Re: *Sings*: You say tomato, while I say to-mah-to (r) -- La Femme Nikita Fan Fiction Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Sunday, January 15, 02:26:23am
Author: JayBee
Subject: Re: *Sings*: You say tomato, while I say to-mah-to (r)
In reply to: Nell 's message, "Re: *Sings*: You say tomato, while I say to-mah-to (r)" on Saturday, January 14, 05:55:55pm

I'm not sure I would say that the spirit of a marriage is limited only to the love the spouses feel. I tend to think of marriage as a lot more than that, and sometimes that isn't even central, only the icing if it actually happens and lasts - historically especially, of course.

Historically, absolutely. Marriage was an arrangement of property rights, first and foremost. It still is, in large part, but in contemporary times there has grown an increased expectation for the need for there to be romantic love between the partners. I would thus imagine that Elena, as a woman of the modern era, would have that expectation from her marriage -- and Michael seemed to do everything he could to encourage her to believe it was there. For it to turn out to have been absent would be, to her, an enormous betrayal.

I also think forms are important. While acting right won't make you think right (to put it quite crudely and inexactly) it is far more likely to keep you remembering what thinking right is - whereas if you act wrong, you have no reason to even recall what right thinking ought to be.

I've seen far too many people comply with the "forms" of things simply to keep up appearances to agree with this view. In fact, I'm enough of a cynic to believe that's the case more often than not.

So, if the section operative in the false marriage tells themself from the beginning that as the entire thing is false, there is no need for them to obey any of the forms of the marriage, and gives themselve permission to do whatever they want - I suspect they will behave quite badly with regard to the poor duped spouse. But, if, on the other hand, out of respect for the duped one, they struggle to make as much of their act as they can true, they will probably treat the duped one better.

I believe that in this situation, the best way to show respect to the duped spouse is to do everything possible to ensure that the spouse never finds out about being duped and thus avoids being hurt. Being "faithful" to the marriage doesn't really matter one way or the other -- except in the practical "Section" sense that the behavior may make you a more convincing actor because you'll "feel" more married somehow. (Thus, ironically, I think Section would encourage fidelity in this case, except for mission-related sex.)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]