h a l f b a k e r yStill more entertaining than cricket.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I think they should have documents to prove you're single, so if you, for example, are dating, you can say Prove you are not married, because I don't want nothing to do with married men.
Hey, but what about...
Relationship_20references
[normzone, Aug 03 2008]
[link]
|
| |
Proven how? This is the relationship equivalent of the halting problem. |
|
| |
Well, how about everyone being issued a government ID card at birth that certifies the individual in question is single. This card must be surrendered at the time of marriage and replaced by the card that certifies marriage. Divorcees and widow(er)s trade in the marriage ID for yet another card that says they are no longer married. |
|
| |
But I still don't see where this proves anything useful. Relational entanglements can and do exist outside of formal marriage. |
|
| |
The only way to get around the objections (what if you're in a long-term unmarried relationship? engaged? or just buried your wife under the patio?) would be to introduce an "Official proof of being a nice guy" card. You would have to submit records of every woman you had ever met, and to avoid you missing out the girls you cheated on, women would be legally required to report all guys they ever kissed/went on dates with/gazed lustfully at. And this new government bureau (staff 500,000) would give you a gold laminated card, which you could flash at girls, saying "Nice guy", for them to say "How boring" and go have sex with a prominent member of government. In fact, I think I'll post this as an idea. |
|
| |
i bet there's an interesting story behind where she came up with this idea... [stu] nice one |
|
| |
Yeah, this is workable. You could get a signed affidavit from a certification agency or a lawyer stating that after the a period of 6 weeks of round the clock surveillance, a search of the registries of x major cities and databases, a local advertising search in said person's home town and an examination of the person's banking statements, then they have no qualifications in giving their true and fair opinion that this person is single as of a certain date. |
|
| |
If the agency had somehow misrepresented, or failed to do their due diligence, then they would be liable for damages. |
|
| |
But then, married guys get more offers. (AFAIK, Honey) |
|
| |
As if hair on the palms and a pair of glasses as thick as coke bottles isn't proof enough???????? |
|
| |
How about a membership card to a Star Trek fan club? |
|
| |
//but hey, if they're schizoids they probably wont resist your advances// ... unless you are one of THEM... |
|
| |
[+]I've always wondered about this. How can a girl be dating someone for more than a few dates and not know he's married. GIrls know everthing. But it does seem to happen all the time. |
|
| |
Men are good liars, given short periods of interaction time and transparent benefits of carrying out with the lie (usually sex). Men are so good at these short term lies, and subsequent tactical manipulation of others, that the consensus is that they are not good at it (men are slow and stupid). |
|
| |
Of course, I'm probably just describing one type of man: the sleaze ball. But, these are the ones who marry into unfulfilling relationships so they can get the sweet job working for her dad, and then take the money and spend it on week long affairs. |
|
| |
There are other types, most notably the spineless coward, the superfan, the jack of all trades, the hippie, the video gamer, the good guy, and the alcoholic. Of the lot, the sleaze ball is the least susceptible to periods of singleness, however much womankind wish this weren't the case. |
|
| |
this would be proof of the negative case. Not a fallacy but very very hard and proofs of the negative case tend to stale quickly (think STD testing). Since healthy relationships are built on trust and honesty I suspect that this would only be a bandaid on the far more serious issues of all involved with using such a license. |
|
| |
Why do you think fabric softener was invented? That stuff says "hands off he's mine" more clearly than any fakeable ID card or barcode tattoo. |
|
| |
[-] I don't see the benefit or necessity of proving the non-existance of something. The truth will usually find you out sooner or later. |
|
| |
Most cultures that I know of involve third parties at some level in the initiation of relationships, whether it's professional match-makers or just extended families. Being lied to is the price we pay for the myth that individual spontaneity is the only valid basis for a relationship. |
|
| |
So, two solutions suggest themselves:
(1) Try dating people with whom you have mutual acquaintances.
(2) Try not having sex with anyone who is not willing to make a *public* commitment to you (if not marriage, then at least, say, an engagement party that would be hard to hide from an existing spouse.) |
|
| |
These measures may seem extreme, but that's only in the context of the post-baby-boom West. For most of the world, they're accepted and well-tested solutions to the problem, even if not 100% reliable. |
|
| |
Proof of non-insanity might be more helpful. |
|
| |
Why make it harder for all the girls to fool themselves into thinking they have finally found that last, nice, available man? It isn't like they couldn't figure it out for themselves if they really wanted to. (pay a few $$ for a background check, asking for a copy of his tax return, look at the indentation on the ring finger, why hasn't he ask me back to his place, where are his friends, co-workers, parents, etc...). What women on the "hunt" need is counseling to accept the reality of the world and thier own desires in it. |
|
| |
Or we could ask men to grow some honor and stop cheating... Naw, that'll never happen... |
|
| |
Sorry if that came out harsh; I'm getting old and cranky. |
|
| |