Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) Newsgroups: net.women,net.nlang Subject: Re: more stupid word combinations ... Message-ID: <2239@randvax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 9-Jan-85 23:56:03 EST Article-I.D.: randvax.2239 Posted: Wed Jan 9 23:56:03 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 14-Jan-85 00:59:23 EST References: <788@pucc-k> Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica Lines: 22 Xref: watmath net.women:4065 net.nlang:2385 > Have you ever noticed that, whenever a couple gets > married, the Master of Ceremonies (whether minister, Justice of > the Peace, or motorcycle mechanic) always says something stupid > like "I now pronounce you 'man and wife'." > > It seems to me that a more intelligent thing to say > would be "I now pronounce you 'husband and wife'" or something > of that ilk. I've heard ``husband and wife'' used on several occasions. I actually find it more offensive than ``man and wife'', as the term ``husband'' could equally be used to describe the owner of cattle. The ``man and wife'' version essentially means ``man and woman''--which is pretty prosaic; I suspect that the intended meaning is ``man and his woman''. We shouldn't be surprised that the traditional marriage ceremony doesn't portray spouses as equals. Anyone know of some more modern alternatives? (Maybe I should ask this of net.social.) How about the history of the ``traditional Christian marriage ceremony''? -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall