"Last week, the pest control guy came to the door. "Are you Mr. Smith?" he says. "No, I'm Mr. Pallotta, Mr. Smith's partner," I reply. "Partner?" he asks. I'm being questioned in my own home. "Yes, partner," I answer. "We're a gay couple." "Oh," he says, trying to process this and maintain his composure."
The writer assumes that because the pest control guy doesn't immediately grasp the context of the word "partner" and questions it that he's being interrogated. Then he assumes that the pest control guys is somehow disturbed by the open admission of sexuality and is trying to maintain composure.
There's a good chance these perceived slights are in Mr. Pallotta's head; he's misinterpreting the pest control guy's confusion as some type of muted bigotry.
There's a lot of ambiguity when the word "partner" is used. I run a business with a partner, so when someone says they're someone's partner, my brain assumes it's meant in a business context because that's the world I spend 95% of my time in.
When I'm informed otherwise, I'm sure there's a noticeable hesitation as my brain processes the change of context from business to relational and re-establishes the rules of social interaction from "this is so-and-so's business partner" to "this is so-and-so's significant other." It's definitely not because I'm "disturbed by the open admission of sexuality and am trying to maintain composure."
I agree with you, only because the word "partner" is probably the worst possible choice of word to use to explain a relationship that represents exclusive pair-bonding of a sexual or close to sexual nature.
'Parter' is too often used in the exact opposite meaning: Your business partner, my dance partner, my tennis partner, Partnership in a firm.
If he had said "boyfriend" of even better, "husband" (which I appreciate you Americans haven't fully embraced yet), I could then allow the inference.
Let's be honest here though, if I referred to my wife as my "partner" I'd get the same quizzical looks and stares as people attempt to process what exactly our relationship is.
That's something that's always bothered me, and this article paints it even clearer: he's constantly thinking about being true to himself and who he is wrt being gay, and yet he uses an ambiguous term to describe his relationship with his significant other. Why not just say "boyfriend", "fiance", or "husband"?
Absolutely agreed that "we Americans" (disappointingly) haven't quite caught on to using husband/wife to describe the halves of a gay couple. A while back a colleague referred to his SO as "my husband" in casual conversation. At the time, I hadn't known him for long, and hadn't known he was gay. It was a pleasant surprise to me that he used a gendered descriptor right off the bat instead of something more ambiguous. I realized at that point that it was very, very rare for me to hear a gay person refer to his/her significant other as anything other than "partner". And I live in San Francisco, of all places.
"There's a good chance these perceived slights are in Mr. Pallotta's head ..."
What? I understand the inference problem, and it's interesting to explain that as a possible solution, but do you honestly think that there's a "good chance" that the author—who experienced the situation first-hand; who had 3x more information [1] about the situation than you—was making it all up?
There's a much better chance that the author just didn't describe the situation with enough detail.
Oh, no, I don't think he was making anything up. I'm just questioning the accuracy of his perceptions. The phrase that really drives that is when he interprets the "partner?" question as being interrogated within his own home.
If you come by my house and asked if I have Black Ops II, I wouldn't relate the story and be like "ianstormtaylor interrogated me in my own home about an XBox game." I would only use that type of phrasing if you'd come by and started asking questions that had some type of accusatory loading.
Yeah, I agree! I bet the pest control didn't actually say those exact words, either! You know, I wonder if there actually was a pest control guy at all--I bet it was really a plumber!
Man, I just can't trust this author at all anymore. Thanks for pointing this out. Thanks also for explaining the ambiguity of the English language to all of us, as well as some of the really interesting machinations people sometimes go through for conversational hesitation. It's information very few people realize and really contributed a lot to the discourse here on HN.
The details of wording or occupation aren't really key to the story though. It is however relevant whether his pause was due to being uncomfortable with the author's sexuality or due to his determining which interpretation of an ambiguous statement was correct. Although I suppose in the end the author's experience of the situation is the main point.
In short, your comment was less constructive than that you criticize. (as is mine)
It's not relevant, though, because the author himself didn't imply either one. The awkwardness, the otherness, of his situation is the point. He said nothing about bigotry, or about the pest guy being "disturbed", which means the commenter I responded to is the one bringing all the baggage to the conversation.
I think you're assuming a lot more about the writer than the writer assumed about the pest control guy. There's very little reason to doubt his reading of the situation, as I'm sure he's encountered it many, many times.
Also, holy crap this entire thread is full of smug heteronormative privilege. HN, I expect better.
I suppose anything that doesn't conform to your world-view is 'smug heteronormative privilege'. If you want a big happy feel-good discussion I suggest you go back to Tumblr. HN is for constructive discussion.
I agree with you; "partner" has an unusual feel in conversation, and I'm never sure what to make of it. I think for some folks this is a sore spot--that the phrase "wife", spoken by a man, is also an open admission of sexuality--so why can't we have a word like that, dammit? We're looking for a language which lets us express an integral part of our lives in a way which is normal to other people.
In "Covering", Kenji Yoshino talks about the strange dance that LGBT people go through. You continually gauge the situation--sometimes overtly, sometimes subconsciously. "Is it worth it?" "Can I give my boyfriend a hug at this service station?" "Should we just break down and get separate beds at the hotel? It'll be easier." "Have we told his Aunt yet, or are am I just a friend in town for Thanksgiving?"
In San Francisco, at least for me, this tension is practically absent--but in rural Minnesota and Wisconsin, it was a very real part of my life. Things are changing quick, though. :)
I think it's you who's assuming too much. I don't see why you think the author assumes the pest control guy is "disturbed by the open admission of sexuality." What the author says is that the pest control guy was "trying to process this and maintain his composure," which could easily describe the process you describe in your last paragraph.
"Last week, the pest control guy came to the door. "Are you Mr. Smith?" he says. "No, I'm Mr. Pallotta, Mr. Smith's partner," I reply. "Partner?" he asks. I'm being questioned in my own home. "Yes, partner," I answer. "We're a gay couple." "Oh," he says, trying to process this and maintain his composure."
The writer assumes that because the pest control guy doesn't immediately grasp the context of the word "partner" and questions it that he's being interrogated. Then he assumes that the pest control guys is somehow disturbed by the open admission of sexuality and is trying to maintain composure.
There's a good chance these perceived slights are in Mr. Pallotta's head; he's misinterpreting the pest control guy's confusion as some type of muted bigotry.
There's a lot of ambiguity when the word "partner" is used. I run a business with a partner, so when someone says they're someone's partner, my brain assumes it's meant in a business context because that's the world I spend 95% of my time in.
When I'm informed otherwise, I'm sure there's a noticeable hesitation as my brain processes the change of context from business to relational and re-establishes the rules of social interaction from "this is so-and-so's business partner" to "this is so-and-so's significant other." It's definitely not because I'm "disturbed by the open admission of sexuality and am trying to maintain composure."