So we should let homosexuals marry, but should we let...

[Cheetah]

So we should let homosexuals marry, but should we let... single people marry themselves???

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39793033/ns/world_news-weird_news/

Bride-to-be set to say 'I do' — to herself
Chen Wei-yih has posed for a set of photos in a flowing white dress, enlisted a wedding planner and rented a banquet hall for a marriage celebration with 30 friends.

But there is no groom. Chen will marry herself.

Uninspired by the men she's met but facing social pressure to get married, the 30-year-old Taipei office worker will hold the reception next month in honor of just one person.

"Age thirty is a prime period for me. My work and experience are in good shape, but I haven't found a partner, so what can I do?" Chen said.

"It's not that I'm anti-marriage. I just hope that I can express a different idea within the bounds of a tradition," she added.

Her $5,675 wedding comes after online publicity that has netted 1,800 largely sympathetic comments.

"I think there will be more and more girls like this," said "divagirl," who did not elaborate.

Taiwanese women are marrying later and less often as their economic status advances, fuelling government concerns about a drop in the birth rate and its impact on productivity.

Australian holiday
Only 40 percent of women surveyed earlier this year by the education ministry said they imagined married people could live better than singles, local media said.

"I was just hoping that more people would love themselves," said Chen, who will go on a solo honeymoon to Australia.

Chen said her mother had insisted on a groom at first but later jumped aboard the solo marriage plan.

But as Chen cannot officially register a marriage to herself, if she finds a man later she will wed again.

"If I had a steady boyfriend, I wouldn't do this," Chen said. "It would be offensive to him, anyway."

I think there is a bit of an oxymoron at the very end here.

But yeah, is this a solution for people who do not find anyone to share their life with?
Or is this simply a stupid way of having a party where she is allowed to wear a bridal dress?
And would you attend (and be serious) a single-person wedding if you were invited?
And of course: Would you consider marrying yourself?

For myself, I would say that I would never waste money on a wedding party to marry myself. Nor would I be able to take it seriously if any of my friends proclaimed that they were going to marry themselves.

Furthermore, I think this woman would meet more marriage-inspiring men if she tried 10 years ago and lost some fat...

But finally, it is her decision to have her own pretend-wedding. Not sure how it will take away the marriage-pressure she felt though.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I wouldn't marry myself, I'm straight.

 

[GhostWriter16]

She can pretend but its dumb and I would never do something so nutty.

 

[superisis]

Sounds a tad narcissistic. What would the practical effects of it be (except to have a party where people can hook up with the bride)?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I just hope that I can express a different idea within the bounds of a tradition
[...]
Chen said her mother had insisted on a groom at first but later jumped aboard the solo marriage plan.

So girl wanted to combine upholding tradition with staying true to single life. I find it ridiculous, but whatever works for others. Certainly less questionable than marrying a virtual character.

I would never do something so nutty.

No, you prefer to talk.
Moderator Action: Warned - trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Its pretty strange but also cool. But its kind of expensive though.

 

[warpus]

So basically all she did was throw a $5,500 party.. and a large chunk of that money was likely spent on the dress, her makeup, etc.

A waste of money if you ask me, but hey, whatever makes you happy

 

[ParadigmShifter]

You could marry bacon, warpus.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

The question isn't whether we should "allow" her to do what she did, but whether we should give her a marriage license for it . . . and what benefits she can get for having said marriage license; which in the US would mean things like she can file taxes . . . with herself, and she can't be compelled to testify . . . against herself.

 

[Miles Teg]

It amazes me that after maybe twenty years, a couple dozen instances, and a B-movie or two, you can still get your face plastered on MSN if you spend a few thousand bucks to marry yourself.

Don't people get bored of hearing about it after a while?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

The question isn't whether we should "allow" her to do what she did, but whether we should give her a marriage license for it

She never asked for one.

Don't people get bored of hearing about it after a while?

Gossip? Nope, people don't.

 

[Cheetah]

She never asked for one.

Should she get one anyway?

And while we're at it, we do we need to give out marriage licenses at all?

 

[say1988]

You are allowed to marry a goat if you want (consumation may face some legal issues, though) or a tube of toothpast. It just won't be legally recognized as the article says about this marriage. There are no laws against having some pointless ceremony.

And while we're at it, we do we need to give out marriage licenses at all?

So long as there are legal benefits to it, yes.

 

[Miles Teg]

Gossip? Nope, people don't.

Gossip is always fresh, because it involves specific people doing specific things. While these things are generally highly similar, the combinations are nigh infinite. If the woman across the street decides to marry herself, that's interesting. If some random person in Taiwan decides to marry herself, that's boring.

 

[Cheetah]

So long as there are legal benefits to it, yes.

That was the actual question: Why are the / should there be legal benefits to marriage?

 

[warpus]

That was the actual question: Why are the / should there be legal benefits to marriage?

Because it's a legal contract between (two) people.

 

[Cheetah]

What?

I'm thinking of things like "file taxes together" and "can't be compelled to testify against", etc. Why do we give such privileges to married couples?

 

[GhostWriter16]

I don't think we should require people to testify against anyone. If they refuse, I don't see a fair legal means to stop them.

As for tax benefits, divorce them from marriage.

 

[say1988]

The former is a direct result of merger of assets (and/or communal control of incoming assets). You could say that all assets be held by the person who brought them into the relationship, but if, say, one partner stays home doing cooking/cleaning/shopping/administrative tasks to support the one who is working, then does the one who was working recieve all the benefit?

Yes there is a discussion to be had, and i don't know where I stand, but those are the obvious reasons I see.

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

This is perfect. If people can marry themselves, then masturbation can't be a sin because it's sex within the context of marriage. I think we have our ace in the hole against Christine O'Donnell.