(no subject)
Oct. 9th, 2013 11:35 amNo, I aten’t dead. I just got busy with Darth Real Life and haven’t been keeping up with LJ/DW. Things are well enough, I suppose (says she unenthuasiastically), just busy.
Interesting article from The Independent about how approximately twice as many UK lesbian couples as gay male couples to dissolve their civil partnerships. Fairly balanced article, and the only major “Grrr! Arrggghhhh!” moment I had was with the headline which said “Divorces” rather than Divorces. Probably the headline was written by someone other than the reporter who wrote the story. Yes, when a queer couple get divorced, it’s not a “divorce”, it’s a divorce. It’s a heck of a lot easier to say than dissolution of civil partnership, just two syllables. But that is a minor thing, given how bad and sensationalistic the article *could* have been, given the subject matter.
I actually only know one couple in a same-sex marriage who’ve gotten divorced, which is pretty good odds considering I know quite a few same-sex married couples. I know *loads* of divorced straight people. Of course, they’ve had much more time to get married and then divorced, given SSM has only been legal here for 10 years. And the one person I do know who’s gotten divorced, that relationship was a train wreck even before they got married. I never thought they were going to make it. Not that I was happy to be proven right. Divorce sucks, almost as much as being stuck in a grievously unhappy marriage with no hope of it recovering.
Edited to add:![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
legionseagle pointed out in comments that the whole “divorce” thing in the headline which got my back up is not necessarily the headline writer trying to be a jerk, that there’s a complicated debate going on in the UK and by using inverted commas, the headline writer may have been seeking not to offend advocates of SSM, rather than seeking not to offend people who find the very existence of SSM and same-sex civil partnerships offensive. I freely admit to having had a kneejerk reaction to those inverted commas, but I was coming at it from a Canadian context in which we skipped the civil partnership step, we have full marriage, and have had it for quite a while, comparatively speaking.
Interesting article from The Independent about how approximately twice as many UK lesbian couples as gay male couples to dissolve their civil partnerships. Fairly balanced article, and the only major “Grrr! Arrggghhhh!” moment I had was with the headline which said “Divorces” rather than Divorces. Probably the headline was written by someone other than the reporter who wrote the story. Yes, when a queer couple get divorced, it’s not a “divorce”, it’s a divorce. It’s a heck of a lot easier to say than dissolution of civil partnership, just two syllables. But that is a minor thing, given how bad and sensationalistic the article *could* have been, given the subject matter.
I actually only know one couple in a same-sex marriage who’ve gotten divorced, which is pretty good odds considering I know quite a few same-sex married couples. I know *loads* of divorced straight people. Of course, they’ve had much more time to get married and then divorced, given SSM has only been legal here for 10 years. And the one person I do know who’s gotten divorced, that relationship was a train wreck even before they got married. I never thought they were going to make it. Not that I was happy to be proven right. Divorce sucks, almost as much as being stuck in a grievously unhappy marriage with no hope of it recovering.
Edited to add:
legionseagle pointed out in comments that the whole “divorce” thing in the headline which got my back up is not necessarily the headline writer trying to be a jerk, that there’s a complicated debate going on in the UK and by using inverted commas, the headline writer may have been seeking not to offend advocates of SSM, rather than seeking not to offend people who find the very existence of SSM and same-sex civil partnerships offensive. I freely admit to having had a kneejerk reaction to those inverted commas, but I was coming at it from a Canadian context in which we skipped the civil partnership step, we have full marriage, and have had it for quite a while, comparatively speaking.
