6 ms·
This your (naive and/or totally fucked up) idea of marriage, certainly not what marriage is for the vast majority (i dare say) of the population.
by armitron 10y ago
This your (naive and/or totally fucked up) idea of marriage,
certainly not what marriage is for the vast majority (i dare say) of the population.
- dionidium 10y agoNah, I think you've got this backwards. You're the oddball with the practical outlook on the institution. I'm actually less conveying my own feelings on marriage than I am describing how everyone around me seems to regard it.
- zeveb 10y agoWhat is marriage for the vast majority of the population? It's certainly no longer about sex (and less and less about sexual exclusivity). It's not really about children. It's not an economic union. It's certainly not lifelong. So far as I can tell it's about a big party, and having the rest of society validate one's current relationship. It's not at all clear why we still have a great deal of permanence-presuming civil law covering what's now clearly become a private, temporary matter. What's the point?
- armitron 10y agoIt's a partnership that works on multiple levels. Not some disney fairy tale about unmake-able promises.
- dionidium 10y agoHave you been to a wedding recently? Those vows aren't about practical concerns. They're about eternal love, as long as we both shall live, to have and to hold. You're free to layer whatever you want over top of that promise. But what you explicitly agree to with literal vows is all about the love, man.
- erispoe 10y agoYou seem to be talking about religious weddings. Religious weddings are exactly that: words, and intentions. What matters is the judge that declares you married and the contract you sign. If you started to make religious vows enforceable in courts, which they are not, you'd probably see a lot less people interested into it.