Are Married Men "Husbands?" How About a New Term for a New Relationship?

[Justtristo]

In my experience the term partner is used a lot, instead of husband, wife and even girlfriend or boyfriend (if the relationship is a long term one). Therefore, I believe the term partner will replace husband and wife as the most commonly used term in both heterosexual and homosexual marriages.

[MTL]

"Master of the house"? Tell that to my wife!   He he
She'll laugh it off and then give me a list of chores to do...

One day my Dad walked past me, list in hand,
and heaved a heavy sigh as he fumbled for his car keys.

" What's wrong, Dad? "  I asked.

" Oh, "  he replied,

" Your mother has a list of things she wants me to do...
....and she wants every item on the list, done FIRST. "

---

Singular - spouse.
Plural - spice.

If we changed the plural of spouse from spouses to spice I would totally give polyamory a shot.  Just so I can give all my spice different nicknames based on their personalty.  Cayenne is the blunt one that doesn't give a fuck about your feelings.  Salt is the one always upset about something no matter how insignificant.  Bay leaf is the one that still plays pokemon for the nostalgia.  Cumin. . .I don't think I need to explain this one.

More relevant to the OP:
I could get behind people using spouse or significant other, or some other variation instead of husband.

And I guess your spices could just call you 'Allspice'  ^^

---

I don't see why people are getting excited about these terms.  If you're not calling each other "bitch" or "fuckhead," then you're happily married, and why look for things to feign outrage about?

lol excellent point

---

You'd be surprised how happily married you can be even if you do call each other those things, so long as you each have a sense of humor.

lol also an excellent point

[Jenny A]

That is incorrect with regard to man and woman, at least with regard to subservience, though it does have to do with gender roles.  Man was originally the word for both adult human males and adult human females.  There is an old English translation of Genesis that calls Adam and Eve men.  Werman (weapon man) differentiated males, and wimman  or wifman (weaving man) differentiated females and eventually vowel shifted to woman.  The "wer" eventually disappeared from the language with the notable exception of werewolf.   Wif eventually became wife.

That is an interesting view and worth looking into. I'm coming from a Christian worldview that defines the wo in woman as meaning of man. I never heard it the way you described, Thanks for the education.

Apparently theologians make no better etymologists than they do historians, biologists, or physists.

The spelling of woman in English has progressed over the past millennium from wīfmann[1] to wīmmann to wumman, and finally, the modern spelling woman.[2] In Old English, wīfmann meant "female human", whereas wēr meant "male human". Mann or monn had a gender-neutral meaning of "human", corresponding to Modern English "person" or "someone", however subsequent to the Norman Conquest, man began to be used more in reference to "male human", and by the late 1200s had begun to eclipse usage of the older term wēr.[3] The medial labial consonants f and m in wīfmann coalesced into the modern form "woman", while the initial element, which meant "female", underwent semantic narrowing to the sense of a married woman ("wife"). It is a popular misconception that the term "woman" is etymologically connected with "womb", which is from a separate Old English word, wambe meaning "stomach" (of male or female - modern German retains the colloquial term "Wampe" from Middle High German for "potbelly").[4][5] Nevertheless, such a false derivation of "woman" has appeared in print.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman#Etymology http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=woman

[MTL]

To me the whole issue of how to label the members of a relationship is almost a moot point,
since I have personally become disinclined to apply "type-of-relationship" labels, of ANY kind.

I would love to have a serious 'Significant Other' for the rest of my life,
but I am reluctant to marry...not because I don't love the idea of being married to a wonderful guy,
but because I am a realist and a pessimist,
and I don't ever want him to think of me as a 'ball-and-chain'.

I am now reluctant to even use the term "boyfriend"...because I feel even THAT term smacks of a degree of ownership or chattel,
and I don't want the man in my life to feel for one second like he is shackled to me, in any degree.

[Pyrrho]

In my experience the term partner is used a lot, instead of husband, wife and even girlfriend or boyfriend (if the relationship is a long term one). Therefore, I believe the term partner will replace husband and wife as the most commonly used term in both heterosexual and homosexual marriages.

Many people have used the word "partner" because they are not married.  Not being married, "husband," "wife," and "spouse" would all be incorrect.  And "partner" has been chosen over "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" as a means of trying to indicate a greater level of permanence than is suggested by the terms "boyfriend" and "girlfriend."

If you do not know if a couple is married or not, then you can use the term "partner."  If the couple is married, you can use the term "spouse" if you do not know the sex of the spouse, or if you do not wish to use a term that designates the sex of the spouse.

If someone hates the word "husband," that person can always use the term "spouse."  If one does that, I would recommend also using "spouse" instead of "wife" for the sake of symmetry and consistency.


Also, not that anyone asked about this, the proper phrase is not "man and wife," but is "husband and wife" (for married people with one man and one woman; for two men, it would be "husband and husband," and two women, it would be "wife and wife").  Both are married, not just one of them.  Likewise, the correct phrases are "ladies and gentlemen," "men and women," boys and girls" (the order makes no difference, but the pairing does; the female equivalent of "gentlemen" is "ladies,", the female equivalent of "men" is "women," etc.).  Gender-neutral terms are available for most of these: "spouse," "human," "child."  Off the top of my head, I cannot think of a gender-neutral term for "gentleman," though it is a word that is not strictly necessary.

[Rhondazvous]

I offered a snide remark earlier in the thread. I still stand by it; however, since the thread has survived I thought it appropriate to provide a more considered response.

Jenny addressed the mistaken etymology so that leaves me with an opinion regarding the goal and your proposed means of achieving it. What you're proposing is simply a change of label invoking the 'lipstick on a pig' analogy rendered cliche. I have no doubt of your conviction and well meaning; however, I can't help but wonder if the label change idea is symptomatic of a subconscious side-effect stemming from our constant inundation of branding and marketing campaigns. This may read like I'm having a bit of fun, but I'm quite sincere here. Change the color, shape, name or the music played with the product being peddled and magically you are made to feel you are buying a new product even though you are being sold the same shit.

Take society's consideration and treatment of women over the entirety of human history and then compare that to the advances made in just the last 100 years or so. The improvement has been exponential. This is not to say that things are yet quite right and I empathize with the frustration that must accompany the silence when you ask the question, "it's so fucking simple, why doesn't everyone just get it?".

We're close, but the last stretch is going to seem arduous mostly because you are living it. Do those that came before you proud and continue to struggle and demand for what is rightfully yours. Endeavor to finish what they started, equal rights and treatment of women. Forcing a label change accomplishes nothing! Enforce what being a woman means and let the terminology evolve on its own accord.

I dig what you are saying. Will the label change by itself or when people suggest (not force, I never force) that we question the status quo?

[bennyboy]

I'd like to suggest a male perspective on this question. These gender issues always seem to portray men as creatures of special privilege, but ignore the implied responsibilities that come with it.

Let's look at "husband" as the owner / supporter of the house. Does this mean the woman is not the owner of the house, and is therefore below the man in status? Maybe. But I think the word also implies extra duty: that the man is the one who has the burden of driving the family through life, of making sure the house thrives, of making sure his wife and children are provided for.

If modern women are not keen on being seen as second in the house, I'd argue that modern men probably aren't that excited about taking all the blame for failure, and all the responsibility for success, when most men are probably married to wives with similar education and intellectual capacity as themselves. We all know that men die younger than women. I think the pressure of filling this role, which is not reasonable, is a big part of this.

Why can't we just drop all this shit, and call it like it is: a "husband" is a male spouse, and a "wife" is a female spouse. Except foor kooky Christians, I don't think anyone else really takes those words to mean more than that.

[Rhondazvous]

I'd like to suggest a male perspective on this question.  These gender issues always seem to portray men as creatures of special privilege, but ignore the implied responsibilities that come with it.

Let's look at "husband" as the owner / supporter of the house.  Does this mean the woman is not the owner of the house, and is therefore below the man in status?  Maybe.  But I think the word also implies extra duty: that the man is the one who has the burden of driving the family through life, of making sure the house thrives, of making sure his wife and children are provided for.

If modern women are not keen on being seen as second in the house, I'd argue that modern men probably aren't that excited about taking all the blame for failure, and all the responsibility for success, when most men are probably married to wives with similar education and intellectual capacity as themselves.  We all know that men die younger than women.  I think the pressure of filling this role, which is not reasonable, is a big part of this.

Why can't we just drop all this shit, and call it like it is: a "husband" is a male spouse, and a "wife" is a female spouse.  Except foor kooky Christians, I don't think anyone else really takes those words to mean more than that.

Point taken. Shared privilege should definitely be accompanied by shared responsibility. If I make a decision in my life, then I have to deal with the consequences of that decision. That's the difference between being a grown women and being a little girl. In a relationship decisions should be shared and the consequences shared as well.

[bennyboy]

Yeah "wife" shouldn't be seen as a derogatory term, because that term now implies new responsibilities, privileges, and contributions that matter a lot more than the ancient history of a word, right?

[Rhondazvous]

Yeah "wife" shouldn't be seen as a derogatory term, because that term now implies new responsibilities, privileges, and contributions that matter a lot more than the ancient history of a word, right?

Aw, between you and Cato, what am I going to do? I agree that changing the word without changing the reality will only cause the new word to take on the same connotations and stigmas as the old word. Still, it's interesting to explore the meanings of words and where they come from.