RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: Siely on Wednesday 06 August 25 06:28 BST (UK)

Title: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Wednesday 06 August 25 06:28 BST (UK)
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/sologamy-marry-yourself-single-solo-autogamy-b2593408.html

Marrying yourself ? A worrying trend for future FH hobbyists.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Zaphod99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 10:03 BST (UK)
Day on day, week on week I find less that's worth reading on the newspaper websites. It's just all clickbait.  And one thing that really annoys me is the proliferation of headlines that end "Here's how".  Are we really being treated that stupidly that we need telling?

Zaph
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Viktoria on Wednesday 06 August 25 10:24 BST (UK)
I am fed up with “ celebrities” I have never heard of!
There seem to be thousands, what have they done to be called a celebrity?
When you think of the many wonderful people doing valuable voluntary work who seek no publicity, they are often nominated by colleagues who feel some recognition is warranted.

It is an odd world.
Viktoria.



Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Wednesday 06 August 25 12:19 BST (UK)
I agree with you. There is an army of "celebrities" I've never heard of , and real newspapers no longer exist.  No wonder the internet has millions of people trying to find out what on earth is going on ! Plus I dont want to marry myself either , I couldnt finish the cake by myself (doctor will tell me off)
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Zaphod99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 12:41 BST (UK)
I think these days to be a celebrity you need to have no qualifications but to have appeared on a reality TV programme.

I am aware that language progresses, but I also notice increasingly there are words that I've never heard of. Like in the title of this thread.

Zaph
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Sandy_W on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:32 BST (UK)
On the subject of language progressing, I've just read this sentence on the BBC News website:

"It will also look at what learnings there might be for the future"

Learnings? LEARNINGS? I thought the word was "lessons". Grrrrrr.....
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:50 BST (UK)
Sandy W,  you are right !

These people had a very good and expensive education at a posh school but their ability is poor !  Then they will tell you that school ties don't really matter
 
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: aghadowey on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:55 BST (UK)
Sandy W,  you are right !

These people had a very good and expensive education at a posh school but their ability is poor !  Then they will tell you that school ties don't really matter

What people do you mean?
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Mike in Cumbria on Wednesday 06 August 25 18:17 BST (UK)
On the subject of language progressing, I've just read this sentence on the BBC News website:

"It will also look at what learnings there might be for the future"

Learnings? LEARNINGS? I thought the word was "lessons". Grrrrrr.....

According to the OED, the noun "learnings" was first recorded in 1483.

"Learning:
What is learnt or taught:

a. a lesson, instruction;
1483 Caxton G. de la Tour cxxxvii. M vij, — The thre enseygnementes or lernynges whiche Cathon gaf to his sone.
1611 Shaks. Cymb. i. i. 43 — The king..Puts to him all the Learnings that his time Could make him the receiuer of."
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Wednesday 06 August 25 18:27 BST (UK)
"These people"  means people who are employed by professional journalists , are paid well, but still produce poor quality work or are on a completely different wavelength.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: aghadowey on Wednesday 06 August 25 19:25 BST (UK)
"These people"  means people who are employed by professional journalists , are paid well, but still produce poor quality work or are on a completely different wavelength.

So you are jumping to conclusions based on some sort of class bias  ::)
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Zaphod99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 22:42 BST (UK)
"School ties"? Does that mean the physical stripey thing around one's neck, or the ongoing allegiance to the alma mater?

Zaph
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: DianaCanada on Thursday 07 August 25 00:59 BST (UK)
Learning can be a gerund (a verb form used as a noun), for example “Learning is a life-long process”, similarly, “Walking is good for you”.  However, I also don’t believe the way it was used in the earlier post is correct, in that is it correct to pluralize a gerund?  I will ponder this while I try to fall asleep tonight and see if it keeps me awake.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Erato on Thursday 07 August 25 02:18 BST (UK)
If we can pluralize 'teaching,' 'saying,' and 'finding,' then why lot 'learning'?
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Thursday 07 August 25 06:41 BST (UK)
Zaphod99

Original post was about a social trend called Sologamy that future FH hobbyists will discover.  It's promotion (many other issues are simply ignored) in the press is due to the people who successfully gain employment in a very competitive profession. Very high competition will mean high scrutiny of their education. Hope that helps your enquiry.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: heywood on Thursday 07 August 25 06:55 BST (UK)
From the article,
“ Marrying yourself has nothing to do with vanity or seeking adoration”.
Celebrities or those seeking that status are mentioned but also others who are seeking something else in their lives for other reasons.

It is not a legal process so why would it be a ‘worrying trend for future FH hobbyists’? Presumably marrying oneself would not necessitate a change of surname.

Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Siely on Thursday 07 August 25 07:18 BST (UK)
Okay so you aren't worried,  your choice.

I would like to know about these things as a FH hobbyist, I think fully appreciating society and its norms at different points of time is the hardest part of FH and perhaps the most rewarding if you really want to understand ancestors.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: heywood on Thursday 07 August 25 07:45 BST (UK)
My point was that, as a family history enthusiast, from my experience,  personal and on this site, sologamy would not present particular difficulties in research.

It is not yet a norm but may point to people’s state of mind or needs which may help understand society at a particular time, as you say.

However, it would not be as difficult to unpick as, for example, relationships where surnames are used for a time but then the persons move on and they and children use new names.

We come across family groups where the children are ‘yours, mine and ours’ and records have to be acquired to sort out ancestry.

I would say they are the kind of changing norms which we have come to appreciate in our shared histories.
Title: Re: Sologamy
Post by: Erato on Thursday 07 August 25 08:06 BST (UK)
I don't see how it would pose much of a problem even if [big if] such self-marriages were legally recognized and registered by the civil authorities.  Autogamous marriages would be dead ends because they couldn't produce any children; parthenogenesis is impossible in mammals.  Any children attached to the autogamous individual would be either adopted or illegitimate.  But adoption and illegitimacy are not new problems for family historians.  We've all had to deal with them in our family trees.