Romanticizing "Partner"

This is a departure from what I've been posting about (as if anyone actually reads this) but it was something I've been thinking about and figured I'd write up a post. These thoughts were spurred by a blog post a former professor of mine wrote in which he discussed the trouble with the term "husband" and how it relates to gay marriage. His argument is that the term is intertwined with a history of patriarchy since the term denotes dominance (he uses the example of husbandry to illustrate this point) and discusses the unique position of gay couples who are now, finally, getting the legal permission to be married.

The post got me to thinking about the terms we use to describe our personal relationships and how the very terms themselves produce and reproduce a male dominant hegemony within our own households even without our knowing. Certainly, as my former professor mentions, the connotations of husband and wife provide certain people with a sense of pride and lend their relationship an ideal of permanence which other terms don't carry, but they also bring with them a history of male dominated oppression that I (would like to) imagine even many of the people that use these terms with the best intentions don't agree with.

And this is where I believe the straight community can learn from the gay community when it comes to relationships. For years gay couples who have dedicated themselves to the same level of commitment and love that marriage denotes for straight couples have used the term "partner" to refer to their loved one. I believe that the the straight community should do away with the terms husband and wife and instead should use only the term partner to refer to the person to whom they choose to be married, or enter into a life-long relationship with.

Partner is a term that denotes equality. Partners in a business or law firm have equal responsibility, equal freedom, and deserve equal credit for the successes of the firm. In a true partnership one partner is not in charge of the other and cannot command the other partner to do anything that she/he doesn't agree with. Two partners must sit down and agree together before making decisions that effect them both, or else the disenfranchised partner has the right to leave the partnership. This, I believe, is a more accurate description of the ideal romantic relationship than one in which the "husband" is able to command the other member of the marriage.

The problem is that "partner" doesn't sound nearly as romantic as husband or wife, it doesn't carry the same sense of intimacy as the two traditional terms. Partners in a business may be equals, but they don't care for one another when they are sick, or support each other emotionally in the way that a "husband" or a "wife" does.

Thankfully though, language is a fluid, living thing, and it can and does change according to times and society. With a concerted effort between couples of all sexual orientations to do away with the antiquated and patriarchal terms and bring a sense of romance to the term "partner" we can do away with the inherent inequalities of the current terms and perhaps bring the vocabulary of marriage up to date with the social changes brought about by the Women's Movement and the Gay Rights Movement. In a class I took on feminist theory we discussed ways in which every person could change their own vocabulary to become to work towards breaking down heteronormativity. One of these was instead of asking a boy or girl if they "have a boyfriend/girlfriend" to instead ask "are you seeing someone," a phrasing which doesn't assume the sexuality of the person of whom you are asking the question. I believe that in the same way doing away with "husband" or "wife" and replacing them with "partner" is a step towards breaking down heteronormativity and patriarchy that everyone can participate in without making drastic changes to their own lifestyle that, taken collectively, could go a long way towards creating a more equal society for everyone.