Marry me.Originally Posted by Clo
(I couldn't resist the irony)
Marry me.
(I couldn't resist the irony)
Everything is pointless, unless you give meaning to it.
In any case, I find weddings, marriage, and every other aspect of the ceremony to ideally be a way for two parties to express themselves as individuals and as a couple, intertwine their families (or friends), and their hopes for their union. I think it's quite lovely. Whether or not it becomes more about the bling and glitz than it is about the emotions and union is not the fault of the ceremony in and of itself.
Of course not. But the ceremony also doesn't add anything to it, in and of itself.
The fact that there even are such arbitrary ceremonies is centered, historically, around religion and god's approval, because without that then you couldn't have sex or start a family. I don't give a crap about religion, god, society, or anyone else thinks about my relationship, so it is meaningless.
Even more mind-boggling to me is that it is characterized as some sort of commitment, as if the relationship is not fully serious and legitimate until magic words are said over you -- man, you sure can't do that without really being serious! Again, this makes sense for the people who require god's or the church's approval (though that requirement doesn't, of course). But without that, why is it any sort of commitment? The decision to move in together, to buy a house together, to have kids together: those are commitments, which as far as I'm concerned are what deserve celebration. Besides, any couple who hasn't already committed to each other by the time the magic words are said over them is in a very immature relationship.
I am not saying that the emotions involved are not valuable and shouldn't be recognized and even celebrated. My objection is to the requirements of the modern form of that celebration, and to the meaning society gives to what is really an arbitrary event.
I can only conclude that so many people continue to value this primitive, superstitious view of marriage because they are brainwashed from birth that it is valuable. The worst offense, of course, is that it is considered so valuable that the government has to take a hand in it, to define and regulate it. But that is another topic.
Well, yeah. Ideally, it's about just a celebration of commitment and union, not sudden commitment and union. The bastardization of these ideals have nothing to do with the ceremony (which is a loose term anyway, as there are so MANY kind of ceremonies, from huge family religious gatherings of the types you are talking about, to small secular personal celebrations among friends and peers), but rather to do with the people who participate in them.
This is what I think, as well. I don't know a single friend who has been "proposed to" (and I know both males and females, actually) that hasn't already discussed wanting to be married and have already committed to one another. Of course that commitment is more important than the actual engagement or proposal. The proposal is more of a story to tell. It has the same value as any other shared event or memory that is special for the couple.
I'm such a study in conflict on this. I like symbols. I don't think I want an engagement ring, ever, unless the other person has one too. It feels too much like a claim to me. I don't want to be claimed.
Even so, my great-grandmother left her wedding set to me when she died. For a long time I left them in a jewelry box because I didn't want anything bad to happen to them. I got older, I went through things, and I thought a lot about their commitments to each other. I haven't seen a single successful relationship since theirs, in my family. I wear her wedding set now, just to remind myself that anything worth doing takes devotion and hard work. Do I need the rings to remind myself of that? Nah. But it's nice to be surprised by that reminder.
BUT I WANT THOSE KNUCKLE DUSTERS SO BAD. If I ever meet someone I want to spend forever with, I'm going to send him to you guys and you'll give him notes and remind him, right? Right. Good.
Signature by rubah. I think.
Holy smurf this thread is annoying. Shut the smurf up already.
How exactly is it annoying?
Several people consistently whining and insisting that a certain ceremony here or there is pointless is pretty damn annoying. If you don't like it, that's cool, but insisting that it is absolutely pointless is pretty much missing the entire point, seeing as each wedding ceremony or engagement can be, and should be, tailored to the people that are having it. Last time I checked there isn't a list of rules of what a wedding can, should, or must be.
Apparently we're committing the mortal sin of discussing an issue he doesn't care about. How terrible of us.
Yeah, okay.
That's what my post was.
Am in agreement with Bunny and I think you are missing his point.
I think the main annoyance here is that there is serious type casting of the very large category of "Wedding Ceremony" into that one specific contrived/shallow/traditional/whatever ceremony where the man always takes the initiative, the woman is always the blushing virgin bride, etc. That's so not what it's like and you're ignoring an enormous culture of marriage that turns their back on the traditions they dislike and creates a ceremony to represent themselves and their families. They acknowledge wedding doesn't equal COMMITMENT FOREVER, but rather is a celebration amongst loved ones.
Highly recommend Offbeatbride.com, which is a really cool website about all types of different ceremonies. LGBT weddings, women proposing to men, huge ceremonies, private ceremonies, gender-queer ceremonies, secular ceremonies, geek culture, etc. It's about molding your wedding into whatever ceremony you choose to represent your identity. To push all of those type of ceremonies into one "pointless" label is fairly presumptuous.
Links:
Proposing to your Boyfriend
Gender-Neutral Renaissance Fair Wedding
Californian Secular Feminist Casual Wedding
To me a wedding is just as much for the public as it is for the couple. Most people don't take others' relationships seriously if the couple isn't wearing rings. To some, a lack of a wedding ring means single and available, no matter how committed the relationship is.
Also, as long as it doesn't involve the possibility of anybody accidentally swallowing the ring or something, a proposal is good.
Apparently you both missed my point, including where I explicitly stated that I was only talking about the common, modern wedding:
I was not, never have, and never will say all possible forms of any type of ceremony are pointless, and putting that argument in my mouth is rather ridiculous. I was defining marriage and wedding to have their standard, common meaning and practice.
However, I still think it is an interesting question: why is there something called a wedding at all? Why is an arbitrary date where some people decide that they're really really serious (instead of just really serious) more significant than, say, buying a house together or deciding to have kids? I do think there are far more meaningful forms of commitment that are more worth celebrating.
Rye, you posted from OBB!Best site ever. It has some articles on secular weddings that I found useful, and decided I didn't have to cater to the wants of my mostly Mormon family.
Because people, shockingly, have opinions on things that may differ from yours.However, I still think it is an interesting question: why is there something called a wedding at all? Why is an arbitrary date where some people decide that they're really really serious (instead of just really serious) more significant than, say, buying a house together or deciding to have kids? I do think there are far more meaningful forms of commitment that are more worth celebrating.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
