Heterosexual Civil Partnerships begin today. Anyone signing on the line ?

[patchworkpatty]

At last , today there is finally a legal process to protect the property, inheritance, pensions and entitlements of all those (mostly) women - who are seriously economically disadvantaged by being in a relationship with children and unmarried . Economic disadvantaged because of reduced earning power and impeded career advancement. Especially for those who are with partners who 'don't believe' in marriage.. or 'don't want a fuss' ..

Or am I being cynical in thinking that 'not believing in marriage' or 'wanting a fuss' really means 'I'm not giving you, the mother of my children any legal right to my home, pensions, savings and belongings. ?

That in fact the only people this new law will help are people with a 'conscientious objection to the patriarchy for marriage'.. who are almost certainly middle class good income earners .
Leaving the vast majority of cohabitating women with children, who earn either nothing or much less than their partners as unprotected as they ever were. ?

Thank you for starting an interesting and informative thread patchworkpatty.

I agree that this needs to be taught in schools. I only know about the legal implications of marriage from reading about it on here. I suspect most people who blithely have children without any thought to the future don't know either.

I found this interesting - (The definition of adultery is sexual intercourse with someone of the opposite sex outside of marriage.)

So having an affair with someone of the same sex isn't a reason to get divorced?

Although I expect that it would be covered by this - Behaviour by the respondent in such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with them

Have some people never attended a marriage in a registry office? No religion, obeying, or giving away ownership. No need for rings, dressing up or a party.

Many. They were lovely. But marriage is rooted in patriarchal oppression. So it's not for me, even if you strip away the above elements. The roots are the same and it's not a system I want to be involved in. Hence personally getting a CP.

But marriage is rooted in patriarchal oppression

Some of us just don't think of marriage that way, and know that historically this was the case, but feel it doesn't apply today. Or maybe they don't care?

But I feel it does apply, as do other people. We'll get a civil partnership, you'll get a marriage. Seems fair?

Ginfordinner Thank you. This is when I love MN ! When you can have a decent discussion with intelligent people who may hold a different view point but would rather articulate their view rather than start shrieking from the keyboard that you must be some sort of right wing Nazi for supporting legal recognition of partnerships . Be it Marriage or CP .

I am also pleased I chose Chat instead of AIBU - where it is almost certain I would have received a multitude of angry responses from financially self sufficient/high salaried woman , who despite their massive earning capability lack the basic reading skills to see that this discussion is relates to 'those with economic disadvantage' ..

For those with similar/greater financial parity with a partner , marriage/CP/staying legally separate is a genuine choice . For those who are not in this position. It's a necessity .

Well, the proof will come over time when we see if there is a significant uptake of CPs.

I think when people agree to get 'married' they inevitably have to tell family and before you know it's a big deal. Quietly saying you are going for a CP next week, and a quiet meal afterwards, takes that pressure away from couples.

There are no expectations on a CP so maybe couples will be less bothered about entering into one. Should say men, as it's usually them that don't want marriage and they seem to have the power. Maybe CPs will redress the balance of power?

Hopefully!

The whole objection for marriage as far as I am concerned comes at the end of the "ceremony" be it church or registry office, the bit that goes "you may kiss the bride". Sorry complete stranger but who are you to decide whether I want to be kissed in public or not without my permission.

I agree Patchworkpatty.
I don't agree with the introduction of CPs - I feel it was a halfway approach to offer the same rights as marriage to same sex couples without having to get out the smelling salts to those opposed so as much shrouded in homophobia as marriage is supposedly shrouded in patriarchy.
Both are legal frameworks offering rights and protections - regardless of what they are called.
I think with the introduction of marriage for all, CPs should have been removed.
I'm also not sure where the press are getting their info from - in my workplace, we have four opp sex CP bookings for the foreseeable future. There simply doesn't appear to have been the demand.
Also, had a quick look at the DM today to see a box outlining the differences - apparently you don't need to involve the courts if you are married and want to separate but if you are CPd you must have it dissolved. No wonder there is so much confusion when even 'journalists' in the mainstream media don't get it right.
Finally, my biggest issue with CPs is that some people will now think that they are civil partnered (it will replace the common law iykwim). And not realise that they actually have to enter into the CP like getting married.
If your partner is reluctant to marry for whatever reason, they will be reluctant to enter in to a CP for the same reasons.

The whole objection for marriage as far as I am concerned comes at the end of the "ceremony" be it church or registry office, the bit that goes "you may kiss the bride". Sorry complete stranger but who are you to decide whether I want to be kissed in public or not without my permission.

You do know you can ask the official to skip that bit right?

The whole objection for marriage as far as I am concerned comes at the end of the "ceremony" be it church or registry office, the bit that goes "you may kiss the bride". Sorry complete stranger but who are you to decide whether I want to be kissed in public or not without my permission. But that's just a cultural/social thing that some people do. It's not necessary and I can't recall any marriage I've been to where that's been said. You could equally do it in a civil partnership if you wanted to.

Trapped you choose what you want said - you don't have to have the stuff about kissing if you don't want to There are several versions of the registry office ceremony for example to choose between, and you can add in/take out. There is only a tiny bit that's the legal words.

But marriage is rooted in patriarchal oppression. So it's not for me, even if you strip away the above elements. The roots are the same and it's not a system I want to be involved in. Hence personally getting a CP.

But doesn't CP have exactly the same roots as marriage (it was designed to be a near mirror image of marriage) but with the added roots of homophobia? I am interested in how CP is seen as an 'untainted' relationship whereas to me that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

Scottish birth, death and marriage certificates have always listed mothers and also any other names women might have been known by throughout their lives.

I'd love a CP arrangement. Our assets are approaching inheritance tax threshold levels, but I don't want to get married. I love my DP but our romantic days are very long behind us and now we're together because we want to maintain a family unit for DS.

I could not make vows I don't believe. I probably won't cherish him until we die or whatever guff you have to say. I just want to sort things out legally, and it may be something we do in the future.

As for protecting women, people are going to do what they're going to do. All the women on here who've realised too late that they have no security when their DP fucks off with Shannon from accounts, would a single one of them have decided against having kids? Really? Unlikely isn't it, because women don't tend to make that decision with the most objective criteria front and centre, do they.

You do know you can ask the official to skip that bit right?
Won't need to in a CP. Like I said up thread I have zero desire to get married again so won't. After 16 years together a CP is just a formality and nothing more, for the avoidance of inheritance tax and pension provision and that's it. We have no DCs so that really is the only reason otherwise we would not bother.

I don't know about Scotland but in England the legal words are:

"I declare that I know of no legal reason why I (your name) may not be joined in marriage to (your partner's name)."

"I (your full name), take you (your partner's full name) to be my wedded wife/husband."

or there's a more traditional version you can use. All the cherishing/death till us part etc are optional.

Ali86
Exactly - all the other words are fluff really.
So, register office, town hall, approved venue - simple ceremony, no religion, no giving away, no kissing, no vows, no guests (other than witnesses who you don't even need to know), no changing of names, no rings.
A civil marriage. Universally recognised.

Ali’s point is very important. I’m not hugely sympathetic to heterosexual couples moaning that it’s not fair they can’t have a CP, but I’m perfectly happy for them to have it if that’s what they want.

However any couple choosing a CP over marriage who might ever want to live or work abroad should research it carefully, because it could prove to be a disastrous mistake if the worst came to the worst.

Two additional points.

Legislation has finally, belatedly, been passed to put mothers’ names on marriage certificates but I can’t find anything online to say when it will be implemented - I think they’re still reprinting the stationery .

Adultery is practically never used as grounds for divorce in heterosexual marriages because you pretty much need to prove that the wrong penis has entered the wrong vagina which is tricky. Far easier to go with unreasonable behaviour.

Get married in Scotland, you can be married anywhere at all. A glen, a mountain, a beach.....your mother’s name is required for the paperwork. You can choose your wording and i chose the simplest agreement to share our lives.

However any couple choosing a CP over marriage who might ever want to live or work abroad should research it carefully, because it could prove to be a disastrous mistake if the worst came to the worst

IIRC a CP can be converted into a marriage at a later date by having the partnership dissolved and then marrying so that obstacle could be overcome if it needs to be. Also with a Registry office etc, there is still the fact that it's a marriage.

As yet nobody has provided me with a compelling argument as to why marriage is the absolute, when there is now an alternative. Marriage is not for everyone and I, for one, am glad that's now been recognised.

I could not make vows I don't believe. I probably won't cherish him until we die or whatever guff you have to say.

That comes across that you view your current partnership as temporary. Do you not envisage spending the rest of your lives together? Or just for the foreseeable future?

Am I right in understanding that those who prefer a CP to marriage are only doing so on the grounds that they view marriage as an oppressive patriarchal construct then? Or are there any other reasons?

@trappedsincesundaymorn you've literally just said "if needed" a CP could be dissolved and marriage sought, haven't you just answered your own question as to why it's not an identically viable substitute?

Pretty much Ginfordinner. although I can only speak for myself. I'd be interested to know what it is about CP that people think is so wrong, when many threads advocate getting married only to secure legal rights and financial secruity? Does it matter that some chose CP over marriage?

trappedsincesundaymorn you've literally just said "if needed" a CP could be dissolved and marriage sought, haven't you just answered your own question as to why it's not an identically viable substitute

True but the key phrase is if needed I won't need to so why should I get married when a CP will be enough. Others will have to decide for themselves if that's the route they want to go down, it's not for me to choose their path for them.