Boston Marriage
Tony Cooper
review ascribed the title to meaning to "single women of independent
means living together, sometimes with romantic connotations". In this
play, the two female characters have an intimate relationship.
I'd never heard of this phrase before. Perhaps President Bush should
move for a separate "Boston Marriage" concept to avoid the current
issue.
--
Tony Cooper aka: tony_co...@yahoo.com
Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> I'd never heard of this phrase before. Perhaps President Bush should
> move for a separate "Boston Marriage" concept to avoid the current
> issue.
Bartelby suggest it comes from "The Bostonians" by Henry James.
Perhaps the Greek islands were too distant for Americans?
Donna Richoux
> Tony Cooper <tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd never heard of this phrase before. Perhaps President Bush should
> > move for a separate "Boston Marriage" concept to avoid the current
> > issue.
>
> Bartelby suggest it comes from "The Bostonians" by Henry James.
> Perhaps the Greek islands were too distant for Americans?
>
But both that dictionary and the original post said that sex was not
essential to the definition. What it sounds like to me is that, in the
19th century, the notion of two unrelated women being
roommates/housemates, sharing the housekeeping costs, was sufficiently
remarkable to be in need of being called something.
Suppose a century from now, someone were to ask, "What did the term
'roomies' mean?" and we explained about being roommates, and said it was
not necessarily a sexual relationship. Would y'all leap on the "not
necessarily" part and assume that it *was* sexual?
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
R H Draney
>
>Suppose a century from now, someone were to ask, "What did the term
>'roomies' mean?" and we explained about being roommates, and said it was
>not necessarily a sexual relationship. Would y'all leap on the "not
>necessarily" part and assume that it *was* sexual?
Probably...it's already happened with "lifelong companions"...the term could
once be used to describe pairs like Holmes and Watson, or Don Quixote and Sancho
Panza; now doing so would imply something less noble...it probably doesn't help
matters to realize that "sancho" is Estado-de-Chihuahua slang for "lover"....r
John Varela
wrote:
> Suppose a century from now, someone were to ask, "What did the term
> 'roomies' mean?" and we explained about being roommates, and said it was
> not necessarily a sexual relationship. Would y'all leap on the "not
> necessarily" part and assume that it *was* sexual?
When I was young it was normal for two people of the same sex to share
an apartment. There was never a thought that this could be a sexual
relationship. It was scandalous for an unmarried couple to share
living quarters, and it was assumed that of course it was a sexual
relationship. Nowadays that seems almost to be reversed. Perhaps it
has to do with increased prosperity and diminished need to save on
housing costs.
--
John Varela
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> But both that dictionary and the original post said that sex was not
> essential to the definition. What it sounds like to me is that, in the
> 19th century, the notion of two unrelated women being
> roommates/housemates, sharing the housekeeping costs, was sufficiently
> remarkable to be in need of being called something.
Presumably unmarried women stayed home with their parents, and unmarried
men took a room at a boarding house. If you lived with someone, you must
be "married" in some sense.
R F
> Donna Richoux <tr...@euronet.nl> wrote:
>
> > But both that dictionary and the original post said that sex was not
> > essential to the definition. What it sounds like to me is that, in the
> > 19th century, the notion of two unrelated women being
> > roommates/housemates, sharing the housekeeping costs, was sufficiently
> > remarkable to be in need of being called something.
>
> Presumably unmarried women stayed home with their parents, and unmarried
> men took a room at a boarding house.
There were boarding-house-type arrangements for women too, as in the
early factories in Lowell and Lynn in Massachusetts.
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> There were boarding-house-type arrangements for women too, as in the
> early factories in Lowell and Lynn in Massachusetts.
My great-grandfather met his wife at a boarding house. She was the
daughter of the owner and one of the few eligible women in the Western town.
Skitt
Living in the same poarding house made dating easy, innit?
When I was still in college I lived in San Jose, and my girlfriend lived in
Oakland. I-880 wasn't finished yet, so I had quite a little journey to make
to get to see her. I managed.
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)
Aaron J. Dinkin
> The play "Boston Marriage" (David Mamet) recently opened here. The
> review ascribed the title to meaning to "single women of independent
> means living together, sometimes with romantic connotations". In this
> play, the two female characters have an intimate relationship.
>
> I'd never heard of this phrase before. Perhaps President Bush should
> move for a separate "Boston Marriage" concept to avoid the current
> issue.
I haven't heard it either, {although / because} I've lived in eastern
Massachusetts my entire life. The Mass. Supreme Judicial Court is expected
to rule Real Soon Now on whether gay marriage ought to be legal, though.
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Dr Robin Bignall
Good question. At university in the early 1960s, and prior to my first
marriage, I shared a room with a guy from the Chelsea College of Art (just
across the road from the College of Science and Technology) whom I met at
the judo club. The term for that in those days was room-mate (or flat-mate
if one had larger premises), and I expect that the word 'mate' raises
questions in people's minds these days.
(In fact, he and his girlfriend introduced me to my first wife, and I was
hooked. Still am after 42 years, but why we are not together today etc. is
a long tale which has been told elsewhere.)
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
I think it has more to do with changed attitudes. Some people (women as
well as men) have begun to realise that a man and a woman can just be
respecting friends, without anything sexual intruding. I had several
relationships like that (as well as many of the other kind) during the
period between wives, for I much prefer the company of women to that of men
if I have the choice.
John Varela
> There were boarding-house-type arrangements for women too, as in the
> early factories in Lowell and Lynn in Massachusetts.
And YWCAs everywhere.
--
John Varela
tomca...@yanospamhoo.com
> And YWCAs everywhere.
YMCAs or YWCAs? My (possibly misguied) impression was that YMCAs came
first, as a (travelling?) men's dorm, and YWCAs came along much later.
John Varela
Looking back up the thread I see the word "early", probably meaning
19th century. I have no idea when YWCAs came into being. I'd guess
early 20th century, when respectable women were more likely to be
living away from family.
--
John Varela
Evan Kirshenbaum
According to
http://www.ywca.org/html/B5b5a.asp
the first YWCA was formed in Boston in 1859. (The New York "Ladies'
Christian Association" was formed in 1858.) The "World YWCA" (joining
The US, UK, Sweden, and Norway) was founded in 1894. According to
http://www.ymca.net/about/cont/history.htm
the YMCA was founded in London in 1844 and the first in America was
(again in Boston) in 1851.
So the YMCA is a little older, but not all that much.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Of course, over the first 10^-10
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |seconds and 10^-30 cubic
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |centimeters it averages out to
|zero, but when you look in
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |detail....
(650)857-7572 | Philip Morrison
Martin Ambuhl
The first YWCAs were in England. It seems that there were two
organizations, one with a missionary mission and the other providing
housing for young women, which merged as the "Young Women's Christian
Association: in 1877.
I don't have a date for the first such US organization, which was in New
York and was called the "Ladies' Christian Association." It was founded
to help young women living on their own. It predated the first US "Young
Women's Christian Association," which was founded in Boston in 1866.
Even though the national organization wasn't founded until 1906,
hundreds of local YWCAs existed by the end of the 18th century.
--
Martin Ambuhl
Anna Skipka
> tomca...@yaNOSPAMhoo.com wrote:
> > R F <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> There were boarding-house-type arrangements for women too, as in the
> >> early factories in Lowell and Lynn in Massachusetts.
> >
> > My great-grandfather met his wife at a boarding house. She was the
> > daughter of the owner and one of the few eligible women in the
> > Western town.
>
> Living in the same poarding house made dating easy, innit?
>
> When I was still in college I lived in San Jose, and my girlfriend lived in
> Oakland. I-880 wasn't finished yet, so I had quite a little journey to make
> to get to see her. I managed.
That year in Oakland high, when I was seventeen,
The grass from there to San Jose was high and cool and green.
-skipka
Martin Ambuhl
> I don't have a date for the first such US organization, which was in New
> York and was called the "Ladies' Christian Association." It was founded
> to help young women living on their own. It predated the first US "Young
> Women's Christian Association," which was founded in Boston in 1866.
> Even though the national organization wasn't founded until 1906,
> hundreds of local YWCAs existed by the end of the 18th century.
Evan has information from the YWCA web site that makes mine seem wrong,
although I have since checked several standard reference books and find
that they have the dates I reported. There seem to be some fact
checkers working for encyclopedia and almanac publishers that need firing.
--
Martin Ambuhl