Marriage Equality Enters New Frontier as Woman Marries 600 Year Old Bridge


I know that there are some religious extremists out there that will be tempted to deny this loving couple the equal opportunity to register their marriage, receive all sorts of benefits and compel wedding photographers and cakemakers to participate in this ceremony.

Others may be skeptical about the great age difference.

But we are entering a new frontier of marriage equality. No longer is marriage defined as being between a man or a woman. We now know that gender is wholly imaginary. A man who puts on a dress now identifies as a woman and is entitled to be treated as such. Or a leopard or a chicken.

Marriage is just love that does not take into account any mere trivia like the history of mankind or human biology. It’s now a ceremony conducted between two beings who love each other. Or three beings. Or forty.

Or a woman and a 600-year-old bridge.

Jodi Rose took her love for the structures to another level as she wedded the Le Pont du Diable Bridge in Céret, southern France.

The new Mrs Le Pont du Diable has spent the last decade travelling across the globe recording the vibrations in bridge cables to incorporate in her Singing Bridges music project.

Rose knew it was love at first sight when she set eyes on the ‘sensual’ 14th century bridge, as she apparently felt the earth move as she drew closer.

Naturally, it was only a matter of time before they became bridge and wife.

The happy couple got hitched on June 17 and while they might not have had the most conventional marriage, they enjoyed elements of a traditional wedding.

The ceremony was an intimate affair with 14 guests including close personal friends and members of the local community. Even the mayor of neighbouring town Saint-Jean-de-Fos gave his blessing.

Choosing the venue was simple enough and the pair made their vows at the groom’s entrance. Rose wore a custom bridal gown and veil, and commissioned rings for both her and the bridge.

The groom, otherwise known as The Devil’s Bridge, was quiet on their big day, but it was clear there are no trust issues between the newlyweds as the bridge is very supportive of his wife’s music project.

‘He understands that I love other bridges – and men – ours is a love that embraces the vagaries of life, as materialised in the swirling currents of the river that flows beneath his magnificent body,’ Rose wrote on her website.

‘The Devil’s Bridge is everything I could desire in a husband – sturdy, trustworthy, sensual, kind and handsome,’ she added.

Their union is not legally recognised in France, but Rose claims their marriage is as strong as any other.

Hopefully that will change soon as France accepts marriage equality. We should embrace and celebrate this brave new world where marriage encompasses everything… and accordingly nothing.

So go out there and find a bridge you love and marry it. But stay away from the 59th Street Bridge. That one is taken.

  • Veracious_one

    …she apparently felt the earth move as she drew closer.

    actually what she felt was the earth vibrating as she walked…

  • Veracious_one

    …‘The Devil’s Bridge is everything I could desire in a husband – sturdy, trustworthy, sensual, kind and handsome,’ she added.

    she left out old age

  • Veracious_one

    Once, long ago, she tried to marry a freight train, but it escaped by jumping the track and taking a dirt road to freedom….

  • Gradivus

    This points out a fundamental reality, one that is so often missed: what people mean by “marriage” in the gay marriage debate is actually not de facto marriage at all. The argument is over de jure marriage, i.e., government recognition, registration, and regulation of marriage, and the concomitant legal entitlements and responsibilities of such government recognition.

    De facto marriage, which exists once two (or more) consenting human adults declare themselves married before friends, family, and/or the community, regardless of any registration with or recognition by government, has been legal everywhere in the United States since the 1960s. That is, for at least the past 40 years, gay couples and members of group marriages have been able to live as married in America without being hauled off to jail or charged with a crime, as long as they don’t file legal papers to have their marriages recognized by the state. So we’re not really talking about a fundamental right at all, since rights can never be granted by government. The state can grant only privileges and entitlements.

  • Gee

    How do we know that the bridge agreed to marry her?

    • Dawn Levesque

      that was my thought as well

  • UCSPanther

    This has been getting silly for years, and is one of the reasons why marriage isn’t even worth the paper it is printed on these days…

    What’s next? Someone marrying a 1952 vintage ALCO RS 3 diesel locomotive?

    • RobinGOOD63

      That’s just it. Where does it all end?

      • Kevin

        At two consenting adults.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Why not 3?

    • Ana Sto

      a Marriage is between two adult human beings. 2 willing and equal partners. partners that can provide and care for one another. It doesn’t begin or end anywhere. It just is. It doesn’t involve race, creed, age or gender. It involves love and an agreement to build a life and look out for one another emotionally and physically. So before we go off proposing to chickens and rocks, lets re-examine that vows need to be said and i do’s. Within the boundaries of consensual human relations, all human beings should be able to marry within the human race. without restrictions on creed, race, gender, etc. it doesn’t end or begin. It just is.

      • Leo_Pusateri

        What about three consenting adults… or forty or fifty consenting adults?

        • MsBitchhands

          Would that in any way, shape, or form affect YOU if more than two people decided to share a life together?

          Why do you feel compelled to have an opinion on anyone else’s life at all?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Why do you?

  • Toni_Pereira

    You judgmental bigots!! Who are you to mettle in the beautiful relationship between a women and a pile of rocks. Shame on you!

    • Veracious_one

      The woman just wanted to marry a partner as smart as she…

      • Brad Lockhart

        and as heavy, too

  • Jerry Reiter

    This is the kind of article that idiots think is clever and assholes believe is true.

    • diegueno

      ..which is why it smells like Santorum.

    • GOPhater

      you are correct, Jerry..

    • Sandy Naylor

      You guys are the experts on a_holes, for sure. Built a whole video industry around them, love them so much you’d literally die for them.
      Nice group of people.

  • Ana Sto

    First off, this was probably a ceremonial gesture to commence her finding the bridge with the perfect acoustics. Before we go off on an outrage about our current debate over marriage lets just take this in.

    This is an awful article. And this guy is writing a book on Islam? I guess anyone can share their bigotry and ignorance now a days. I’m ashamed, on the author’s behalf, I am ashamed that he felt even remotely credible while posting this rubbish.

    • Leo_Pusateri

      Daniel Greenfield is writing a book about Islam?

  • Kira

    Did the bridge consent? Marriage is between two consenting adults. Sounds to be like this bridge was forced into a unwanted union.

    Oh, and try not to open your mouth again- it just makes you look stupid.

    P.S. Sorry, edit: It just confirms you ARE stupid.

  • Robin Bass

    Just wondering…did the bridge say “I do”?

  • Laura Preble

    The bridge could not consent, therefore, your comparison is flawed.

    • Jacquie_H

      What do you mean the union between two reasoning, consenting adults is not the same as the union between a person and an inanimate object that has no consent, and can therefore give no consent, to marry, because it is not alive nor conscious?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Sure limit it to objects that can consent. How does that make you any better than Rick Santorum?

  • Gabby3992

    I think Ana Sto summed it up perfectly. This was a promotional stunt by an artist, she even says “He understands that I love other bridges – and men”. This article just proves the low intelligence of some, trying to relate a promotional stunt to two grown consenting adults actually getting married… scraping the bottom of the barrel here!!

  • Homophobes=Morons
  • Leo_Pusateri

    What a looneytoon…

  • Emily G.

    Last time I checked… bridges can’t talk, or consent…
    I’m PRETTY sure that this woman marrying a bridge is completely irrelevant to the subject of same sex marriage.
    “Oh geez! The gays can get married now. That means people are going to start marrying animals, inanimate objects, and children!”
    What?- I truly hope most people realize that animals, inanimate objects, and children aren’t CONSENTING ADULTS.

  • Fred Gottshalk

    Take away her welfare, food stamps and any other state sponsored benefit.
    LET THE BRIDGE SUPPORT HER!! Pun intended. I hope that it is a strong bridge.

  • GOPhater

    That totally f**ked up…weird!

  • MsBitchhands

    A bridge is a non sentient object incapable of entering into a legal contract. This woman has a specific fetish, but the bridge is incapable of incurring liability or making decisions in any way. Her ceremony, though unusual, is her personal expression of her desires and fetishes, but it is NOT a legal wedding and never could be.

    To lump this in with homosexuality and trans* people using the “slippery slope” analogy is not only ignorant, it’s completely baseless.

    Homosexuals and Trans* people are HUMAN BEINGS that are capable of making legal contracts, assuming liability, and understanding the myriad of responsibilities that are required to create a marriage and a life.

    Completely unfunny homophobic, transphobic, sensationalist tripe!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I’m sorry that you’re not willing to get behind Marriage Equality based on your hangups.

      But we’re going into the 21st century now.

  • Tine

    Jave your journalists nothing better to do???

  • Daniel Greenfield

    Only if you reject Marriage Equality with a narrow minded definition of marriage.