daily transaction report

i have a suspicion that natali stole the privatizing marriage idea from me.

(i misspelled suspicion and privatizing, but thanks to spellcheck, no one will ever know unless they read my parenthetical remarks. i also just misspelled parenthetical and may be using the word wrong.)

i say stole because i'm always talking about how stupid it is that the state would need to sanction marriage.

but stole isnt the right word because ideas exist independent of people. maybe. it's complicated. ideas are more like viruses that infect people and cultures and institutions. but whatever.

here's what i've been thinking about lately:
why not extend this privatization to dating?

(i misspelled privatization again.)

here's how it works:
anytime you start dating, or possibly even talking to, anyone, work out a contract. something like we agree to date for three months, split the charges on any and all dates, limit our physical contact to such and such, spend this much time together, ect. then, at the end of the contract period you can either renew the contract, create a more "serious" contract (or a contract reflecting more serious dating) or breakup. that way if it's not really working out you only have to stay in it til the end of the contract. you can also work out penalties for failing to live up to the terms of the contract. and if you can't work out a dating contract with your potential partner, you probably shouldnt be dating anyway.

bobby is getting bloated

my ward crush announced his engagement today to this girl in our ward. i guess i will stop praying they will break up now. my please make the blond adrien brody look a like in my ward break up with his girlfriend prayers were getting a little pathetic anyway.

which brings me to proposition 8. i personally am against it. mostly because i am for gay marriage and against referendums. it seems like there is mob/bully mentality behind them. and no one has been able to explain why we elect representatives but still allow the entire electorate vote on specific issues. i wish i had paid more attention in school. or i wish our government made more sense. one of those two things.

moving on the answer of course is privatization of marriage. the idea is explained in detail HERE. basically, all marriages would be contracts not requiring state sanction (so we dont even have to go into the civil rights/morality argument which im sure no one enjoys). everyone would tailor their marriage contracts to suit their needs. the contract would describe expectations and how assets are treated. it would make divorce a less traumatic experience. religions could still sanction marriages as they saw fit. and this wouldnt just benefit gays but women and children who are often the victims of no fault divorce and poor marriage (exit) planning. it would also put singles and married people on equal footing. privatization. think about it.

oh yeah and the cute photographer is married too.

baby seems we never ever agree, you like the movies and i like t.v.

a new study shows that women on birth control might not be attracted to the best people for them.

Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes are involved in immune response and other functions, and the best mates are those that have different MHC smells than you. The new study reveals, however, that when women are on the pill they prefer guys with matching MHC odors.

it goes on to say that the pill causes a woman to be pregnant, hormonally, thus basically putting her in a "post-mating" state.

gaaa--freaking--rate! not only am i 30 and dropping off the deceased members of what's left of my egg family monthly, now i can't even sniff out the right man because i want shorter, lighter periods, and better skin!?

in all seriousness, we all learned from paula and the cool cat years ago that opposites attract, so we shouldn't be too surprised to learn that. i guess we are now left to decide which is more important to us: a satisfying relationship with less wandering eyes and offspring who are more fit, or better skin, less monthly emotional imbalance and milder cramps (oh. and pregnancy. sometimes i forget people are having sex).

i'm leaning towards the latter, but i'll get back to you.

i'm stickin with you

so my friend skrittle is getting married. for a while, fight and i have been thinking about pursuing a career in wedding planning. we've got a lot of great ideas. here's the idea we pitched to skrittle and his soon-to-be-wife (an idea they immediately shot down):

typical wedding set up. friends of the bride on one side, friends of the groom on the other. the wedding music plays and the bride walks down the aisle just like normal. but wait. where is the minister? he's not there. who's going to perform the ceremony? this is a disaster. then a video screen appears. it's the minister on his scooter (the minister is our friend poland jones who is authorized to legally marry people). "i better hurry. i'm going to be late," he says. he's weaving in and out of traffic. then he crashes. he digs himself out of the rubble and start running. "i cant be late for this wedding!" then someone starts shooting at him. the bullets are wizzing by. he's finally shot. there's blood everywhere. the video fades to black. then, all of the sudden, the minister jumps out from behind a curtain. "i barely made it. this must mean it's really true love." applause breaks out. the ceremony is performed. a total success. a wedding none will ever forget.

my moon, no man

this is a guest post from my frances. she is cool.

a week or so ago, elliot and i took a nighttime walk along the flat streets and struck up a conversation about the moon. elliot, you see, is a little freaked out by the moon, because the presence of the moon in our sky means the sun is shining somewhere else in the world where we can't see it, but we believe that it exists there nonetheless.

the only time i am freaked out by the moon, i told him, is when i can see the moon and the sun at the same time, in the same sky. there is something about that phenomenon that feels distinctly not right to me, i said. like the sun and the moon don't belong together or something.

elliot pounced. obviously, he said, you have some sort of subconscious angst related to gender relation, as the sun and moon are strong symbols of the masculine and feminine, respectively. uh-oh.

him: maybe you have a subconscious adherence to traditional gender roles, and you think men and women don't belong in the same sphere.
me: not likely.
him: no. not likely at all.

pause.

him: maybe you don't want to exist in the same sphere as men. you want to rule the sphere on your own.
me: more likely.
him: yeah, yeah.

pause.

me: or maybe i just don't quite understand how men and women can exist in the same sphere, happily and balanced. it is not that i don't believe it can be done. i see it done, and done well, around me all the time. but i still don't quite get it.
him: yeah, yeah.

it is this last assessment, i believe, that is the truth. or, at least, my truth.

now first, let me be very clear in saying that in no way does any of this mean that i am opposed to women and men coexisting. i am, in fact, very staunchly in favor. maybe my general confusion about the workings of male-female relationships stems from the fact that i can barely make it to a second date, let alone a lifetime commitment. but i do think there is something magical, mysterious and miraculous about two people deciding to spend forever together, something that cannot be understood from the outside.

i mention all of this because i leave in a few hours for portland, where sallee will become a mathews and enter forever the marriage vortex. again, not a bad thing. a good thing, in fact. a wonderful, happy, appropriate, joyful thing for which i am glad. but again, i just don't get it.

intellectually, of course, i understand. i have heard all the stories, the experiences, the processes. you ask questions and you get answers. you have concerns and they get addressed, or become less important. you think. you talk. you try. you pray. and then. you know. or rather, you know enough to take the next step. to make the choice.

emotionally though, spiritually even, it is still difficult (for me, at least) to understand how one might know. you just know? and that's it? because there has been at least one time in my life when i thought i knew something about this sort of thing and it turned out that i was, in fact, wrong. or, maybe more accurately, i came to know something different from what i thought i knew. and it was painful and hard.

it is also hard, i have come to believe, to watch people do things you don't understand, even when those things are very, very good. and it is, probably selfishly so, especially hard when those things involve a change in someone's life that changes your life, too. but, after my own thinking, trying and praying, i have learned this one, very important thing. i don't need to understand how it works for someone else. i don't need to understand how it works for someone else in order to rejoice when they rejoice, and i don't need to understand how it works for someone else in order to believe that it will work out someday for me, too. and, most importantly, the way that it works out for me is going to be just as strange and mysterious and difficult to understand for everyone else outside of my sphere, my sky.

and so i feel, at last, at peace. a little sad, of course. the bittersweet kind of happysad that always accompanies an occasion, and a revelation, of this sort. but, i am also most pleased to offer my joy and congratulations to the soon-to-be mr. and mrs. mathews. may your sky always be full of beauty, balance and love.