when does a bf/gf become a partner?

Henry_Hoover_2

It's a tough one, but i'm inclined to say "living together".

I call my OH my partner. We have been together for 7 years, we live together, share bills etc, not married but we are engaged.

Calling him my fiancee sounds a bit.. twee! So I just call him my partner.

piratefairy

ooh, i disagree (sorry henry!)
i think it's perfectly possible to have a mature, and grown up realtionship without having ot be living together..

but i do see that there isn't an objective set of requirements..

i know that a previous realtionship of mine was at the "partner" or whatever the preferred term is, stage..regardless of the fact that i woulnd't live with a "partner"..

SandC

Work dos can be so bleddy anti single it does my head in!

BitterAndTwisted

"Partner" on an invitation is a nice, easy weasel-word used not to offend any homosexuals out there because you know you can't use the term "spouse", "husband" or "wife". If you're not gay, I would operate on the premise that it means spouse, long-term OH and/or the father/mother of your children. Definitely not a b/f or g/f if you're not living with them in a long-term, committed relationship.

fernliebee

My DH and I have been together since we were 16 and got married 2 years ago. For the 8.5 years prior to marriage he was my BF (but I guess we were young) even though we lived together and had been together for a long time. Then once we were married he was my husband, which even after over 2 years I'm still getting used to

I personally don't like the terms partner or fiance, though can entirely understand why you wouldn't want to say BF as you get older, so not much else you can call them

As for OP, if I was single I would be searching around for "a flavour of the week" to take, purely because the invite is so ambiguous! It seems a really weird way of doing things, surely they are either catering for +1 or not!

kalaika

If I were to receive an invite for me and 'partner' and was told that it is not a '+1', I would assume that it would mean that you can take a partner/bf/gf if you have one but if not then you wouldn't be allowed to bring a best mate instead. But, I guess it may depend a little on the type of 'do' that it is as to why they might want to specify that.

Personally I don't think that the OP's friend should get too hung up on what constitutes a 'partner'. I think if you've got someone that you are in a committed relationship with (even if it's a fairly new relationship - it's not your fault if you've only recently met!) I would take them along as the 'partner'.

goggle

I've just read these responses to my pal & after a giggle says to add the following:

Pal is going on her own (like several people are - some because they are single, others because partner works or can't get childcare or doesn't want to go or whatever - no discrimination against singles), but it's her workmate that's causing the grief!
J has been with her boyfriend for 2.5 yrs but they do not live together & don't intend to untill they get married - both are in their early 30s if it matters! Pal & several people in the office says bring him - you are an established partnership, but there is a small but vocal core who say she can't as he's not a "partner" just a "boyfriend" and that unless you are living together it doesn't count. Of course the most vocal person is the 21 yr old receptionist who knows *everything* & is of course bringing her "partner" who she has been living with for the grand total of 9 weeks (and is the 3rd person she's cohabited with in the 18 months my Pal's been at that place!).

I'm glad my workplace doesn't do this - it's either employees only or "+1" - never "partner only"

kr15snw

I started calling my bloke my partner after about 2 years, this was when I thought 'this is for the long run, hopefully for ever'.

Same as sending out invites for my wedding, due to room restrictions we don't have room for +1's but we are inviting partners.

piratefairy

Do you not think it's wrong to make a distinction between +1 and partner for invites like that. If it's a venue which is short on space, surley it's a case of inviting just the named invitee. No partenrs/ no +1s.
Or invite fewer guests, with +1 on the invite?

That just seems more logical to me, than to let yourself get drawn into the "how serious is your relationship" debate with all and sundry.

xmaslolly76

goggle wrote: »

I've just read these responses to my pal & after a giggle says to add the following:

Pal is going on her own (like several people are - some because they are single, others because partner works or can't get childcare or doesn't want to go or whatever - no discrimination against singles), but it's her workmate that's causing the grief!
J has been with her boyfriend for 2.5 yrs but they do not live together & don't intend to untill they get married - both are in their early 30s if it matters! Pal & several people in the office says bring him - you are an established partnership, but there is a small but vocal core who say she can't as he's not a "partner" just a "boyfriend" and that unless you are living together it doesn't count. Of course the most vocal person is the 21 yr old receptionist who knows *everything* & is of course bringing her "partner" who she has been living with for the grand total of 9 weeks (and is the 3rd person she's cohabited with in the 18 months my Pal's been at that place!).

I'm glad my workplace doesn't do this - it's either employees only or "+1" - never "partner only"

If your friend has been with her OH for 2.5 years and they plan to do things the right way ie: get married move in together have children (which i applaud them for) then i would say they are partners and are in a committed relationship. As for the receptionist she sounds like a jealous little bint and i would ignore her completely because at 21 she obviousley knows everything after her whole 9wks of experience in a committed co-habitting relationship NOT!!!!