Gay 'divorces' up by 44%

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph....ivorces-up-by-44.html

Since Lesbians are twice as likely as gay men to separate, what could be the reason why Lesbians find it more difficult to settle into a happy relationship, than their male counterparts?

Why such a rise in Gay divorces by both sexes anyway?

These figures are not The Telegraph's figures or even The Daily Mail's (mind my mouth), but the Office for National Statistics.

[craft1948]

I didn't know there was such a thing as gay marriage..............I thought they were civil partnerships.

[Answerprancer]

You're right Jack - it was a rhetorical wonder ;-)

[whiskeryron]

It appears to me that two ladies in partnership are accepted more in society than two guys.Ron.

[New Judge]

Don't know the answer to the question but, as a point of pedantry, there has been lots of talk here of "marriages" and "weddings". Same sex couples cannot marry of have a wedding. Instead they are limited to "civil partnerships" - a different thing entirely.

Similarly the definition of "divorce" (and I'm pleased that AOG placed it in quotes) is "the dissolution of marriage". Same sex couples who have undergone a civil partnership and who wish that partnership to be dissolved have to apply for a “dissolution order”.

Although the effect of both these procedures is similar to the procedures in which heterosexual couples take part, it is important not to confuse the two. I note that there has been increasing use of the terms "marriage" and "wedding" when referring to civil partnerships. If care is not taken the same thing will happen as has happened to "railway station", which seems to have disappeared in favour of the entirely inappropriate "train station".

[New Judge]

Sorry, craft. You posted whilst I was composing my answer !!

[jno]

what's inappropriate about that as a place where "trains" stop?

[jackthehat]

I agree, NJ......and am fervently hopeful that the notion of CP will soon be jettisoned and all will be free to marry and divorce equally before the law.

[ladybirder]

Does anyone know if a person in a Civil Partnership, entered into a second CP without dissolving the first, if they have committed a crime.

[jackthehat]

Yes, they have.

[jno]

is that "bigamy", or does that only apply to marriages, jack?

[jackthehat]

I'm not sure if it has that name, jno........but if you have been CP'd previously you have to produce the requisite paperwork to confirm that you are free to do so again.

[jno]

might just be some sort of fraud, then. Presumably the penalties are in line with bigamy though.

[scotman]

JNO

Railways have stations, trains do not.

[jackthehat]

A while ago, but I imaginr it still holds true.

http://www.familylaww...uk/site.aspx?i=ed2310

[ladybirder]

Thanks Jack. Seven years in prison - phew!

[jno]

scotman, that just begs the question: I say trains *do* have stations. It's where the trains are stationary. The railways are stationary everywhere. If you like, the stations are OF railways but FOR trains.

Jack, yes, looks like that "civil bigamy".

[rov1100]

Its a well known fact that children keep marriages together. For gays not being able to have a child from both must cause a problem. We don't know who fathered the child Elton John or his partner but it would be quite natural for the other to feel left out and is really an adopted parent.

We are all governed more by religion that we care to admit!

[jackthehat]

A well-known fact......!!??

Did you read the divorce statistics given in the links?

*You* might think that you'd feel like an adoptive parent but Elton and David have obviously dealt with that.

I would prefer that religion kept out of the bedroom.

[ummmm]

Errrrr Rov....is there not loads and loads and loads of hetrosexual marriages where one party has children but the others don't??

[Kromovaracun]

"If care is not taken the same thing will happen as has happened to "railway station", which seems to have disappeared in favour of the entirely inappropriate "train station""

Oh no!