Poll of the Day > "sibling-in-law" is a weird term

(+) Yeah! (+)

first off, I don't talk about them very much in a setting where I'd have to say "sister-in-law" instead of Sarah. And when I am, it's just as easy to say "brother's wife" or "husband's sister". Also why are those both your sister-in-law? Kinda seems like if those would have different terms. also incesty for your sister to be fucking your brother in law tbh

thots?

---

Also maybe this is just me but I don't call my aunt's husband my "uncle". He's just my aunt's husband.

---

This topic is fucking stupid Im outta here lmao

---

FatalAccident posted...

This topic is fucking stupid Im outta here lmao

gtfo

---

lol sorry

---

FatalAccident posted...

lol sorry

I thought you were out of here?
---

MrMelodramatic posted...

Also maybe this is just me but I don't call my aunt's husband my "uncle". He's just my aunt's husband.

I call my aunts husband uncle, also 2nd cousins since they're a generation older than me

---

I rarely use "in-law" when referring to my family through marriage.

---

I dunno, I use the term though

---

Mead posted...

I use the term though

---

MrMelodramatic posted...

also incesty for your sister to be fucking your brother in law tbh

How?
---

Revelation34 posted...

How?

Brothers and sisters shouldn't bonk

---

MrMelodramatic posted...

Brothers and sisters shouldn't bonk

Unless theyre married, I guess... Like in this case... Beside, they are brother and sister. They are your brother and your sister...
---

just other ways to word things,.
My brother-in-law went to the store.
My sisters husband went to the store.
like tomato/tomato

But, i think it could be more a respect thing.. possibly.
If he is like a brother to you(depending on situations), bro-in-law might/may be better than saying, my sisters husband.

For example you are standing with a friend you consider a brother but hes also your sisters new husband.. you introduced him as?
i think it depends on the relationship you are portraying as well. If you went with sisters husband it could mean you are closer with your sister. Brothers-in-law would be opposite. Hes my bro first or hes my sisters first, could be a way to view it.
just hypothesizing.

MrMelodramatic posted...

Brothers and sisters shouldn't bonk

Your sister is not related to your brother in law therefore it is not incest.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Your sister is not related to your brother in law therefore it is not incest.

incesty.. as in incest-like. Pertained to the arrangement of the wording i believe. .. sister to be [screw]ing your brother... in-law. The emphasis was on the first part of that sentence, saying that without the in-law it gets a bit weird.

MrMelodramatic posted...

Also maybe this is just me but I don't call my aunt's husband my "uncle". He's just my aunt's husband.

My granddad was with someone after my nan. I always called her his wife even though she insisted on calling her grandmother. Also my dads GF will always be that to me even though at one point growing up she lived with us and was the closest thing to a mother figure I've had. I never thought of her as anything like that though. My dad and her are not married and never was. I tend to use official family terms when blood related.

---

It'd be silly to avoid using the term in-law.

MrMelodramatic posted...

Brothers and sisters shouldn't bonk

In-laws =/= blood relatives. And it used to something of a tradition for widows/widowers to marry an in-law, particularly in times when marriage was used to secure alliances.

Chocoborian posted...

incesty.. as in incest-like. Pertained to the arrangement of the wording i believe. .. sister to be [screw]ing your brother... in-law. The emphasis was on the first part of that sentence, saying that without the in-law it gets a bit weird.

The fact that you have to deliberately make that sense clunky as fuck shows that it doesn't really work. And in that case, you'd be referring to them by their relationship. If you're introducing your sister and her husband, you'd say "this is my sister and her husband." If you're just introducing your sister's husband, you should say "this is my brother-in-law." However, and this is true, you wouldn't randomly be talking about your sister having sex. That's a little creepy, my dude.

---

Zeus posted...

It'd be silly to avoid using the term in-law.

In-laws =/= blood relatives. And it used to something of a tradition for widows/widowers to marry an in-law, particularly in times when marriage was used to secure alliances.

so if an in-law is tradition for marrying in-laws. Meaning non-relatives is tradition of marrying non-relatives. So in the end it could be the same as saying my sibling-married..
do you know if this was ever used in English?

The fact that you have to deliberately make that sense clunky as fuck shows that it doesn't really work. And in that case, you'd be referring to them by their relationship. If you're introducing your sister and her husband, you'd say "this is my sister and her husband." If you're just introducing your sister's husband, you should say "this is my brother-in-law." However, and this is true, you wouldn't randomly be talking about your sister having sex. That's a little creepy, my dude.

we were both referencing an earlier comment. It is creepy, which I believe was the point of the original posters comment, simply trying to point that out. As for my quoted input it was a theory on the original statement for how he got there so others may see what was meant (if that is the case).. because clearly it went over a lot of peoples heads as they are pointing out the obvious. I was trying to point out what they may have missed.

Are we talking about different scenarios now, in terms of your examples?
If you were also relating to my earlier post. All I was trying to say is that under different circumstances one might think to use them differently, not that how they say it is right or wrong. I was only using one circumstance, not saying this is how it should always be. I have no authority to a final say.
Also you used sisters husband, so both appear to be acceptable at certain times.. so.. Cant one also write if you are introducing your brother-in-law you could say my sisters-husband.?? Or is it an actual rule??
If he/she is still his/her husband/wife, and the one being introduced may only grasp husband-wife relations, would it just be fine to say so-and-sos so-and-so? (Lol)

if you are trying to point out that the term sisters husband could be to the meaning of the guy banging said sister then yes, I agree. But the same is also true for sister in-law which could also be to the meaning of the guy banging said sister in the same sense, is it not? Also if talking about a brother instead of a sister..? If you are an adult than no matter what you know what happens would you not..? Or is it more that husband or wife wording specifically, may lead people to think that only means sex as oppose to using in-law? I dont really understand where youre coming from for that.

However, if you were trying to point out my use of the word relationship, than that could have been a bad choice in speaking of the friendship between two people.

Was all just meant to be a contribution to conversation. Ill try to ask you first if Im not fully aware of how to go about correctly contributing something in the future. Sorry about that. Thanks for understanding.

Chocoborian posted...

incesty.. as in incest-like. Pertained to the arrangement of the wording i believe. .. sister to be [screw]ing your brother... in-law. The emphasis was on the first part of that sentence, saying that without the in-law it gets a bit weird.

It only gets weird if you don't know the meaning of the word incest.
---

they added the term in-law specifically to stop it from being incest. believe me, I majored in Marriage History.