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