This makes sense, but does it suggest that if you can love someone without being wed – which even the marrying types do before they actually tie the knot – then legally binding marriage is only useful if indeed the union is to fall apart? Planning for separation is surely the strangest reason to marry? As someone who has never dreamed of marriage, it is hard to express how unconvincing that argument is. Much more refreshing is Kathi and Acky’s approach, which can only be described as carpe diem in its most practical execution. When asked if she had looked into, or cared about, what it means practically or legally for the future, Kathi assured me in no uncertain terms that she had not. "I am the least practical person ever in that regard. I’m into the 'live life as it comes' type of philosophy and it hasn’t crossed my mind. I know that there are legal implications, but I would never consider getting married just for that. If people believe that marriage is a sacred union, especially religious people, then I think it would be a bit insulting to their tradition for someone like me to do it just for a tax cut. I’m just living life the way I want to, and am extremely lucky to be doing it with my best friend holding my hand the whole time."