected to change our beliefs on that?" Last generation is was "discrimination against ni****s, how can we be expected t change our beliefs on that?" Did you know the confederate battler flag was first hoisted on the S Carolina govt buildings in 1962 in reaction to the civil rights movement. Terrible thing that, people changing their beliefs there.

You folks can continue to deny the obvious but the article was completely specific about eliminating the terms Husband and Wife and replacing them with Spouse or Couple. So if I was an American I'd just be a spouse not a husband.

I guess Churches will no longer have ceremonies stating do you take XXXXX to be your lawfully wedded Husband because that term will no longer exist. Now it'll be do you take XXXXX" to be your lawfully wedded spouse and since the term is gender neutral it'll make everyone happy happy happy except the people who still believe in the institution of marriage and the terms husband and wife.

Although it'll be interesting to see what would happen if some churches decided to defy the changes and continue to use the terms on their paperwork.

$1:

More than two dozen Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the words "husband" and "wife" from federal law.

Those "gendered terms" would be replaced by "gender-neutral" words like "spouse" or "married couple," according to the bill from Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.

As for her using bullshit examples to try and make her point shows that the argument has been lawed from the beginning especially considering making threats against anyone in the US is illegal so trying to claim that you could threaten the President's husband with impunity is completely disingenuous.

$1:

She said her bill would also have other benefits if it became law. In one example, she noted that U.S. law says it's illegal to threaten the president's wife, but says nothing about the president's husband.

I'm sorry but changing everything to try and fix what you personally perceive to be past wrongs doesn't work and only tends alienates everyone who disagrees with you especially if your proposals are ridiculous in the extreme.

But then again attaching this piece of idiotic legislation to ending racism and homophobia isn't much better.

[Caelon]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

You folks can continue to deny the obvious but the article was completely specific about eliminating the terms Husband and Wife and replacing them with Spouse or Couple. So if I was an American I'd just be a spouse not a husband.

IN LEGISLATION ONLY. It allows the legislation to include husband, wife, partner, rocking chair or whatever you choose to partner with under the term spouse. Call yourself a husband, that bas**#$d or whatever you want. there is no mention of daily usage.

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I guess Churches will no longer have ceremonies stating do you take XXXXX to be your lawfully wedded Husband because that term will no longer exist. Now it'll be do you take XXXXX" to be your lawfully wedded spouse and since the term is gender neutral it'll make everyone happy happy happy except the people who still believe in the institution of marriage and the terms husband and wife.

Although it'll be interesting to see what would happen if some churches decided to defy the changes and continue to use the terms on their paperwork.

Absolutely nothing. Do not make a mountain out of a mole hill. The church and you can continue to do as you please. There will be one law to divorce your spouse. Not separate wording for husband, wife or same sex partner.

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

More than two dozen Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the words "husband" and "wife" from federal law.

Those "gendered terms" would be replaced by "gender-neutral" words like "spouse" or "married couple," according to the bill from Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.

Exactly. So no issue. Refer to above.

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm sorry but changing everything to try and fix what you personally perceive to be past wrongs doesn't work and only tends alienates everyone who disagrees with you especially if your proposals are ridiculous in the extreme.

But then again attaching this piece of idiotic legislation to ending racism and homophobia isn't much better.

I do not find them ridiculous. I see that the proposal adds clarity. If you see it as homophobic then it from your frame of reference seeing it as an attack on the status quo.

[sandorski]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

andyt andyt:

Read Caelon's post. Then realize that the reactionaries are just as offended or outraged. So much so that nobody should be expected to change their personal thoughts, morals and beliefs to suit their agenda. Funny how the reactionaries think it has a lock on being reasonable while the progressives are always called ideological.

"I mean, discrimination against gays, how can we be expected to change our beliefs on that?" Last generation is was "discrimination against ni****s, how can we be expected t change our beliefs on that?" Did you know the confederate battler flag was first hoisted on the S Carolina govt buildings in 1962 in reaction to the civil rights movement. Terrible thing that, people changing their beliefs there.

You folks can continue to deny the obvious but the article was completely specific about eliminating the terms Husband and Wife and replacing them with Spouse or Couple. So if I was an American I'd just be a spouse not a husband.

I guess Churches will no longer have ceremonies stating do you take XXXXX to be your lawfully wedded Husband because that term will no longer exist. Now it'll be do you take XXXXX" to be your lawfully wedded spouse and since the term is gender neutral it'll make everyone happy happy happy except the people who still believe in the institution of marriage and the terms husband and wife.

Although it'll be interesting to see what would happen if some churches decided to defy the changes and continue to use the terms on their paperwork.

$1:

More than two dozen Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the words "husband" and "wife" from federal law.

Those "gendered terms" would be replaced by "gender-neutral" words like "spouse" or "married couple," according to the bill from Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.

As for her using bullshit examples to try and make her point shows that the argument has been lawed from the beginning especially considering making threats against anyone in the US is illegal so trying to claim that you could threaten the President's husband with impunity is completely disingenuous.

$1:

She said her bill would also have other benefits if it became law. In one example, she noted that U.S. law says it's illegal to threaten the president's wife, but says nothing about the president's husband.

I'm sorry but changing everything to try and fix what you personally perceive to be past wrongs doesn't work and only tends alienates everyone who disagrees with you especially if your proposals are ridiculous in the extreme.

But then again attaching this piece of idiotic legislation to ending racism and homophobia isn't much better.

You already are and have been a Spouse.

[Freakinoldguy]

Yup, I am a spouse. But by introducing this legislation the question still remains. Why if everyone who's married is already a spouse gay or straight do they need to remove the term Husband and Wife from the Federal Government lexicon.

Is it some form of addition by subtraction used for self gratification or is it designed to denigrate and disassociate those people who still prefer to refer to themselves by those terms?

[herbie]

raydan raydan:

What's the alternative... bitch and dickhead?

Top and Bottom...

Big deal - We're common-law so we're both 'spouses' anyway. No sleep lost.