Marriage feedback [inofficial Poll]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyNeudaiz

I do not particularly like my opinion being misrepresented. If you say your favorite color is Yellow and someone turns around and tells people it's Pink, you're going to want to correct them. That is the last I have to say on the matter.

---

Totally off topic but confident woman are hawt, and you are clearly confident. Take this as a comment that can be disreguarded per my previous statement :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

Are any of the JP posters commenting about this thread in particular?

---

quite a bit, actually

Heh, oddly enough one of the other debates was what to call the opposite partners... since wife and husband would be out of the question. So what we should call them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoxyLalonde

Heh, oddly enough one of the other debates was what to call the opposite partners... since wife and husband would be out of the question. So what we should call them?

---

I think the level of creativity for the word would depend on where lore was included or not and where the original name was derived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoxyLalonde

Heh, oddly enough one of the other debates was what to call the opposite partners... since wife and husband would be out of the question. So what we should call them?

---

how about just... partner?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

I think the level of creativity for the word would depend on where lore was included or not and where the original name was derived.

---

If we go with "hand-fasting" I could be down with calling my "wife" my "hand-maiden" ZING!... I Kid, I Kid :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

Quite a few cultural institutions have chosen "binding" as an alternative term for marriage quite successfully.

Another interesting tidbit about marriage:

Up until as little as 40 years ago, only the woman was required to say "love, honor, and obey" in most ceremonies. Additionally, prior to the 20th century, there was no mention of the word anywhere in marriage. It is our romantic culture that has really altered that perception.

Didn't Final Fantasy XI previously use the term "hand-fasting?" This is a very old term to describe the old celtic rites of "marriage". This kind of thing is mostly practiced in SCA and pagan rituals these days; groups that are some of the highest acceptors of gay/lesiban and even plural marriage lifestyles. It would seem that since Final Fantasy XIV is a pagan society (no really, look up what it means), that this would be a good term to use.

Additionally, SE can go out of their way to allow players to run the process so there is no inherant game verification of sex. This way they can distance themselves from the modern issues and just let the players do what they want without assuming moral responsibility, which in the end, is really what should happen.

---

I know pagan ^_^ lol

And I am unsure what you mean by player run process?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

If we go with "hand-fasting" I could be down with calling my "wife" my "hand-maiden" ZING!... I Kid, I Kid :D

---

lol! hand-maiden without thinking ... sounded good but now I'll never think about that the same XD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

how about just... partner?

---

Although, on second go around... calling them "My Anything" is in and of itself a kind of Retro idea as it implies some kind of ownership. I think in a true even grounded scenario you would call each other by name and simply state that you are "hand-fasted" to them (yeah Im just gonna keep going with that term). That is if you REALLY want to get in to the equality of the thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmyNeudaiz

And this is where I stopped reading.

Go back, read my posts, come back, give me a real response that doesn't twist my words.

You CAN NOT honestly think that I want to play this game for online fake marriage.

---

Sorry, I guess you didn't post this

Quote:

---

It's like if I said we shouldn't have new jobs because I don't like them.

---

Good think you stopped reading if you didn't post that, because if you did post it after reading my post you'd feel stupid for posting.



If you did post

Quote:

---

It's like if I said we shouldn't have new jobs because I don't like them.

---

yes people would think you play this game to get married.


Shougun this is an MMORPG but I'd hope you know what "role" you're playing in this RPG. You are a hero of the word in this game. Different people play that role differently. There can be games that are RPG's that have nothing to do with Rper's. But this game can have both RP's and non-Rpers. And as for the my statement marriage is for the RPG's still stand as correct. Please know what your talking about Shougun before replying. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

I know pagan ^_^ lol

And I am unsure what you mean by player run process?

---

First off, im sure you know what it means but I always kind of reply to the world and not just a person. Having been on forums for so many years I expect people to jump on me for everything, sorry :/

as far as player run, I think you should just make the tools openly available for people and let them do what they will rather than having a "sign-up" system like 11 had in the beginning. EG:

1. Wedding Items freely purchasable from a vendor then engravable or alterable by a crafter
2. Hot wedding/celebration locations available for anyone to just walk in to with a party and have their own instance made.
3. Specialized crafted only items such as celebration cakes and items for sale via players

Essentially have the players drive the process while allowing SE to be as hands off as possible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoxyLalonde

They've made a few references to how much we've discussed it a bit... in general it summarizes to
They don't seem to like the word marriage
They think the topic is sensitive in other countries and thusly the name should be changed for that reason aswell
They believe that no one should be excluded.

---

So we're all in agreement then? Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serdapi

You are a hero of the word in this game. Different people play that role differently.

---

Actually strictly speaking you don't really play any kind of role. The use of MMORPG to describe a situation where you do very little actual role-play outside of RP servers is the reason most call them MMO's now.

Additionally, the role of THE CHARACTER you play (not the role YOU play) is that of an adventurer amongst many adventurers all working together to save the world. This is reflected most upon inspection of the Final Fantasy 14 (an 11) logo showing an innumerable amout of entities. Traditionally in all non-MMO FF games, only the protagonist is shown.

While it is true that your character is given a pivotal role, It is likely best to state that there are other adventurers contributing in equally important ways through-out the realm, but that you are simply not privy to there movements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

First off, im sure you know what it means but I always kind of reply to the world and not just a person. Having been on forums for so many years I expect people to jump on me for everything, sorry :/

as far as player run, I think you should just make the tools openly available for people and let them do what they will rather than having a "sign-up" system like 11 had in the beginning. EG:

1. Wedding Items freely purchasable from a vendor then engravable or alterable by a crafter
2. Hot wedding/celebration locations available for anyone to just walk in to with a party and have their own instance made.
3. Specialized crafted only items such as celebration cakes and items for sale via players

Essentially have the players drive the process while allowing SE to be as hands off as possible

---

Ah, I would hope that there are many tools given by SE. For example the procession having in game camera views and movements set up if desired to have a organized experience. (Like watching a cinematic except you set the cinematic up before hand).

I didnt want a wonderfully seamless yet great looking experience limited to those who have dedicated fraps buddies with a sense of art direction lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Ah, I would hope that there are many tools given by SE. For example the procession having in game camera views and movements set up if desired to have a organized experience. (Like watching a cinematic expect you set the cinematic up before hand).

I didnt want a wonderfully seamless yet great looking experience limited to those who have dedicated fraps buddies with a sense of art direction lol.

---

I can see where you are comming from. I think, however, there may be some technical issues with this. Certainly, it would be great if there was some kind of "recorder mode" where various angles are show and you can flip between cameras but you would be essentially opening additional view feeds and I don't know the implications on the threading of the game execution if you need to make this available to many different people at once.

I think forming that in to a question as to "how we might have tools to best record pivotal moments, regardless of reason" would be an excellent question for Yoshi-P in a future interview!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

Actually strictly speaking you don't really play any kind of role. The use of MMORPG to describe a situation where you do very little actual role-play outside of RP servers is the reason most call them MMO's now.

Additionally, the role of the character you play (not the role you play) is that of an adventurer amongst many adventurers all working together to save the world. This is reflected most upon inspection of the Final Fantasy 14 (an 11) logo showing an innumerable amout of entities. Traditionally in all non-MMO FF games, only the protagonist is shown.

While it is true that your character is given a pivotal role, It is likely best to state that there are other adventurers contributing in equally important ways through-out the realm, but that you are simply not privy to there movements.

---

That is a more accurate statement, mine was meant to be more general. "Hero of the world" meaning mostly what you said, there can be many heroes. Like in the trailer said "bravest among us" aka heroes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Ah, I would hope that there are many tools given by SE. For example the procession having in game camera views and movements set up if desired to have a organized experience. (Like watching a cinematic except you set the cinematic up before hand).

I didnt want a wonderfully seamless yet great looking experience limited to those who have dedicated fraps buddies with a sense of art direction lol.

---

Personally I would like something simple, like the Fable version of it, a quick cut-scene to some stain glass windows and a quick discussion about how the two are bonded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLYIv0wJWN8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

I can see where you are comming from. I think, however, there may be some technical issues with this. Certainly, it would be great if there was some kind of "recorder mode" where various angles are show and you can flip between cameras but you would be essentially opening additional view feeds and I don't know the implications on the threading of the game execution if you need to make this available to many different people at once.

I think forming that in to a question as to "how we might have tools to best record pivotal moments, regardless of reason" would be an excellent question for Yoshi-P in a future interview!

---

I would imagine that they could easily create a cut scene creator (maybe should have said cut scene over cinematic), just like the Unending Journey book inside the Inn. Where you just pick a scene and go. Except this scene is a little bit player driven.

Everyone gets in room, players are assigned positions, pick their clothes to wear, the ritual type is set and then they press play. The event is watched and then gets saved into your book with everyone who was there saved in it as well.

I wrote a camera/camcorder post before that SE should put in for great team photos and dungeon fights but for particular events I think a more guided process would be appreciated (not that you have to use it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoxyLalonde

Personally I would like something simple, like the Fable version of it, a quick cut-scene to some stain glass windows and a quick discussion about how the two are bonded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLYIv0wJWN8

---

In theory the cut scene creator for the ritual would be the same thing except not premade.

One important reason is that SE would have to admit small support or just ignore the LG community and make one cutscene for hetero couples.

Though I agree it shouldnt be too complex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shougun

Everyone gets in room, players are assigned positions, pick their clothes to wear, the ritual type is set and then they press play. The event is watched and then gets saved into your book with everyone who was there saved in it as well.

---

Wait, are we still talking about marriage? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcell

Wait, are we still talking about marriage? lol

---

lol Was talking about a general system to allow players to make a binding of their choice while also having the game direct scenes for them for better / impossible views and animations.

If the room is rented and the theme of the room is chosen to be wedding style but there is no game support with the cameras it would be hard to create a memorable moment specially if you dont have friends to fraps or something. With this system you get a professional view, animation direction and can also save it to your book of memories (the thing in the Inn).

It doesnt have to be a wedding (hand-fasting) but it could be.

I don't see how anyone is against this discussion on behalf of "wasting resources". Were those people also complaining when the Firedance (which actually included an emote) was included? If you've been in FFXI you'll know that weddings are ultra-cheesy, and unimportant, but a way to make a linkshell have some fun, be dorky and socialize (a thing that many posters need to try some day).

I never got married in FFXI, like I've said before, SSM wasn't allowed and I kinda found them too cheesy since I never expected them to happen. But now, SE has the chance to make a change, and to stop excluding a segment of players. Marriage will be included, that's not up to discussion, it's just up to SE to continue making a group of players alienated just because of their sexual orientation.

I'm not saying I will get married the very first day it is possible, but if I can't because my boyfriend is playing a male Roegadyn instead of a female, I'll be really disappointed in them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

I feel I should point out that the Oxford and webster dictionaries actually define marriage as a union between a "husband" and "wife", and then go on to specifically call a "husband" and "wife" as a "man or woman (respectively) in the state of marriage or matrimony"

for quick reference you can look here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage?s=t

Take notice of the fact that it includes a sub-term "gay marriage" as a "similar institution" between 2 people of the same sex. Most people don't realize this, but in most dictionaries, contexts, and societies, Marriage is in fact defined as heterosexual in nature (That is not to say that widespead opinion shouldnt change this fact).

In terms of the origins of the word "Marriage", It was created between 1250–1300 AD during the middle ages as referenced to the Middle English mariage of different spelling.

So actually Marriage has always been between a Man and a Woman and is in many circles considered a type of slang when used with same sex relationships. I'm not putting a judgement here, I am simply stating why I think we all get hung up on the idea of changing the meaning of the word Marriage when we really should just stop using that term to describe something it traditionally isnt (Even if we want it to). It is a bit like deciding you are just going to start calling a hamburger a hot dog because they both contain meat.

What we should really do is come up with a term, other than marriage, that best describes a relationship between two individuals based on love (since that is what people defend as their need to call it a marriage). I mean honestly, there is nothing in the definition of marriage that says ANYTHING about love and if you know anything about history it has CERTAINLY been an optional component.

---

While you are correct on what the specificity of today's definition means, it did not mean so when the word first became used. The etymological origin of marriage, as it entered the English language in the 1300s was simply to enter into wedlock. It was derived from the Latin word maritare which applied not only to people, but animals, foods, or anything else that could be brought or mixed together with an implication of permanence. One can argue there was an implied understanding that it was between man and woman, but no facts exist to support either side. We can't know if English speakers at that time even took that idea into consideration. They probably didn't. What we do know is that in ancient times, as well as today, you can "marry" sexless, inanimate objects together such as food. There is no real precedent to say that gender in inherent to the meaning of the word itself, just one idea (a current, and admittedly longstanding, idea) on one facet of the meaning of the word.

Any linguist worth his or her salt will tell you that language is far from permanent and that words are defined by current usage, not their etymology. Language is mutable and constantly evolving. When change in meaning happens it tends to happen rapidly, whether it be change in scope or complete transmutation, and those who write dictionaries are always playing catch up to update definitions. If the majority of society chooses to expand the current understanding of what we mean when we say marriage, consciously or unconsciously, it will happen regardless of any kind of resistance that might present itself. Consensus in usage trumps all and dictionaries ultimately serve to reflect usage, not the other way around.

The bottom line is that while we can certainly open a dictionary and say "this is the word's meaning," we can't point to a dictionary and say "see this is what it says so it can't ever mean this other thing" because that isn't how language works. What is written in the Oxford Dictionary could change tomorrow, if the common usage determines it must.

None of this is relevant to XIV of course and I am also among those who agree that this feature should be called something else entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EnkiOro

I'm not saying I will get married the very first day it is possible, but if I can't because my boyfriend is playing a male Roegadyn instead of a female, I'll be really disappointed in them.

---

I don't know if you have been reading, but we have kind of moved from a should they/shouldn't they to how they can implement the system so that it is properly inclusive without having to come to some kind of moral epiphany as a business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wynn

None of this is relevant to XIV of course and I am also among those who agree that this feature should be called something else entirely.

---

I'm guessing you didnt read the post to which this was response, but the post specifically talked about the definition of marriage as it is stated today and it's origins as a basis for an arguement as to why it holds meaning. That is the part I was setting straight. There is no point in having conversations about who is and isnt a proper linguist without realizing that today, dictionaries are still the central reference point to "meaning". You can certainly change the meaning of any word in any context for your personal uses and no one would consider you wrong.

It seems that at the end you agree with me regardless at the end, though, so that's good. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

I don't know if you have been reading, but we have kind of moved from a should they/shouldn't they to how they can implement the system so that it is properly inclusive without having to come to some kind of moral epiphany as a business.

---

This is my 2c and feel free to throw the flame buckets... But it would sound well if SE called it a partner ship or a union of sorts. For all cases be it of same gender or other wise, that way they would not be in hot water "politically".. Idea being to not step on any toes. Meaning the word marriage should not be used.

Quote:

---

What we should really do is come up with a term, other than marriage, that best describes a relationship between two individuals based on love (since that is what people defend as their need to call it a marriage). I mean honestly, there is nothing in the definition of marriage that says ANYTHING about love and if you know anything about history it has CERTAINLY been an optional component.

---

I couldn't agree more!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

I don't know if you have been reading, but we have kind of moved from a should they/shouldn't they to how they can implement the system so that it is properly inclusive without having to come to some kind of moral epiphany as a business.

---

When people argue semantics means there's little to argue about. I honestly don't give a damn what they call it, as long as they use the same word for both unions and hold the same meaning.

Also so far I've only seen a couple of you arguing the word itself, versus the hundreds of posts like mine, showing my support for SSM. Not sure why my post was special, but thanks for the attention!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twiddle

This is my 2c and feel free to throw the flame buckets... But it would sound well if SE called it a partner ship or a union of sorts. For all cases be it of same gender or other wise, that way they would not be in hot water "politically".. Idea being to not step on any toes. Meaning the word marriage should not be used.

---

We've gone over that idea a bunch in this thread and it went down really well, so don't worry, you can unequip that flame shield! Though if there's a name change, it should be the same across the board. Would be much safer to abolish the term 'marriage' altogether.

Here my theory, there a reason why there so many different types of religions out there and their stance on marriage is somewhat the same, it because each was started to fit their own particular ideology for their type of religion. Don't like what another religion rules are start a new religion to fit your ideology and then preach and try to recruit others to your particular religion one for example that is new scientology. Instead there people out there who want to cram their views down other people throats to conform to their ideology many different types of groups are guilty of this.
When you have so many different stances of philosophy of religion or beliefs etc. out there it will always bring conflicts/wars with others. That also true when people try to force another groups to change their views or beliefs to conform to their beliefs. This battle of ideas have being going on since are beginning of are brief existence as a species. When you have so many of those battling out which is the correct belief or whatever the end result is never a good thing for anybody history repeats itself and it usually is a bloody one. I don’t think as a species sure are technology have advance and stuff but as a people we still make the same mistakes over and over.
I know not so much on topic but something I’ve been thinking about recently and this is not meant to try to make people upset btw.

I fully agree that a new term should be used when referring to the emotions, feelings, love 2 people have for each other regardless of the gender. As the word marriage (like stated above) is a term used to "bond" 2 people of opposite genders together for means of procreation and (like stated above) many times be it in past or present the ritual of said word is done do to necessity than actual love between 2 people.

Thing is and this is the hard part the term used needs to be "new". As union, bond, partner ship, exe, are far to closely intertwined with the word marriage. In the last 10 years i have been to ~50 weddings, and soon will attend my own (none of which are, were SS). And nearly all terms we are using now are used when 2 people speak vows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EnkiOro

When people argue semantics means there's little to argue about. I honestly don't give a damn what they call it, as long as they use the same word for both unions and hold the same meaning.

Also so far I've only seen a couple of you arguing the word itself, versus the hundreds of posts like mine, showing my support for SSM. Not sure why my post was special, but thanks for the attention!

---

And all the people who happen to be in the forums right now who agree with same sex marriage is great, but down-playing the talk of a real-world solution as applied to a pan-socilological issue is inflamatory, rude, and frankly counter-productive to the solution process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twiddle

Thing is and this is the hard part the term used needs to be "new". As union, bond, partner ship, exe, are far to closely intertwined with the word marriage. In the last 10 years i have been to ~50 weddings, and soon will attend my own (none of which are, were SS). And nearly all terms we are using now are used when 2 people speak vows.

---

I agree that it is difficult but I think that this kind of thinking is really the way forward to both sides both in game and out. It has to start somewhere!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twiddle

I fully agree that a new term should be used when referring to the emotions, feelings, love 2 people have for each other regardless of the gender. As the word marriage (like stated above) is a term used to "bond" 2 people of opposite genders together for means of procreation and (like stated above) many times be it in past or present the ritual of said word is done do to necessity than actual love between 2 people.

Thing is and this is the hard part the term used needs to be "new". As union, bond, partner ship, exe, are far to closely intertwined with the word marriage. In the last 10 years i have been to ~50 weddings, and soon will attend my own (none of which are, were SS). And nearly all terms we are using now are used when 2 people speak vows.

---

As for names, I've seen:
Bonding, Soulbond, Pairing, Pact come up, I mentioned handfasting (Which if memory serves me well originated in ancient Europe and involved tying the hands of the couple together to show a permanent bond)

I'm totally open to new name ideas, feel free to think of some if you can and add them to this thread! :D

Also good luck on your r/l wedding Twiddle!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

And all the people who happen to be in the forums right now who agree with same sex marriage is great, but down-playing the talk of a real-world solution as applied to a pan-socilological issue is inflamatory, rude, and frankly counter-productive to the solution process.

---

Can you reword in a manner more easily understood with out me using thesaurus!!!

Anyway i don't think that anyone is "down-playing" anything here, a solution to a "pan-sociological" problem is needed to pacify people who will potentially play this "game".. A solution which will not in any manner of speaking affect anything or any out come in every day culture. You have a problem much older then people alive today, being looked at by people who have never used dial up internet. Best approach is to band aid the issue for the sake of the game launch and move forward. There are factors here at play that many aren't even aware of, as such best solution is to as band aid the topic.

Add a disciple of faith class can join any players in bonding at level 50 >.> just wondering :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twiddle

You have a problem much older then people alive today, being looked at by people who have never used dial up internet.

---

I don't disagree. However, I think there is some virtue, especially in today's society with presenting a solution that everyone can get behind as far as execution. Macro ideas are always built in a microcosm and if there was a system put forth that really got somewhere, I guarantee you it would be reported on and see some limited traction, if at least in some small internet medium.

I see no reason why the LBGT marriage equality can't be solved in a platform like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by odintius

Add a disciple of faith class can join any players in bonding at level 50 >.> just wondering :P

---

Haha that would be awesome!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colvin

I don't disagree. However, I think there is some virtue, especially in today's society with presenting a solution that everyone can get behind as far as execution. Macro ideas are always built in a microcosm and if there was a system put forth that really got somewhere, I guarantee you it would be reported on and see some limited traction, if at least in some small internet medium.

I see no reason why the LBGT marriage equality can't be solved in a platform like this.

---

Again use simpler words!!

Any who, to comment on your statement. I don't typically quote movies but I'll do it this time.
"A person is smart, wise, and rational... people are blind, irrational, and stupid" MIB I
Unless you can make people see the BIG picture, what you are thinking is impossible.

The LBGT equality can be addressed, first step being don't use the word marriage after the acronym. What people understand under that word has 0 connection with what a dictionary will read. As well that word does not represent the relation ship a LBGT couple would have to begin with.

I am against using the word partner for calling your bonded other half. Mainly because when you hear the word partner in RL, everyone automatically assumes a buisness partner, and then there's an awkward silence as you explain what you mean by that.

No one is confused by the words husband or wife, which is why if we have a different word for calling your other half, it should be something entirely new or descriptive enough that people don't get tripped over what your using the word for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psion

I am against using the word partner for calling your bonded other half. Mainly because when you hear the word partner in RL, everyone automatically assumes a buisness partner, and then there's an awkward silence as you explain what you mean by that.

No one is confused by the words husband or wife, which is why if we have a different word for calling your other half, it should be something entirely new or descriptive enough that people don't get tripped over what your using the word for.

---

I've never had that problem D: ... It's a pretty common term.

As for the husband/wife thing, I'm not entirely sure what word you could use that signifies 'unity' while sidestepping the stigma of marriage.

Partner / Bonded partner pretty much summed it up, though if they picked something like pact then... pact-mate? But that may not work depending on how you look at the word 'mate' lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nix

I've never had that problem D: ... It's a pretty common term.

As for the husband/wife thing, I'm not entirely sure what word you could use that signifies 'unity' while sidestepping the stigma of marriage.

Partner / Bonded partner pretty much summed it up, though if they picked something like pact then... pact-mate? But that may not work depending on how you look at the word 'mate' lol.

---

Would be hard to use mate in terms of a binding between sisters/brothers (if your intention was to bind in that way rather then a SSM like scenario).

Just make up a word that means to have your paths be melded together as witnessed by the lodestone :D

I'm sure there are words in other languages that refer to "soul mate" in a broader term but I cant think of anything in english that wasnt already mentioned lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nix

I've never had that problem D: ... It's a pretty common term.

As for the husband/wife thing, I'm not entirely sure what word you could use that signifies 'unity' while sidestepping the stigma of marriage.

Partner / Bonded partner pretty much summed it up, though if they picked something like pact then... pact-mate? But that may not work depending on how you look at the word 'mate' lol.

---

This has been talked about for ages, how do you side step something that predates written history, to mend an issue just as old? The union of a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation. And the agreement to take care and protect that person and said offspring has been defined by the word marriage. The word means little more. Issue here is what should the "-------" between a man and a man or a woman and woman, or anything of that caliber be called. Emotion between the 2 partners exists "BUT" no procreation can happen.