Well that was time and money well spent by the feminist harridan and her

[Burney]

pathetically henpecked man, wasn't it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39039146?ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=twitter

[Sir C]

pathetically henpecked man, wasn't it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39039146?ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=twitter

Have these ****s honestly got nothing better to do?

[Burney]

Have these ****s honestly got nothing better to do?

What could be more important than striving to defeat the patriarchy by rejecting the institution of marriage on the grounds that it was once oppressive to women?

:shakehead: It's a bit like refusing to go to Barbados because it used to be associated with slavery.

[Monty92]

What could be more important than striving to defeat the patriarchy by rejecting the institution of marriage on the grounds that it was once oppressive to women?

:shakehead: It's a bit like refusing to go to Barbados because it used to be associated with slavery.

It does kinda make sense for people who want the legal benefits of being married but without having a wedding, as it would stave off the "what, you're getting married and not having a party???" questions from friends and family.

[redgunamo]

It does kinda make sense for people who want the legal benefits of being married but without having a wedding, as it would stave off the "what, you're getting married and not having a party???" questions from friends and family.

Cheapskates, you mean?

[World's End Stella]

pathetically henpecked man, wasn't it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39039146?ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=twitter

Is that Jorge? :rubchin:

I always thought he would look just like that.

[redgunamo]

Is that Jorge? :rubchin:

I always thought he would look just like that.

I rather think he looks like this

http://cdn4.thr.com/sites/default/files/2015/07/pj_o_rourke_h_15.jpg

[Monty92]

Cheapskates, you mean?

If pissing away all your life savings on a party that would almost certainly be ruined by assorted clinically diagnosed mental family members is being "cheapskates", then yes.

[Sir C]

It does kinda make sense for people who want the legal benefits of being married but without having a wedding, as it would stave off the "what, you're getting married and not having a party???" questions from friends and family.

My word yes, when the law is forcing you into a situation where you might, theoretically, have to speak the phrase, "No, we're not having a party" then fascism has clearly crept in without our noticing. Pure evil.

[Burney]

It does kinda make sense for people who want the legal benefits of being married but without having a wedding, as it would stave off the "what, you're getting married and not having a party???" questions from friends and family.

You can book a registry office any time you like. All you need is a couple of witnesses. Job done. Why do you need some additional special status to achieve the exact same thing?

[Pat Vegas]

It does kinda make sense for people who want the legal benefits of being married but without having a wedding, as it would stave off the "what, you're getting married and not having a party???" questions from friends and family.

So telling them they have a civil partnership is a better idea? :-(

Plus now everybody knows.

[Pat Vegas]

You can book a registry office any time you like. All you need is a couple of witnesses. Job done. Why do you need some additional special status to achieve the exact same thing?

That's the one thing I noticed about getting married how incredibly easy it was to do.

[Monty92]

You can book a registry office any time you like. All you need is a couple of witnesses. Job done. Why do you need some additional special status to achieve the exact same thing?

You know what family can be like about this stuff. My mum would be upset if I got married but didn't have a wedding. A civil partnership would be easier to explain away .

[Sir C]

If pissing away all your life savings on a party that would almost certainly be ruined by assorted clinically diagnosed mental family members is being "cheapskates", then yes.

That's rather more a reflection of the state of your finances and your family than that of the traditional wedding, of course.

[Burney]

That's the one thing I noticed about getting married how incredibly easy it was to do.

Yup. All you need to do is prove you're not already married or related to one another, book a date, get two people to bear witness and you're away. Anything else is entirely up to you.

[Monty92]

That's rather more a reflection of the state of your finances and your family than that of the traditional wedding, of course.

What have I said against the traditional wedding?

[redgunamo]

If pissing away all your life savings on a party that would almost certainly be ruined by assorted clinically diagnosed mental family members is being "cheapskates", then yes.

Yeah, if you do it wrong. I made a fortune out of mine.

Or rather, the wife did :-\

[Burney]

You know what family can be like about this stuff. My mum would be upset if I got married but didn't have a wedding. A civil partnership would be easier to explain away .

'Yeah, mum, I couldn't face spending any money or time on you and the rest of the family, so I just had one of those civil partnership doodads instead. Hope you don't mind?'

I'm sure she'd be delighted. :hehe:

[Sir C]

What have I said against the traditional wedding?

You described the traditional wedding 'party' as the pissing away of hold on, why am I typing this out, you literally just typed it yourself.

Do you have memory issues?

[Pat Vegas]

'Yeah, mum, I couldn't face spending any money or time on you and the rest of the family, so I just had one of those civil partnership doodads instead. Hope you don't mind?'

I'm sure she'd be delighted. :hehe:

I think we need to analyse this couple a bit more.
http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/736/cpsprodpb/14740/production/_94767738_civilpartnershippa.jpg

He seems to have a handbag.

[Burney]

I think we need to analyse this couple a bit more.
http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/736/cpsprodpb/14740/production/_94767738_civilpartnershippa.jpg

He seems to have a handbag.

I imagine he keeps his manhood in it.

[Monty92]

'Yeah, mum, I couldn't face spending any money or time on you and the rest of the family, so I just had one of those civil partnership doodads instead. Hope you don't mind?'

I'm sure she'd be delighted. :hehe:

I doubt very much she would be "delighted", but she would certainly be more understanding of our depriving her of the excuse to buy a new frock.

As I said, if you only want to get married for the legal benefits, and don't want a party, there is some merit to a civil partnership...

[Monty92]

You described the traditional wedding 'party' as the pissing away of hold on, why am I typing this out, you literally just typed it yourself.

Do you have memory issues?

If I could afford it, or had parents or in-laws able to subsidise it, I would happily "piss away" a load of money on a wedding. I have nothing against traditional weddings at all.

[Burney]

I doubt very much she would be "delighted", but she would certainly be more understanding of our depriving her of the excuse to buy a new frock.

As I said, if you only want to get married for the legal benefits, and don't want a party, there is some merit to a civil partnership...

You know there's still a ceremony at the council offices for a civil partnership, right? After which most people choose to have parties to celebrate? Why would the fact that it's a civil partnership rather than a wedding make a difference to whether or not you have a party?

[Monty92]

You know there's still a ceremony at the council offices for a civil partnership, right? After which most people choose to have parties to celebrate? Why would the fact that it's a civil partnership rather than a wedding make a difference to whether or not you have a party?

I thought I'd explained this already. Getting married comes loaded with expectation. If we explained we were doing it as civil partnership because we want to avoid the expectation that comes with getting married, I think auld Maureen would be more understanding.

[Sir C]

If I could afford it, or had parents or in-laws able to subsidise it, I would happily "piss away" a load of money on a wedding. I have nothing against traditional weddings at all.

Does the phrase "piss away" not suggest a meaningless, frivolous use of money?

Marriage is a serious business, m. You would do well to remember that. Marriage is a sacrament, like communion or confirmation, a gift from God to enable us to produce children to further serve Mother Church and do God's work.

You wouldn't understand, being a heathen and all, but eternity in the sulphurous fires of hell with the devil himself raping your ársehole with his trident will hopefully educate you.

[Monty92]

Does the phrase "piss away" not suggest a meaningless, frivolous use of money?

Marriage is a serious business, m. You would do well to remember that. Marriage is a sacrament, like communion or confirmation, a gift from God to enable us to produce children to further serve Mother Church and do God's work.

You wouldn't understand, being a heathen and all, but eternity in the sulphurous fires of hell with the devil himself raping your ársehole with his trident will hopefully educate you.

Spending 20k on a party is frivolous and indulgent. I'd do it if I had the money, because that's what it costs. I'd also spend that on an Arsenal season ticket if I had the money and that's what it cost. It would still be frivolous and indulgent.

[redgunamo]

I doubt very much she would be "delighted", but she would certainly be more understanding of our depriving her of the excuse to buy a new frock.

As I said, if you only want to get married for the legal benefits, and don't want a party, there is some merit to a civil partnership...

No, cheapskatery is cheapskatery, whatever frock you dress it up in.

A wedding is an opportunity for your whole squad to get together to promote and support a certain value in a way of life. Essentially by reaching into their pockets and helping the happy young couple to pay for it. Presumably you have seen The Godfather?

Some will contribute cash, others will understand that the fellow will need more and better work and will make that offer and so on.

There is a serious side. It's not just about getting dressed up and getting pissed.

[Burney]

I thought I'd explained this already. Getting married comes loaded with expectation. If we explained we were doing it as civil partnership because we want to avoid the expectation that comes with getting married, I think auld Maureen would be more understanding.

Expectations such as this being a sign of lifelong commitment that your friends and families might want to celebrate, you mean?

I really fail to see what difference there would be. Besides, you'll forgive me if I'm not sure our lawmakers ought to spend their time legislating in order to help you avoid a small degree of expense, arseache and social awkwardness.

[Pat Vegas]

I doubt very much she would be "delighted", but she would certainly be more understanding of our depriving her of the excuse to buy a new frock.

As I said, if you only want to get married for the legal benefits, and don't want a party, there is some merit to a civil partnership...

fly to Vegas and get married there and come back and it's all done and dusted.

I thought that long term couples had certain legal rights these days anyway.

[Burney]

Spending 20k on a party is frivolous. I'd do it if I had the money, because that's what it costs.

No it doesn't. My wedding only cost a few grand. :shrug:

[Monty92]

No, cheapskatery is cheapskatery, whatever frock you dress it up in.

A wedding is an opportunity for your whole squad to get together to promote and support a certain value in a way of life. Essentially by reaching into their pockets and helping the happy young couple to pay for it. Presumably you have seen The Godfather?

Some will contribute cash, others will understand that the fellow will need more and better work and will make that offer and so on.

There is a serious side. It's not just about getting dressed up and getting pissed.

You're suggesting I crowd-fund a wedding?

[Monty92]

No it doesn't. My wedding only cost a few grand. :shrug:

How many guests? Surely the food was a bit meh?

[Pat Vegas]

OK there are very few differences between Marriage and Civil Partnerships.

So clearly the woman who wears the trousers wants to f*** about without sadsack handbag getting all upset and divorcing her.

Civil partners cannot call themselves “married” for legal purposes.
Civil partnership certificates include the names of both parents of the parties. Marriage certificates include the names of only the fathers of the parties.

Adultery cannot be used as a reason to dissolve the Civil Partnership. In a marriage, if one party is unfaithful this is grounds for divorce. This isn’t the case in civil partnership dissolution. Adultery isn’t recognised in same-sex partners.

[Pat Vegas]

No it doesn't. My wedding only cost a few grand. :shrug:

Same here. in fact I made a profit. and everyone had plenty of food and drink.

[Sir C]

How many guests? Surely the food was a bit meh?

The food was excellent.

Mind you, a great deal of the budget disappeared down my throat in liquid form, a lapse in good behaviour for which I really ought to have apologised before. :-(

[Monty92]

Expectations such as this being a sign of lifelong commitment that your friends and families might want to celebrate, you mean?

I really fail to see what difference there would be. Besides, you'll forgive me if I'm not sure our lawmakers ought to spend their time legislating in order to help you avoid a small degree of expense, arseache and social awkwardness.

Yes, I'd be happy for our friends and family to celebrate our lifelong commitment to each other and have nothing in principle against spending heavily for them to do so, but that is not possible due to clinically mental family members who would very likely ruin it (as they have numerous other landmark events over the years).

Nevertheless, I wouldn't have a civil partnership for the precise reasons you identify, but it also remains true that they are not entirely without merit.

[Monty92]

The food was excellent.

Mind you, a great deal of the budget disappeared down my throat in liquid form, a lapse in good behaviour for which I really ought to have apologised before. :-(

How many guests?

[Luis Anaconda]

The food was excellent.

Mind you, a great deal of the budget disappeared down my throat in liquid form, a lapse in good behaviour for which I really ought to have apologised before. :-(
Did you racially abuse anyone?

[redgunamo]

You're suggesting I crowd-fund a wedding?

Good point actually. We used to call it "family & friends" though, of course.

[Sir C]

How many guests?

How the fúck would I know? You think I went to my friend's wedding and stood around counting the guests?

You're a bit odd sometimes.

[Monty92]

Good point actually. We used to call it "family & friends" though, of course.

I'm just trying to imagine various friends faces if I asked them if they'd contribute some money towards a wedding :clap:

[Sir C]

Did you racially abuse anyone?

I'm not sure that I did, but I did behave rather badly with b's mother-in-law, I believe. Not in a sexytime way. I vaguely recall telling her some dreadful lies.

[Monty92]

How the fúck would I know? You think I went to my friend's wedding and stood around counting the guests?

You're a bit odd sometimes.

Was it a big bash? 100+ you reckon? I think we'd struggle to keep it under 200.

[Burney]

How many guests? Surely the food was a bit meh?

About a dozen or so. Food was fine - much better, dare I say, than at most weddings one attends.

It was in the upstairs room here.

http://www.thedrapersarms.com

[Burney]

Did you racially abuse anyone?

I think there was only one person there he could have racially abused. Unless he started on the Irish, of course.

He was out of earshot, so there's every chance.

[Sir C]

Was it a big bash? 100+ you reckon? I think we'd struggle to keep it under 200.

Just 200 of your closest friends? :hehe:

There's your problem, right there. You have that third world mentality where you see the wedding as an opportunity to demonstrate the full extent of your vulgarity. I mean 'wealth'.

This is pretty typical of many medieval cultures like that from which you were shat; in the West we have invented the concept of 'good taste' instead.

[Burney]

Was it a big bash? 100+ you reckon? I think we'd struggle to keep it under 200.

'Struggle to keep it under 200' :hehe:

Don't be a bell-end, m.

[redgunamo]

I'm just trying to imagine various friends faces if I asked them if they'd contribute some money towards a wedding :clap:

True. The thing is, yours will not be the first or the only one. Everybody will have, or will in the future, benefit from the same racket or scheme.

It's just the way it works. Your idea is the way it *doesn't* work, so you end up arguing the toss about civil partnerships and whatnot :-|

[Sir C]

'Struggle to keep it under 200' :hehe:

Don't be a bell-end, m.

:shrug: It's all about show. I bet he'd be wearing a gold hat and would enter the room on an elephant.

[Pat Vegas]

How the fúck would I know? You think I went to my friend's wedding and stood around counting the guests?

You're a bit odd sometimes.

'How many guests?' :hehe: reminds me of 'what do you bench?'

[Pat Vegas]

Was it a big bash? 100+ you reckon? I think we'd struggle to keep it under 200.

I had about 50 odd. But still managed to keep it down I was fortunate to use some contacts to get a good deal the hotel and stuff but this wedding stuff can be done on a budget. there is no need to spend a fortune.

One is deaded since the wedding so I will cross him off the photo.

[Monty92]

'Struggle to keep it under 200' :hehe:

Don't be a bell-end, m.

I'm serious. That would mainly be family. We did a count a while back and stopped at 150 essential invitees.

[Burney]

:shrug: It's all about show. I bet he'd be wearing a gold hat and would enter the room on an elephant.

I was thinking it would be more like...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZNmGaEw57Q

[Burney]

I had about 50 odd. But still managed to keep it down I was fortunate to use some contacts to get a good deal the hotel and stuff but this wedding stuff can be done on a budget. there is no need to spend a fortune.

One is deaded since the wedding so I will cross him off the photo.

The first rule is under no circumstances do you tell the venue that it's for a wedding, since that immediately puts a 40% markup on the original price.

[Sir C]

I was thinking it would be more like...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZNmGaEw57Q

Now that is some groovy dancing, but where are the chicks?

[Pat Vegas]

I'm serious. That would mainly be family. We did a count a while back and stopped at 150 essential invitees.

I invited uncles and all that but cut off their kids who have kids. no kids allowed at my wedding.

[Monty92]

Just 200 of your closest friends? :hehe:

There's your problem, right there. You have that third world mentality where you see the wedding as an opportunity to demonstrate the full extent of your vulgarity. I mean 'wealth'.

This is pretty typical of many medieval cultures like that from which you were shat; in the West we have invented the concept of 'good taste' instead.

Do you agree it's correct and proper to invite everyone who's invited you to their wedding?

[Burney]

I'm serious. That would mainly be family. We did a count a while back and stopped at 150 essential invitees.


'Essential'? 150 members of your respective families who you regularly see and thus must not offend? Really? :rubchin:

I refer you to my earlier 'bellend' comment.

[Pat Vegas]

The first rule is under no circumstances do you tell the venue that it's for a wedding, since that immediately puts a 40% markup on the original price.

:nod: we are having a conference.
There will be a wedding cake that needs to be kept in the fridge but it's purely for the conference.

[Burney]

Now that is some groovy dancing, but where are the chicks?

Maybe they have their own dance?

[Sir C]

Do you agree it's correct and proper to invite everyone who's invited you to their wedding?

No. I think it correct and proper to invite those in whose company you would wish to celebrate this most joyful of days. That, to me, suggests close friends and such relatives who actually mean soemthing to you on a day to day basis.

You're still thinking about the look of the thing, and ignoring what the event is about.

[Burney]

Do you agree it's correct and proper to invite everyone who's invited you to their wedding?

Of course not! What other people do with their weddings is up to them, but has no bearing on what I do with mine.

[redgunamo]

Never be embarrassed by wealth, C. This dishonest contempt and disdain for money is just another trick of our supposed betters to keep us without it.

As the man said.


Just 200 of your closest friends? :hehe:

There's your problem, right there. You have that third world mentality where you see the wedding as an opportunity to demonstrate the full extent of your vulgarity. I mean 'wealth'.

This is pretty typical of many medieval cultures like that from which you were shat; in the West we have invented the concept of 'good taste' instead.

[Monty92]

Of course not! What other people do with their weddings is up to them, but has no bearing on what I do with mine.

Well, that would lighten the load a touch, but not without diplomatic consequences :-(

[Burney]

No. I think it correct and proper to invite those in whose company you would wish to celebrate this most joyful of days. That, to me, suggests close friends and such relatives who actually mean soemthing to you on a day to day basis.

You're still thinking about the look of the thing, and ignoring what the event is about.

I've found this one. How fücking bored does the poor bride look? :hehe: Then all the lads go mental at the end. :clap:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCJxsbaVR3s

[Sir C]

Never be embarrassed by wealth, C. This dishonest contempt and disdain for money is just another trick of our supposed betters to keep us without it.

As the man said.

One is certainly not embarrassed by wealth, r, but one is most definitely shy of ostentation.

[Pat Vegas]

Of course not! What other people do with their weddings is up to them, but has no bearing on what I do with mine.

What if someone makes you their best man.
Do you have to return the favour?

[redgunamo]

'Struggle to keep it under 200' :hehe:

Don't be a bell-end, m.

Sure. Everyone, and anyone, who wants to help you celebrate your nuptials ought to be welcome :shrug:

[Monty92]

'Essential'? 150 members of your respective families who you regularly see and thus must not offend? Really? :rubchin:

I refer you to my earlier 'bellend' comment.

No, I think essential family would be about 70-80 who we'd need to invite to avoid major upset. There's probably 30 overseas alone.

Friends would be less burdensome, especially if we had a no kids rule.

[Sir C]

I've found this one. How fücking bored does the poor bride look? :hehe: Then all the lads go mental at the end. :clap:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCJxsbaVR3s

Those people are fúcked in the head :-(

[Burney]

Well, that would lighten the load a touch, but not without diplomatic consequences :-(

Balls to diplomatic consequences. Anyone who's actually bothered is a probably a cünt anyway imo. I'd be delighted to avoid most weddings due to them being painfully tedious affairs.

[redgunamo]

One is certainly not embarrassed by wealth, r, but one is most definitely shy of ostentation.

That's the wrong way to look at it. For instance, you drive a nice car because you *have* a nice car. Simples.

[Monty92]

Balls to diplomatic consequences. Anyone who's actually bothered is a probably a cünt anyway imo. I'd be delighted to avoid most weddings due to them being painfully tedious affairs.

Oh this would be a c*nt fest, whichever way you slice it. Personally I'd never make any effort to see any of them ever again, but the other half feels a little differently (whilst agreeing that most of them are c*nts).

[Burney]

What if someone makes you their best man.
Do you have to return the favour?

Nah. In fact, it's a considerable imposition, if you think about it.

[Pat Vegas]

Balls to diplomatic consequences. Anyone who's actually bothered is a probably a cünt anyway imo. I'd be delighted to avoid most weddings due to them being painfully tedious affairs.

:nod: Plus my mates wedding I had been lumbered last minute with tasks :furious:

I was in charge of the music. which was essentially an old ipod attached to a big speaker.
with this fella looking at me giving me the signal to 'fade out' **** off.

[Burney]

Oh this would be a c*nt fest, whichever way you slice it. Personally I'd never make any effort to see any of them ever again, but the other half feels a little differently (whilst agreeing that most of them are c*nts).

Well there you go. Why on earth would you want to invite 200 cünts to your special day? The mere fact that you would consider doing so tells me you're looking at the thing all wrong.

[Pat Vegas]

Nah. In fact, it's a considerable imposition, if you think about it.

I didn't really need one. I just had one for formality. I didn't give him any duties.

Though looking back I would have asked for his assistance to sort of shepherd people around a bit.

[SWv2]

Was it a big bash? 100+ you reckon? I think we'd struggle to keep it under 200.

I had about 60 at mine.

Not one aunt, uncle, cousin or relative on my side, just friends and their partners, essentially people I wanted to be there.

[Burney]

:nod: Plus my mates wedding I had been lumbered last minute with tasks :furious:

I was in charge of the music. which was essentially an old ipod attached to a big speaker.
with this fella looking at me giving me the signal to 'fade out' **** off.


I would never give anyone a task that involves them having to stay remotely sober at the reception. To do so would seem actively unpleasant to me.

[Burney]

I didn't really need one. I just had one for formality. I didn't give him any duties.

Though looking back I would have asked for his assistance to sort of shepherd people around a bit.

I didn't have one at all. I had an old chum to act as my witness, but that was basically it.

[Pat Vegas]

I would never give anyone a task that involves them having to stay remotely sober at the reception. To do so would seem actively unpleasant to me.

This was at the ceremony so rather than enjoy it I am thinking hope I press the right button.
The track was called best day of my life or something.

I put it on and thought oh **** it's wrong. as I was expecting Bryan Adams or something.
it wasn't summer of 69.

[redgunamo]

Well there you go. Why on earth would you want to invite 200 cünts to your special day? The mere fact that you would consider doing so tells me you're looking at the thing all wrong.

You can't promote the idea of family, the future, children etc. with that attitude, I'm afraid, which is presumably the whole point of the thing. It's not the time for meanness and selfishness and me, me, me-ness.

[Burney]

You can't promote the idea of family, the future, children etc. with that attitude, I'm afraid, which is presumably the whole point of the thing. It's not the time for meanness and selfishness and me, me, me-ness.

Mate, there are barely 20 people on this earth whose happiness and enjoyment I truly give a shît about, let alone 200.

[Sir C]

Nah. In fact, it's a considerable imposition, if you think about it.

:nod: That's why I had the poove.

[redgunamo]

Mate, there are barely 20 people on this earth whose happiness and enjoyment I truly give a shît about, let alone 200.

Of course, but everyone enjoys a booze-up and a dance. That's the point. You don't have to care about them but the more of them there are, the merrier.

[Burney]

:nod: That's why I had the poove.

Best Best Man Ever imo. Got hammered with you beforehand and gave a wonderfully short oration. That's all one needs really.

[Burney]

Of course, but everyone enjoys a booze-up and a dance. That's the point. You don't have to care about them but the more of them there are, the merrier.

I disagree. Best weddings I've been to (i.e. the only ones I've enjoyed) have both been relatively small affairs.

[Pat Vegas]

I disagree. Best weddings I've been to (i.e. the only ones I've enjoyed) have both been relatively small affairs.

Exactly, otherwise it's even more strangers you have no interest in talking too than normal.

[Sir C]

Best Best Man Ever imo. Got hammered with you beforehand and gave a wonderfully short oration. That's all one needs really.

Hmm. He spent the day before getting me hammered from about midday onwards. In the evening he moved on to shovelling the devil's dandruff up my bugle. After I finally got to bed at about 3, he re-appeared at my door to enquire whether I had any further stash as he had used all his up. Then the next morning he paced around like a caged lion muttering, "I'm so nervous, I'm so nervous.." until I almost had a breakdown.

Sub-optimal, really.

[redgunamo]

I disagree. Best weddings I've been to (i.e. the only ones I've enjoyed) have both been relatively small affairs.

People always say that though, for Monty reasons, I imagine. But it all really misses the point; it's supposed to be a whole clan, community or whatever, coming together to celebrate and promote a belief in a certain way of life. It is not supposed to be about the limits of one person's whim or wallet.

[Burney]

Hmm. He spent the day before getting me hammered from about midday onwards. In the evening he moved on to shovelling the devil's dandruff up my bugle. After I finally got to bed at about 3, he re-appeared at my door to enquire whether I had any further stash as he had used all his up. Then the next morning he paced around like a caged lion muttering, "I'm so nervous, I'm so nervous.." until I almost had a breakdown.

Sub-optimal, really.

:hehe: Sounds perfect. Just what a chap needs when under pressure.

[Pat Vegas]

People always say that though, for Monty reasons, I imagine. But it all really misses the point; it's supposed to be a whole clan, community or whatever, coming together to celebrate and promote a belief in a certain way of life. It is not supposed to be about the limits of one person's whim or wallet.

Sounds like the 4th place trophy of weddings.

[redgunamo]

Sounds like the 4th place trophy of weddings.

How do you mean?

[Burney]

People always say that though, for Monty reasons, I imagine. But it all really misses the point; it's supposed to be a whole clan, community or whatever, coming together to celebrate and promote a belief in a certain way of life. It is not supposed to be about the limits of one person's whim or wallet.

We're all a bit more nuclear these days. I belong to no 'clan'. Unless you're a direct blood relation (father, mother, sibling, niece, nephew, uncle or aunt at a pinch) you can fück right off.

[redgunamo]

We're all a bit more nuclear these days. I belong to no 'clan'. Unless you're a direct blood relation (father, mother, sibling, niece, nephew, uncle or aunt at a pinch) you can fück right off.

I suppose so. Homos and whomever else may just as well get "married" too then as it makes absolutely no difference to anything anymore :-\

[redgunamo]

We're all a bit more nuclear these days. I belong to no 'clan'. Unless you're a direct blood relation (father, mother, sibling, niece, nephew, uncle or aunt at a pinch) you can fück right off.

But it's like anything; imagine if the only people who ever contributed to a cause were those who were actually seriously committed to it, rather than those who are merely on hand because of the booze, the birds and the Bratwürst.

Football clubs, all these street protests, rock festivals and so on. Their success is measured in numbers.

[IUFG]

tbh, he's had a narrow escape there, Clive