a committed relationship regardless of some official piece of paper.

Oh, but it's not "legal" or "moral" or "righteous" or or or . . . So all the people who are "legal", "moral", and "righteous" have no reason to treat it as legitimate. Because "right" is how they define it.

Holy bollocks, Steph, your coworkers' stupidity and lack of decency and compassion is just enraging. Of *course* this loss is huge for you. (1) You have known and cared about Tim's mother for years; she was a part of the life you and Tim share. (2) You are also grieving for Tim's loss, because you love him and care for him. None of that would be any different if you were married. I really don't see what is so hard to understand about all this!

And you can call her your "MIL" for mother-in-love.

Oh, that's lovely. More flippantly, I'm also fond of "the sin-laws" and "the out-laws," both of which are used by my unmarried, long-partnered friends to refer to their partner's family. But really, in all the ways that count, ESPECIALLY right now, she was your mother-in-law, and your coworkers' inability to recognize that is just staggering.

As far as Steph's co-workers go, I'm in the "words fail me" category.

Hubs's mother was damn well my mother-in-law. To the extent that I called her "Mom." Steph's relationship deserves no less respect.

For some reason this reminds me of a friend of mine who got pregnant while not married. Her father literally stopped speaking to her. Then she quickly got engaged to a man she'd known for two weeks (not the father of her child). So then her father started talking to her again; in fact, he was all excited about the wedding and acted as if the whole not-talking-to-his-daughter thing had never happened.

Her father literally stopped speaking to her. Then she quickly got engaged to a man she'd known for two weeks (not the father of her child). So then her father started talking to her again; in fact, he was all excited about the wedding and acted as if the whole not-talking-to-his-daughter thing had never happened.

People. They're... people. "Rational" my ass.

And they wonder why I don't classify myself as "christian". Oy. I thought the phrase was "love thy neighbor" not "judge thy neighbor". What ever.

ION. Is it too early to announce that (I think/hope that) there's a pretty good chance I'll be able to see a lot of you people, in person, in October 2011?

Also, Shir, you'll be coming to the LA area during your visit, right?

ION- I'm home today, and watching People's Court. Two jaw dropping incidents. Case one, a buyer-beware case, the plantiff describes his haggling as "I tried to jew him down to $300". Wha?? The judge was livid. Rightfully so.

Case two. tenant suing former landlord for being evicted. The tenant admits that he brokered a crack deal for the landlord! Judge asks if the landlord was part of a crack deal, and landlord pleads the fifth.

I really shouldn't watch daytime TV.

I think I kinda hate your co-workers.

I'd say that, only without the kinda.

ND beat me to it. Jeebus.

Ugh Steph, sorry you have to deal with such douchery at a time like this.

And while this seems like an odd segue, Shir, I'm delighted to hear you'll be visiting. How exciting!

Oh, but it's not "legal" or "moral" or "righteous" or or or . . . So all the people who are "legal", "moral", and "righteous" have no reason to treat it as legitimate. Because "right" is how they define it.

As someone who considers herself Christian, I do not understand this attitude at all.

That's awful, Steph!