Civil partnerships to be opened to opposite sex couples

[Lottapianos]

Well I was NOT expecting to hear any good news from the Tory party conference but here we are. I know lots of us on here have been waiting and hoping for this and it's been announced today. No idea yet when it will become legally possible but it's happening.

I think this is really good news and DP and I will most definitely be taking full advantage at the earliest opportunity

Turph, you've really made some excellent points in your last few posts. I'd just like to underline that while I see the genesis of the civil partnership as a compromise fudge to accommodate the anti-gay marriage lobby, I really appreciate the significance it has to the LGB community, and I certainly wouldn't see it as a lesser commitment at all, and I can see why you are irritated by some of the heterosexual campaigning on this.

What do you need to give up wrt civil partnerships? It doesn't affect anyone else apart from those who would like to enter into one.

What do you need to give up wrt the word woman? It doesn't affect anyone else
You're telling me to make room for you because you want something I have. I'm telling you I don't want to, I shouldn't have to and your issues with marriage are your problem, not mine. Surely you can see the parallels?
(Assuming in this instance you are a heterosexual who wants a civil partnership, I'm not scrolling back to find out)

FloralBunting thanks, I'm definitely a minority on this I think and that's fair enough. I'll still state my opinion and I'll call out hypocritical arguments when I see them too. I'm off to bed now though. Goodnight!

I feel like you're saying that homosexuals had the legal stuff sorted, so the celebration and proud, defiant announcement that this was the person you were going to spend your life with - that's just paperwork so let's let mates do it or siblings do it to save bloody tax??

Errr, no. You're making stuff up projecting things onto my words that I never said.

Please don't do that.

Ok, so heterosexual people shouldn't have asked for the ability to have a CP because it is something exclusive to same sex couples.

(What if one of the couple is bisexual... probably doesn't matter as the relationship is straight I guess).

Of course we do. I lose the right to a homosexual union. I lose the right to a homosexual ceremony. I end up with the default union, that I'm begrudgingly allowed to take part in, even though half the team didn't want to pick me to play.
It doesn't mean anything unless it means something. Some posters here just want to get married/civil partnered to save tax, and aren't interested in making a public statement about being out, proud and in love because it has never occurred to them that might be massively important to other people.
Ok it doesn't have the immediacy of sexual predators being able to destroy safeguarding, but it's important to me, and I feel something has been taken from me, worse still, I feel it has been taken to give to people who don't even value what they've taken! Now I'm definitely going to bed because this is exhausting.

I know it's not the point, but I think opposite sex couples who would go for a CP would value it enormously.

But it's entirely likely that this will be forgotten about and then a change of government will mean its dropped and put on a back burner and not ever actually happen.

I don't have a dog in this fight at all or really a strong opinion on cohabiting, civil partnerships or marriage. We all have to fudge institutions in one way or another, you know?

But I'd like to thank Turph for her eloquence and passion on this thread and for giving me a perspective to think about that I am ashamed to say I was lacking.

Yes, I really see this point actually. Equal marriage was not available, so civil partnerships were created. I think it's fair to say that not wanting equal marriage wasn't a particularly fair basis for creating civil partnerships, but the LGB community embraced the idea as something that was specially theirs, so they could publicly commit to each other and receive protection in law.

To have some heterosexuals demand access does look quite a bit like the privileged wanting extra things for really not very compelling reasons in comparison. It's a little bit reminiscent of straight couples wanting to colonize a gay bar. Yes, there's no particular reason why they should be excluded from a public venue, but equally, for some people, it is a little bit tone deaf to push in when there are perfectly accessible bars everywhere else.

I understand where I didn't before as well. Which is interesting as previously I would have been very keen to have a CP with my long-standing opposite sex partner. Now I feel like it would be insulting to same sex couples with CPs, and I feel that I wouldn't take it up if it became available.

Turph does make a very good case.
I have always thought I would have preferred a civil partnership, but maybe marriage was and is just in need of change from the inside so it's no longer so much about patriarchy and religion.

And you're right - there are no arguments for why opening up CPs is a bad idea. Just a load of denial about patriarchy, and a load of sneering and nastiness, and complete refusal to accept that many people feel uncomfortable with marriage

Lottapianos, do you still feel that way after the more recent posts?

Turph, you have definitely shared a different perspective, and have done it without sneering or being nasty. I don't begrudge you anything. I hear what you're saying and thank you for sharing your experience. I have my own feelings about CPs which I have made clear on this and other threads so I don't really have anything else to add right now