By
now, I assume most of you have heard about “sologamy,”
the practice of marrying one’s self. Kind of the opposite of “polygamy,” but not
really any more traditional or inspiring.
This,
from womensbusinessdaily.com:
“In a 2019 Vogue
interview, Emma Watson described herself as ‘self-partnered.’ She used the
term to describe how she wasn’t pursuing a partnership but was instead focusing
on ‘dating’ herself. The term ‘sologamy’ really isn’t much different. As
opposed to monogamy, or even polyamory, someone prescribing to sologamy is
first and foremost dedicated to loving themselves. This idea isn’t meant to
promote selfishness and narcissism. Instead, it promotes self-love, focusing on
improving and adoring yourself.” Alrighty then. Perhaps it is a tad
narcissistic, but whatever, right?
And more
from womensbusinessdaily.com:
“Kshama Bindu married
herself in India’s first sologamous wedding. She performed many traditional
Hindu wedding rituals but only invited 10 close friends and family members. She
isn’t the first person to have a sologamous wedding. In 1993, a dental
hygienist named Linda Baker in LA declared she was tired of ‘waiting for
the chain of events that lead up to feasting on [a] wedding cake.’ So she
invited seventy-five friends to watch her marry herself, becoming ‘her own
lovely wedded person.’”
Sologamy,
you say? I have one question: what if you asked yourself to marry yourself and
you turned yourself down? That would be heartbreaking! Would you have recourse
against yourself?
Would
it be possible to leave yourself at the altar? That would be a bummer.
But
why not marry
yourself? I mean, everyone else is flawed, right?
These Brave New Times are so
liberating and intoxicating for open-minded progressives like us!
I
can’t wait until I can renew my vows with myself! So meaningful and special!
Kids?
Don’t harsh my mellow, dude! The last thing this world needs is more kids—even
if they should somehow happen to turn out as great as me.
No comments:
Post a Comment