I went with them last weekend and came back Sunday evening to work this week. OK, so I only went into the office for one day and there's not been much to do, as a contractor I have to show some sort of activity to justify being paid. WPKAW's parents don't have any inter-web connectivity and frankly I was looking forward to a week by myself.

But the question arises of just what WPKAW's motives are. Friends have suggested that she's explicitly demonstrating that she cares for the midgets and can look after them for a week without me. In doing so she thinks that she shows herself to be fine marriage material. But if that's the case, she fundamentally and repeatedly misunderstands my reasoning against marriage. I got a barrage from her mother on Sunday about how nice it would be, it's the natural step to take and so on. It's not WPKAW that I don't want to marry though, it's anybody. I don't think I've ever really explained it well enough. maybe I don't understand my reasons well enough to make any explanation clear. But here goes.

Why I won't get married
It's all a question of permanence. And cynicism. Nothing is permanent. Should I make a promise to stay with someone for the rest of my life when I doubt that it's a promise I could keep? What is the purpose of getting married? Where marriage once gave a measure of security, I don't see that as valid any more. Divorce is not much harder than splitting up when you just live together anyway. People change. If they are lucky enough to be able to change together then the relationship might last. But to tie two people together regardless of any future incompatibilities seems more like punishment than reward.

And what security is being sought? Security against what? I already have midgets that go between myself an MoM. Until it happened, I never wanted to have midgets there'll be no more midgets in my life. Although the midgets did noticeably suffer slightly when MoM and I split, we worked hard to remain on friendly terms and had quickly reached a stability that gave them structure and security. I had no need of someone else to help take care of them.

What other security should I need? I am teh modern man who can take care of himself. I need no one for support. I can pay my way, cook, clean, dress myself, arrange my own time. If I ever feel the need for someone to take care of, I have two midgets that deserve that role. I don't desire to have some adult be a burden to me. A healthy adult should be able to take care of themself and why should I choose one that could not?

The cynic in me views many others' relationships as being heavily laden with the need to take care of someone or be taken care of. Isn't that a parent/child relationship rather than and adult/adult one? Love songs and romantic literature are full of allusions to need. To being incomplete without the other. But i just don't feel incomplete. I don't yearn for someone to complete me or enhance me.

Asking me to change my views on marriage would be akin to expecting someone to change religions. Is it not selfish to ask someone to give up their long held faith simply to make you happy? Would WPKAW's Baptist parents be pleased if i were Muslim and expected WPKAW to convert? To expect me to marry when I hold these views would be asking me to make a false promise. I may be a cynic, but my partner would have to collude in the cynicism. And then why bother getting married if she believed my promise was not true?

I still don't think someone with opposing views would understand. If my views are incoherent then they are just excuses. Maybe I'm just a commitment-phobe. Maybe if I "just met the right woman" I would change my mind and all doubt would be cleared away. But I'm not so idealistic to believe that any more.

Dr H went to church
WPKAW's parents invited us (WPKAW, myself and the midgets) to attend church with them on Sunday morning. I thought it would be educational for the midgets to attend a service. They've only ever been to weddings and funerals. I was curious to see if modern baptist sermons are any different for the CofE ones I suffered as a child. It was more interactive and geared towards families. The first 10 minutes were announcements of old people dying, people going into or out of hospital and prayers for them. Then there was a half an hour demonstration where the kids got to write down things they'd done wrong on slips of thin rice paper and red coloured water was poured over them. Miraculously "the blood of Christ" washed away their sins! After that the kids were taken out to a separate play room where they danced and did arts and crafts. The rest of the sermon (about an hour) was take up by a geometric deconstruction of the first two lines of the Lord's prayer. Yes, I did say geometric deconstruction. Geometry was used to show strength and beauty in shapes with certain numbers of sides that coincided with the number of words in certain phrases. Each word was also individually dissected and analysed. "Father" got special attention as singling out Christianity as the only religion that had an intimate, caring God.

One thing that surprised me was that the pastor claimed that the later line asking to be absolved of trespass shows that Jesus never meant this prayer for himself as he had never committed a trespass. I had been led to believe that Jesus had sinned twice and that demonstrated that he was human as well as divine?

Three films
Dogville [2004]
Lars von Trier's Palm D'Or nominated film of charity, morals, abuse and exploitation in the 1930s has been criticised for being anti-American. Trier is himself critical of America, but the unfolding tragedy of the downfall of the people of Dogville could be played out in any destitute small town across the world. What makes Dogville unusual on first viewing is the minimal set. It is like a Cluedo board or architects plan with the outlines of buildings painted in white onto a black floor with minimal props to designate the activities of the people within and the names off the occupants and streets painted on also. Why? Well, this is a very small town of only about ten buildings. The lack of walls heightens the claustrophobia by shrinking the town to one entity. Everyone knows everyone else's business. It's the antithesis of using special effects, it works well and you get used to it quickly.

Nicole Kidman got paid less than her make-up artist for appearing. She enters Dogville on the run from gangsters and the folk reluctantly agree to shelter her as a test of their moral character. Over time charity turns to extreme exploitation but Kidman's character remains steadfast in her charitable nature even when escape plans are thwarted and she's chained up to prevent any further attempts. I'll not add any further spoilers as this is an amazing film I'd recommend everyone sees. [9/10]

The Asphalt Jungle [1950]
Nowadays this noir heist movie is more noteworthy for being one of Marilyn Monroe's first films. but she is the worst actress ever in this and one has to wonder quite why she was cast. Luckily she is only 11th on the original billing. In reality this is one of the classic gritty noir thrillers from John Huston. [8/10]

Grave of the Fireflies [2004]
I have to come clean and state that I'm not a fan of animated features. I supposed I'm a bigot who still has the feeling that animation = cartoons = for kids. Same with comics. This may have gone a long way to change my mind. I don't think GotF could have been realised quite so effectively with conventional actors. To sum up, this melancholic portrayal of the fate of two orphans struggling to survive in Japan at the end of WWII is terrifically affecting without being too overly sentimental. Enough to make a grown man tear up. not this one, but another grown man. [9/10]