Damn, I was all set to badge this based on the title alone, because I thought it was about the implied possession of the phrase "I have a girl/boyfriend." I hate that fucking phrase. I have a car. I have a toy. I have a person. Nope.
I have a sister. I have a teacher. I have a son. I have a mechanic.
Got baggage with those usages of possession too? Or is it only when a romantic relationship is in play?
I think this is a valid point. Clearly, language changes over time as people come to view things differently, but this thread is about possession and I think it's hard to express certain relationships without expressing possession to one degree or another. To me, this all suggests that people are expressing discomfort with an idea of interpersonal relationships that does not reflect their own ideas. I'm ok with that, but some language to go along with it might be nice. For example, I like saying "my dog" instead of "the dog that I'm taking care of". It's so impersonal and vague.
WELCOME TO MY LAST BREAKUP! In which not only did my ex argue with me about me not liking the nickname "m'Emily" (which meant "my Emily"), but then tried to use "my girlfriend" as an example of why "my Emily" would be an okay nickname that I should just rearrange my entire feelings about in order to be okay with it. I asked him if he was really going to use that as an example, and then stated that at least "my girlfriend", similar to "my brother" denotes one specific aspect of a relationship that you have with a given person, whereas "my (insert name here)" implies complete and total ownership of the person as a whole. "my girlfriend/boyfriend" is contextual and implies that person's relationship to you. After all you would say "my mother" right? Because it means out of all the mothers in the world, this specific one has a relationship with you. I don't find myself referring to the people I date as "my boyfriend" or what-have-you - I much prefer to refer to them and introduce them as their first name, and let the fuckers figure it out - but I can understand where that convention comes from. "my (full name here)" though, that's just fucking ridiculous.
This is touching on the complication of language, truly. "Have" is so myriad in its meanings that to relate it only to its "possessive" or "ownership" role is problematic and kind of a single reading of the language. I mean, for sure, you can read the phrase "I have a significant other" as a possessive relating to "I own this person in some way" or "this person is attached to me and only me without any other defining features", and it is of course very problematic, and has a deep, dark underbelly of ugliness. But if you try and take that and expand it to other relationships the concept breaks down, right? which is what briandmyers is getting at. Like, "I have a Conductor who is frustrating to deal with." I don't possess "my conductor", I possess "my relationship with my conductor", which, in the context of this example, is poor. I think the problem comes from the fact that "I Have a significant other" ends there. there is no context to the relationship like the one I have with my conductor. This leaves it open to the concept of sole possessiveness (which leads to severe problems in relationships). "have" also has a concept of time/space involved. "I have been to Paris, once." "I have to go." Thanks for setting my brain a-working. How do you bring a significant other up in the context of a conversation?
Tough one. I freely admit to having used "I have..." at various points in my life. I don't know what it is about the phrase that rubs me wrong exactly -- yeah there are overtones of possession, though as briandmyers points out, it's mostly coincidental -- but it's hard to avoid using. I like "I'm with someone" or "I'm dating a girl named x" as direct replacements, but it doesn't always sound right, and those aren't perfect substitutes.How do you bring a significant other up in the context of a conversation?