Interesting. If I’m applying for a loan, I’m single. If I’m at a party or a bar, I’m unattached (I won’t lie and say I’m divorced). Because a 40 year old never-married woman is unwanted goods, regardless of my dating history. There’s clearly something wrong with me if I’ve never married. (there’s a portion of my extended family that’s convinced I’m a lesbian solely because of this.)
Although we are both divorced, we own a home together and plan to be together forever. We’ve recently begun introducing ourselves as a married couple just because there is no term we liked to describe our situation.
Single equates to “never married” to me. I’m not 30 for a couple of months yet, so being single in my set is preferable to being divorced. Divorced in one’s twenties means a history of poor decision-making, more baggage, and kids more often than not. I think the stigma swaps around 35, though.
Because marriage is a legal status. Shacking up together is not and attracts no special privileges as a result.
‘Living with my partner’ is standard in the UK, it’s the status of 1 in 6 people so hardly eyebrow raising. In fact, if someone introduces me to their partner, I assume they’re living together as partner suggests more permanence than boyfriend/girlfriend.
I’ve played cards with a “partner” whose name I didn’t even know. Why are people so terrified of words that call something what it is, and spend their whole lives with the covers of euphemisms pulled up over their heads?
Why can’t I just introduce someone by saying “This is Jane – we’re sleeping together”, a fact that is certainly implies with “This is my wife Jane”, but it excludes the non-fact of “We are married”.
Well, one should start here with the realization that a good portion of our society is Christian. The teaching of Jesus is that marriage is dissoluble only by the death of one party, and that a divorced person with a living spouse, who has sex, is committing adultery. So I’d say that, for many Christians, it would be particularly important to know in a dating context whether the person they are intending to date is truly single, or divorced. A civil divorce doesn’t necessarily mean you are no longer married in the eyes of God.
You mean, you think it is “particularly important” for you (and everybody else) to know whether another person (me, for example) is committing a sin in the eyes of your god? If you need to know this detail about a person you are “in a dating context” with, just ask.
That’s cool with me, so long as your god mans up and pays my mortgage.
Because it reduces the complex nuances of a pair-bond to the fairly irrelevant detail of coitus? Two people who can’t have sex for whatever reason can still be a family/social unit, and two people that are fucking may not be.
I know a gal who says she marks other and fills in temporarily unremarried.
SO BFD I’ve had sex with a partner whose name I didn’t even know, even two of them at once on a few occasions.
Exactly my point. There are countless nuances that go into congealing a relationship – which ones need to be the ones encompassed by the terminology for the status?
I’ve thought about something similar. It seems that the terms could, in theory, be interpreted (read: misinterpreted) as meaning:
Single: Person has never had any significant coupling experience
Widowed: Person is sexually experienced, and probably has kids
Divorced: Person is sexually experienced, probably has kids, and is a loser, incompetent, unreliable, and/or has a bad personality, because they were unable to (or didn’t try hard enough to) save their marriage. Don’t associate with this person - they don’t (or can’t) keep commitments.
Obviously, this stuff isn’t always going to be true. Some people are divorced with no kids, and some people have never been married, have five kids with five different partners, and have grave issues with responsibility and commitment.
For those who design these forms: Why do you want to know?
I can’t think of a better example of why such a distinction is sometimes helpful, than the OP’s own explained reasoning.
If you’re so emotionally invested in distancing yourself from something as formative as a marriage you created, and, one assumes, worked hard at, that you don’t even want to own it, maybe that’s a red flag that you’ve still got some issues to work through. Or, perhaps, just that you’re bringing some baggage along with you, I guess. I could see how that could be informative to any potential date, to be honest.
Needing to desperately split hairs over this distinction says more about the OP than it does about society, I think.
Good points. I have used terms like “girl cousin” to describe a relative. Considering that I have only one first cousin who is female, this seems reasonable.
Also, several languages (Japanese being one), distinguish older siblings and younger siblings using vocabulary. Using casual vocabulary, you can’t just say that you went to the beach with a sister and a brother - you would have to say something like, I went to the beach with little sister and big brother. It is possible, of course, to refer to a sister or brother in general without committing to specifying a relative age, but it is more complex and convoluted.
Kinda OT, but something that always bugged me was that it’s hard to explain in English, without sounding stilted, that Jane is the younger of your two sisters who are still both older than you. If you say “Jane is my younger sister,” that could mean that Jane is your sister, maybe your only sister, maybe one of many, who is younger than you, or it could mean that Jane is one of your older sisters, just not the oldest. You end up having to say “Jane is the younger of my older sisters.” Because of the comparative/superlative rule in English, you don’t know whether there is another sister older than you, but younger than Jane. I wouldn’t mind words like those in Japanese.
Some languages have different words for “aunt” and “uncle” depending on whether they are on the maternal or paternal side. Same with grandparents.
I think one needs to know if two people should be treated, socially and legally, as a nuclear family. If two people do not form a family unit, it is sort of rude to assume that they do. . .and if they do, it’s rude to treat them as if they do not. I would like to be introduced in a way that lets me know which of these is appropriate. “Partner” or “spouse” signify “family” to me. Most other terms are ambiguous.
Speaking of ambiguous relationship terminology: straight women describing their straight women friends as their “girlfriends.” Bugs the shit out of me. If you’re fucking her, planning on fucking her, or used to fuck her but now you just watch a lot of TV together, she’s your girlfriend. Absent that, she’s just a friend.
The black women I know in Memphis use the word friendgirl to describe their platonic female friends