MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and
chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.
We're a "no marriage till gay marriage" couple... though we'd still prefer something more secular, it looks like the big mind-meld ceremony is just around the bend. I couldn't be prouder of my leftcoast home. :)
Congratulations, California! Now, to make sure that the Constitutional Amendment doesn't pass there, as it will require a Federal Supreme Court ruling to overturn.
(One of my college professors drove up to San Francisco to get married in 2004. His photos from that trip are full of proud, happy, loving couples; it was very inspiring).
I think it's fantastic, of course... I just want to know that it's not going to be overturned. I mean I want it to mean what it's supposed to mean, not now-you're-married / now-you-aren't / are! / aren't! / ask me tomorrow!
^ that's pretty much how we felt, so we did it all by ourselves alone. Nobody can take that from us. Besides.....I'm not sure I want the gubmint snoopin on my personal matter of da heart.
I am confused by the line in the article, "Both women [in the couple] said they have been together for 34 years." Was the reporter expecting a discrepancy in their accounts? Just somehow confused that there were two women in one couple and so had to emphasize it with "both"? I don't get it.
I saw that, too. Yeah... obviously the sensible thing to write is "the couple say they have been together for 34 years" or "Pontac says the couple has been together for 34 years". I can't think of any other reason for the painful awkwardness than just pressing the point that they are both women. Both! Women!
I am confused by the line in the article, "Both women [in the couple] said they have been together for 34 years."
Registered with me too.
Know what else is weird? Their photo is in the LA Times article. I saw it and I'm like, "How do I know that woman? Famous lesbian activist? No, that's not it. Author? No.... TV? Don't think so. Grocery store? Hmm. Yes? Wait, grocery store? I've seen her in the grocery store? That can't be it."
Then I read the caption, and yes, they're from Davis, and I know her from the grocery store.
I am confused by the line in the article, "Both women [in the couple] said they have been together for 34 years."
Ha, ok, take a look at the picture of the couple in this NYTimes article. Maybe that explains the weird line in the LA Times article- the left out context that one of their signs appears to have been wrong at one point.
Ooh, we could all sign a congratulations card and have you sneak it into her bag.
Yes! Or arrange for the cashier to give her a bottle of champagne (that we've cleverly procured beforehand) when she checks out!
I like the idea of random acts of congratulations. When the marriages were taking place in SF in '04, a bunch of from L.A. arranged for bouquets to be given to couples.
Yes.
i could make a card or send a printable front to mudpup. i have an idea in mind of one i made a long time ago with an image transfer of an old watch on the front. Inside it could say, "It's about time" or something.
What's the most stereotypical wedding gift ever?
photo by splunge
photo by TheophileEscargot
photo by Kronos_to_Earth
photo by ethylene
