> e.g. sworn brotherhood, which is the form that same-sex affectionate relationships usually take in traditional societies. I'm fascinated by what you mean her

> e.g. sworn brotherhood, which is the form that same-sex affectionate relationships usually take in traditional societies. I'm fascinated by what you mean here. > Since same sex marriage is not inherently sexual, what's wrong with just saying "my sworn life partner and legal spouse"? There's nothing wrong, per se, with the phrasing you outlined. The problem is the double-standard: straight couples can talk about their marriages without fear of repercussion under this law, because heterosexual relationships are normalized and not seen as inherently sexual. However, same-sex relationships are sexualized by default in the minds of many people, and mentioning their existence (regardless of the lingo!) is tantamount to "talking about sex" in the minds of the conservative, religious right. There aren't any specific words that are being banned in this law, despite the "don't say gay" nomenclature the media and some others use. But it is a de-facto ban on acknowledging that LGBTQ+ people and/or relationships exist; the terminology used isn't actually the issue at hand.