As for this stuff with Gaijin, it seems he is seeing this from a Japanese point of view. He's not talking about how an American society does it - he's saying Japanese society handles it differently. The Japanese consider verbal contracts to be binding just as we consider written ones to.
> He Is. Very much so.
In this situation Ukyo and Ranma's fathers would be forced by society, since it is established that they did have such a contract, to discuss it and come to a satisfactory agreement. Ukyo and Ranma have nothing to do with it legally (though they can do what they like themselves), since the contract is between their fathers. Because it's not being fulfilled, they should be bound to sorting it out themselves in a peaceful fashion. Unless they want to take it to court - which as Gaijin mentioned is a Bad Thing in Japan.
> I do so love understatement.
On a somewhat related note, am I the only person who despises the word "claim" in this context?[/quote]
>*snerk*
Isn't _quite_ right, anyways.
Basically, I'll take the "three" primary "fiancees" in order
Shan Pu: She's a chinese. You're kidding, right? She's got NO claim in Japanese eyes. To be cold, she HAS no claim.
Ukyo: I get the impression that the agreement was between FATHERS.
not clan heads, nor families, nor schools.
She's got some possible giri in Ranma's eyes (with or without the dowry)
but... that's wiped becasue SHE REFUSED THE ENGAGEMENT.
It's dead, chums. When she stated (Viz, NPR, orginal sorce all have the same vaule meaning) that she was NOT there for the engagement and attacked Genma FIRST (as was right), she negated the engagment.
No engagement there, boyos.
Which, leaves the Tendos.
EOS.
(ANY Tendo. Ranma has NOT by WORDS chosen a fiancee.)
Andrew


