Happy anniversary, Pryhills!
Happy anniversary, Pryhills! Many more to you.
21 September 2005
House in order
I somehow missed this when Michael first posted it and have ended up in the odd position of getting my Gay Orbit bulletin through that straight guy over there. The original article is from 365Gay, which isn't always super-reliable, but I'm assuming it's accurate in the main:
This kind of thing always pisses me the hell off. I agree with Michael's commenter Don: "This is sad. But after 19 years of being together why didn't they have arrangements already made?" You said it, brother.
You know, Atsushi's life insurance goes to his parents. He owns our apartment outright. We don't have a joint bank account. He's closeted to both his parents and his company, so we can't do anything that would indicate official recognition of some kind of relationship between us. This is not my ideal arrangement, but my life with him is what's most important to me, so I make the necessary compromises. I am, after all, the one who decided to fall in love with a traditionalist Japanese man. And he sacrifices things, too: his company doesn't promote unmarried men up the management escalator. I make more or less as much money as he does and save responsibly, so I wouldn't have major financial worries; but I would have to leave the artifacts of our shared life behind almost in their entirety and start over. This is not a fun topic of conversation, but we've considered it a necessary one. I know where I stand, and I've made my peace with it.
Therefore, I find myself hard-pressed to lavish unalloyed sympathy on people who don't make wills, don't thoroughly acquaint themselves with the terms of their civil unions, and don't do everything they can to make sure their partners are provided for when they have, from where I'm standing, all kinds of tools at their disposal. Jordan and Price were able to be public about their relationship. They took the availability of civil unions so casually that they put theirs off for six months while one of them decided what to wear. I want to see laws changed so we can provide for our partners as much as anyone does. I also hope things are settled in Jordan's favor. But she and Price were irresponsible. It might not be fair that we have worries that straight married couples do not, but it's reality.
During their 19-year relationship, Rene Price and Betty Jordan thought of themselves as married, especially after they registered as domestic partners on the last day of 2004.
But after Price died unexpectedly in July, Jordan learned that she was not entitled to the couple's Perth Amboy home, their cars, or the $9,000 in Price's bank account.
Price's death at age 61 exposed one of the many places where New Jersey's domestic partnership law does not treat partners like married couples: When a domestic partner without a will dies, the surviving partner has no right to his or her possessions.
This kind of thing always pisses me the hell off. I agree with Michael's commenter Don: "This is sad. But after 19 years of being together why didn't they have arrangements already made?" You said it, brother.
You know, Atsushi's life insurance goes to his parents. He owns our apartment outright. We don't have a joint bank account. He's closeted to both his parents and his company, so we can't do anything that would indicate official recognition of some kind of relationship between us. This is not my ideal arrangement, but my life with him is what's most important to me, so I make the necessary compromises. I am, after all, the one who decided to fall in love with a traditionalist Japanese man. And he sacrifices things, too: his company doesn't promote unmarried men up the management escalator. I make more or less as much money as he does and save responsibly, so I wouldn't have major financial worries; but I would have to leave the artifacts of our shared life behind almost in their entirety and start over. This is not a fun topic of conversation, but we've considered it a necessary one. I know where I stand, and I've made my peace with it.
Therefore, I find myself hard-pressed to lavish unalloyed sympathy on people who don't make wills, don't thoroughly acquaint themselves with the terms of their civil unions, and don't do everything they can to make sure their partners are provided for when they have, from where I'm standing, all kinds of tools at their disposal. Jordan and Price were able to be public about their relationship. They took the availability of civil unions so casually that they put theirs off for six months while one of them decided what to wear. I want to see laws changed so we can provide for our partners as much as anyone does. I also hope things are settled in Jordan's favor. But she and Price were irresponsible. It might not be fair that we have worries that straight married couples do not, but it's reality.
9 September 2005
Could you be the dream that I once knew?
Oh, yeah, did something gay happen in California this week? Hmm. Sample reaction (the comments, not the main post): Bleating about the democratic process? Check. Mewling about equal protection? Check. Hysterically brandishing dodgy civil rights analogies? Check.
Where, oh where, I keep asking myself, do people get the idea that gays are cheap opportunists with self-centered princess complexes? I just don't understand, you know?
Where, oh where, I keep asking myself, do people get the idea that gays are cheap opportunists with self-centered princess complexes? I just don't understand, you know?