Subscribe to The Curmudgeon!

Google Groups
Subscribe to The Curmudgeon
Email:
Visit this group

Friday, August 13, 2010

You Are Mine! . . . Literally

Seriously, enough with the engagement rings already. I'm not actually sure of this in any way, but I feel like these have to essentially be replacements for the antiquated bride prices, which were basically payments to purchase a family's daughter. (Interesting that a guy doesn't have to wear anything to let other women know he's already been bought.) So that fancy, expensive, diamond ring you've always dreamt about is hearkening back to a time when women were property...yet we're still expected to buy them? The jig is up, ladies (translation: no, it's almost definitely not up). An engagement ring is like a dolled-up version of those bright orange "PAID FOR" stickers they slap on any items that don't fit in your grocery bags at the supermarket.

Well, I'm taking a stand. If the woman I marry is a feminist, as I am, I will not be buying her an engagement ring. If she demands one, then she will be treated as chattel and required to perform the duties expected of a woman who has been paid for: cook my meals, change the kids' diapers, service me orally at my behest... She can work, though. Dual income's pretty sweet.

2 comments:

  1. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/fashion/weddings/01FIELD.html?emc=eta1

    ReplyDelete