If marriage needn’t be between one
man and one woman- and, really, who doesn’t laugh at that quaint old notion in
today’s world?- if it bears no relation to bearing children, then it has no
intrinsic meaning and therefore no intrinsic parameters whatsoever.
Most of us know about polygamy, but how many of us are versed
on the rapidly growing practice of solygamy?
Solygamists marry themselves.
Recently, in fact, Italy's Laura Mesi spent nearly $10,000 on her wedding
reception, which was replete with a tiered wedding cake sporting just one figure atop. The 40-year-old fitness instructor from a small town near Milan is believed to be the first Italian to marry herself. This may be good for Hallmark- new category!- but will most of the women marrying
themselves expect their parents to pay for these “weddings,” too? (The one
benefit parents traditionally have had when their daughters can’t find a
significant other is they are spared the cost of paying for a wedding).
Several attendees described Mrs. (and Mrs.?) Mesi's wedding as a "fairy-tale" ceremony.
Several attendees described Mrs. (and Mrs.?) Mesi's wedding as a "fairy-tale" ceremony.
If marriage can exist irrespective
of the genders or quantities of those betrothed, if it no longer even requires
two (or more) people, shouldn’t a person be able to marry just one part of
themselves? ‘Til death do them part? Makes sense, no? And certainly, then,
those with multiple personalities should be able to marry one or more of their
alter egos.
Voila! Another new category,
solygamy polygamy!
No comments:
Post a Comment