Re: partner
- From: wollman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Garrett Wollman)
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:51:33 +0000 (UTC)
In article <g5os3k$q85$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peacenik <cnelsonpublic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"R H Draney" <dadoctah@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:g5o4ub0127r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Lately I've been hearing more and more use of the term "spousal
equivalent"...if
nothing else, this seems to indicate how weary most people are of
searching for
a suitable way of describing such a relationship....r
There's certainly a sense of sarcasm and protest in that term, given the
denial of the right of bona-fide marriage to gays.
I don't think so. Before /Goodridge/, my employer offered
separate-but-equal insurance coverage for "family" and "self +
same-sex spousal equivalent" (SSSE?). (I don't recall whether the
SSSE coverage also included dependents the way "family" does.) Now
they offer separate and unequal "family" and "self + spouse" coverage,
independent of the anatomical configurations of the people involved.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wollman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
.
- References:
- partner
- From: Peacenik
- Re: partner
- From: Nick
- Re: partner
- From: R H Draney
- Re: partner
- From: Peacenik
- partner
- Prev by Date: Re: What tense to use in this situation?
- Next by Date: Re: National anthem etiquette
- Previous by thread: Re: partner
- Next by thread: Re: partner
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|