In Canada, for immigration purposes at least, the definition also includes monogamy. "Open marriage" is, we were told in no uncertain terms, invalid according to the Canadian Immigration Bureau.
-
-
Replying to @iridienne @arthur_affect
Yeah well The insistence that I marry my spouse was made in the context of Trump having gotten elected and me wanting to write out medical/mental health Powers of Attorney to personal friends since I didn't trust my mother I just wanted to push my biomom out of any emergencies
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Back when I actually liked this person, I bemoaned the absence of a reliable system of "lateral adoption", e.g., formally and legally committing to being somebody's sibling, with all the emergency powers that entails Basically the complete self-determination of one's family
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Like there's not really any good reason why I should be eternally connected in a bureaucratic sense to my bioparents I should be able to completely define who the people relevant to my life are and who I consent to have any involvement in it But the tyranny continues
3 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
In my case even "lateral adoption" would have been disastrous because I rapidly came to utterly despise both of the people I would have "adopted" four years ago But my experiences also taught me a lot about how bullshit our mentality of what is and isn't a "sham marriage" is
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Before we even said vows I was persuaded that in fact, we wouldn't be a sham, because we genuinely loved each other (possibly true!) and they felt deeply protective of me and were sincerely thinking of me as a life partner So, really, they entered into a sham and I didn't
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
I was genuinely in love with my "partner". Everybody could see it. I literally would tear up talking about them. So, like. Idk. It was like Schrodinger's Sham Marriage. It was real or fake depending on who was observing it.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Anyway idk If two people enter into a sham marriage and then they decide they're genuinely in love (a la many stupid romance plots), was it really a sham marriage? If they truly love each other and intended to, but then never got around to the Three Cs, was it ever a real one?
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
The entire system of marriage is really fucking sketchy about the mens rea, frankly
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
anyway since the sexual politics of trans women's bodies and lives are weird, it's kind of inevitable that the way these systems work are designed to enshrine our social marginalization and irrelevance people don't want to fuck us, much less marry us, so we're just cordwood
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
Transition certainly interacts interestingly with marriage law Like the UK's current situation where transition is not only instant and automatic grounds for divorce, but the non-transitioning partner can veto legal transition if they wish
-
-
I've never understood how the "LGB alliance" types square this particular circle. Like, the fact that one of the pillars of their ideology is "being considered technically on paper to be in a gay marriage is a terrible thing no-one should be subjected to against their will"
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.