Civil Partnerships for heterosexual couples?

[LoopyGremlin]

Perhaps I don’t know enough about it, but why would some couples prefer this to a simple, low-key registry office marriage?

France has the pacte civil which has a different history to British civil partnership.

It also means that now, by ticking Civil Partnership on any kind of form, you're not automatically stating your sexuality by doing so. The same applies to marriage, once same-sex marriages came into being.

Married is a loaded term, steeped in sexist history.

A civil partnership is exactly that - a partnership. Which ideally marriage is, but sadly it isn't always seen that way.

OH and I are considering travelling to england to have a civil partnership.

It’s probably neither here nor there for most people. I suspect there will be some who would prefer to be married and who will get this as a compromise option instead, and that’s sad for them. I suppose no more or less honest than marriages where one person is less invested than the other though. And I suspect that most people will privately consider it to be a two-tier system with marriage being “better”, and I don’t really know who benefits from that. But my guess would be not women in relationships they deserve better from. As always.

I think this is good news for all the people who dislike the patriarchal history of marriage but want to have the legal protections. I don't understand why people have a problem with it.

No it doesn't affect me but it's pointless. We already have register office marriages if people don't want any religion or want it to be cheap etc.

The objections to marriage are not only religious or financial.

I don’t understand it either. I was reading an article on the BBC News website, and they all mentioned the fact that wedding ceremonies are rooted in a patriarchal past - I mean, this isn’t the Victorian era, your wedding can be absolutely anything you want it to be. I got married in 1999, and I ditched the whole to honour and obey, whilst my husband decided he wanted to say it. 🤷🏾‍♀️

Married is a loaded term, steeped in sexist history.

A 'civil partnership' is steeped in discrimination against same sex couples. It was only created because the right didn't want to extend marriage to same sex couples. 'Partner' was the term same sex couples had to use due to not having the same rights or value as hetero relationship. 'Civil partnership' is meaningless outside the UK. You go anywhere else and well, you're just an unmarried couple.

Silly AF.

In your eyes.

Civil partnerships don't come with an uncomfortable history
Er, how so? They are steeped in homophobia.We want to get married. DP is unable to physically at the moment. We are thinking of a civil partnership to protect our legal rights until he is well enough to plan a wedding
Doesn't quite work like that - it is either/or. At present a CP can be 'converted' to a marriage, this is extended to opposite sex couples at present but will likely be removed now that everyone has the choice either. CPs are not marriage lite. Once they cannot be converted you would have to dissolve through the courts to enter into the other.
Divorce is also much simpler to do
How so?

OH and I are considering travelling to england to have a civil partnership.

Which is then entirely meaningless if 'civil partnerships' are not recognised in your own country. Literally, just a piece of paper. Much like 'common law', not recognised outside of the country where you are.

If it doesn’t affect you I don’t really understand why anyone would be bothered about it.
It obviously matters to some people a lot so what harm does it do to have it as an option?
I don’t care either way. If you want a marriage fine, if you want a civil partnership also fine.

I see CPs as being just that: a civil partnership.
Not ‘marriage’ which is based on and steeped in the Christian patriarchy.

I believe that ‘infidelity’ is not grounds for dissolving a CP.

FruitcakeOfHate

I am not sure you are right about that. Civil partnerships will be recognised in the whole of the UK surely?

Quite a good article here from the Guardian... www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/29/first-of-84000-couples-get-set-for-a-civil-partnership?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I’m in a civil partnership, and have always felt it should be available to different sex couples and that marriage should be available to same sex couples. Equality for all seems a good thing to me.

These Civil Partnership ravers make me LOL. The woman always says 'I am NOT getting married and bowing to the patriarchy!' Whilst still doing all the wifework and childcare and letting her career take a backseat to drudgery!

Like loads of other people, I can't fathom why they don't just pop into a register office with 2 witnesses and do it quietly and cheaply. This is just attention-seeking IMO.

And did you see the couple who were THE FIRST to do it? (Rebeccan Steinfeld and Charles Keidan...)

She looked like she'd just woken up, quickly cleaned the kitchen, and hung the washing out, then grabbed her coat on the way out.

And HE didn't look much better!

Could have made a bit of effort with their appearance FFS.

@BlaueLagune

And men don't get married because they want to protect their assets. They're not going to enter into an identical in all by name civil partnership.

This exactly.

It's utterly pointless. Civil Partnerships were created for same-sex couples when marriage was not an option for them. As soon as marriage became a possibility for same-sex couples, Civil Partnerships should have been abolished within a week.

*Rebecca Steinfeld, (not Rebeccan!)

Why do they need to make an effort with their appearance? What a nasty post. Ime marriage is often all about appearance and little else.

Oh do give over.

Nasty post my backside!

I'm entitled to an opinion FFS!

How on earth do some people get through a day in real life, when they deem throwaway comments/opinions of strangers, on a public message forum as NASTY. Get a grip!

Marriage is a legal contract.

Genuinely intrigued by all the comments saying civil partnerships are pointless and silly. By getting a civil partnership I'm not insulting your choice to be in a marriage - but simply that a civil partnership is what works for me and my partner. It's a positive thing to give people a choice.

And yes, someone who doesn't want to plan a big wedding/doesn't agree with some of the archaic the traditions of marriage/doesn't want to be a wife COULD just get wed in a quickie registry office weeding. Or they could... get a civil partnership.

Could have made a bit of effort with their appearance FFS.

One of the many reasons I would prefer a civil partnership to a wedding.

Expectations of fluff and puff

This will be massively unpopular on here...
But for me marriage is a patriarchal institution. I know others don't agree and say you can make it what you want. But I don't want any part of something that used to be about women being sold off. So both me and my partner have been closely following the case for heterosexual civil partnerships for years. We have a mortgage together, been together for 15 years and are child free by choice. So it's right for us. Neither of us want a wedding but if it was just that we'd do low key registry office.

Forgot to say the reason we will do it is the legal protection it offers. So for us it's an alternative to doing some basic work with a solicitor! Just wanted to explain our thinking on the issue.

What I don't get is why people are so bothered about it. Marriage still exists and is probably what most couples will do. As I said we'd do it because it's right for us. But it doesn't mean I care enough about the other option (marriage) that I think it shouldn't exist! Just feels a bit over invested in something that has no impact on them at all.