what happened to "spouse" that got replaced with "partner"?

[Anonymous]

I think of “partner” as distinct from boyfriend / girlfriend and as conveying more seriousness and commitment to the relationship without the legal / religious formality of marriage. It’s also more egalitarian than wife / husband.

Also, doesn’t bother me in the least and think it’s weird that some people are bothered by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a ridiculous word to describe a person with whom one is in a romantic relationship; yet another attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite the language to their own self-serving means.

Whenever someone uses that term, I ask how long they've been working together.

At least you out yourself as being uneducated. It’s best others know quickly. FYI, Partner has been the norm to be used for adults in countries like the UK and Australia forever.

So? Since when are they the standard bearers?

Again, you’re outing your ignorance. It’s not a new term or “an attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite language.” Maybe, just maybe, you don’t know everything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a ridiculous word to describe a person with whom one is in a romantic relationship; yet another attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite the language to their own self-serving means.

Whenever someone uses that term, I ask how long they've been working together.

At least you out yourself as being uneducated. It’s best others know quickly. FYI, Partner has been the norm to be used for adults in countries like the UK and Australia forever.

So? Since when are they the standard bearers?

You want to know since when the U.K has been the standard bearer for the..English language?

Could you let that sink in for a hot second?

Lol. They walked right into that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My boyfriend uses "partner" because he's too chicken to get married, but "boyfriend" makes him feel disposable, like we're just dating and someone else could swoop in and snatch me up. I guess he feels partners are committed, but boyfriends get dumped.

I refuse to use it. I told him he's just a boyfriend until he puts a ring on it, then he can be upgraded to husband. But I'm not using "partner", if he won't commit, why should I?

It's always nice when people post from the previous century.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a ridiculous word to describe a person with whom one is in a romantic relationship; yet another attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite the language to their own self-serving means.

Whenever someone uses that term, I ask how long they've been working together.

you sound delightful.

And you sound like you're about 10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a ridiculous word to describe a person with whom one is in a romantic relationship; yet another attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite the language to their own self-serving means.

Whenever someone uses that term, I ask how long they've been working together.

Language evolves, unlike you.

“Partner” floating around on its own is an inherently meaningless term, though. John and Jane could be business partners, dance partners, tennis partners, figure skating partners, spades partners, and so on. AAs in some parts of the country call their friends their partner too. Even the gays long qualified it as “life partner”.

Utterly vague and vapid language for people too lacking in courage to call a thing by its name. You feel childish for calling a 50 year old man your boyfriend? It’s because the whole premise is childish on its face!

But it’s not floating around on its own, there is this thing called “context.”

“My husband and I are looking for a new place.”

“The father of my children and I are looking for a new place.”

“My roomate and I are looking for a new place.”

“My boyfriend and I are looking for a new place.”

“My partner and I are looking for a new place.”

Which one of these five statements provides the least information? You [not you specifically] impose making an assumption of your own weird self-constructed universe on the audience rather than being precise in language. Words mean things. How can partner simultaneously mean “person who is my life partner of many years,” “person who is my boyfriend but we are of an age where it sounds silly,” and “person whose relationship with me could be of any nature/duration but I would rather not divulge out of privacy” at the same time and we’re all just supposed to emotionally labor over which one it is by context? In a way, that is quite narcissistic.

Nice summation. Thank you. It goes to show that it's a pretty meaningless term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a ridiculous word to describe a person with whom one is in a romantic relationship; yet another attempt by infantilized progressives to rewrite the language to their own self-serving means.

Whenever someone uses that term, I ask how long they've been working together.

Language evolves, unlike you.

“Partner” floating around on its own is an inherently meaningless term, though. John and Jane could be business partners, dance partners, tennis partners, figure skating partners, spades partners, and so on. AAs in some parts of the country call their friends their partner too. Even the gays long qualified it as “life partner”.

Utterly vague and vapid language for people too lacking in courage to call a thing by its name. You feel childish for calling a 50 year old man your boyfriend? It’s because the whole premise is childish on its face!

+1. Childish and narcissistic as well.

[Anonymous]

Are you he same person that started the y'all thread? Why do you care what other words people use?

Freak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My boyfriend uses "partner" because he's too chicken to get married, but "boyfriend" makes him feel disposable, like we're just dating and someone else could swoop in and snatch me up. I guess he feels partners are committed, but boyfriends get dumped.

I refuse to use it. I told him he's just a boyfriend until he puts a ring on it, then he can be upgraded to husband. But I'm not using "partner", if he won't commit, why should I?

I hate the term for that reason. People mostly men get to use a label that can mean anything. Boyfriend, fiancé, husband were stages. I guess people who want to hide what stage in a relationship they are prefer it. Either for privacy or because they are dragging their feet and want to keep a relationship as ambiguous as possible.

Also many people are choosing to not get married but operate like a married couple so they prefer it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s to help normalize using partner. It’s a more inclusive term.

I am straight but I use partner sometime because I feel dumb saying boyfriend at age 44.

Obviously that's different.

But if you're married, I find it weird to say partner. I assume it means they're gay, which is fine with me, but then when I find out they're hetero, I wonder why they didn't just say husband or wife.

[Anonymous]

I would prefer you just use their name. Larla. Larlo. It seems less formal and helps me remember their name.

[Anonymous]

It sounds better than still calling someone “fiancé” 4 years into a relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds better than still calling someone “fiancé” 4 years into a relationship.

I mean, if you've been engaged for four years you have bigger problems than what you call your "partner."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just following the lead of those trendsetting Canadians.

Also common in the UK, Germany, and many Nordic countries.

[Anonymous]

Left Modernism