More than one woman I used to work with expressed a little frustration with the lack of a suitable term for the man she lived with, or was going with. "I'm fifty-five years old. I'm not going to call him my boyfriend like I was still in high school." Lover can also describe a merely sexual relationship, an affair, so that is usually avoided. POSSLQ was cute but it never caught on, and I can't say I miss it. There are longer phrasings, such as "the man I am going with," or indirect sentence-reconstruction approaches like "we've been together for nine years." Housemate implies no romance, significant other almost took but was clumsy, man or old man seem earthy but not formal respectable terms, sweetheart, beloved, honey convey warmth but no permanence or commitment.
I corresponded with a woman who used partner to describe her relationship of thirty years - they do not live together so I don't quite know what that means, but it does at least sound adult. Yet it has a bit of a chilly feel to it. (She may want that but be unable to say it out loud, but that's an individual situation.) Boyfriend does sound young, but at least it is warm and affectionate. I went with a couple of girls in college who were unable to get over the hurdle of describing me as their boyfriend even after a few months of exclusive relationship - but those may also be idiosyncratic.
I never added to the discomfort of any of these women who were floundering and searching for a best term, but neither did I rescue them with reassurances that I understood what they meant. There's a lot of variety out there, and I usually didn't know quite what they meant. I mostly just thought to myself that this is what happens when you won't take on the terms husband and wife. The English language actually reflects the reality quite well: when you move away from those terms it is because you are going to places the culture is not used to, beginning about fifty years ago. Many people would prefer not to define their relationship very precisely, not because it wouldn't be accurate, but because it would be more accurate than they are willing to admit. It's not the language that is imprecise, it's the relationship.
We always want to have everything both ways, don't we?
5 comments:
In my subculture it's not unusual for young academics or performers to have spouses that aren't even domiciled in the same country, let alone the same house. But I suppose the schedule of such careers allows many periods per year of extended together time in one home or the other, more so than most careers.
I'll drop in the term beau, which is of course better in written conversation in English than spoken, as it won't be confused as a nickname.
In Quebec my colleagues said ma femme/mon mari, but then explained that they weren't formally married -- and in Quebec I gather there's not much difference in law between a formalized marriage and the obligations and protections one nets just from exceeding a time threshold of living together as a couple.
One woman refers to 'my gentleman friend'
That's pretty good, but doesn't describe whether they are living together.
@ Douglas2 - America used to have common law statutes that took effect after seven years or so. I recall a coworker in the 80s who was worried because she and her live-in were over five years and did not wish to get married. They decided to split "for a year" at about 6.5 and never got back together.
I think most would understand if you said that he, or she, was mine.
You’re right though. The formally respectable term is husband, for those who care about being formal and respectable. If other things are more important to you, then you may have to pay this small price for the convenience.
For civil purposes, a lot of states count a couple as common law after 6 months of continuous co-habitation. And others are a year, after which one partner can sue the other for half of their stuff.
Post a Comment