Agreed. Have always found that kind of thing cringeworthy. Ditto the public singing of happy birthday in a restaurant and the declaration of love on a billboard. Must point out, however, that you are presuming that only men do the proposing, which is not the case.
I reserve, however, the case of the screaming public breakup, which I have always wanted to do, just for the entertainment value.
Having been the screamee in one of these, let me assure you that it's only entertaining for the screamer (well, and the two to three hundred passers-by there on Franklin Street). Especially once it escalates into the jump-on-my-back-and-pull-my-hair breakup.
Ha. Given how the day has gone, I was expecting you or apostropher to say: "Hey, my spouse proposed on the Jumbotron at the superbowl."
I note that I was careful to avoid gender-specific language save for the parenthetical aside; anyway, the article's gist suggests that men do the majority of proposing, and that women are on the receiving end of most proposals made by men. (It's looking like I had the quote wrong, but that was the motivation...)
The whole point of the screaming breakup is to entertain the audience. Ideally, both parties are screaming. Jumping on the back and hairpulling, extra points.
either the other person has already agreed, or not.
And then, there's the AlGorean "little known third category," familiar to those, for example, whose fiancees hound them to propose and then, six months after accepting the proposal, decide they don't want to get married.
Please note that any resentment in ogged's post is not directed at all females, but at one female in particular, and that he really hates fratboys. Happy Valentine's Day everyone! Why hasn't anyone else brought the "cry cry masturbate cry" joke yet?
Yeah, Valentine's Day seems to be putting everyone in a great mood for some reason. I will be refreshing your blog until I get a life and decide to go home, for sure.
What I don't get is the couples who get engaged-to-be-engaged or pre-engaged and then there are "conditions" for it to turn into an engagement/marriage thing. My neighbor is one such chick. She recently got pre-engaged and will only agree to engagement when he:
(a)gets a better paying job which he
(b)holds for 6+ months and
(c)is then in a position to buy a house
and let us not forget the important
(d)buys a big ring and
(e)comes up with a creative and romantic proposal event.
Blech. Of course, this comes from the chick who had a spontaneous mutual proposal in a car that let to eloping in Vegas.
(a)-(c) don't sound unreasonable to me, necessarily, though my eyes skipped "better-paying" the first time. If I were in a position to be anywhere close to pre-engaged, I could easily imagine the target saying "We can't get married until you're in a position to live in the same city for more than one year, and it had better not be a city that sucks." (d) and (e) seem lame, though.
MW, if only I made my flight! I'm sitting on the floor outside the snooty airport club in hubcity airport, bumming the wireless signal and killing time (3 hours now) until the next flight to Gentleville.
And I think making a big-production proposal part of the deal is pretty damn lame (just have a big production wedding, if you must -- but life isn't about puppydogs and fairytales anyway). I mean, if the proposing party is into it, great. But agreeing to get married (which to me counts as engagement) only if there is a big production made about formally asking (which then makes it a conditional agreement based on a one-time stupid event taking place?) is really stupid. I hate folks who are all about the proposal and wedding and forget to think about a the marriage. And guys who are roped into this stuff who don't dig it themselves (because if it is mutually agreeable and pleasurable I guess it isn't so bad) better realize they'll just be expected to keep producing romantic events (or get nagged to death)
And surprise proposals on TV ... potentially cruel!
I'm down with the word "implicature". But "implicate", not followed by "in {the,a} scandal"? Now that's an ugly word. Besides, I'm speakin' with the masses over here.
Shoot, I missed this 'proposal fest,' probably because I was too busy watching "An Officer and a Gentleman," which if you will recall had a both a proposal rejection because he didn't have the right job and it also had a big public proposal that appeared to be accepted.
Back in my day (does anyone get lavaliered anymore?) I figured the 'engaged to be engaged' thing was cover for guilt free sex. That is, a way for the woman to have pre-marital sex and not be a slut.
I'm also despising the public-proposal-escalation that is hapenning. Soon proposals won't be good enough until they occur during the Super Bowl while the whole world watches.
Agreed. Have always found that kind of thing cringeworthy. Ditto the public singing of happy birthday in a restaurant and the declaration of love on a billboard. Must point out, however, that you are presuming that only men do the proposing, which is not the case.
I reserve, however, the case of the screaming public breakup, which I have always wanted to do, just for the entertainment value.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 2:52 PM
the screaming public breakup
Having been the screamee in one of these, let me assure you that it's only entertaining for the screamer (well, and the two to three hundred passers-by there on Franklin Street). Especially once it escalates into the jump-on-my-back-and-pull-my-hair breakup.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 2:55 PM
Ha. Given how the day has gone, I was expecting you or apostropher to say: "Hey, my spouse proposed on the Jumbotron at the superbowl."
I note that I was careful to avoid gender-specific language save for the parenthetical aside; anyway, the article's gist suggests that men do the majority of proposing, and that women are on the receiving end of most proposals made by men. (It's looking like I had the quote wrong, but that was the motivation...)
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 2:56 PM
apostropher, was that back in the mullett days?
Posted by fl | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 2:57 PM
Yes, yes it was. So you can imagine what an easy target that presented.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 2:58 PM
the public singing of happy birthday in a restaurant
I've been told the waitstaff hates this, because it takes so much trouble to get everyone to the table at the same time for the song.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:07 PM
"at this point, she'll be happy just to see me down on my knees."
...
Posted by tweedledopey | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:08 PM
The whole point of the screaming breakup is to entertain the audience. Ideally, both parties are screaming. Jumping on the back and hairpulling, extra points.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:09 PM
either the other person has already agreed, or not.
And then, there's the AlGorean "little known third category," familiar to those, for example, whose fiancees hound them to propose and then, six months after accepting the proposal, decide they don't want to get married.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:13 PM
Please note that any resentment in ogged's post is not directed at all females, but at one female in particular, and that he really hates fratboys. Happy Valentine's Day everyone! Why hasn't anyone else brought the "cry cry masturbate cry" joke yet?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:15 PM
Matt, you cracked my shit up.
If a bitchy feminist can't hold intelligent lefty men accountable, then there really is no hope for the future.
I'm going to post my own proposal story over on my blog; y'all will enjoy it, I'm sure.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:20 PM
Yeah, Valentine's Day seems to be putting everyone in a great mood for some reason. I will be refreshing your blog until I get a life and decide to go home, for sure.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:22 PM
Well, give me a few minutes. Am also im'ing with boyfriend.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:24 PM
Why hasn't anyone else brought the "cry cry masturbate cry" joke yet?
We're..... busy. Sniff.
Posted by cw | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:24 PM
Your asterisk begs the question- what if you can work a cock joke into your proposal?
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:44 PM
Posted.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 3:56 PM
What I don't get is the couples who get engaged-to-be-engaged or pre-engaged and then there are "conditions" for it to turn into an engagement/marriage thing. My neighbor is one such chick. She recently got pre-engaged and will only agree to engagement when he:
(a)gets a better paying job which he
(b)holds for 6+ months and
(c)is then in a position to buy a house
and let us not forget the important
(d)buys a big ring and
(e)comes up with a creative and romantic proposal event.
Blech. Of course, this comes from the chick who had a spontaneous mutual proposal in a car that let to eloping in Vegas.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 4:19 PM
pg! Great to see you! You made your flight?
(a)-(c) don't sound unreasonable to me, necessarily, though my eyes skipped "better-paying" the first time. If I were in a position to be anywhere close to pre-engaged, I could easily imagine the target saying "We can't get married until you're in a position to live in the same city for more than one year, and it had better not be a city that sucks." (d) and (e) seem lame, though.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 4:27 PM
"I will tell you about how my husband proposed after I finish IMing my boyfriend."
I would have noted that earlier, but I masturbated too much when I was younger. God, I love this blog.
Posted by fl | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 4:33 PM
MW, if only I made my flight! I'm sitting on the floor outside the snooty airport club in hubcity airport, bumming the wireless signal and killing time (3 hours now) until the next flight to Gentleville.
And I think making a big-production proposal part of the deal is pretty damn lame (just have a big production wedding, if you must -- but life isn't about puppydogs and fairytales anyway). I mean, if the proposing party is into it, great. But agreeing to get married (which to me counts as engagement) only if there is a big production made about formally asking (which then makes it a conditional agreement based on a one-time stupid event taking place?) is really stupid. I hate folks who are all about the proposal and wedding and forget to think about a the marriage. And guys who are roped into this stuff who don't dig it themselves (because if it is mutually agreeable and pleasurable I guess it isn't so bad) better realize they'll just be expected to keep producing romantic events (or get nagged to death)
And surprise proposals on TV ... potentially cruel!
FL:
I masturbated too much when I was younger
Didn't we all?
And is this to imply that you've stopped? ;)
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 4:45 PM
Yes. Human sexuality is like a dead language to me.
Also, there was this in the background.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:00 PM
It just implies that he masturbates the right amount or less than the right amount now.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:09 PM
implicates
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:11 PM
Ben, you must have been a whiz at symbolic logic.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:12 PM
Oh no, Matt. You've corrected Wolfson. He hates that.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:16 PM
YEAH, weiner, YEAH! That's what I'm talking about! H Paul Grice in tha HOUSE!
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:18 PM
I'm down with the word "implicature". But "implicate", not followed by "in {the,a} scandal"? Now that's an ugly word. Besides, I'm speakin' with the masses over here.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 5:22 PM
It just implies that he masturbates the right amount or less than the right amount now.
No, it could also imply that, at his age, there is no longer any such category as "masturbates too much." God knows I can't find a ceiling.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 6:03 PM
Chapping.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 9:04 PM
Perhaps you've seen my wedding announcement.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 9:14 PM
I'm sure you noted that Chappy's alma mater is the (game)Cocks. Favored ball cap of frat boys everywhere. I'm sure ogged has six.
Posted by cw | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 10:36 PM
USC (South Carolina)= Cocks
USC (Southern California) = Trojans
Coincidence?
Posted by aj | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 11:08 PM
those post-birth weeks that bad, apostropher?
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 02-14-05 11:41 PM
Shoot, I missed this 'proposal fest,' probably because I was too busy watching "An Officer and a Gentleman," which if you will recall had a both a proposal rejection because he didn't have the right job and it also had a big public proposal that appeared to be accepted.
Back in my day (does anyone get lavaliered anymore?) I figured the 'engaged to be engaged' thing was cover for guilt free sex. That is, a way for the woman to have pre-marital sex and not be a slut.
I'm also despising the public-proposal-escalation that is hapenning. Soon proposals won't be good enough until they occur during the Super Bowl while the whole world watches.
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 02-15-05 8:26 AM
Michael, while I no nothing of the apostropher's marital relationship, I can safely say: yes, almost certainly.
Labs, spit-take.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-15-05 11:17 AM