Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

No same sex civil partnerships

191 replies

Applebite · 21/02/2017 11:52

AIBU to wonder who would take this to Court? Surely the point of civil partnerships was to recognise FINALLY that gay people have the same rights and needs as hetero people?

Or am I missing something that you get in a civil partnership but not a marriage? I mean, I can see why you might not want to get married, and why you would think there should be more rights for "common law spouses", but would a civil partnership give you anything (or less of something) that marriage wouldn't?

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/21/heterosexual-couple-learn-outcome-civil-partnership-battle-court/

OP posts:
MargotLovedTom1 · 22/02/2017 13:16

Having said that I don't care if opposite sex couples wish to be civilly partnered. I just don't like the assumption that a wife has less equality. Also, someone mentioned up thread about 'surrendering' to a spouse. Such a loaded term.

boatrace30 · 22/02/2017 13:21

Most countries on the continent allow civil partnership. It's a fantastic way to get the legal recognition of your partnership without marriage. I say this as someone who is married, but I found the verdict very disappointing and have a lot of respect for this couple taking the issue to court.

TiltedNewt · 22/02/2017 15:54

They raised £35k to take the case, which is of course their right to do, but I find it odious when same-sex marriage isn't yet legal in NI.

A quick google tells me homosexuality is illegal in 73 countries. I find it odious that you complain about same sex marriage in NI when in 73 countries people can't even have a relationship without being locked up.

But wait, 10 of those countries have the death penalty for homosexuality. I find it odious that I am complaining about 63 countries when in 10 countries people don't even have the right to live if they are homosexual.

What you are basically saying is shut up and put up because some people have it worse than you.

ahatlikeprincessmarina · 22/02/2017 15:56

Exactly, TiltedNewt. It's not a grievance competition. It's a request for equal treatment.

passingthrough1 · 22/02/2017 16:07

I would also prefer a civil partnership. I KNOW a wedding doesn't have to be all wedding-y with the white dress and the father giving the bride away (yuck). And I know marriages can be a partnership of equals and you don't have to change your name etc etc. But I have no interest in getting married and being someone's wife, but I would like my partnership acknowledged.

Fair enough it's not the biggest deal, I guess eventually we'll do a registry office thing and not mention it to most people, but I'd prefer a CP.

ArcheryAnnie · 23/02/2017 11:04

No, that's bollocks, TiltedNewt. NI is in the same bloody country as me. If we are all about taking legal challenges to get marriage equality in the country we live in, I feel absolutely free to judge the poor oppressed straight people who make it all about them first.

MackerelOfFact · 23/02/2017 12:05

It's not a grievance competition. It's a request for equal treatment.

But it still won't be actually equal, will it? It won't suddenly put heterosexual and homosexual relationships on an equal footing, legally, culturally or socially. Same-sex couples still won't be able to get married in a church, for example, or have their legal marriages recognised worldwide. So it doesn't create equality, just eliminates the one and only disadvantage faced by straight couples, who are significantly more privileged to begin with. And the point is CPs don't even confer additional benefits, it is literally just an administrative difference. It's worse than marriage, practically speaking.

I don't disagree that there is room for some kind of legal union that isn't marriage. How that can ever really be achieved I don't know, because it's it's unlikely that something that could be introduced that would be globally recognised in the same way as marriage, given the non-secular nature of the majority of countries. CPs aren't even recognised by every country.

Original poster
Applebite · 23/02/2017 12:17

When a straight couple can show what discrimination they face by getting married instead of CP, it might be compelling. But so far most of the posts on this basis just read as people trying to be clever/different.

OP posts:
MackerelOfFact · 23/02/2017 12:45

Quite, Applebite. I'm not sure what hetrosexual (or indeed homosexual) couples actually gain from entering a CP rather than a marriage.

From what I can gather, it's:
a) that adultery isn't ground for divorce/dissolution (but you can obviously work through adultery in a marriage should that 'benefit' particularly appeal)
b) they can avoid having to say vows
c) they can travel abroad to various jurisdictions and be legally unconnected
d) they can avoid the cultural, social, historical and semantic basis of marriage

A and C aren't really 'benefits' for most people. B and D might a big deal to some, which is fair enough; vows are pretty flexible though, and you can choose to ignore or engage with as much or as little of the historical context of marriage as you so choose, as we do with hundreds of other things (such as OPs land ownership example). Does legislation really need to change to protect people from feeling they are somehow endorsing those things?

I don't know. The bottom line for me is that CPs were never about equality. It's enough of an insult that they exist, let alone that people think they're missing out.

JAPAB · 23/02/2017 12:48

When a straight couple can show what discrimination they face by getting married instead of CP, it might be compelling.

They would probably face more by having a CP rather than a marriage.

But if it is psychologically important to people that they have this name for their union rather than that name, why have a seemingly arbitrary divide on who can make this choice.

EurusHolmesViolin · 23/02/2017 14:00

While I support CP, wanting it instead of marriage because of the connotations is problematic given that CP is rooted in the bothering of gay people. Homophobia isn't better than misogyny. They both have problematic connections.

EurusHolmesViolin · 23/02/2017 14:26

Othering. Not bothering.

TiltedNewt · 23/02/2017 14:53

ArcheryAnnie

Actually, not bollocks. I really do find it odious that you care more about yourself than you do people who face the death penalty for their sexuality based purely on the fact they don't live in the same country as you. The one making this about themselves is you, not those pesky straight people. Those pesky straight people are pointing out that inequality sucks no matter the sexuality. And they are on the whole saying that it is undeniable that homosexuals have to face much, much worse than this, but it doesn't make this right.

In fact, you are actively encouraging discrimination because you feel others should suffer like you have. That is truly odious.

TiltedNewt · 23/02/2017 14:56

But it still won't be actually equal, will it?

Good point. I take it all back. Let's not bother with fighting inequality or injustice, we will only have something else to challenge if we win a small victory. Let's just stick to what we have now.

samG76 · 23/02/2017 15:55

I do think the "bride" is a professional complainer, so have little sympathy even though she does have a point.

ArcheryAnnie · 23/02/2017 16:35

I really do find it odious that you care more about yourself than you do people who face the death penalty for their sexuality based purely on the fact they don't live in the same country as you.

You really are reaching, TiltedNewt. In fact, no, your aren't reaching - you are lying. Where have I said that I "cared more about myself than people who face the death penalty for their sexuality"? I don't live in NI, and I am not planning on getting hitched to anyone, of any sex, so it's not about me. It is about where I can reasonably expect to influence legislation, and amazingly, that's more likely to be in the country where I live than in, say, Afghanistan.

(And I do support women seeking asylum here on the basis of their sexuality. What have you done, then?)

TiltedNewt · 23/02/2017 17:17

Apologies ArcheryAnnie I appear to have mixed you up with another poster. I do, however, stand by my point that it is not a competition and equality should be the dream, not just for those in our country or those deemed worthy enough, but for everyone.

And me? Sorry to burst your bubble but I work in the charity sector. I won't go into specifics if you don't mind but I help a lot of people through the work I do and I get paid significantly less than I would if I worked in the private sector. Does that make me worthy of an opinion then? Probably not, I'm not oppressed enough.

PandoraMole · 23/02/2017 17:25

I am aware that this legally leaves me in a rather precarious position should my partner die and visa versa. A civil partnership would resolve this.

So would a couple of appointments with a decent solicitor.

There's also no reason why 2 people couldn't just pop down the registry office with a couple of witnesses, do the necessary and crack on with their lives if they don't want a big, fussy, expensive wedding.

It does seem a bit all over the place admittedly but I think spending goodness knows how much public money bringing it to court is pretty ridiculous and attention seeking tbh.

Andrewofgg · 23/02/2017 17:30

Civil partnerships were all bs anyway. Shouldn't have been introduced was just a way for the gov to cop out of allowing samesex marriage sooner.

It was all public and Parliamentary opinion would allow at the time and a very good thing it was too. But now I would suggest closing it to newcomers and offering existing civil partners a free "conversion" to same-sex marriage; if they prefer not to, fine, let them remain in c.p. indefinitely.

That would be a better use of any parliamentary time which can be spared for this West London first-world "problem".

Same-sex or opposite, if you don't want your marriage to be patriarchal don't be patriarchal about it.

LozzaChops101 · 23/02/2017 17:33

Andrew ^ You can already convert to s/s marriage from CP, with or without a ceremony. Just not in a church, obviously.

Andrewofgg · 23/02/2017 17:34

I know. I had in mind a free option. There was one when SSM started - for a time. Let's make it permanent.

EurusHolmesViolin · 23/02/2017 17:36

So would a couple of appointments with a decent solicitor.

Hmm. Not necessarily. Depends on why the position is precarious. A decent solicitor won't be able to stop the other cohabitant having the right to unilaterally change their will to stop providing from you, or to allow you to use your cohabitant's unused IHT allowance with no questions asked. There are some things that you simply don't get outside marriage or CP.

I do find the moral arguments against marriage but in favour of CP verging on the distasteful, as I said upthread: you're basically saying you'll refuse to associate yourself with an institution because of sexism, but not have the same standards for homophobia. But there are people who feel like that and there's no point pretending the law as it stands makes provision for them.

VelvetSpoon · 23/02/2017 17:40

Words like ridiculous and attention seeking are really inappropriate Imo, unless you're going to apply similar terms to anyone pursuing a case to the Court of Appeal on a point of law...

Why should people HAVE to get married, if marriage is not what they want, but they would like some legal protection/ recognition of their relationship?

One of the most offensive comments about this case I've read (not on here) was some numpty who said how sad it was that he didn't love her enough to marry her Hmm, which has to win points for being utterly patronising and crass.

Is it really hard to understand that some people don't want to enter into a marriage for valid reasons? However minimalist the ceremony may be.

Tomorrowillbeachicken · 23/02/2017 18:22

I think they should allow it tbh.

flowersalloverme · 23/02/2017 18:29

There are no Civil Partnerships in Ireland (ROI) anymore since same sex marriage became legal. It is marriage or non legal partnerships now.

Civil Partnerships prior to the same sex marriage Act can be converted to marriage, or they can stay Civil Partners. But the option is not there since last year.

Sensible solution.

Time for UK to do the same thing.