"same-sex pair" vs "same-sex couple"

15:20 Mar 25, 2015 

I will wait the statutory 24 hours, but I wanted to say thank you to all for answers, agrees and comments, which confirm exactly what I felt, with some excellent arguments and examples. I will be able to present a well-justified - and purely linguistic! - defence of my rejection of 'pair'.

10:14 Mar 25, 2015 

I think there are quite strong arguments you can use. "Same-sex pair" is quite rare applied to human partners in a "romantic relationship"; examples are mostly journalistic headlines and cases where the word "couple" has already been used and a synonym is wanted to avoid repetition. And in my view it's strictly a misuse of the word. When applied to humans it refers to engagement in some sort of joint activity. Referring to a couple, as has been said, "pair" is overwhelmingly applied to animals.

Really I think the dictionary may be your best ally. Take Oxford Online, for example, where relevant definitions of "pair" include

"Two people related in some way or considered together"
(students working in pairs)
"A mated couple of animals"
(nine breeding pairs of birds)

whereas the definitions of "couple" include:

"Two people who are married, engaged, or otherwise closely associated romantically or sexually."

And so it is with other dictionaries I've glanced at for this purpose.

The conclusion must be that "pair" implicitly denies either the nature of the relationship or the status of those involved as human beings.

09:45 Mar 25, 2015 

You reassure me! It is absolutely clear that the person wishes to 'make a statement' in this way. And said so explicitly when his original 'same-sex pair' was corrected to "same-sex couple". I agree with your remarks both with and without your translator's hat on. But I wish to propose a linguistic justification for rejecting 'pair' - which I personally find offensive. And the remarks here will help me to do so.

09:38 Mar 25, 2015 

Whether or not "pair" implies animals, without my translator's hat on I would be vehemently opposed to the implicit notion that a same-sex couple is not a real couple and that a different word should be used. With my translator's hat on I would say that there is no linguistic justification whatever for the notion that a "couple" is necessarily heterosexual.

09:29 Mar 25, 2015 

I note that Tania mentions animals - I confess that this was my original thought too! I see from Google that "same-sex pairs" may be used for humans both as a substitute for couple and to designate pairs of friends - or brothers, sisters, twins etc. This may be my way out for a person who realises his desired usage may be seen as pejorative. I fear his audience may be shocked by 'same-sex pair'. Interesting as in French there is only "couple de même sexe", AFAIK, and don't know how one would avoid "couple" in French!