...it took me this long to realize "partner" was a personal relation, not a professional relation.
I'm also amused by just how hard these reporters seem to even avoid pronouns or other language that would indicate his gender. Strikes me as really really odd.
I wonder if the media and/or government(s) were bending over backwards to make damn sure no one could be accused of homophobia. Dunno about the US, but in the UK, if there were the slightest smell of homophobia, a whole new can of worms would have been opened. The gay rights folk would have, rightly IMHO, exploded, with quite a lot of public support. Oddly, I reckon if this had been some how made a gay issue, the government would have been in a lot more trouble. Last thing this UK government in particular wants is any more controversy over gay rights issues. Lining it to the spying would be both explosive, and kinda 1960's traditional!!!
Or perhaps some credit is due in that some parts of the media have simply grown up, and the gay part really is a non issue. Which would be a good thing.
You know they government has fucked this up when even the Daily Mail writes an article that sympathetic about terror law abuses directed at a gay couple closely linked to the Guardian.
>Partner is the only gender neutral way of expressing this thought
Not really. Significant other does the job fine and cannot be confused with a business partner.
On the other hand, my dad is a business owner and I've had people assume he was gay when I referred to his co-owner as "his partner, Jeff".
This angle of understanding is now clearly incorrect.
Now I have to go and look up whether or not Miranda is a Guardian reporter, for instance, because that's an assumption I made that may not be true after all.