?

Log in

No account? Create an account
heart + stomach
Innerbrat
Advancing the sum total of human knowledge and endeavour!
Marriage and other reasons to be happy 
13th-Jul-2007 02:27 pm
lesbians
Not to get all Bob Hoskins-y on you, but it's good to talk.

A old friend pinged me this afternoon to say "uh, hey, are we good?" and I got the opportunity to say "well, I wasn't happy about thing x, but I'm over it," and she said "oh, yeah, I'm sorry about x but yay being good!"

Funny how clearing even vaguely clean air can be satisfying.

Also, I am ready to go! Well, except for the stuff I've forgotten, but who cares about that? I don't that's for damn sure. I even have a wig!

...no not'scythe, though. Well, actually I do, but I'm not bringing it for obvious reasons. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can start with no not!scythe and then have one by next Saturday?


ALSO ALSO The InnerMom wrote a response to tyrell's rant about tories and marriages, and I promised I'd post it, so I will. Even though I personally don't have the time to think and stuff.

The proposal may say reward marriage. This would NEVER be accepted as people demand the freedom to live as they what.

What it really means is that the State should treating all family units equally. At the moment, the Benefits system is encouraging any except the wealthiest to make decisions that are not in the best interest of their own children. Children need a stable, loving, supportive and truthful environment.

At the moment, for many average wage earners, it is financially better to live as singles (or at least lie that to that effect) and then bring up children supported by benefits. If a (mixed-sex) couple live together, they are treated as married by the State and have the same financial disadvantages. (I don’t know how the State treats single-sex couples with children). As soon as the couple marry or officially live together, their income is combined. The homemaker has ’income’ from his/her partner and so the State benefits are reduced.

Why should two people with children who live in the same house be so much worse off (unless they lie) than a similar couple who maintain two dwellings (because as I said if they live in the same house they are treated as married)? How can the mother and father bring up the children truthfully if they are lying to get Benefits or living separate lives? How can a mother give stability to a child if a new boyfriend appears every year or so? Much of the child abuse occurs within families to the extent that women may be given the opportunity to check the criminal records of new boy friends.

On bringing up children alone, I really don’t see how it can be done, except by living on benefits in bad circumstances or really wealthy. Average nursery costs are £8K a child and maybe more because the parent has to travel to and from work and have lunch breaks while the child is at nursery. That parent is unlikely not to be paying 40% on that money which means that she must earn £27K for nursery care alone. Then having worked in that high powered job for 50 hours a week, she spends the evening playing and reading with the children (please), cooking, cleaning and preparing for the next day. The nights are spending copying with children who won’t sleep. At the weekend, she sees the boyfriend – who obviously lives elsewhere – and who expects a fresh and lively companion for a night out.

In conclusion, children need a stable, loving, supportive and truthful environment. The State must not encourage the exact opposite of what children

Meanwhile I have to clean the kitchen for the last time in a week. Yay!
Opinions 
13th-Jul-2007 01:44 pm (UTC)
*dies at wig*

Wish I could help you with the scythe. I did do a google search for a scythe prop but the one I found was out of stock and about $300 bucks.
13th-Jul-2007 01:47 pm (UTC)
I have one! It's mounted above my desk and occasionally i use it to work out mechanics of fighting.

But I can't exactly import it into the States, y'know?
13th-Jul-2007 01:54 pm (UTC)
Yes, the whole importing part would be rather difficult.

And yes I'm jealous of your scythe.
13th-Jul-2007 01:46 pm (UTC)
What is a not!scythe? maybe then I can help.
13th-Jul-2007 01:48 pm (UTC)
It's one of these.

Long and axe-y

13th-Jul-2007 01:55 pm (UTC)
Wow, that's quite the fancy axe. My suggestion would be to knock one together from craft foam and possibly cardboard . . . probably attached to some PVC pipe for the handle. The stake at the end might be tricky. Could use the craft foam to fake it or try to find a dowel rod that would work, or against fake with cardboard. (I'm assuming you're looking for quick, cheap and light--forgive me if you want something more awesome--you'd need more time than Saturday.)

You should be able to get sheets of craft foam at a craft store, although I'm not 100% where that'd be in the UK. I know Joann's and Michael's carry them here and they're pretty inexpensive. A PVC pipe would be getable at a hardware store. You'd probably want some paint (spray or otherwise) to get the rod black, but something like construction paper over the handle would suit that fine. The blade and all would be from craft foam/cardboard for support, but you could either cover it in tin foil or paint it with some sort of metallic model paint . . .
13th-Jul-2007 02:04 pm (UTC)
Well, I won't be in the UK, I'll be in Chicago. And I want very quick, very cheap and light. It's all about the quick fix!

But thanks, that looks like it might be an idea. You are the fancy dress king!
13th-Jul-2007 02:10 pm (UTC)
Oooh, well then. If you'll be making it IN Chicago, you should have no problem. If you're making it to ship, definitely make sure you have the blade part come unattached from the PVC rod, otherwise it won't fit in the suitcase, obviously. XD


I do a lot costuming, so I'm well versed in the ways of making stuff out of nothing. XDXDXD I made a pretty groovy flight harness out of that craft foam. It's awesome versatile if you can get your hands on some. Cuts with scissors but you can glue it and sew it or whatever. :D
13th-Jul-2007 01:53 pm (UTC)
Many pieces of cardboard and a broomhandle?
(Deleted comment)
13th-Jul-2007 02:08 pm (UTC)
Hooray for drunk!

Dude, I think I might actually be able to pull this costume off.
13th-Jul-2007 02:13 pm (UTC)
Good points from InnerMom, but I've gotta disagree with one thing: Two people living separately are not better off. They're each paying rent/mortgage that can bury them. Living together is the only way to get remotely NEAR the property ladder in the UK right now, and it is not hard to find a mortgage that is twice my current rent (and more than the maximum I could pay per month).

Having said that, I agree that bringing up children alone is incredibly tough (and probably always has been). Making the decision to split when there are children might be worse for the child in terms of disruption, but is also often the right thing. Children DO need a loving and supportive environment, but marriage is no guarantee of that. Marriage isn't even a guarantee of children, and yet the benefits would still apply to childless couples. It rewards people who stay together, but that doesn't measure anything regarding their fitness to be parents.

Worse, it encourages people who *aren't* going to be great spouses or parents anyway to do it for the money.

Okay, I'm going to extremes :) Basically, there's going to be cases on either side but all that's definite is this is an *appallingly* thought-out law. The Conservatives backing it are announcing to the World "We don't know how to implement policy. Don't trust us with anything". The morals/practicalities of family structure can be debated, but this wide-ranging law doesn't help anyone in my opinion.

But that's only my opinion, which is famously ranty anyway :)

Also, that's an awesome wig.
13th-Jul-2007 03:51 pm (UTC)
I completely agree that living separately make no sense. It costs more, in rent, heating, travel etc. For people who support themselves, go ahead and live your lives the best that you can but don’t force your choices on others. I still think that marriage is best for children and the wider family.

My point was that to get State benefits, many couples lie that they are separate, and that lying to bad – for the morality of society, the couple and the children.

What I strong object to is the UK benefits system which encourages people to lie about being a couple, and of course you cannot do that if you are married.

For the sake for our American friends, the UK benefits system provides extra allowances for single parents and won’t even allow one partner’s tax allowance to be used by the other so if one person stays at home they lose £5K tax allowance. It is often said that a couple with children (but saying they are single) have to work 16 hours at minimum wage to bring home the same money as a couple working 116 hours at the same rate. The state provides housing allowances, free school meals, help with child care etc for the single parent which are all lost if a second parent admits to being around.

“From The Times July 11, 2007
The only real financial benefit in being married comes when you are widowed. Husbands and wives can inherit their spouse’s estate without having to pay inheritance tax. Cohabiting couples are liable to pay 40 per cent on all assets above £300,000


So if you have more than £300K saved up, get married, otherwise lie and get benefits.
(Deleted comment)
13th-Jul-2007 11:27 pm (UTC)
((SB, there is no precident for defensiveness in this family. You enter a discussion, you see it through to the end or leave. No one gets to take sides or team fight. In other words - I am watching this discussion, not adjudicating it. Also, I don't think that was shouty.))
(Deleted comment)
13th-Jul-2007 11:33 pm (UTC)
As long as I'm in the country, which I am.

I'd rather you saw the dinosaurs, because I have to work as well, but there can be lunches and drinks and stuff between wokring and dinos
14th-Jul-2007 11:02 am (UTC)
Anonymouse
I appreciate hearing your views. In fact between you and Steve, I now realise that perhaps the Tories really do want to reward marriage as an institution rather than removing the bias towards the unmarried liars.
Shout all you want. Inner Mum
13th-Jul-2007 02:18 pm (UTC)
You know, given all this discussion, I'd be interested to hear what the laws ARE in the UK, because in the US (for the most part) the laws are so totally tipped to married people that people get married for the advantages. And it makes life extremely problematic for those of us whose marriages aren't recognized by the feds.
13th-Jul-2007 03:56 pm (UTC)
From the InnerMom:

For the sake for our American friends, the UK benefits system provides extra allowances for single parents and won’t even allow one partner’s tax allowance to be used by the other so if one person stays at home they lose £5K tax allowance. It is often said that a couple with children (but saying they are single) have to work 16 hours at minimum wage to bring home the same money as a couple working 116 hours at the same rate. The state provides housing allowances, free school meals, help with child care etc for the single parent which are all lost if a second parent admits to being around.

From The Times July 11, 2007

The only real financial benefit in being married comes when you are widowed. Husbands and wives can inherit their spouse’s estate without having to pay inheritance tax. Cohabiting couples are liable to pay 40 per cent on all assets above £300,000


So if you have more than £300K saved up, get married, otherwise lie and get benefits.
13th-Jul-2007 03:57 pm (UTC) - Howl
Anonymouse
I just wanted to see if I could howl - in support of marriage for the sake of children.
(Deleted comment)
13th-Jul-2007 05:05 pm (UTC) - Re: Howl
I'd get married "for the sake of the legal stuff" (wills, etc). I find it hard to believe that your relationship changes that much before and after you say a few words. I for one wouldn't be more likely to abandon a relationship that's going through a bad patch because I didn't go through a ceremony.

I think I may have one of the least romantic attitudes to marriage.
13th-Jul-2007 04:46 pm (UTC) - Re: Howl
Why marriage? Why not cohabitation? And if that's ok (and it certainly seems to be) what kind? Polyamory? Kibbutzes? A return to the extended family?
This page was loaded Apr 23rd 2018, 2:13 am GMT.