Tuesday, August 09, 2005

The Odd Couple

Marriage is no longer a sacred institution. As it is, the straights are not doing a good job of preserving it. Divorce rates are high; one can get married today and have it annulled the next day like Britney did and now, the mother of all insult - two men plan to get married in Toronto.

And they are both straight.

This definitely takes the wedding cake. (Geddit?)

Apparently, they are doing it because of the tax benefits of marriage. They want to "shed light on the widespread financial implications of the new legislation and are willing to take it all the way." Or maybe this their way to their 15 minutes of fame.

Not to say that gays and lesbians have not done the same thing i.e. marrying for reasons other than love and commitment.

But for financial gains?

I am certain that in the older and even the current generation, there are homosexuals who get married for the sake of pleasing the parents' and conforming to society's expectations.

Or maybe they just couldn't stand anymore of "When are you getting married?" questions, which always come accompanied by the arched eyebrows, busybody yet hopeful look which says it-had-better-be-some-time-this-century.

However, we are in the age of information technology, the 21st century, not the middle ages.

As you may have known, marriage based on romantic love is fairly new in human history; it is less than 300 years old. People in the past got married because of practicality, stemming from considerations of property, religion, and complementary abilities.

Just look at the practise of arranged marriages in most cultures. A good example of a non-romantic marriage but for political gains: Cleoptra and Mark Antony.

On one hand, I find this unbelievable because it makes a mockery of marriage. On the other, one has to respect someone else's right to what they want to do, as long as it is legal (which it is, because the same-sex marriage laws in Canada do not mention anything about sexual preference).

Even though they insisted that "they don't want their nuptials to insult gays and lesbians", I personally feel it is.

Gay and lesbian rights advocates have been fighting for marriage rights, so that homosexuals can have the same recognition and endorsement from society of their union. To show that the love and commitment between two persons of the same sex is not inferior to the heteros'.

This reminds me of what Spot posted a while back. Spot said that:
I see two aspects to a marriage. Firstly, the emotional commitment between two people. Secondly, the legal recognition of that commitment, and hence its legitimisation, which society bestows by way of a ceremony/ritual or piece of paper. You can have the former without the latter (i.e. a de-facto marriage). I’ve learnt that sadly, you can also have the latter without the former (i.e. a shell of a marriage).

I suppose these two old gits couldn't find any woman to get hitched with. I mean, who would want to get into a sham marriage? They are indeed The Odd Couple (like the movie), but with a twist - Old Desperate Duds.


Spot said...

the principle behind what they're doing is no different from that relied on by straight people who get hitched so that one of them gets a visa to stay in the country (eg, QAF Lindsey and french guy).

and if you believe what you see in movies (and i MUST snerk at this), this "green card marriage" thing is oh so common.

certainly with their declaration of "taking it all the way", their intentions are suspect. yet, they do have a point.

they're just utilising the legal framework of marriage. tax breaks and other socio-economic benefits of marriage are practical considerations for anyone, gay or straight. as you correctly point out, for the gay movement, being denied of access to these benefits is one of the biggest issues.

what's good for the goose, is good for the gander. the funny thing here is how it's being demonstrated two-fold.

marriage, the institution, is a legal construct. society and legislators saw fit to bestow economic benefits upon members of this institution as a means of promoting the legitimacy that the piece of paper confers.

that people, gay or straight, should wise up to how the system can be abused, is only inevitable.

what's being made a mockery of is not this legal institution called marriage.

it's commitment.

Espion said...

I have been wanting to write What is Marriage? - after writing What is Sex? - for some time. Maybe I should do just that shortly.

In brief there are several dimensions/perspectives in marriage, namely physical, legal, social, religious, psychological, spiritual, etc.

But to me the true meaning in marriage is a message, ie something that points to a greater reality, even beyond this world.

It is like a letter is not about the letter itself, but of the concepts, ideas, thoughts, emotions, etc conveyed in the symbols and media that make the letter. And no one remembers the colour of the paper nor the ink used in the letter after reading it. So it is with marriage too.

And further marriage is just another example of analogical reasoning in Nature - and animals dont marry, only humans do.

Philosophically there is no necessity for analogical reasoning to be valid at all. The fact it is, reveals something about Nature itself, namely its teleology.

This big-picture perspective reveals other truths about marriage that cannot be discerned by looking at it from ground level.

More in details later.

Spot said...

derek - heehee...dunlah post such provocative topics.

as you can tell, i get all pseudo-intellectual and stuffy. :)