and I just thought I was scared of spiders because they have an un-human shape - it turns out people are phobic of things that look less like them - i.e. not scared of big looks like you rip your arms off bears or gorillas etc. but massive scared of spiders and stick insects. I did a survey on it once - well made up some data to fit the theory anyways :-)
I'm still not convinced on the marriage argument - it doesn't follow that those who choose not to get married are unwilling to make that promise. There are and have been many in the world who have, despite not being married, spent their entire lives together. But it does bring more affirmation to what I would consider doing if I were - if it is about the importance of making that promise not just to yourselves but to your 'tribe'. Then again I am all swings and roundabouts on this one :-) I could see it going like the dairy, meat, veg arguments that run round my head in the supermarket - ending in a very confused Claire at the milk counter - deciding if she follows all the logical arguments to their conclusion she can't eat anything.
Heh. Joe Jackson recorded a song at the beginning of the 'eighties the refrain of which was "Everything gives you cancer." I think of it every time I hear the latest diet scare. Red meat's bad for you; red meat's essential for you; red wine's bad for you; red wine's full of health-giving antioxidants. Carbs was the crowning moment for me; carbohydrates are actually the body's fuel! Why the hell would you cut them out? I generally think that eating everything in some kind of moderation is probably the best bet.
My feelings about marriage apply to me, really; as with everything else I believe in, I won't try to force my views on anyone else. That said, I would say that a non-choice is still a choice. If a couple is willing to spend their lives together, but have chosen not to get married, they've clearly made some kind of choice (unless, for some reason, marriage isn't an option available to them). It's probably the right choice, for them; but as I say, in that instance, their reasons for not getting married, whatever they are, are the relevant thing.
I'm still not convinced on the marriage argument - it doesn't follow that those who choose not to get married are unwilling to make that promise. There are and have been many in the world who have, despite not being married, spent their entire lives together. But it does bring more affirmation to what I would consider doing if I were - if it is about the importance of making that promise not just to yourselves but to your 'tribe'. Then again I am all swings and roundabouts on this one :-) I could see it going like the dairy, meat, veg arguments that run round my head in the supermarket - ending in a very confused Claire at the milk counter - deciding if she follows all the logical arguments to their conclusion she can't eat anything.
Reply
My feelings about marriage apply to me, really; as with everything else I believe in, I won't try to force my views on anyone else. That said, I would say that a non-choice is still a choice. If a couple is willing to spend their lives together, but have chosen not to get married, they've clearly made some kind of choice (unless, for some reason, marriage isn't an option available to them). It's probably the right choice, for them; but as I say, in that instance, their reasons for not getting married, whatever they are, are the relevant thing.
Reply
Leave a comment