Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

...to think 'partner' means a cohabiting partner, not just boyfriend.

376 replies

fideline · 27/02/2014 19:29

This has twice caused major confusion recently.

I realise most of the time it doesn't really matter much, but referring to someone you are 'just' dating as your partner is confusing wrong.

Isn't it?

OP posts:
Grennie · 01/03/2014 04:07

There are differences between trhe struggles and interests of LGBT people. There are very good reasons for example, why lots of lesbians ended up refusing to work with gay men. The sexism was just so basic and painful from so many gay men.

JapaneseMargaret · 01/03/2014 04:37

I think you need to re-read your thread title, to see why people are supposedly taking this the wrong way.

You obviously didn't actually mean co-habitating couples - or you've changed your mind on that point as the discussion has progressed - even though that's the specific benchmark you give in the title.

It's probabaly just set the tone incorrectly from the off.

I have no axe to grind; I have neither a parnter nor a boyfriend. But I still fail to get why the need for a distinction between the two is important.

Who cares if someone calls their 5-minute boyfriend their 'partner'? It doesn't detract from anyone else's partnership; it just indicates that people interpret things differently. I don't think the meaning has necessarily changed, but that people simply use the word differently. And that's OK.

BitOutOfPractice · 01/03/2014 07:39

fide I just had to come back and tell you what happened to me yesterday. It made me laugh so much after what we had discussed here.

I went out for lunch yesterday with my snogpot near his place of work. I then dropped him back at his office as I had a long onward journey because I am away this weekend with my girlfriends Shock

Anyway, I decided I needed a wee and asked if I found come into his big corporate swanky offices to find a loo. So in we go. The bf/dp/op goes up to the security guard and says "is it ok if my friend uses the loo!"

Friend?!?! Friend?!?!

I have to say I laughed my head off.

I thought you'd be pleased that he had used an appropriate term for his non-cohabiting significant other Wink

TillyTellTale · 01/03/2014 10:42

I would say that using partner for a long-term poly relationship is quite conventional. It's the only word that fits.

As to how you have one: here's an imaginative exercise. Imagine a polygamous furrin marriage, where there is a man who has two wives. Now imagine that this is happening in erm Manchester and the women are bisexual and ardent feminists.

So, you get three people, who all love each other.

This is actually based on a real life situation.

TillyTellTale · 01/03/2014 10:54

In between wondering what constitutes being sexually "over-experienced", I have remembered that I used to confuse people when I said boyfriend. I said "boyfriend" and they heard "extremely short relationship of six weeks". They'd then at some point ask, "so long have you been with 'im" and I would say 3 years. They would then stutter about how that was longer than they'd been with their partner.

And to return to this vexed question of over-experience. I mean I've only slept with one person, which blessed would undoubtedly approve of, but we've gone way beyond in-bed, in-the-dark... I don't think I've ever restrained my lust, given access to contraception! Grin

blessedhope · 01/03/2014 16:41

^Yes I approve tilly...of you, not the three anti-moralists of Manchester.

ReginaldBlinker · 01/03/2014 16:55

Bloody hell, can't believe how worked up people are getting about this!! OP, YANBU. I'm 26, but have been with my boyfriend/partner for almost 6 years now, however I always feel a bit flighty talking about "my boyfriend", so I normally use "partner" at work or whenever I want to feel like a grown- up Grin

We live together, have done for 3 years, fwiw.

TillyTellTale · 01/03/2014 17:53

Rest assured, I do not want your approval. I have no evidence you have morals. Morality is more than making sure your sex life is normal, by the standards placed on upper-class women of Edwardian times.

People often admire my integrity, and I don't mean my sex life there, and yet one of my poly friends is one of the most moral people I know. She is an incisive and compassionate thinker, who is knowledgable on many subjects and campaigns against bullying, rape, domestic violence and all manner of things. She can be relied on to help others, like a modern-day St Martin.

One interesting thing is that when people try to judge me for not having enough partners, she is straight in, pointing out the intellectual flaws in their arguments, and pointing out the real moral dimensions to sexual activity, such as consent, honesty and responsibility. You can be an immoral person, who has only ever had sex with one person, and ignored their boundaries, and a virtuous person who has had sex with 159 or more.

She'd even defend your right to make your choices, out of principle. Even after reading your silly posts.

What would your acquaintances and family say about you, other than "doesn't have sex a lot"? What's your stance on human rights abuses? Donated to Water Aid recently? Are you an unthinking racist? Do you think about your privileges? What about animal welfare? Considering the hard questions, and making choices? That's morality.

blessedhope · 01/03/2014 22:17

Tilly: have donated to numerous good causes (not Water Aid specifically); supporter of Amnesty International; actively anti-racist and anti-fascist; pro- animal rights; and I believe that any sex outside of a man/woman marriage is immoral. You can disagree but that's my position.

I am not, however, saying that those who I believe are sexually immoral are necessarily lacking morals in other ways. For example the couple I first mentioned and was bashed for being 'very very judgmental' about, both probably on balance do more good than bad. The woman in particular is extremely well respected as a teacher and in her community, helping to organize a major event to raise money for anti-bullying and mental health charities, working with children and otherwise housebound elderly people in church where she is a warden and the protection contact; she even provided me with a very empathetic listening ear and support in the run up to an expected bereavement.

That doesn't give her any good excuse for the personal decadence she admits to being involved in though: watching explicit Petra Joy DVDs while her 'submissive' partner services her with his tongue; splashing out £170 on a huge flacon of fragrance and another £65 on cream only for him to touch her flabby perfumed body with, giving her the 'self-esteem' to continue her sumptuous indulgences instead of losing weight; going to a fancy hotel for a weekend of no-strings sex with a man 20 years younger (29yo), with his full approval- and other things too numerous to mention which show her puzzling moral dichotomy.

On the one hand she's caring, sensitive and responsible; on the other she fails to comprehend the value of moderation, sexual exclusivity or repressing her flesh in general. From a lifelong practicing Christian at least we family values proponents should be able to expect better. Still, having some faults of my own I don't want to sound self-righteous.

ReginaldBlinker · 01/03/2014 22:31

I have read and re-read this post, trying to figure out where in the world you think you have the right to judge and vilify others, blessed, and I don't seem to be able to find anything besides a hugely over-inflated sense of self-importance.

What your overweight mate does on her own time is absolutely none of your business, and affects you in no way whatsoever. I'd also hazard a guess that she's probably a much more pleasant person to be around than you.

No wonder you waited until marriage to have sex... You probably married the first man who'd have you.

BitOutOfPractice · 01/03/2014 22:49

Blessed, the 16th century called, they'd like their opinions back!

I assume you're a wind up merchant?

BitOutOfPractice · 01/03/2014 22:50

And as for not wanting to sound self righteous. Epic fail!

ReginaldBlinker · 01/03/2014 22:58

I did actually laugh out loud at that Bit!

BitOutOfPractice · 01/03/2014 23:13

I thought the 3rd para of her post read like a bad black lace novel. "Serviced with his tongue". Someone isn't getting enough methinks Wink

ReginaldBlinker · 01/03/2014 23:17

And, I do think it's a bit strange that so many "sexual deviants" seem to tell blessed the complete details of their sex lives, even to complete randoms who happen to ring with a simple question...

marfisa · 01/03/2014 23:19

blessed's last post... well, words fail me. I need the lace handkerchief myself now. Please catch me as I swoon.

watching explicit Petra Joy DVDs while her 'submissive' partner services her with his tongue

sumptuous indulgences

repressing her flesh

It's like reading erotica. Grin

As for Tilly, I love you for your last post. In a chaste, platonic, non-partner-like way, of course. That means no tongue-servicing.

marfisa · 01/03/2014 23:20

X-posted with Bit! Maybe this is a wind-up?

blessedhope · 01/03/2014 23:49

Wow, the extremists come out when someone suggests a person who is respected for their moral decency in most areas of life shouldn't be so unashamed of her sexual debauchery [of course I fault her DP too for being such a weak and corrupted man he's willing to accept such an arrangement...] That's hardly 16th Century stuff btw.

reginald I am not vilifying anyone. I was responding to tilly who tried to sidestep my point on sexual morality by talking about all the other good things her polyamorous friend does unrelated to sex- so I was actually being more respectful by citing the positive elements of her off centre moral code as well as the negative. I also have no specific problem with my friend being overweight- I used to be myself, and many people can't help it for medical reasons... my concern is that instead of showing the self-denial/ discipline needed to go on a diet and give up luxuries for a while she embraces her fat, saying that she finds her partner massaging her 'affirming and validating'. It's an issue of persistent sensuality, not of size.

And repressing the flesh is from textbooks on Christian ethics (similar phrases are found in Islamic and Far Eastern works I've read), referring to the exact opposite of "erotica".

BitOutOfPractice · 02/03/2014 00:04

Oh blessed. Either you are a wind up merchant, purposely trying to make us guffaw. Or else you are a very deluded person with no sense of irony whatsoever.

I am still chortling at you calling us extremists Grin

fideline · 02/03/2014 00:08

Persistent sensuality, eh? Sounds awful. Hopefully not contagious.

OP posts:
Suzannewithaplan · 02/03/2014 00:08

Petra Joy?

I thought they were rubbish!

Suzannewithaplan · 02/03/2014 00:10

I like to refer to him as my 'latest squeeze' it makes me think of old fashioned saucy seaside post cards :o

fideline · 02/03/2014 00:11

Sorry, i'm calling troll.

Never read such feeble soft-porn purporting to be RL anecdote.

OP posts:
BitOutOfPractice · 02/03/2014 00:11

Fideline at least blessed has united us. Silver linings and all that!

fideline · 02/03/2014 00:12

I'm starting to think old-fashioned cartoon terms are the way forward Suzanne Smile

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread