Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

Entry archive:

Spanish Carlos Baturin (L) and Emilio Menendez (R) hold their hands during their wedding in Tres Cantos townhall near Madrid, 11 July 2005. (PHILIPPE DESMAZES/AFP/Getty Images/PHILIPPE DESMAZES/AFP/Getty Images)
Spanish Carlos Baturin (L) and Emilio Menendez (R) hold their hands during their wedding in Tres Cantos townhall near Madrid, 11 July 2005. (PHILIPPE DESMAZES/AFP/Getty Images/PHILIPPE DESMAZES/AFP/Getty Images)

Facebook's 'civil union' status: What do you think? Add to ...

Single? In a relationship? It's complicated?

The latter used to be Facebook's catch-all status for those whose relationships didn't fall into conventional categories. But the social networking site has now taken what's considered a major step in support of gay rights in the U.S. by offering the status options of "in a civil union," depending on the state the user lives in, and "domestic partnership." (In Canada, Facebook offers the option "in a civil partnership.")

More related to this story

While some gay and lesbian rights advocates are applauding the website's move, others aren't so pleased. According to Wired magazine, many rights activists consider terms like civil partnerships and civil unions as inadequate substitutions for legalizing same-sex marriage.



"Not sure how I feel about this. It's like a win but also defeat at the same time," one user commented on Facebook, under the name Gay Aussie.

Wired reports another Facebook member, Quentin Equality Hill, added: "I dislike this. It's the same as anti-gay-marriage states. We are not good enough for the word marriage. Now Facebook is agreeing."

What do you think? Are the new status options a good idea? A bad idea? Or it's complicated?

 

In the know

Most popular videos »

Highlights

More from The Globe and Mail

Most popular