How do we differentiate between two gays? Take a case of a married gay couple. How would mother-in-law know that if she is dealing with her ''daughter-in-law'' or ''son-in-law''? I hope you get the point.

Question

How do we differentiate between two gays? Take a case of a married gay couple. How would a mother-in-law know that if she is dealing with her daughter-in-law or son-in-law? I hope you get the point.

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,
How do we differentiate between two gays? Take a case of a married gay couple. How would a mother-in-law know that if she is dealing with her daughter-in-law or son-in-law? I hope you get the point.

Such nomenclature is still evolving.

I think she'd say 'son-in-law'. Or, to be smart, she could ask them what term they prefer.

I've heard two lesbians who adopt a child spoken of as 'two mothers'.

Clive

Nona the brit · Answer

People who are gay do not change ***!

So a man is a son-in-law and a woman is a daughter-in-law.

Thomas Tompion · Answer

I have a friend who wrote to tell me that her son, Tom, had entered into a 'civil union' with his 'partner', Charles.

The son writes to me of 'my partner, Charles'.

And the mother refers to Charles 'Tom's partner'.

I imagine that Tom refers to Charles' mother as 'Charles' mother' or 'my partner's mother'.

This is some people's way out of the linguistic problem, and I suspect it's quite a usual way in BE.

I have a feeling that my friend with a lesbian daughter uses the same form of words, but they haven't formed any sort of semi-permanent arrangement yet and the language may change should some civil ceremony take place, though I doubt it.

Jackson6612 · Answer

Thomas TompionThis is some people's way out of the linguistic problem, and I suspect it's quite a usual way in BE.

Question 1:
Here 'the linguistic problem' refers to the fact that no regular referents have yet been settled for those relationship. Right?

Question 2:
What is Thomas suggesting here, "I suspect it's quite a usual way in BrE"? Inventing new ways out of linguistic problems is usual with BrE?

Question 3:
The Macedonian king, Alexander, had relationships with males. I don't know if he had any interest in women. They say gays and lesbians are equal partners and they entertain each other's physical desires and pleasures. My question is particularly focused on gay relationship. I'm in to know if there are any gays who, though being sexually attracted to males, aren't really interested in receptive role. I leave it to you to infer the meaning of receptive in this context. Perhaps, that word choice could offend some feminists, I couldn't think of any other fitting word offhand.

Clive · Answer

Hi,

I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum very much anymore.

Question 1:

Here 'the linguistic problem' refers to the fact that no regular referents have yet been settled for those relationship. Right? Yes

Question 2:

What is Thomas suggesting here, "I suspect it's quite a usual way in BrE"? Inventing new ways out of linguistic problems is usual with BrE? That's true about BrE. But I believe Thomas was referring to the particular solution he offered for the particular problem he was discussing.

Question 3:

The Macedonian king, Alexander, had relationships with males. I don't know if he had any interest in women. They say gays and lesbians are equal partners and they entertain each other's physical desires and pleasures. My question is particularly focused on gay relationship. I'm in to know if there are any gays who, though being sexually attracted to males, aren't really interested in receptive role. I leave it to you to infer the meaning of receptive in this context. Perhaps, that word choice could offend some feminists, I couldn't think of any other fitting word offhand.

Here's a simplistic statement about what is really a more complex topic.

People who have *** with other people of the same gender are considered gay, regardless of which role they prefer.

Clive

Jackson6612 · Answer

Hi

Question 1:

Is the following deconstruction analysis to the point?

CliveI'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum very much anymore.

1: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum.
2: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum anymore.
3: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum much anymore.
4: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum very much anymore.

The first suggests that you are not sure if Thomas has ever visited the Forum - perhaps he is not even the member here.

The second says Thomas once used to visit the Forum but probably is not active any longer.

The third indicates that Thomas logs on to the Forum, but maybe he does it only occasionally, not really much.

The fourth is a modification on the third in that it further includes the idea of degree of recurrence of 'occasionally' and takes it to next level, Thomas' contribution level to the Forum suggests he is not very much involved here.

Question 2:
Does my mere speculation have something to do with reality, are there really some gays who don't want to be receptors?

Please let me know. I'm always receptive to learn about new things, ideas...

Best wishes
Jack

Clive · Answer

Hi,

Question 1:

Is the following deconstruction analysis to the point?

Clive

“I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum very much anymore. ”

1: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum.

2: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum anymore.

3: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum much anymore.

4: I'll try to answer, as I'm not sure if Thomas visits the Forum very much anymore.

The first suggests that you are not sure if Thomas has ever visited the Forum - perhaps he is not even the member here. Yes

The second says Thomas once used to visit the Forum but probably is not active any longer. Yes

The third indicates that Thomas logs on to the Forum, but maybe he does it only occasionally, not really much. Yes

The fourth is a modification on the third in that it further includes the idea of degree of recurrence of 'occasionally' and takes it to next level, Thomas' contribution level to the Forum suggests he is not very much involved here. Yes

Question 2:

Does my mere speculation have something to do with reality, are there really some gays who don't want to be receptors? I'm sure there are. Let's leave this topic now.

Please let me know. I'm always receptive to learn about new things, ideas...

Best wishes, Clive

Funnypictures · Answer

lolz how is tht possible ???

How do we differentiate between two gays? Take a case of a married gay couple. How would mother-in-law know that if she is dealing with her ''daughter-in-law'' or ''son-in-law''? I hope you get the point.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions