Disqus - Latest Comments for jdoscher

Re: If I Blogged...

jdoscher — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:27:57 -0000

Facebook by the volume of people, but face-to-face by the number of conversations.

Re: Who Gives This Woman To Be Married To This Man?

jdoscher — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:19:18 -0000

Anytime we defer to someone else for wording, tradition, or instruction we're adopting the same thoughts and implications that they had- whether intentional or not.

Re: Who Gives This Woman To Be Married To This Man?

jdoscher — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:35:08 -0000

Chris,

I am out on the fringe of your fringe friends, but I still feel like I can comment here =) Much of marriage ceremonies does carry over from a time when the bride was considered to be a posession in the general sense of the term. One of the great things about our culture in general is the freedom to subscribe to as little or as much of our heritage as we choose. My wife and I bought a marriage package in Vegas, so take that as background on my perspective:

1.) Marriage is a largely formal event, no matter if it is from the judge at the local courthouse or from your life long church's minister or priest. That formality is good in a way- there are things that need to be said and done to help separate them from daily events, and for many people a more formal event does more to set this event apart and add significance to the occasion.

2.) Carrying the name is a funny thing. For a married couple with no children, the surname is usually an indication of how the union is balanced. I've seen men take on their wives' names only, which admittedly seems a little weird to me. It really is a matter of choice that in the absence of children is neither here-nor-there for me.

2b.) The surname for children is a rather big deal though. This is how children are identified with their parents in society, and as a father adopting my stepson this summer, I can attest to the importance of a son taking his father's name, even if it is adoptive. We live in a patriarchal (sp?) society, and as such the tradition is to pass the male's name to the children.

To me, this is important because it's the one thing that I know will be left besides memories when I am long gone- and it is the one thing that I have been given to me, literally by my forefathers. It's also worth mentioning that many cultures change the middle name of the bride to their former surname to keep the family name traceable after marriage.

Things are much simpler when we don't involve the victorians =)

Re: The Corporate States of America in the 21st Century (version 1.7)

jdoscher — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 15:51:53 -0000

You may be underestimating the role of religion in mass consumerism. Religion continues to remain the hub for many as a means of weekly gathering, using it as a chance to compare material gains between families and factions throughout the country. Calling for boycotts of companies and products as requested by their demoninations, they are creating a new supply chain that begins with purchases (or boycotts) of products, leading all the way up a chain ending with policitcal influence as exerted by religious lobbyists in government circles.

This cannot be downplayed in a near-future society, as the percieved unity through faith, solidarity in vision and confidence in our economy is influenced by local, regional, and federal clergy. The excellent example of this is the legal feud over religion in state-sponsored areas such as parks, memorials, and schools. This is only recognized because it is considered by some to be a key moral ground or simply because it is a cause celeb amongst successful religious clans or non-religion groups. The greater concern should be the deals and trades made in smoke-filled rooms that are slowly replacing capitalists with fundamentalists.

In my view capitalists are easy predect- the motivation is clear- the accumulation and display of wealth. The view of fundamentalist religious groups is no less than world subjugation. Religion in many areas of the country already represents a perspective in an argument and not a lifestyle or philosophy.

Simply put, consumerism is primarily driven by a desire to purchase without understanding- the goal of many being to have the capacity to purchase without consideration to capacity. As long as the general populace relies on others to make decisions for them, the ruling class will continue to drive those decisions through advertising, religion, and greed.

It's through this train of thought that I assert that the working class will not notice the shift of power, as it would create more effort for the incoming organization to transition.