December 11, 2010
Image via Wikipedia
Weddings. Some people live and die by them, some are repulsed. Some will be happy as long as it’s an open bar.
April Winchell runs Regretsy, a blog that highlights the most atrocious things people try to sell as handmade art on Etsy.com. She’s also getting married in the not-too-distant future. Brides.com realized that there are a lot of snarky women out there who aren’t interested in doilies, but would like to read something funny by a woman who shares their sentiments. You can read her monthly column starting here.
She has a very simple list of what she wants:
1. A nice dress
2. A picturesque location
3. A good meal
October’s column inspired some additions:
4. Paper invitations
5. Real cake
If you hadn’t guessed, October’s column is about ways people try to save money. This includes emailing invitations instead of mailing them (because Great-Aunt Bertha has email?) and creating a fake cake for display while a cheap sheet cake is cut in the kitchen. April was not impressed.
read more »
August 30, 2010
Portia DeRossi hasfiled paperwork to take on spouse Ellen DeGeneres‘ surname. Feminists have objected to the practice of wives changing their names to those of their husbands, for good reason. It can be read as another way in which a woman sublimates her own identity for that of her husband.
But how does that change when the marriage consists of two people of the same gender? What occurs then? I’m sure a new norm will develop over time, but meanwhile, Portia DeRossi gets to make her own rules.
Lori Sokol has written a column at The Huffington Post about the issue:
According to a European study published earlier this year entitled, “What’s in a Name? 361.708 Euros: The Effects of Marital Name Change,” women who took their partner’s name appear to be different from women who kept their own name on a variety of demographics and beliefs. A woman who took her partner’s name or a hyphenated name, for example, was judged as more caring, more dependent, less intelligent, more emotional, less competent and less ambitious in comparison to a woman who kept her own name.
read more »
August 25, 2010
Do you remember when the anti-marriage equality crowd began to thump hard on the idea that the legalization of gay marriage would ruin the institution of mixed-sex marriage? One thing that many who did not agree with that said was that divorce does worse for marriage than allowing same-sex marriage would. Most anti-equality activists didn’t want to touch that. They mostly just said that yes, that was true, and that was why same-sex marriage shouldn’t be implemented, it would further weaken “traditional” marriage. They didn’t want to come out against divorce completely, presumably because there are so many of their own — in their families, their friends, even congregations in their churches — who had been through a divorce. Nobody wants to be told they might not be able to get out of a bad marriage should that marriage end up being a bad one, no matter how little they wish to admit it. And, they didn’t want to come out in favor of it, either, because that went against the Bible they liked to beat others over the head with.
Well, I’ve just recently heard of a movement that changes that. Apparently, it’s not a relatively new movement, but it’s new to me. And it may be gaining a bit of traction. There is a movement to implement covenant marriage in states. One thing that should be noted is that this is not really a banning of divorce, despite what some may say or despite what my post title suggests. However, it does severely limit the grounds for divorce. Mostly it seems that the grounds are as follows:
- Your spouse is convicted of a felony that requires jail time
That’s it. Now, of course, if you move to a state that does not recognize covenant marriage, you can file for divorce without worrying about it. But, if your state does recognize covenant marriages and you are in a covenant marriage, you are probably screwed unless one of the above is there.
read more »
August 24, 2010
From today’s Subrosa entry:
My parents brought up the “marriage” word again. I’ve told them about my engagement with W and that I intend to marry him, but it’s like I’ve said nothing. I live with that growing dread, underneath everything else, that my parents will somehow disregard my wishes and start telling people I am eligible.
I don’t want this. I don’t want this process. I don’t even want the word brought up. Whenever it does, it brings me heartache and I hate it. These people just don’t know how to listen.
Today was all right. W came, so that was amazing. Four hours late, due to malfunctioning brake pads and a northeast corridor train that was shut down. We made out in his car a lot. We had lunch in an isolated South Indian restaurant somewhere in the middle of nowhere, staffed by an old man with a sunken face. I felt guilty and would not allow him to wait me. I cleaned everything on my own while he stared plaintively in my direction, slightly confused, but looking like he’d much rather sit down and take a damned nap and not have to worry about young fresh farts like me and our ridiculous appetites.
We then came back, parked the car in the library garage. Spent time together there. Gypsied to Starbucks. Again, a good time, but with that undercurrent of sadness.
Everything is so finite. Time — the world — maybe even love.
July 15, 2010
note: I posted this on Subrosa on April 10, 2008.
I visited the library today and found Taslima Nasrin’s Shodh sitting on the used book sale shelf. I bought it immediately. When I began to read it, the memories flooded back.
On August 10, 2007, I woke up to the news that Taslima Nasrin was assaulted at the launch of the Telugu translation of her novel Shodh. (It was published in the original Bengali in 1992,) I was staying not a mile from where the assault occurred and I read it fresh off the press that came along in with the milk.
I mention this because during Contemporary Europe today the class discussed Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the radlcal secularist Somali-Dutch politician. She’s also a perpetual refugee, bouncing around from one party to another, shrill but nevertheless dogged. Like any other politician, her motives are pretty tainted and stained, but her life and the threats on her person hurt to read. Recently, she came/left the US via the American Enterprise Institute, wrote a few pretty vitriolic books and papers and went back to Denmark.
Taslima Nasrin is different from Hirsi Ali in the sense that she’s never had political aspirations — it is worth noting activists are not necessarily good politicians. Unlike Hirsi Ali, who left when she was younger, Taslima was already employed as a government doctor. She became a gynecologist. Her initial experiences in feminism or straying away from what she saw as the “demons of her faith” was from constantly having to treat rapes of young girls.
read more »
July 13, 2010
Oh darling, no, we mustn't! Not 'til you put a ring on it!
I was over at F’s earlier, and picked up a book I keep seeing around but haven’t yet bought. It was a romance by Judith McNaught, with one of those mild covers that doesn’t indicate anything vaguely erotic, unless you cought the castle thrusting up through the clouds. As I flipped the pages, my eye landed on tongues and other such things, and I found myself smack dab in the middle of a love scene. As we’re wont to do, I began reading it out loud in a melodramatic voice.
“What,” F demanded, “is so enjoyable about RAPE? All these love scenes are rapes!” (She has read the book.)
“Ah, but you see,” I explained, “it’s to avoid being a slut. She can’t want it. But if he rapes her and she enjoys it, then it’s ok, because she’s not a slut.”
F shook her head in disgust.
read more »
July 10, 2010
Which is which? Statue depicting three generations of women in China. via Flickr user cmphotofocus.
As a writer, I pride myself on my knowledge and use of the English language. I appreciate its subtleties, and have learned how to play these notes like a good instrument. Imagine my surprise, then, when I came across a blog post inferring that the term “Ms.” is some kind of freak aberration invented by feminists to confuse us and undermine the social order!
read more »
June 24, 2010
Today, when I was browsing through The Frisky‘s archives I read the following article. It’s made me think seriously about women and money, I hope the ladies at BAL (and the four other people who read this blog) can help me out.
Jessica Wakefield — a Frisky contributor & the author of this piece — writes about her desire to marry a man for his money. Or, as she writes, “Bank accounts—and debts—do matter. And acknowledging that doesn’t make me a gold digger akin to Anna Nicole Smith—it makes me smart.”
Her post reacts to a book that I haven’t read. It’s called Smart Girls Marry Money. Based on the product description I’ve read on Amazon, I don’t want to read it. It looks like post-feminist shockumentary nonsense. If it were in my power to get rid of every book in the genre I would. I swear. But since I can’t, I just pretend these books don’t exist.
(So here I am, breaking my own cardinal rule. Yay.)
read more »
January 25, 2010
I regularly read the posts on Jezebel.com. While browsing this morning I came across their review of Lori Gottileb’s book, Marry Him: the Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough. A lot of relationship bloggers have a great deal to say about this book because it’s a book that elicits strong opinions. Many people, including Prozac Nation’s Elizabeth Wurtzel, agree with Gottileb’s general premise. Jezebel does not, and neither do many female bloggers and writers. Newsweek has an impressive rebuttal of Gottileb, which I’ve also found through Jezebel. These are all worth reading.
Neither the premise nor the author’s love of the subject is uncharted territory. (An excerpt of the book appeared in the Atlantic in 2008.) The premise goes like this: women in the dot-com, post-feminist-and-Facebook, fiercely individualistic and picky present have insane checklists for potential partners. These wishlists might include height, political, clothing, outlook, wealth, status, emotional and other such requirements. However, these attitudinal shifts create some real repercussions. When women reach their thirties and find themselves still single, they realize that they’ve passed up on many legitimate offers for reasons that seem stupid retrospectively.
Someone’s got to put the brakes on this bullshit.
read more »