Glory boxes

Heather’s friend Caz says I’m the only person she’s ever known to have had a glory box. We were discussing the whole concept a few days ago, when I suddenly remembered that I’d had one. It wasn’t really a formal thing, not a box per se, but rather some space on a shelf in the linen closet. Still, I was certainly introduced to the idea of the glory box at an early age.

It was all the fault of my maternal grandmother. I would’ve been maybe ten years old when she began to give me tea towels, sheets, and bath towels for birthdays and Christmases. I can actually remember feeling incredibly mystified and ripped off: What’s this crazy old woman giving me towels for? Doesn’t she know we have towels?

If it’s possible, I felt even more ripped off when I found out that not only had Grammy given me a stupid present, she’d given me a stupid present I wasn’t supposed to use until I was married. I think I probably just went with it, though, because she was all sorts of weird and kind of intimidating. I also knew she was really broke, and generally somewhat lax on the grandmotherly responsibility front. Part of me wonders whether she hit upon the glory box idea so she could buy all my presents at Coles when she went to buy her groceries. I can imagine her loading up the shopping trolley: ‘Aisle 8, creamed corn … aisle 9, double-bed sheets for the eleven-year-old. Perfect.’

I don’t actually know what happened to the linen my grandmother gave me. I must have left it behind for mum when I moved out, or else mum had started using it even earlier. I’ll have to ask her about all this when I ring her tomorrow. In my head, I think this whole glory box farce went on for a really long time, until I was in my teens. And then we didn’t really see my grandmother much. My brothers were much older, fully grown by that point. Gram’s mental and physical health deteriorated quite quickly, and she died a few years ago. I never really knew her as an adult. I wonder what she’d think about my marriage plans if she was still around. She never had much luck with men, so who knows? Maybe she’d be quite supportive.

Does anyone else in their late twenties or early thirties remember having a glory box? Am I an aberration (apart from in the obvious ways, I mean)?

Australian Marriage Equality

I'd urge any Australians who are interested in marriage law reform to check out the Australian Marriage Equality website. Just click the link above. The site has news, information, and a 'registry' of Australian same-sex couples who've married or had a commitment ceremony. You can also join their database for news updates.

The proposition

Quite a few people have asked me and Heather who proposed to whom. It didn't really work like that. The decision to get married was more a process that happened over a couple of months.

At first, I didn't even think of going to Canada to get married. The idea just didn’t occur to me. I was thinking more along the lines of a commitment ceremony here in Australia. But when I raised the idea of commitment ceremonies with Heather, (i.e., I said ‘maybe – not now – but maybe one day in the future we could …’) she was very resistant. She said that they generally seemed pretty ‘hokey’, and she didn’t see the point of them.

‘They aren’t legally binding,’ she said. ‘So why bother?’

I could see her point. But at the same time, it was important to me. I liked the idea of the ritual, and what it meant. Heather came to see that it was really important to me. And she decided that she liked the idea as well.

We'd been planning to visit America at the end of 2005, to visit Heather's family and friends. Heather is American, from Florida, and she has family there and in Massachusetts. Civil unions between same-sex couples are legal in some US states, but you have to be a resident of that state to legally marry. Florida is not one of those states, and I'm an Australian resident anyway, so there was no hope of us having any kind of official union in the US.

We tossed around the idea of having a commitment ceremony when we visited. One of Heather's friends is a Unitarian Universalist minister in Florida, and she was really excited when she found out we were planning a union. She offered to officiate and arrange everything for us. We really liked that idea. But I worried that I would feel strange about the whole process, because my friends and family would be unlikely to attend due to the cost. I imagined I might feel quite sad, and that was the last thing I wanted on my wedding, or commitment, day.

One day, it finally struck me.

'Heather,' I said. 'Do you think we could make a little trip to Toronto when we're in Boston? Would it be very complicated?'

She looked at me. 'You wanna go get married in Toronto?'

'Yeah, I think so.'

'Okay, let's do that.'

And so, we decided. This way, we won't have to worry about one or the other of us feeling sad because our family isn't present. Instead, we will have a little ceremony in Toronto, attended by just a few of Heather's Canadian friends, and a series of parties to celebrate afterwards. We will have wedding parties in Boston, Florida, and Brisbane, so no-one will miss out. And we make the fun last even longer, across two continents and three countries! I can't wait.

Teeth

I went to the dentist two days ago. I'd been having some pain above my right canine tooth. Turned out I had an abcess, and had to have root canal therapy. For various reasons, it was a tricky job and I had to go to an 'endodontist'. I didn't even know such a profession existed, but that's not surprising. Apparently they are specialists who specifically deal with issues related to the root canal and the pulp of the tooth. And they charge an awful lot of money. For two visits of one hour each, I'm going to be paying $1200. I nearly fell off the dentist's chair.

As I lay for an hour with my mouth open while the drilling and filing went on, I tried to imagine what it would be like to earn $600 an hour. 'Tried' being the operative word. I actually think this may be beyond my comprehension.

I reassure myself with the knowledge that dentists have really high suicide rates. Not that I want my endodontist dead (she seems really nice) -- I just want there to be some kind of downside to an income of twenty grand a week.

Erosion by time

Nearly a year ago, on the 27th of May 2004, the Marriage Legislation Amendment Bill had its second reading in the Australian Parliament. Phillip Ruddock introduced the bill, stating: ‘This bill is necessary because there is significant community concern about the possible erosion of the institution of marriage. The parliament has an opportunity to act quickly to allay these concerns.' This Bill is an astonishingly slippery and mean-spirited amendment, and should be read by as many people as possible. Ruddock continues:

The government has consistently reiterated the fundamental importance of the place of marriage in our society. It is a central and fundamental institution. It is vital to the stability of our society and provides the best environment for the raising of children. The government has decided to take steps to reinforce the basis of this fundamental institution.

Now, if marriage is a ‘central and fundamental institution’, why does its basis need reinforcing? Because the way it was enshrined in law left a loophole that might be exploited by homosexuals. Ruddock continues:

Currently, the Marriage Act 1961 contains no definition of marriage. It does contain a statement of the legal understanding of marriage in the words that Commonwealth authorised marriage celebrants must say before they solemnise a marriage ... Those words are: 'Marriage, according to law in Australia, is the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life'.

The government believes that this is the understanding of marriage held by the vast majority of Australians. It is time those words form the formal definition of marriage in the Marriage Act. This bill will achieve that result. Including this definition will remove any lingering concerns people may have that the legal definition of marriage may become eroded by time.

Eroded by time? Since when is 'time' a synonym for 'queers'? It is only after all of this foreplay that Ruddock gets to the main game, casually, as if same-sex marriage wasn’t the primary motive for this amendment from the start:

A related concern held by many people is that there are now some countries that permit same sex couples to marry. It has been reported that there are a few Australian same sex couples who may travel overseas to marry in one of these countries on the basis that their marriage will then be recognised under Australian law on their return.

Australian law does, as a matter of general principle, recognise marriages entered into under the laws of another country, with some specific exceptions. It is the government’s view that this does not apply to same sex marriages. The amendments to the Marriage Act contained in this bill will make it absolutely clear that Australia will not recognise same sex marriages entered into under the laws of another country, whatever country that may be.

Ruddock finishes by highlighting the government’s ‘fundamental opposition’ to same-sex couples adopting children, and assures parliament that the bill will prevent such adoptions from taking place.

Of course Australia followed the lead of the US, with its wave of conservatism, and implemented these changes. The funny thing is, Britain has recently allowed gay civil unions. And we talk about the British being conservative! Not anymore. Not compared to us, on this issue.