3 ms·
Ok, this feels like we're quibbling. Would you accept a more liberal definition of marriage such as common law? This policy is, of course, roughly equivalent t
by raganwald 16y ago
Ok, this feels like we're quibbling. Would you accept a more liberal definition of marriage such as common law?
This policy is, of course, roughly equivalent to only dating people who are living with someone else.
Slightly more accurate but you know.... I'm going to claim poetic license. The underlying sentiment seems to be correct even if there is some room to argue the simile isn't 100% isomorphic to reality.
- modoc 16y agoGreat way to select people who can be lived with, aren't terrified of commitment, etc... Although there may be fidelity issues... :)
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- Periodic 16y agoI've heard people say, when speaking of potential partners, that there's nothing better than a widow/widower. They've already proven they aren't afraid of commitment, that they can get along with someone, and they are single through no fault of their own. The equivalent in this case would be people who did good work, but at a company that went under for reasons out of their control.
- mkramlich 16y agoTherefore a two-time widow is even better. And a three-time widow. Wait, now I'm getting suspicious...
- irrelative 16y agoYou're completely correct in comparing this to relationships (though maybe dating is better than marriage, but still...). Basically any pairing problem is prime territory for a technical solution. That's why we see so many attempts (and even successful ones) at dating sites. And job sites. And apartment sites. Whenever you're involved with many options to choose something, and the other party has the chance to reject you, you have an interesting problem. Am I missing any big ones besides housing, courtship and employment? I guess higher education could be considered, but it's a little lopsided: more of a few-to-many relationship.