Saturday, April 19, 2008

i'm blogging this!!

teraninse says:
I mean, if your own wedding can't be a highly individualistic, idiosyncratic affair, I don't want to know what can be.
teraninse says:
that's not to say...break out the furries for bridesmaids....but..


So, um, yes. The things that were said by, and to, Kyraninse/Seraninse/Teraninse (with occasional comments from Chris, who I gather was in the same room as her at the time), related in bits and in the wrong order because I can, and edited for brevity & to protect the guilty.

teraninse says:
and when are you getting married?
(and I'd do it again) says:
oh, we got married on February 29th.
teraninse says:
......*boggle-eyed*
teraninse says:
that's...a good anniversary, IMO
(and I'd do it again) says:
*shrugs* it took all of thirty seconds. we picked the 29th because we hate the world.
teraninse says:
*snicker*
teraninse says:
I'm horrified that I didn't know though. @@
(and I'd do it again) says:
no one knows except a few people on my deadjournal list, and a few members of his family, and the two friends who came along with.
teraninse says:
chris: I think that's pretty shabby, for her not to tell me, even for someone who doesn't think marriage counts for much.


This is entirely true, especially in Chris's case. As with many young things (but worse, because I'm such a flybynight floozy), the people I've met have come along in blocks associated with different locations & different educational institutions & different internets fads; Chris has been my friend for roughly 6 years, an extraordinary length of time - outside of my siblings and the blue and purple people, there might be no one I've known longer.

(and I'd do it again) says:
honestly, I didn't put it around much because I'm not proud of it in the least.
teraninse says:
because it was a purely political/practical move?
(and I'd do it again) says:
it's playing a system I hate in a blatantly unfair way.
teraninse says:
...I'm all about manipulating an unfair system to suit me, but then I'm horrible like that.
(and I'd do it again) says:
*nodnods* yeah, I wasn't THAT wary of doing it, but I feel queasy about bragging about it. My siblings knew I was marrying, but I didn't actually tell them about it afterwards - I hope my father doesn't know at all.


There was some talk about the age problem - how young marriages are so not okay in the UK, but pretty normal in the US. (Average age at first marriage in UK: 29 F / 31 M. US: 26 F / 27.5 M. I am twenty-freaking-three). Hint: I am not from the US, so this is generally not okay with me.

teraninse says:
*pokes gently with a poker* it's not bragging just to let people know you got married
(and I'd do it again) says:
but what WOULD I be telling them, if I told them I got married?
teraninse says:
btw, I thought you might want to know, M and I are getting married?
teraninse says:
*spreads hands in shrug*
teraninse says:
Chris was still thinking that you were "going" to.
teraninse says:
I mean, you could have it come out casually over dinner conversation sometime ten years down the road, but.
(and I'd do it again) says:
no, I mean, what would I be conveying to them? that I support Georgia's hetero-only, perk-ridden marriage system?
teraninse says:
oh
(and I'd do it again) says:
that I am into the whole 'marriage' thing with the nice long history of women being property and stuff?
teraninse says:
I'm the chinese immigrant here, no stealing my lines.
(and I'd do it again) says:
that my sex life is now sanctioned by Jesus?
teraninse says:
...you would be conveying that you're getting married to M, who I'm assuming you adore?
(and I'd do it again) says:
yes, I do, but I keep the adoring fairly private...I'm just like that.
teraninse says:
...sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.
teraninse says:
even if it has a bit of marijuana in it, it's still a cigar


And now it all gets political, as if it wasn't already:

teraninse says:
I dunno, that's like saying, I'm never willing to go through an affirming ceremony with the man I love -- just because he happens to be male (which isn't PC) and because I get some perks out of it.
teraninse says:
which -- to be honest, smacks of silly to me, on some level. I wouldn't marry chris even for the perks unless I loved him, and so what if it's easier for us just because we happen to be sanctioned by the government? that's...like wanting to chop of your limbs in sympathy of the beggar down the streeet. *bad analogy*
(and I'd do it again) says:
no, it's not because he's male that I have an issue with it, it's because I supposedly could not do this if he wasn't.
(and I'd do it again) says:
if something's restricted to heteros it can't fit with my relationships/my life because I am not hetero and never will be.
teraninse says:
yes...and no
(and I'd do it again) says:
there's no sort of relationship I could have with a man that I couldn't also have with a woman, I'm pretty sure of that
teraninse says:
yessss....
teraninse says:
but I'm assuming you don't want to have the same kind of relationship you have with M with another woman.
(and I'd do it again) says:
not any woman I know currently, no, but that doesn't mean I never will and certainly doesn't mean I never would.
(and I'd do it again) says:
so it's not about sympathy for the beggar down the street, it's about sympathy for MYSELF.


Slightly related; Belle has a shiny new post on the subject of passing, which is more or less what this is about. And I feel upset just copypasting all this, right now.

(and I'd do it again) says:
oh, i didn't even mention how annoying the actual marriage bit was; the judge sprang fucking Jesus on me.
(and I'd do it again) says:
I swear that's not even legal
teraninse says:
this is why you don't want to be in the SOUTH!
teraninse says:
amirite???
(and I'd do it again) says:
it would've helped if the ceremony itself hadn't been so yuckmaking. I'm convinced it didn't HAVE to be - he MUST've had a secular script in a drawer somewhere, surely - but about two lines in I nearly interrupted him to say 'waitwaitiwait who said anything about JESUS?' I should have, really. :/
teraninse says:
hahaha.
teraninse says:
that's...icky indeed.
(and I'd do it again) says:
i didn't want to make a scene. i was having such a nice morning up until then.


The South part seems relevant; now, I'm a n00b here, and I'm also a pretty obnoxious and socially inept human being, but the area seems to have a higher density of totally annoying men than anywhere else I've ever been. The Bookworm tells me that this is part of why her mother had the family move up to New Jersey when she herself was but a small bookworm.

From my Deadjournal at the time: Btw, I totally got married last Friday - yes, on leap day. This is only worth mentioning because the judge was a jackass. (Nakki and M say he wasn't, that he was just a 'traditional southern guy'). He ignored me the whole time and never used my name - M had a name, but I was 'the bride'. He asked (empty-handed) M for the certificate, then gave the fresh copy to M once he'd got it ready, even though I'd given it to him in the first place and I was standing there with a GIANT PURPLE HANDBAG. He even sprang fucking Jesus on me. Bitchface could've asked if we liked Jesus - I didn't feel like I could stop him at that point... (Yes, we must be the only people in _______ County who don't like Jesus, but, dude, that first amendment thing?) *le sigh* I'm not an atheist - if I was, I imagine I'd've been rather madder about it than I am. I believe in god, just not your poxy god who likes his prayers and amens laid on inch thick with a trowel, at my bloody thirty-second no-fee leap-day courthouse wedding. That was just rude, offensive and just maybe illegal. This is not holy matrimony - see, if it was holy, you wouldn't be fussed about whether I was doing it with a boy or with a girl.

There is negative problems - ie, all the above - and then there are positive problems, like this one:


(and I'd do it again) says:
and that's another problem - I don't know any married people and barely ever have done. My parents had a pretty miserable marriage for the first 11 years of my life; M's father's now living in Alabama with his 5th wife, and M's brother and aunt are divorced too...
teraninse says:
*nodnods*
(and I'd do it again) says:
i don't really know my extended family at all - just my uncle and aunt in Preston, who are very Christian and...generally not people who inspire me. So all I see is the big-media-weddings on TV, which are just cringeworthy
teraninse says:
...uck
teraninse says:
yes.
teraninse says:
I think...I'll blog about this at some point.
(and I'd do it again) says:
clearly there should be a WEDDING DRESS with 'I'm blogging this' stitched on the veil........
teraninse says:
CLEARLY!
teraninse says:
there's some slogging through icky-making weddings of both the pagan variety and the x'tian variety. haha
teraninse says:
and...oh darn...but...chinese wedding dress or european? @@
teraninse says:
ack! cultural identity strikes again!
(and I'd do it again) says:
oh, I went to an icky Pagan handfasting once. felt like a big dressing-up game, the couple split up three weeks later
(and I'd do it again) says:
OOOH, what a question!
(and I'd do it again) says:
(I do know another pagan couple who married - in Edinburgh, so I missed it - but a few months later, the wife ran off with my ex-boyfriend...)
teraninse says:
...*sigh*
teraninse says:
...
(and I'd do it again) says:
(the happy couple had been together ten years before that. *sigh*)
teraninse says:
just..no comment.
(and I'd do it again) says:
mm.
(and I'd do it again) says:
so, yeah, there's NO ONE i can look at and say 'I want what they have!'
teraninse says:
nothing wrong in creating your own
teraninse says:
I mean, what's fanfic, after all?
(and I'd do it again) says:
indeed not, but feels like I'm starting with nothing


The elephant in the room, do you see it? No? Good. It shall not be spoken of, for all I am leaning on one of its exploding pink feet. But I will say this of it; I came here - here being everywhere it's taken me - to get away from gender. I hate gender, remember? It's repugnant. Like most of us (of either designation), I could make a long list of all the times I was told UR DOIN IT RONG when I was a girl-child, but that would just make me feel shittier. I cannot tell you how glad I was to find out that there was a way to do this whole love crap without it being about gender roles. (This is still a huge part of why I love slash so fucking much - because I am a big old sop, but I despise gender. It's also why I find lesbian romance a zillion times easier than the hetero variant, and why I've basically wound up wanting to strangle all-but-one of the guys I've ever had a thing for, but I persevere. Being queer gives me a way to do straight).

Whether I feel this way because I'm queer or because I'm me is something the jury is still out on. But I am reminded of a Slate article I read two years ago;

Of course, some opponents of same-sex marriage are just anti-gay. But to dismiss all opposition to gay marriage as pure bigotry is to miss an important point. The key to evaluating the real stakes here is to think of gay rights in terms of two major categories: gay marriage and everything else. [...] And polls show consistently growing support nationwide for gay rights other than marriage. Gallup found that 90 percent of Americans support equal employment opportunities regardless of sexual orientation. And 79 percent support the idea of homosexuals serving in the armed forces, a profound change in public opinion since the 1990s, when President Clinton thought it politically prudent to abandon his push for nondiscrimination in favor of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

But somehow same-sex marriage is a different story.

[...]

Many people get married because they want the established sex roles the institution provides: a blushing, beautiful, white veil and miles-of-lace bride set off against her dashing, handsome, chivalrous groom. Same-sex marriage seems to undermine these very sex-specific statuses, leaving everyone a sex-neutral "applicant." Sure, we could say same-sex marriages involve two brides or two grooms, but something really is lost in this translation: At that point the terms do not describe distinctively gendered roles but are merely gendered descriptions of the same role.


...Dear god, does that last paragraph make me feel ill. I can barely believe that there's anyone alive who wants that, let alone a whole bunch of people who equate it with what your genitals looked like when you were born.

So Kyraninse gets on to the rewriting of affirmation (which is something she posted about yesterday too - and ooh, look, a Punkass post on the topic):

teraninse says:
and as a friend, I wanted to know because I wanted to add my congratulations for affirmation and blessings to the pot, regardless of what the federal system has to say about it. not that congrats and blessings have to be specifically time-tied, but...
teraninse says:
well, sometimes it is. superstition and tradition and all that.
(and I'd do it again) says:
can i ask what the congrats would be FOR, though? it's not like the relationship's changed at all because of it
teraninse says:
I'm working within my paradigm, in which if I ever married chris, I'd essentially be formally announcing to the world that I'm taking this man to be mine and I vow to honor, cherish, protect, and succor until death do us part. [In her blog post she amended this to 'until life do us part']
teraninse says:
and this would be an affirmation that would resonate, for me, within the spiritual realm also, since I believe in intent, spirit, and magic.
(and I'd do it again) says:
*nodnods* I grok that.
teraninse says:
and so...if I weren't willing to say those things, I wouldn't want to get married, even for practical purposes. I'm assuming that you also meant those things when you said them.
teraninse says:
which, to my belief, is, regardless of society and law, a very powerful thing.
(and I'd do it again) says:
yes, but I would've meant them with or without the marriage part. that's just what the relationship is like.
teraninse says:
*nod* marriage is a nice convenient excuse to have a affirmation ceremony, in my eyes. maybe this is just me, but for me it's not binding unless it's been ceremonialized.
teraninse says:
partially because of the paradigms of intent and magic that I work with.
teraninse says:
so -- in my eyes, if I congratulated you on your marriage, I'd be happy for you that this affirmation happened and was now binding, so to speak.
teraninse says:
which is NOT to say, you should advertise your marriage when you don't want to, just to make people happy.
(and I'd do it again) says:
I think I get you now - I guess my main problem is that the affirmation ceremony is coupled (hurr) to a raft of legal benefits that fucks over a huge number of people *of whom I am one*
teraninse says:
that makes sense.
teraninse says:
lots of it.
(and I'd do it again) says:
but I believe in intent, and this relationship is one of the reasons I do.
teraninse says:
but -- I don't see a reason to be ashamed of your marriage per se just because it is supported by a corrupt system.
teraninse says:
or not the marriage itself, but the ceremony of it.
teraninse says:
btw, none of this was supposed to be "chastise chastise, bad, bad thene" -- I just wanted to hash out the why and wherefores.
(and I'd do it again) says:
nah, I get that and thanks, I kinda think I needed to get it out with someone...
teraninse says:
*nod*
teraninse says:
Do you feel like the marriage ceremony is just ...well, not empty ritual -- but can have, can do without, as the chinese would say?
(and I'd do it again) says:
I don't know, because I don't know of one that would be appropriate for me, so I feel like I'm comparing 'can do without' with...nothing. Dunno what 'can have' would be like.
teraninse says:
I've talked about wedding ceremonies at great length with my friends -- one of whom's mother and father got married on a hill top somewhere with witnesses and that was all.
teraninse says:
I also attended a wedding this past summer where ...they exchanged vows they wrote themselves and that was it.
teraninse says:
If you like, and only if you do, I'd be happy to talk with you about what you might like for a possible affirmation ceremony if you feel like the yuck-making should just be ignored on the metaphysical level.
teraninse says:
and ONLY if you feel it's something you want.


Do I? I don't even know. I have too much pride to be any good with bindings, or gods for that matter. I am happy with what I have flung myself into; but I am at my most happy when not putting words to it, when just being here, words and symbols bedamned. Feck. Must hit 'publish post' now.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

no furry bridesmaids here.

This is one of the many great things Kyraninse said to me over the other day. I am putting it here while I am busy organising some of the others into a post of blogginess. (Meanwhile, go read her introspective post on race issues fatigue).


There's a story about buddhism. Once, there was an old woman who gave a meal to a monk. Before the monk left, at the old lady's request, he told her a mantra that would lead to enlightenment. Unfortunately, as the old woman was going rather deaf, she mis-heard it. Not having a rosary, the old woman would drop a bean from one pot to another as she recited this mantra --

One day, a monk was passing by a hovel when he saw a strange golden aura coming forth and he knocked on the door. He was very surprised to see naught but an old woman, and he hastened to ask her how she had achieved her spiritual growth.

She said, a monk told me to recite "blargh". The monk was surprised and told her, but you've been saying it wrong this entire time! The old woman was, naturally, somewhat upset, and wanted to learn the correct version. The monk told her the correct version, and then, quite pleased with himself, set off again. By chance, as he was walking away, he saw that the golden glow had disappeared.

He realized that he, in fact, was the person in wrong and hurried back to tell the old woman that he was terribly sorry, but she was right and he was, in fact, wrong. She had been taught another version that was also correct, and it didn't occur to him until he had thought about it some more. The old woman thanked him for coming back to tell her this and sent him on his way again,.

and only the monk knew how close it had been, and of his relief when he saw the golden glow gradually turn brighter as he walked away again.

SO -- it's intent that matters.

people can tell you you're wrong till they're blue in the face, but that doesn't make them right. not even if it's that irritating niggling voice at the bottom of your brain.

Saturday, April 12, 2008

*pokes head up*

Yep, I'm here, I have my blogging hat back on, I've just not blogged yet, though there's no shortage of things to be blogged at. Here are some of them:


Isn't this fun? The Serious Fraud Office politely drop their enquiry into corruption in the arms trade between the UK and Saudi Arabia because of blackmail from the Saudis. The High Court now tells them that ending the enquiry was illegal, and it has to reopen, now. (In a rare moment of win, the US government said the same thing a few months back). So have they got the spine? Is Gordy going to get over his reliance on the arms industry and grow a pair of bollocks over this one? He bloody well better do.


Paula. Oh, Paula paula Radcliffe, who has this to say about the torch relay:

A peaceful protest on the sidelines - fine. But don't try to stop the torch, because the torch is about more than the Beijing Olympics. It's about the Olympic spirit and the importance of the Olympics in teaching youth, and teaching the world, what sport can do - how sport can bring people together, how it can overcome suffering, how it has overcome even wars in the past.

It's a very powerful thing, and trying to stop the torch was trying to stop that message, so that was wrong.


Everything I could possibly say about this turned up on political_macros.Is she even hearing what she's saying? That this thing is important and powerful and can overcome? If that's true, why the fuck is she trying to stop that process by taking part when she knows damn well what the case against is? This is the powerful moment, and she's picked the side of the spineless.


Michael Chertoff, a charming chappie from Homeland Security, is worried that his internets might not be safe:

He told the world's biggest IT security conference that serious threats to cyberspace are on "a par this country tragically experienced on 9/11".

Such attacks can hit financial bodies and a government's powers, he said.

"We take threats to the cyber world as seriously as we take threats to the material world," Mr Chertoff added.


...So, yeah, he's stood up and said it. 9/11 wasn't tragic because of the loss of thousands of lives, or because of the threat it represented to democracy, freedom and peace - it was tragic because it threatened financial bodies and a government's powers.

In other internets news, the EU has decided, by a narrow vote, that civil liberties really are more important than stopping music/film piracy. Also: I turn my back for two months and you look what happens. (Though I feel that the Beeb has failed to get to grips with this whole phenomenon).


There have been many great threads at FSF lately. See this one on rape in s-f/f, which I derailed by talking about r&r and h/c themes in slash; a cool thread about how crazy Allecto inspired some non-crazy talk about Firefly...in which Allecto shows up [@ April 2nd, 6.01am] and asks the internets to apologise for calling her names, exactly as if she isn't dehumanising and full of contempt for all women who don't do as she'd like them to, Kai Cole included; and Laura Q on the religious indoctrination of children, about voluntary withdrawal from the world and about things SFnal - I didn't comment there, not so much because I thought she crossed a line as because I think a line exists in a place where she's not seeing it.


And yes, this. Not smart, Ms Self-Appointed Expert On All People Everywhere. Not big, not clever, and, sadly, not even original. [if we're doing citations, I totally stole that link from Holly at Feministe].


The break did me good - I sifted through old notebooks, played videogames and thought. It's kinda good to have so much backlog of stuff to type; feels so bountiful that throwing out the rotten bits doesn't hurt. I've tentatively decided to put fiction first until the 8th of every month from now on, at least if there's something I want to work on. But now I'm back to other things - taking walks; making clothes and shit; and, that thing I keep not mentioning - my tarot blog. I hope the usual Living Room Theory of Internets (it's my space, and if it's not your kind of space I can throw you out whenever I like) can be presumed; so if you want to see the family shrine, do not be Ellie. (Do Not Be Ellie isn't a bad rule in general...)