As the first gay "marriages" in England and Wales took place yesterday, there was much debate about how to refer to the partners in a civil partnership, writes David Batty.
The case of Sir Elton John, who "married" David Furnish yesterday, has - unsurprisingly - attracted the most comment.
The Evening Standard, predictably, opted for "Rocket Man … and wife" in its story on the happy couple, while other tabloids referred to them as bride and groom (though failing to agree which was which).
Charles Mosely, the editor in chief of Debrett's, the guide to the aristocracy, wondered whether Mr Furnish might gain a title or whether same-sex partners would miss out on this "honour", as the husbands of women made baronesses already do.
He told the BBC's Today programme that one solution might be to make him a "laddy" rather than lady.
But what about your average Joe or Joanne? While some couples seem happy to refer to each other as husbands or wives, others are adamant this is one trapping of heterosexual respectability they won't be adopting.
Jemima Kingsley on the Naked Translation blog, notes how the language of civil partnership is "horribly formal and brings to mind all the legal associations [of marriage] and none of the emotional ones".
She considers plain "partner" as too ambiguous, given that it currently covers "business partner, opposite sex boyfriend or girlfriend, and same sex boyfriend or girlfriend", although she suspects the term may become exclusively associated with civil partnership in the long-term.
One solution offered on the Barbelith community is to cap up the term partner when it refers to someone in a civil partnership – and abbreviating it to Pr.
But the issue is clearly not so pressing to all posters, with one suggesting that big fat hairy gay men refer to one another as "husbears". Presumably, this means a small fat hairy gay man would become a "cubby".
