Yep, hands up, took me a while too.

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.

Even the Daily Mail's coverage was surprisingly good (I looked at it explicitly expecting a total hatchet job).

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.

While I'd love to think the media has grown up, the past few years haven't given me much hope. :)

I'm not British but I lived in London for two years and I believe this is the way the British say "significant other." Its pretty forward thinking actually, because they use it for all of the options and therefore take the stigma out of same-sex couples using it to refer to themselves.

It is, however, far more commonly used when referring to same-sex couples.

No, it's not.

David Miranda.

Hey @drivebyacct2 you're account is dead just FYI.

He's been told more times than I can count at this point. I think he's decided that he doesn't care.

Oh ok.

drivebyacct2 you are hellbanned.

>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.