Scarlett Johansson romain dauriac divorce
Scarlett Johansson was right about 2 things she said about marriage in her interview with Playboy Magazine which is coming out next month – and she is wrong about one thing. This is what she reportedly said:
“I think marriage initially involves a lot of people who have nothing to do with your relationship, because it’s a legally binding contract, and that has a weight to it,” she says. “Being married is different than not being married, and anybody who tells you that it’s the same is lying. It changes things. I have friends who were together for 10 years and then decided to get married, and I’ll ask them on their wedding day or right after if it’s different, and it always is. It is. It’s a beautiful responsibility, but it’s a responsibility.”
It is true that marriage is a “responsibility.” A big one. And it is true that being married is emphatically not the same thing as living together, even if you live together for 50 years. Marriage is different from shacking up. Period. But it arguably is not true that “marriage involves a lot of people who have nothing to do with your relationship because it is a binding contract.”
Marriage is a binding contract. And it is true that marriage can involve alot of people who have nothing to do with your intimate relationship (what goes on in your bedroom is private) but there are a lot of people, like in laws who can be involved in your marriage and they do have something to do with your relationship and frankly, because of them your relationship can fail. On the other hand, you can look at it another way and say that nobody except for the two people have anything to do with their relationship.
The part I object to is the last part where she says “because it is a binding contract.” The fact that these people are or are not involved in your marriage is not a function of there being a “binding contract,” Scarlett. Marriage is a binding contract and there are many people who are involved in your relationship – rightly or wrongly. But they are involved no matter that there is a binding contract or a non-binding one.
It is a technical point but I think it needs to be distinguished that the binding nature of the marital contract was not the reason there are all these interlopers in Scarlett Johansson’s marriage. Understand my point?