I'm not understanding the whole wedding/engagement business

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not against getting married as in committing the rest of your life with another person, but:

1. An engagement ring is meant to show that a woman already belongs to (i.e., is a possession of) and is therefore off-limits. Men themselves do not wear engagement rings. Why is this acceptable?

2. Why does popular culture show women as being surprised/hysterics when the man she's been dating gets down on one knee? Especially if you've been in a long-term relationship, shouldn't marriage be something you've discussed and therefore not be as surprising?

3. Why do people think a man is a gentleman for asking a woman's father permission to marry, as if she can't decide on her own? Why does the tradition of a father "giving away" his daughter at a wedding ceremony still exist? On a related note, why is it considered feminist to keep your father's last name instead of taking your husband's last name where the choice really is between belonging to one man or belonging to another man?

4. Why do people seem to reject the idea that a wedding, at the end of the day, is just one big party and probably a waste of money that could've gone to your savings account? Why spend so much on a dress you'll wear once? What about the money AND time that goes into planning pre-wedding stuff? From what I've heard people are struggling with student loans and credit card debts. If a wedding is only the beginning of your life together, why spend most of your money on it?

i'm not complaining about an extra ring haha oops

movies are romanticized versions of life and not to be taken seriously. sometimes it can be a surprise though, i'm sure. i wouldn't want it to be a surprise in my life though.

feels on this one...but it can get complicated. i think that a woman should take whichever name she chooses. i also know women who choose to use their mother's surname if she has her own, which of course was probably her mother's father's but there's no changing history. personally, if i end up marrying my boyfriend i would consider taking his last name because i like it and coincidentally, it is a word which describes me pretty well. but i also would consider keeping my father's name because the newest generation of his family line are all female and so it could possibly die out if no one keeps it.

people like parties. this is something i don't feel myself but can understand for others. its more than just a party too, its a tradition. and it makes people feel special. plus i used to make a decent amount of money as a wedding photographer's assistant, so again, i'm not complaining if i were to get married i would consider having a small ceremony and cheap after party with immediate family and a few close friends, and i'd probably get a relatively cheap but pretty dress, maybe black lol.

i would only decide to be married if the legal benefits of being married would make it worthwhile and if i felt strongly about the marriage being successful. after all, marriage is just a legal contract with lots of social and religious baggage.

People don't care about the history of things. They like pretty trinkets and parties.

That's basically it when it comes to why people keep all the traditional elements.

I guess some people like "tradition" because...it's fun and makes them feel like part of something bigger than themselves. Like putting up a Christmas tree, which I still do even though I'm an atheist. However, I avoid putting blatant religious imagery or Santa Claus stuff on it these days. And I really don't like the sexist and conspicuous-consumption traditions around weddings, so my fiancé and I got each other a pair of matching cheap wedding-type rings for our engagement, since these days both sexes usually wear wedding rings, at least.

In practice, it is. But it's all just a part of the show, where you show how happy you are about the engagement, and perhaps in more "traditional" relationships the man is supposed to get to decide just when the official engagement starts, even if they've been talking about it for months.

I don't know anyone personally who still asked the woman's dad, and was shocked that people still do that. The giving away thing makes me cringe, but like the whole theater of engagement, it's supposed to be this huge sentimental moment and part of the fun of tradition in the vein of Christmas. As for names...well...clearly the most feminist thing would be to have both change their names to something totally unrelated to either of their parents, but given that some 85% of American women still take their husband's last name for tradition's or convenience's sake or other reasons (maybe a beef with their dad), to not do so is still considered a kind of statement even though your birth last name was in all probability your father's. Symbolically, it's saying that you are not changing your fundamental social identity by being married, regardless of how problematic that social identity was before.

That's why my fiancé and I plan to skip all that and do a courthouse wedding. But once again, think Christmas, Chanukah, birthdays, Independence Day, and other festivals. Do you and your relatives need all those stupid presents you buy each other? No. Do you need to buy a ton of pretty paper you're going to toss later and put up a ton of ornaments? No. But people do it because it's fun and makes them feel integrated into society. Weddings are a festival akin to birthdays. They kind of represent a social birth into a new phase of life that may lead to birth or adoption of other human beings. And many people want this festival and want it to be exciting and socially successful so badly that they are willing to spend what should have been half the down payment of a house or condo on it. I, for one, am trying to buy an actual condo in advance of marriage and build up contingency savings, and agree with you that shelling out on all this stuff is stupid. Plus my fiancé and I almost saw my future brother-and-law break up with his soon-to-be wife over their wedding planning. So we're happy to avoid the stress and strain of this festival.

I am male and I wear an engagement ring. Purely because I see the ring as a sign of commitment and love, not possession. So it only seems fitting we should both have a ring.



My Fiance knew the question was coming, we had discussed marriage (as one should), but she didn't know exactly when I would ask.



I didn't ask my fiances fathers permission (he doesn't seem to have taken issue with this). He is not her owner.



Agreed. Weddings are expensive and annoying and who really spends $4,000 on a dress to wear once? Eloping is a much better option. Way cheaper to start with and I mean who really wants to go to a wedding anyway? Most people only attend because they "have" to. Spare them and elope! Save the money for a house deposit or at least enjoy it on your honeymoon. A marriage is about 2 people, not all the family and friends and an open bar.

So what happens if you are both women? Do you both stay standing? Also, what about if you are both men? Do you both get down on one knee? That would be awkward. [I'm not really being serious here, since the mental images are quite funny to picture.]

Each to there own...

Doesn't matter, man and women, 2 men, 2 women, ND/NT they should do what they feel is right for them and there relationship (as everyone is different). Or it could possibly be which ever asks first. I know of women who have proposed to men, and I don't see an issue with it.

I kinda think of the engagement ring as a kind of dowry aswell like the guy is saying I'm so committed to marrying you I'm willing to spend 3 months wages on a ring.

Also I think women cry from happiness when they finally see the ring.

As for the asking for hand I see that as a kind of respect. Like whoever is the head of the family. My mother and father raised me so asking for their permission for my hand would show he respects the family I come from.


As for the wedding to me it is the joining of two people and a way for you to commit to each other in love, religion and law. The the big party afterwards is to celebrate the love the couple has.

I'm hoping to have a hand tieing ceremony when I hopefully one day get married because the symbolism of being joined to one another

When you're not in love and can't imagine ever having that kind of happiness all the traditions around weddings just seems fake. A whole load of fuss and expense for nothing.

I've always been a romantic and symbolic. But I have to admit that my being in love may colour my opinion. My thing is more about family, I have a big family and want them to celebrate with me

I crushed so hard on a few guys and felt ruined when they rejected me or used me and felt I would never find love. Its weird when you meet someone you are actually in love with and they love you. Its like you see the future in that person I know you will find that.

Even so marriage just doesn't mean as much to some people and that's ok . My friend is in love and still just wants to elope instead of a big party.

1.Some men do wear engagement rings. Sometimes it's more like an engagement wrist band or cufflinks or a dog tag. Sometimes couples wear an engagement tattoo. A modern interpretation for this could be that the couple is declaring that they belong to each other.

It may have its roots in biblical slavery but it doesn't mean it has to mean that today.

2. People can still be excited even if they have discussed marriage with their partner. They might have an idealised image of how they want their engagement to go. I've heard that some couples with organise a "surprise" engagement (the same way that Bender in Futurama rehearsed his funeral). It might not be a surprise, per se, but some people like to have a fuss made over them and want to engage in a ritual like this. It has a lot of social capital, I suppose. People like outrageous romantic displays for some reason.

3. Again, this is rooted in this biblical notion of one's daughter being property. However in a modern context, it is important to ask for the blessing of the in laws because they're going to be part of your family and it's important for both families to be on good terms. Again, the idea of a father "giving his daughter away" can be reinterpreted as a supportive and loving father embracing and blessing the love between his daughter and son/daughter in law.

It's also not feminist or anti feminist to take the husbands name. It has its roots in nefarious practices, but that doesn't mean it is nefarious in and of itself. You don't legally have to take your husband's name. A few of my friends have their mothers last name or a hyphenated name. Some people take their step father's name because ther biological father was a dick. All families are different and all marriages are different.

4. Because that's precisely what it is - a big party for you, your family and your spouses family. It's supposed to be a day where you can be totally indulgent and over the top because why not? You're gonna be stuck together so you might as well start it was a bang. Yes it is a total waste of money and it is mostly meaningless but what better way to waste money than with the people you love? That's really what it's about. It's all about the experience (and the food and the gifts and the hundreds of pictures that will be taken).

I like this quote

I do aswell

IMO, and from a combination of time and observation, it seems to boil down to: "it's VERY profitable"...

Just look at all the movies - quite possibly, literally, ALL the movies in existence, except a few niche/independent ones - which have, whether as their focus or as a subplot, some form of romance between a man and a woman (placing non-heterosexual romances aside for the time being). By the end of that film, no matter what else has been going down, there will be, at the very least, a kiss or a date, or some form of implication that "something is going to happen" between these two. The whole engagement/wedding song and dance is simply a culmination of that trope, and one which happens to make a buttload of money, with the all-important promise of a "happily ever after". I'm in no way suggesting that it's all a big farce for those who do it, people do genuinely get married for love, just strongly think that the very specific way in which it's all done suggests a great deal of societal expectation and a certain level of cultural conditioning. Diamonds, silver, gold, silk, lace, gifts, food, alcohol... is it purely chance that these are all purchased in abundance?

Also, not to mention the promise of the pitter patter of tiny new future contributors to society.

Why yes, however did you guess? I once was engaged and split up a few months before the wedding...

When it comes to getting married, everything except the marriage license is OPTIONAL. You can do (or not do) whatever you like. Some people follow traditions because they enjoy them, others do it because they're just not very imaginative, or because they're conformists, or because their relatives pressure them into it. But it's all completely optional, and you'll be just as married whether you do any of it or not.

It's really only been recently in western society that marriages have been so big and flashy etc.
When I was growing up the weddings were "Bring a plate, hire a hall, have a party/dance". (Bring a plate = shared meal/potluck dinner). It was more about sharing the day with your friends and family. Gifts were about helping the couple get set up - bedding, appliances etc - very practical. Nowadays, quite different.