|
tripping over the broomstick
2002-04-11-10:44 a.m.
Well the world-famous tvzero linked to me in his diary today, and here I am without a fresh entry for all the throngs of people who are migrating here from his diary. Right. Seriously though I think Jonny is a cool guy though. Actually to sorta clarify my statement, I think it would be great if I ever met a girl that I wanted to be with and only with for the rest of my life. But the whole ceremony with the two rings and the black suit, white dress with long dragging thing, that horrible wedding song on the pipe organ, gaudy flowers, throwing rice, (RICE?!?), the little crossing-arms-feeding-cake shit, lighting the two candles together, it's so fucking lame and un-original. If you really want to have a ceremony that symbolizes the two of you coming together, make it somewhat reflective of your lives! That, and the idea is fucking silly and antiquated, something your grandparents' grandparents made up to keep women on a leash so that they could fuck women on the side without fear of their wives doing the same. And now days women want it more than men, how ironic. This ceremony where you profess in front of tons of people that you love each other is great. But the fact that people need a ceremony to make them feel obligated to stick together "for better or worse" is ridiculous. If you love someone, you should be with them through anything, regardless of whether or not you're married or not. If I'm going to raise a child or children with someone, do I need the potential scorn of society and our families to prevent me from walking out or going to someone else? "But what if it didn't work out and you decided to seperate after you have kids?" You ask? Well, any woman I chose to have kids with would understand the importance and complexity of raising children, and would understand, as I would, that we would have to remain friends and trusting of each other in order to raise the children right. I don't think it would be harmful to a child at all to have parents who were no longer in love, but who still spoke as one with regards to discipline and rewards, education and the other needs of a child. The truth is that your parents don't have to be in love with each other to love you. And the sooner kids find that out the better. Look, I know as well as the next person that no one is interested in reading someone elses opinion for 5 paragraphs straight, so I'll just sum this up: If you don't think that being with someone you love regardless of their troubles or imperfections is something you should just DO, you don't know what love is anyway. Assuming all that, if things do fall apart, you can still raise a child just fine if you grow apart and no longer want to be together if you realize that their well being is more important than your petty differences. If you can't say that about the person you want to marry, then you really shouldn't be marrying them. And as Jon said, I AM very rooted in reality. But you can be in "lovey dovey romantic world" all you want, sooner or later reality will find you and bite you in the ass. Or the romance will fade and behind it you'll see the underlying reality. It doesn't have to be an ugly reality if you just give some honest thought to shaping it though. I've preached like an idiot enough, I'm going to lunch.
Prev - Next
|