Her "wife"

  • Thread starter Thread starter flatlanderjenn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lemongrass80 said:
So let’s see if I’ve got this straight…

It’s a reasonable option for the OP to refer to her boss’ wife as her “wife” (in quotes) in written form.
Click to expand...
Using quotes is a good idea. If someone is adopted, we can refer to the people who adopted them as their “parents”. :rolleyes:
 
exnihilo said:
The relationships you describe above are not inherently cruel to the child. A same sex couple necessarily deprives a child of a mother or a father. It is a form of child abuse. While you might not comment on it to compare it to a relationship that is not inherently abusive to the child is unwarranted.
Click to expand...
My point wasn’t about whether a relationship is “inherently cruel” to a child. I was referring to the OP, in which they stated:
I want to say he’s not biologically related to her but I don’t know if it’s my place
Click to expand...
It’s no-one’s place to say this kind of thing, and I think it’s awful the OP finds this amusing. The OP’s boss has a son, whether biologically related or not, and this would not be considered an issue if a adoptive parent or a step parent said this.

Lou
 
Thorolfr said:
Using quotes is a good idea. If someone is adopted, we can refer to the people who adopted them as their “parents”. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
One can only be wife to a husband. The symmetry of the terms demands that. Though perhaps that will be subject to redefinition also…:rolleyes:
 
Rau said:
One can only be wife to a husband. The symmetry of the terms demands that. Though perhaps that will be subject to redefinition also…:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
In many languages, including in English, the words “wife” and “woman” were often expressed by the same word, so it really just denotes gender. For example:
wife (n.) Old English wif (neuter) “woman, female, lady,” also, but not especially, “wife,”
Click to expand...
etymonline.com/index.php?term=wife

The same is true, to give another example, of the Hebrew word 'ishshah which means woman, female, or “wife” as we use it now.
 
Thorolfr said:
In many languages, including in English, the words “wife” and “woman” were often expressed by the same word, so it really just denotes gender. For example:

etymonline.com/index.php?term=wife

The same is true, to give another example, of the Hebrew word 'ishshah which means woman, female, or “wife” as we use it now.
Click to expand...
So, one can be a wife with no marriage at all. Makes sense…:rolleyes:

Perhaps it intends to denote THE female member of the married couple. Just sayin’ 🤷
 
Rau said:
So, one can be a wife with no marriage at all. Makes sense…:rolleyes:

Perhaps it intends to denote THE female member of the married couple. Just sayin’ 🤷
Click to expand...
So a woman married to another woman would still be a “wife” since she is a female member of a married couple. 🤷

But originally, the Old English word “wif” could be used interchangeable to have either a more general meaning of an adult member of the female sex or someone married to a man. You would originally have had to look at the context to see which meaning was intended.
 
Thorolfr said:
So a woman married to another woman would still be a “wife” since she is a female member of a married couple. 🤷
Click to expand...
Or perhaps we have the term “wife” to denote the female member of the couple, recognising that the couple must also have a male member “husband”. Complementary words for complementary roles belonging to complementary genders. So simple really. 🤷
 
Rau said:
Or perhaps we have the term “wife” to denote the female member of the couple, recognising that the couple must also have a male member “husband”. Complementary words for complementary roles belonging to complementary genders. So simple really. 🤷
Click to expand...
Again, the word “husband” did not originally denote a male member in a marriage. That is a more modern connotation:
husband (n.) Old English husbonda “male head of a household, master of a house, householder,” probably from Old Norse husbondi “master of the house,” literally “house-dweller,” from hus “house” (see house (n.)) + bondi “householder, dweller, freeholder, peasant,” from buandi, present participle of bua “to dwell” (see bower).
Click to expand...
etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=husband
 
Rau said:
As your reference says Thor:
"husband (n.) Old English husbonda “male head of a household…”

How many can be the head of a household? I’d have thought one at most. Old English goes back a fair way…😉
Click to expand...
Most people back then did not live in small nuclear families but in extended households, so the head of a household need not have been married although he would probably have been a man. It might have included a man (perhaps unmarried), his brothers and perhaps their wives and children, uncles, nephews, etc. Most likely the head of household would have been married, but not necessarily. A man in a marriage was not the primary meaning of the word “husband.”
 
This definition back and forth is silly and pointless.

There is civil marriage which includes gay and straight marriage. There is catholic-recognized marriages which are straight only. To stick your fingers in your ear and say wah wah wah gay marriage isn’t real, or have pointless debates over the definition of “wife” is a waste of time.
 
Thorolfr said:
Most people back then did not live in small nuclear families but in extended households, so the head of a household need not have been married although he would probably have been a man. It might have included a man (perhaps unmarried), his brothers and perhaps their wives and children, uncles, nephews, etc. Most likely the head of household would have been married, but not necessarily. A man in a marriage was not the primary meaning of the word “husband.”
Click to expand...
I have witnessed your extraordinary contrivances to justify same sex sexual relationships (as good, with no Scriptural or moral objections to be found), marriage between two persons of the same sex as entirely reasonable and now to undo the meaning of husband and wife. I must applaud your endeavour…😉 but at the same time, I lament it.
 
DaddyGirl said:
I suppose you can ignore the law and pretend it doesn’t exist…but that doesn’t make it disappear.

.
Click to expand...
Right. Just like the law in these United States, the United Kingdom, etc. protected the rights of slaveowners for a couple of hundred years.

Just because something is legal at a given point doesn’t make it moral.

Ask anybody who walked for Civil Rights 50 years ago.

Ask anybody who’s Marched for Life for the last 40 years.

Peaceable protest is one of the rights we enjoy as American citizens, along with free speech.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top