How valid is Ukyo's engagement?

[antimatterenergy]

A thread I recently read made me think about the validity of Ukyo's engagement. The way I see it this engagement can be considered invalid in a number of ways.
First I'll start with the simplest, Ranma's dad claimed that he told Ukyo's dad that Ranma was already engaged. Therefore Ukyo's dad knew ranma was unable to be engaged with someone else and pushed it on Genma anyways. Of course we only have Genma's word on this.
Second possible way that this engagement can be considered invalid. Ukyo had put up her dowry in a bet and lost it (doesn't matter if the person was cheating).
Third if this was a modern Omiai, as it appears to have been the people involved get a say as to whether they will marry the person or not (in a traditional omiai they are generally married at their first or second meeting with no say in the matter). If Genma really did ask Ranma which he preferred Ukyo or that food item Ukyo always makes which name I can't recall at the moment and Ranma really did choose the food over Ukyo it can be considered as ranma vetoing the Omiai. If Gemna really didn't ask Ranma that since Ranma can't remember the incident in question the only real reason he would have for making that story up besides making Ranma look bad is to cover his own ass. Though it is entirely possible that Ukyo and her father saw it as a traditional Omiai and not a modern one.
Fourth Ukyo gave up her claim on the engagement instead she wanted revenge. When she defeated Genma she even stated that she wasn't there to marry Ranma she wanted revenge. The fact that Genma took the beating instead of running away or defeating Ukyo (both would be in character for him) is also telling. Since she defeated Genma and got her revenge her honor would of been restored all Ranma had to do was let Ukyo defeat him and then get on with her life. Ukyo would have seen it as having her honor fully restored and would have gone home.
The fact that Ranma's dad stole her dowry does not validate the engagement all it does is show that Genma is a thief and it was more a crime of opportunity then planned out. (pretend to go along with it to get the cart then run no real planning and probably figured that Ukyo's dad would just call the police and forget the entire thing about an engagement since it would be to much of an embarrassment to admit that he was going to engage his daughter to a thief)
What does validate the engagement is Ranma calling her his fiancee and no one stating straight out that the engagement isn't valid but Genma did leave himself a way out. Ranma probably does consider it valid as well as most of the cast. Amazons probably don't care one way or another, most of the cast were not told all the details only knowing that Genma engaged Ranma to her, Ranma's mom probably doesn't see a problem (marry Akane and take all the rest as mistress's is probably her line of thinking). The only one who seems to know that it isn't valid is Genma and he doesn't seem to want to do anything about it instead leaving it all to Ranma.

[Innortal]

Okay, good points.
Now, the counter points.
Cart: While Ukyo did lose it, it was not really hers to lose. One cannot gamble away something they don't have. Since the cart was still her fathers, the Gambling King could only claim it when it came into Ukyo's possession. As such, it could only be collected from her when she married Ranma and Genma died. Then, it would have fallen to hers as property. Since Genma lives, and it was gievn to him as dowry, then their is no claim on it.
Revenge: Revenge was added in part of the agreement after Genma ran away. She cannot return to her clan unless the Saotomes are dead, or she becomes one. So, she can choose one or the other.
Father: Truthfully, Father Kuonji should have been the one seeking revenge, not her; which makes her father as bad as Genma in my opinion for fostering off his responsibilities onto his children. As such, we also have the story of the agreement that was never disputed by either side, showing that both parties knew the agreement was dishonoring a previous one. Therefore, we have a revenge arc for a dishonorable agreement, to retain honor. I have yet to see a parent in that series not missing a few coconuts from the palm tree.
Following these, Ukyo has as much as a valid engagement as the others.

[Zwzn]

Okay, good points.
Now, the counter points.
Cart: While Ukyo did lose it, it was not really hers to lose. One cannot gamble away something they don't have. Since the cart was still her fathers, the Gambling King could only claim it when it came into Ukyo's possession. As such, it could only be collected from her when she married Ranma and Genma died. Then, it would have fallen to hers as property. Since Genma lives, and it was gievn to him as dowry, then their is no claim on it.

Going by this reasoning Ranma never lost the dojo.
(edit)It is likely also that both fathers did not know of the loss of the cart to the Gambling King. So the spirit of the agreement is still in tact.
(edit) Also by taking the cart Genma could be said as making Ukyo's claim more valid then Akane's.
(edit)Ukyo could be said to have a thriving restaurant as the replacement dowry.

[antimatterenergy]

About Revenge. By Ukyo stating that she doesn't want to marry Ranma and saying that she wants revenge that can be interpreted to mean that she has given up on the engagement. Therefore nulifying it from her side.
Ukyo was able to gamble away the cart in the same way that Ranma gambled away the tendo dojo. Niether belonged to them but it seems by Soun's reaction that they took it as being valid. If the gambling king had been honest and did not cheat Ukyo's father would have had to honor the debt or convince the gambling king to take something else therefore Ukyo was actually able to lose the cart before it was part of her dowry.
Yes Ukyo really doesn't have anything to say about it one way or the other just like Ranma has no real say in the matter. It in truth is a dispute between Ukyo's father and Genma and they should deal with it. Personally I think the Ukyo's father just didn't want to raise Uyko. By giving Ukyo to Genma he wouldn't have to and by having Ukyo be and dress like a boy he wouldn't have to deal with raising a girl. It also makes a good excuse for Ukyo's dad when ever something is not going his way he could say something like it was Uyko's fault that Genma and Ranma left and use that to guilt trip her. Anyways it seems that Ukyo was more interested in revenge and hurt by Genma's actions than her dad ever really was.

[Dragonboy]

Question: Has Ranma ever actually REFERRED to Ukyo as his fiancee in the series before, unless it was to tease Akane with? (i.e. 'She's the cute fiancee, and you're the uncute fiancee') I know there were several times when he openly called Akane his fiancee (Ice-skating episode being the most memorable) but to my knowledge he's never done anything like that with Ukyo or Shampoo. When Tsubasa or Konatsu show up he never says 'Sorry pal, she's MY fiancee.' nor does he do the same for Shampoo with Mousse.
Honor and obligations or not, if Ranma won't even admit to it, the 'engagments' barely even exist, because for all of their talk, no one, including his parents, could make Ranma marry someone if he absolutely refused.

[nuclear death frog]

Ranma's mom probably doesn't see a problem (marry Akane and take all the rest as mistress's is probably her line of thinking).

No, that is not her line of thinking.
That is a fanon line of thinking which has nothing whatsoever to do with Nodoka as shown in the manga.
Nodoka as shown in the manga is completely oblivious to Ranma having more than one girl after his hand romantically (she refers to the other girls as Ranma's friends even when sitting around the table with them); and is not obsessed with Ranma having mistresses or giving her many grandchildren -- she never refers to EITHER of those even *once* in the manga. Nodoka is, in fact, even more prudish than Akane is. Just look at the Bust Battle arc (vol. 34)

[TerraEpon]

There is at least one point in the manga where Nodoka is hoping Ranma is peeing at Akane, because it's manly....it's likely that that Akane is his fiancee that it's manly, but I'm almost positive it's there.
That's prudish?
-Joshua

[nuclear death frog]

And what about her trying to slash the perceived pervert apart with her katana, eh?

[antimatterenergy]

After thinking about Ranma's mom for a little while and rereading part of the manga with her in it. I've come to the conclusion that she is anti-pervert and a bit of a prude generally. Though since Ranma and Akane are fiancees she expects and even encourage that they be (as Akane would say) perverted with each other. I have no idea if she even knows that the other girls are fiancees/psuedo fiancees (Shampoo is by amazon law his wife not a fiancee to make it offical all they'd have to do is probably sleep with each other, Ukyo's claim is on somewhat shaky ground, and Kodachi has no semi-official claim but could probably get one from Genma when ever she wanted. I think she did in one of the anime episodes). So after thinking about it I have no idea what her reaction would be but I wouldn't rule out her deciding they are to be misstress/second wives because it used to be common in samurai families for a guy to have a mistress/concubine and even looked as a good thing since the wife could split the duties of taking care of the house and kids. Also the guy would generally be more devoted in those types of situations. But that isn't common in Japan anymore but Nodoka seems old fashioned enough to have that way of thinking.

[Yarrow]

There is at least one point in the manga where Nodoka is hoping Ranma is peeing at Akane, because it's manly....

Strange woman, that Nodoka.

[Zwzn]

There is at least one point in the manga where Nodoka is hoping Ranma is peeing at Akane, because it's manly....

Strange woman, that Nodoka.

It seems fairly close to canon that she is about as sane as a Kuno.

[Innortal]

The whole family, sadly Ranma included, is mostly of the "do as I say, not as I do" approach.

[Zwzn]

The whole family, sadly Ranma included, is mostly of the "do as I say, not as I do" approach.

I don't recall Ranma ever telling people how they should live. So when was this?

[WarGiver]

The validity of the engagement is ultimately in the eyes of others. If a guy proposes to 2 diferent women of his own accord and can only marry one, it does not affect the fact that he has 2 fiancees. So Genma's intention to not honor it and as a crime of the moment is moot. When Ukyo did show up she DID refer to Genma as 'father' this could be taken to her willingness to uphold her part ot the pact.
The gambling king really does not fit into this, if it does and is used to annull Ukyo's claim, then the Tendo claim would have to be anulled as well, since Ranma was to get it, just as Ukyo and he would get her cart from Genma. Thus using that logic Shampoo is the only real fiancee (Takahashi had backup plans for that).
As to Ukyo's actions when she showed up... the phrase 'Jilted Lover' comes to mind.
In reference to Ranma calling Ukyo his fiancee, I think he did, but I can not reference it, so I might be in error.
(aside, supporting information to next point)
Nodoka's knowledge of the curse and how she learned of it definately shows she could figure it out even with people trying to keep it from her. The final part of where she learned of it shows she has an open mind and deductive reasoning. The kettle vs the water it contains is a small error on her part, she figured out the curse then, which was before she actually saw it.
(end aside)
I bring this up to show that she must have some knowledge about the fiancee mess. I would almost suspect that the pillbox event was a game on her part. She is too traditional to do anything if she knew, but I am certain she does.
This leads to my point. Despite knowing about the fiancee mess, when she met the fiancees (assuming that they told her, as Kodachi seemed to intend to do), was too close to the end of the manga for any concrete evidence of her opinions to show up. its all just speculation. But Takashi did show that Nodoka was smarter then she outwardly would appear.

[Togashi Gaijin]

War's got good points - which leads up to this observation:
Americans spend a great deal of time trying to determine if something is valid by applying legal rules and concepts - we believe in the Rule Of Law as a determining factor, and we tend to use the legal system as a *first* resort when resolving disputes. Our entire society views the legal system as the upholder and enforcement of social and business agreements - which in general must be In Writing And Witnessed to have validity.
To the typical Japanese, the court system is the *LAST* place to go. Bringing something up in court is an admission of failure in a very basic and fundimental manner - it's admitting that the very society has failed them. Verbal contracts are considered morally and socially binding, and an entire network of informal arbitration exists to resolve disputes without involving the legal system if at all possible.
Business contracts for companies of *all* sizes are done verbally. Social contracts are done verbally. Any written agreement done is considered binding - informally - because everyone expects that if a dispute *DOES* arise, the contract will be used simply as a starting point for cooperative compromise. Both sides are expected to uphold any agreement, but to bend equally when disputes arise.
Are Genma's various "engage Ranma" deals legit? In Japan - absolutely.
-Togashi Gaijin-