The other day I was listening to a
song on the radio. Which I often do. I find radio is the easiest way for me to
be exposed to new music. Sometimes I don't trust recommendations from friends.
Who made them music experts?
Anyhow, somewhere in the song the
singer sang that he would be some imaginary person's groom. I had just come
from a discussion about horses, so I thought he was offering his services as a
horse helper.
Odd when you think about it, that
the word for a bride's mate would also be the term for someone who tends a
horse. Not a very complimentary accouterment to the bride in question.
"Hi, I'm the bride. This is my
groom."
Lovely. Is that why he calls you a
little filly? Has he been currying you lately? Strapping on the nosebag?
Checking your frog for sawdust?
The broader implication, that the
bride, or women generally, need some sort of tending, kind of puts the marriage
on a less than even foot to begin with. Especially as it implies that foot is
part of a set of four on some sort of domestic animal.
Because free-spirited as horses can
be, they are in the long run domestic animals, and require endless hours of
slogging labor to schlep around bales of hay and shovel and cart off piles of
manure. And although there are those that think that that is indeed a perfect
metaphor for matrimonial incarceration, I beg to differ.
Perhaps more marriages would thrive
if one of the parties was not thought of as a domesticated animal and the other
not thought of as its custodian.
Although it does help explain the
whole bridal the bride and bridle the harness soundalike thing.
America, ya gotta love it.
No comments:
Post a Comment