In Thursday's guest column, Matthew Meltzer's use of trite warnings and sweeping generalizations served to demonstrate his estimation that if he is not ready for marriage in his 20s, no one else can be.
Not married himself and relying on the dependable source of "or so I am told,"Meltzer gave his argument little credence. His glamorization of drunken escapades as the superior alternative to marriage reveals more about Meltzer's own maturity (or lack thereof) and values than that of most 20-somethings. The institution of marriage is certainly worthy of examination and critique.
Yet Meltzer merely resorts to a repetition of unoriginal exaggerations, undermining what could have been a thoughtful analysis of an establishment rife with both tradition and controversy.
As with most things in life, all relationships are individual and cannot be categorized with such blanket statements. Signing a marriage certificate in one's 20s does not guarantee a happily ever-after, nor does it "only lead to bad things" as Meltzer puts it.
Sadly, Meltzer simply propagated cliched gender stereotypes with his tales of wives who are "ALWAYS THERE."
As Meltzer seems to be under the unfortunate assumption that women want to trap men into a marriage in order to secure a partner for viewing "Grey's Anatomy"and dominating in Pictionary, I suggest he take his own advice and do some thorough self-examination before ever considering marriage, even past his 20s.
