Commit to Yourself

For awhile now, a close friend and I have bandied about the notion of throwing self-commitment parties if we choose not to marry. In other words, I would marry myself, she'd marry herself, and we'd have a double self-commitment ceremony. For awhile, the deadline for abandoning the prospect of marriage and committing to lifelong singlehood was 30, but now that 30 is not just a hypothetical state but a reality bearing toward us in the mirror, the minimum age has somehow been raised to 35.

Of course we're half joking. And we're half serious.

It seems like a gutsy thing to do, throwing a party in your own honor. But why should it? In the last blog, we talked about how the average wedding is more a homage to the self than to the love of another person. Given that fact, celebrating yourself in style almost makes more sense than sparing no expense for what should be one of the most selfless commitments of your life, the promise to place another human being's needs before your own.

Fans of Sex and the City may remember the episode entitled "A Woman's Right to Shoes" in which Carrie's designer stilettos are stolen at a baby shower when the yuppie mother insists that all footwear be removed at the door. When the mom-to-be refuses to compensate Carrie for the loss and accuses her of indulging in a self-centered, high-priced lifestyle, Carrie rightly counters that shelling out for a wedding or a baby is no more virtuous than forking it over for anything else that's won your heart, including shoes. She argues that singles are expected to bankroll couples' weddings, homes, and children but receive no financial help for their own dreams. In response, Carrie sends word to the self-righteous mama that she's marrying herself and has set up a gift registry for her Manolo Blahniks.

Although it's played off tongue in cheek, Carrie's turn of the tables is a respectable move which affirms the value of single people. Take a moment to think of all the ways that you, as a single, have funded the lives of your coupled friends. No doubt, you've given gifts to the couples you know for all of the following:

--Engagement party
--Bridal shower
--Bachelor or bachelorette party
--Wedding
--Housewarming
--Baby shower

Quite likely, you also give Christmas presents to your friend and his or her spouse as well as to each of their children, while you get just one present in return. The same probably goes for birthdays.

And if you've ever been in a bridal party, you've also born the cost of your formal attire, the bridal shower if you're a woman, the bachelor or bachelorette party, and other miscellaneous expenses along the way (i.e. your transportation to and from the wedding, your lodgings if necessary, your stylist and/or makeup artist, etc.). Then when your friend gets pregnant, you're responsible for throwing a shower for that, too.

In a time when almost everyone got married, it was assumed that in a few years your turn would come and your friends would return the favor. But the marriage rate has declined by 50% since 1970, and it's no longer a certainty that a single person will ever tie the knot or have children. I don't have any statistics on how much married couples take home in gifts over a lifetime, but I'm sure it's thousands of dollars.

I know some people will argue that the spoils of a wedding or baby shower are tempered by the costs of the wedding and the baby, but how the money is spent isn't the issue. The role of the married parent and its attendant expenditures is a lifestyle choice. So is the choice of a single person to start a business or go back to school or travel...or even buy a pair of quality shoes. The choices of a single person aren't less ethically valid than those of a married person, but for some reason, society doesn't fund those choices.

Sometimes, singles are even labeled "self-centered" even though they're ultimately spending money the same way married people do--on things that make them happy. If those things are cars and clothes and gizmos for themselves instead of for a spouse or child, what of it? Married people attain these same things through the rounadabout method of requesting them from their spouses for birthdays, anniversaries, Christmas, Mother's Day, Father's Day, and Valentine's Day. Single people cut right to the chase and buy them outright. So what's the difference?

Carrie Bradshaw had the right idea about "marrying herself." While the prospect of reciting vows to love, honor, and cherish yourself might sound silly, the principle is anything but. As singles, we should all be committed to our own growth and betterment. We should promise to take care of ourselves, to treat ourselves with dignity and respect, to stand up for and protect ourselves when necessary. We should vow to be honest with ourselves, to learn from our mistakes, and to push ourselves when the time calls for it. Most of all, we should commit to accept ourselves for better, for worse; for richer, for poorer; in sickness and in health. No matter who else makes or breaks these promises to you, you should always keep them to yourself.

And if you reach a point in life at which you know that you're not going to or don't want to be married...heck, throw a party! Go ahead. Rent out a huge facility, wear an elaborate gown, feast on catered delicacies, collect presents. Make it known that you're celebrating the person you've become and the person you're still becoming. Everybody needs a day to bask in the love of family and friends and be the sun of their universe. The act of committing yourself to someone else shouldn't be what makes you worthy of that.

But if you do get married a year later, just don't expect anyone to go out and get you another set of Lenox. ;)

How do you feel about the expenditures singles are expected to make without receiving anything in return? Have you had trouble affording the costs associated with special events for your married friends or family? Would you ever throw a party for yourself? Have you made a commitment, formal or informal, to yourself?


Fun Link of the Day