Now on to one of the sub questions. Is it natural? Well, someone mentioned that it wasn't natural only for humans. Now, why this discrimination? If the Gods of various religions keep throwing and creating people who are homosexual, either a) They're bad factory operators or b) Something is fishy with whatever anti-gay talk religious conservatives swear is sacred.
Which does bring up another point. What are two homosexual partners known as?
A couple?
Right, it's not the case when it's not male/female.
What? yes it was the case when it wasn't male/female. That's what I was pointing out. male/male female/female was still marriage.
Here's how I'm thinking of it right now.
Heterosexual marriage <- Marriage -> Homosexual marriage
They are both types of marriage, with different names to denote whether one is married to another gender or the same gender. That's the only difference.
Then your not finding a different word for marriage at all as originally proposed. Besides we already have this as noted, it's called gay or same-sex marriage. So what's the point of coming up with another modifier to marriage?
Currently, you say, "I'm married to -partners name-" but when homosexual marriage is eventually accepted, it would be nice to know whether their partner is a different gender or not, to avoid awkward situations.
If it's accepted I don't see a serious awkward really coming up. I would think it would be pretty clear once the person said they had a husband or wife.
For example in a world where it's accepted I could see things going something like this. Steve: I just got marriage. Random lady: Congratulations! Steve: There's my husband Bill now. Random lady: He looks very handsome.
I see it going this way without awkwardness because it won't matter if the person they are married to is male or female.
It's not necessary to do a lot of things, but beneficial. Brushing your teeth, washing your car, wearing shoes, checking the weather forecast, etc. It would just make things more clear.
Those aren't very good examples. They do have necessary functions to them. Further more this is compared to renaming marriage where we are getting disadvantages from it instead of benefits.
Perhaps there's some homophobic website out there that has this as it's headliner/motto?
A male is not really meant to be with another man, and ditto for girls. I mean, really. If we were all gay, we'd all be DEAD.
not sure if you are the same person or that you talked to him. if your going to join a discussion though you have to understand that saying things is only 50% of participating. you also have to listen. so go back (you probably wont because you wont even read this comment) and read
That's what I was pointing out. male/male female/female was still marriage.
I'm not saying it's not.
Then your not finding a different word for marriage at all as originally proposed. Besides we already have this as noted, it's called gay or same-sex marriage. So what's the point of coming up with another modifier to marriage?
Well the idea has sort of changed since I first introduced it.
Now what I'm basically saying is it would make sense to have a different term for both homosexual and heterosexual marriage, both of which are still marriage. Kind of like how you select male/female on a form, instead of just circling "erson."
If it's accepted I don't see a serious awkward really coming up.
Women in the workplace is perfectly normal and acceptable now, right? So when you see someone and address/treat them as you would a woman, only to have them tell you that they're a man, you don't find that awkward? I think it would be fairly similar. Just by simple statistics, the large majority of marriages would be heterosexual marriages, which would lead you to have to assume that it's heterosexual, while knowing there's a distinct possibility that it's a homosexual marriage. It's just uncomfortable.
Or perhaps that's just me and my extreme social awkwardness, I've never been a very extroverted person.
I would think it would be pretty clear once the person said they had a husband or wife.
Well I guess that answers my earlier question. I've never actually met a homosexual couple so I wasn't sure what they refer to each other as. Makes sense.
I see it going this way without awkwardness because it won't matter if the person they are married to is male or female
You have a point. However, I personally find it awkward when I'm not sure about something, regardless of what it is. Perhaps I'm in the minority there though, not positive.
Further more this is compared to renaming marriage where we are getting disadvantages from it instead of benefits.
Not renaming, further defining. Currently for the large part of our society, marriage has been strictly heterosexual. I simply think it would make things more clear if there were separate terms for each, after marriage.
Can't seem to find anything in search.
Joking/sarcasm/random musing. I really think it's just a copy/paste.
Women in the workplace is perfectly normal and acceptable now, right? So when you see someone and address/treat them as you would a woman, only to have them tell you that they're a man, you don't find that awkward?
There are still hang ups in play leading to this awkwardness. If I saw a guy and still thought they were female it's likely they wouldn't care. The awkwardness would really only be on those with these hang ups.
I think it would be fairly similar. Just by simple statistics, the large majority of marriages would be heterosexual marriages, which would lead you to have to assume that it's heterosexual, while knowing there's a distinct possibility that it's a homosexual marriage. It's just uncomfortable.
I don't think it would be similar. If I heard someone was married and met their spouse I would then know they were married to either a male or a female. If it was same-sex there wouldn't be a difference in how I would view or treat their marriage from that of an opposite-sex marriage, so the use of a modifier wouldn't be necessary. It only becomes viewed as necessary when someone is self conscious of the matter, which wouldn't come into play much in a world where it's generally excepted.
I've never actually met a homosexual couple so I wasn't sure what they refer to each other as. Makes sense.
You have a point. However, I personally find it awkward when I'm not sure about something, regardless of what it is. Perhaps I'm in the minority there though, not positive.
If your not sure of something, just ask. For instance I've had plenty of people think I'm female because when reading my online name they mistakenly add extra letters to it. (MaggieGrayWolf)
Anyway let's take this sentence. "Pat went to the store." Is it really that awkward not knowing if Pat is short for Patric or Patricia?
Anyway let's take this sentence. "Pat went to the store." Is it really that awkward not knowing if Pat is short for Patric or Patricia?
No. But let's change the context. You're at someone's house and they mention off-handedly, "Pat went to the store." That would be awkward for a few reasons.
1) Who's Pat? (if you don't already know) 2) What importance does Pat have? Relative, lover, friend, neighbor, etc. 3) Why did they decide to tell me this?
Again, this is probably just me and my social awkwardness, so yeah.
If I saw a guy and still thought they were female it's likely they wouldn't care
Well, it would be awkward for me because I wouldn't want to insult them or anything and there's no way to ask that question besides straight out.
If I heard someone was married and met their spouse I would then know they were married to either a male or a female. If it was same-sex there wouldn't be a difference in how I would view or treat their marriage from that of an opposite-sex marriage, so the use of a modifier wouldn't be necessary.
True enough I suppose.
See how one goes for your self.
No I didn't mean a wedding, I just meant how they would introduce/address them to others. "This is my husband, Bill." was pretty much what I wasn't sure of. I just never thought about it really.
Another great article from the British media. Most bizarre case I've heard of in sometime.
Thats terrible... Why would she do that? Does she even consider how she would feel if someone did the same? Did she have likem some extreme affection for these people? Like, was she mentally ill or something?
Thats terrible... Why would she do that? Does she even consider how she would feel if someone did the same? Did she have likem some extreme affection for these people? Like, was she mentally ill or something?
I'd like to say I understand, but I really haven't a clue. What motivates someone to do something like that is beyond me. But it's a real gender bender isn't it!?
Made me think though, wasn't there a case in a US of a girl who thought she was a boy?
Dunno, I've never heard of that.
I've got a question for all you Christians out there who say homosexuality is wrong because it doesn't produce children.
What is the difference between a homosexual lifestyle and a monastic lifestyle in terms of reproduction? Neither produce any children, as monks/nuns are celibate, whilst male/male female/female couples are unable to reproduce without external aid.
