To ask why some people object so much when someone refers to the person they don’t live with as a partner?

[AlternativePerspective]

I’ve seen this numerous times on threads, in fact I even saw an OP about it once, saying that “if you don’t live with him, he’s not your partner he’s your boyfriend.”

And all i can wonder is, why? Why does it bother people so much?

People have numerous reasons for not living together, sometimes it’s for logistical reasons or work reasons or because of children from a previous relationship, or distance. That doesn’t make the relationship any less valid.

Added to which, by that definition, if a woman moved a bloke in after six weeks he would apparently earn the title “partner”.

I can only think that maybe people who are so bothered by it are insecure in their own relationships, and want to think that their relationship is superior because they live together, when actually it might be even more shit than the relationship of a couple who don’t.

But I do wonder if anyone can explain just why it annoys them so much....

I have 15 year olds referring to the person they've been going out with for a month as their partner because they think BF/GF sounds childish.

I certainly wouldn't be calling him my boyfriend at 40 years old 😬
This. I'm in a LAT relationship and have been for quite a number of years. While "partner" admittedly doesn't quite fit (totally separate homes, finances etc) I'm hardly about to use the term "boyfriend" which sounds both juvenile and temporary.

I think ‘lover’ deserves a come back. Unless you’re from Bristol

Meant to add I'm pushing 60!

I think ‘lover’ deserves a come back. Unless you’re from Bristol

Maybe especially if you're from Bristol.

@Glowcat
I agree, I’m 49 and I never say “my boyfriend” always use the term partner. I feel I’m too old and I’m not a teenager 😂

I say partner if it’s a casual conversation with someone I don’t know very well.
I’m a lesbian and just don’t particularly want people knowing my business.

This, really reared its head on the thread about non cohabiting partners being unable too see each other during lockdown. Those of us who chose to make our own risk assessment and proceed anyway we're told we were irresponsibly killing people 'just for a shag' and lots of 'you should just move in' with no acknowledgement of the very good reasons why that isn't always practical or desirable. I've been with dp for 4 years but following a horrible betrayal and divorce, plus children who have no need of further disruption or possible instability, we are entirely separate day to day. If either of us, wants to end the relationship there are no practical difficulties in doing so. I don't think that makes us less committed. It means we are together purely because we want to be, not because the financial or practical issues hold us together.

It has an implied permanence. Like pp said if someone comes to ask advice about their partner it often does make a difference whether said partner has been on the scene two days or two years. It’s not sneering or smug to ask.

sparklyring I totally disagree with that.

I actually think the monotony of daily life is what kills a lot of relationships. It removes the joy and makes it about duty, obligation and doing what society expects.

Yes, there are circumstances (particularly when you share children) when it makes sense. Aside from that and the financial benefits I see only downsides in cohabitation.

It creates dependency, makes people have contempt for one another, diminishes their social pool etc.

Reframing your relationship with someone so you are choosing to be with one another, not just going home to them because you have a shared mortgage, is an amazing, life-giving, liberating thing in my book.

I think the vast majority of people who get sniffy about this definition of partner vs boyfriend only do so because they are either insecure about their own relationships (mired as they are in monotony) or because they are just incredibly old-fashioned.

I think taking a chance on someone by moving in together, knowing that it could all go tits up, is a commitment. It’s one I’m never going to make again after a nasty divorce because I don’t want to take that risk.

Yes it is, bits it's not the only one, not I'd it what defines a relationship as serious.

Bloody hell, that was gibberish! I meant living together isn't the only defining characteristic of a committed relationship.

It’s a very odd form of gatekeeping. Marriage / civil partnership obviously has a distinct, relevant legal definition, but outside of that it doesn’t matter what you call it - it means the same thing!

Moving in together is a commitment but primarily a financial one.

It doesn’t necessarily entail any greater emotional commitment and in fact in many ways it’s a cop-out - often it is pursued with the goal of making life cheaper and (for the man anyway), easier as he has a housekeeper and planner and sometimes free childcare. It’s often done for quite cynical reasons.

It isn’t a lifelong commitment like marriage, it doesn’t commit either partner to long term financial obligations and it doesn’t prevent cheating, neglect or bad behaviour.

It’s a poor yardstick of meaningful commitment, just a hangover from the days people were expected to get married before they had sex, with a liberal helping of self interest.

I honestly don’t care what anyone else decides to call their significant other or whether they live together or not. Boyfriend or partner really doesn’t bother me. Lover makes me feel icky though. People like to compare though and see their relationship as superior somehow.

I have a friend who likes to compare our lives. She met, started dating, got engaged and got married in the space of 6 months. In that time, they weren’t living together until just before the wedding.

My husband and I were together 2 years before getting engaged and then engaged for 3.5 years before getting married. In that time, we had a child, bought a house and had been living together for the majority of our relationship.

My friend told me that my husband and I would catch up to her and her husband soon (in the few months between her wedding and mine).

’It isn’t a lifelong commitment like marriage, it doesn’t commit either partner to long term financial obligations and it doesn’t prevent cheating, neglect or bad behaviour..’

Marriage isn’t a lifelong commitment. It doesn’t prevent cheating, neglect or bad behaviour. Marriages are harder to sever and they give more financial protection to the lower earner but to me living together is pretty much on a par with marriage.

Glowcat

No I totally agree marriage doesn't prevent any of those things.

My point was that its bizarre for people to argue that cohabitation, which has even less legal or financial (or moral) commitment than marriage, and which is usually entered into primarily for convenience reasons, is a hallmark of commitment.

I reiterate that its more to do with people questioning the validity of their own (stale and boring) relationships with people they're yoked together with because they can't untangle their mortgages.

I do not enjoy cohabiting as I need lots of space because I am borderline Aspergers. I agree it makes people dependent. However it also has financial benefits so can see why people do it. Our life is more liberating on our own.

My dp was here a few weekends ago. Usually when we are together we're actually doing something specific, watching a film, playing a fake, going out somewhere or whatever. For the last few hours before he went home he was just 'there' and I didn't feel like I could do what I wanted, or watch rubbish TV. I'm not sure I'll ever cohabit again. I love my private space when the kids aren't around.

Agree with PP that on MN I’ve only ever seen it when someone describes a problem with their partner, and then it turns out they’ve been together for 3 months every other weekend and not met each others’ DC. Answers are very different depending on the commitment level.

I think ‘lover’ deserves a come back. Unless you’re from Bristol or Gloucester. .

Sorry to hear you have had such a tough time OP. I'm glad to hear you have such a supportive partner.

My sister was due to be getting married this month. For various reasons they don't live together. According to Mumsnet their relationship doesn't really count and they can't complain about not being able to see each other.

BendingSpoons its insane isn't it...

This idea that was being pushed at the start of lockdown by the government that if you were dating someone and wanted to have any expectation of continuing to date them you must rush to move in with them. Jenny Harries and that dreadful comment about now being the time to "test your relationship".

Really dangerous set of assumptions. On the one hand there's people saying you should "test your relationship" by moving in, saying you're not a real couple of you don't live together and certainly don't have the right to call yourself "partners" if you don't live together.

On the other there's a huge spike in domestic violence under lockdown -- some of it no doubt connected to people having rushed to "test their relationships" and generally making poorly thought out attempts to cohabit way too soon. And no-one thinks to connect the dots...

This reminds me about the time I started a new part time job working with another woman who was also part time.
She mentioned a few times about her partner and then after a few weeks told her partner was ‘Alice’. I hadn’t realised she was gay but whatever.
Turns out she ran a small business and Alice was her business partner and she was actually married to a man. How we laughter when I realised