- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topics
- Tests
- Magazine
- Psych Basics
- Blogs
- Diagnosis Dictionary
Gatherings of the so-called ‘parasite singles' - dinners out, travel adventures, shopping trips - really were communal. Whole groups of women participated as equals. No one woman, and no pair, was singled out as special and above all the rest. The bonds they cherished as lasting were with each of the other women. These women were not narrowly linking themselves to just one other person.
No Evaluating?
How about we could consider the possibility of not evaluating and judging each other period?
Why should any memember of one camp defend their position vs. the other? What if we were free to be who we really are, married OR single? For all I know each status could be a transitory one external to who I really am as a person, a status defined by law reall, nothing internal to who we really are...being married is has not advantages/disadvantages other than possible financial (in the event of a split) and tax implications...really...it could provide some false sense of belonging to an elite club but that's about it, like any other elite club, say those who own a ferrari, or BMW and so on...it doesn't really seem that relevant to the core of who we are, or am I am missig something? I mean big weddings are like a big birthday or grad party or some other big part in my view, and being married vs. single (I have been both) is really an external lable, you could be single but feel married and be married but feel singl, it is how you feel and who you think you are that's more important than what the law considers you to be, in my view!
You said that being married
You said that being married or single "doesn't really seem that relevant to the core of who we are." That's exactly right! And that's why it's so frustrating when people assume that marriage has deep, life-altering effects that will automatically make us happier, healthier, wiser, more mature, more generous, etc., etc. When you're a single who bears the brunt of those incorrect assumptions from the married majority...well, it can be very demoralizing.
While I would disagree that marriage confers no advantages other than financial ones, the legal and financial advantages themselves are significant and reason enough to protest their legality. Compare these legal advantages to, say, the days when only men had a voice in elections. Sure, it was only a legality that women weren't considered full-fledged, independent adults. But that legality meant that women couldn't vote for their own representatives! That was hardly a minor point. Well, the laws that discriminate against singles have a similar effect.
"only 28 percent of Americans feel couples should expect a gift"
I hate getting a wedding invitation with the little registry cards falling out of it. It's like they assume you'll get what's on their little lists. If I ever get married, I'm not registering anywhere. Why should anyone feel like they must get me a gift? Ugh.
Saw this interesting article on Yahoo news today:
"Only 3 percent of Americans said they'd declined an invitation to attend a wedding in the past two years for financial reasons. And 90 percent of those who'd attended a wedding recently said they'd bought a gift for the couple.
But that doesn't mean couples should assume they're getting one: The survey, conducted by GfK, showed that only 28 percent of Americans feel couples should expect a gift.
"I just think it's rude to assume people will give you something," says Higgins, of Marine City, Mich. "You just don't know how much people have." Liz Collins of Savannah, Ga. agrees. "A present is something people should give if they are so moved," says Collins, 31, who works with her husband at a home for boys.
And yet most Americans feel obliged to give gifts nonetheless — including those who know they can't really afford it."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090615/ap_on_re_us/us_fea_lifestyles_ap_pol...
lavish weddings
yes, they are idiotic. but in this economy, at least they help keep the money moving (making work for caterers, etc.).
Post new comment