Kelli28

I'm not against the gays getting married and believe that it should be recognised however marriage is very traditional and gays are very modern. I would've thought they'd like there own meaning given to them to celebrate the fact it is a same sex marriage a bit like indigenous Australians have their own name, flag ect. They are still Australian but celebrate it differently.

knockoff nige

So you just want to be part of a 'no gays' club?

How is being gay modern but being straight traditional? Modern marriage today seems to be 'stay married, if you like. Sample the rest of the menu if you get bored'. Should there be a different word for that?

Gordon Barlow

Most people in the West are tolerant of same-sex sexual relationships, but half of them draw the line at same-sex marriages. Why is that? Most people in the world probably couldn’t care less if siblings live together, but very few approve of sexual goings-on between or among them. Almost all of them would draw the line at non-sexual marriages between siblings. But why?

What is so special about marriage? It isn't all about children, in these sophisticated times. At least, not in the West, where promiscuity is blatant, adoptions are easy, artificial insemination is routine, divorces are simple, surgical sex-changes abound, birth control is everywhere, and serial monogamy is the norm. The old ideal of “the nuclear family” has gone out the window.

Kelli28

Yeah coz you easily get that from what I wrote! All I'm saying is it'd be nice for same sex couples for them to celebrate it as its own thing it's like calling someone who is bisexual gay, when there not or not recognising the difference between genders itd be silly to have one name for everything

There is its called an open marriage

bcworld

Marriage can be quite modern too...that's probably why 70%+ and increasing all the time of marriages in Australia for example do not take place in a religious setting. So if 'traditional' = religious(?), then society has already taken care of the modernisation.

GarryP

Really?

Give "Pride and Prejudice" a read sometime. 1800s and we are talking arranged marriages, with dowries, and 'a good match' having nothing to do with love, but instead cold hard cash. Wife becomes the husband's property.

Isn't that 'traditional'?

I get the feeling that much of the objection here is because 'marriage' as defined in a particular worldview, is concerned with the 'main sequence' of life. Grow up, go to school, get a job, find a boyfriend, get married, get a house, have kids, retire, die - it's one of those markers that says you are 'on the path' which you are supposed to hit by different ages. So if someone comes along and says "well actually it can be part of a different path entirely", or indeed "well you don't need it at all", it changes one of those markers and introduces some uncertainty into the worldview.

Well, that's my theory.

PS I think you'll find homosexuality stretches back longer than marriage does....

knockoff nige

Yes, I easily got that from what you wrote. What difference does it make if a word gets redefined? Does it devalue the word or the point? Or does it make no difference whatsoever when it's applied to recognise two people rather than just a man and a woman. If marriage is for life (traditionally), by your standards you can't call today's version marriage. Or should gays call it 'gay marriage' and not ever be allowed to call it 'marriage'? You would call and 'open marriage' a marriage wouldn't you?

Swerv-o

Indeed. Homosexuality was a regular and completely accepted aspect of the classical civilisations such as Greece and Rome. It's certainly not a new thing.


S

Kim67

Lol....I think you could be right about that.

Beoz

As a gay pal said to me once. ..... Men like shagging. When you throw a woman into the mix it just complicates the matter. It's far easier to be gay where everyone is from Venus.

Swerv-o

Good observation, though I think that bi-sexual is probably the best of both worlds - why rule out half the population in either direction?


S

Beoz

That is true. If you feel like a conversation option 1, if you don't feel like talking, option 2

GarryP

Surely by that reckoning the thai ladyboy would be the optimum solution - the looks of the lady, but with none of the nagging?

It's roughly for that reason I think when we finally get realistic robots, the women will be out of luck.

Kim67

Out of luck? Nah, just rid of a few a*@holes.

Beoz

That makes me think of the credit rolls in the Inbetweeners 2 film.