Debriefing: a wedding

But, dittany, if men are to be convicted of rape, then surely it is important what other people (the jury) think about it?

I agree totally that the majority of rapes are within relationships.
I agree that they should rapists should be punished.
I think part of the reason they get away with it is because if a couple are already in a sexual relationship and are living at close quarters it can be difficult to prove rape took place.
Nothing more to add.

dittany.
Rape in marriage is illegal-and rightly so.
But could there be reasons for the low conviction rates other than people taking the view of 'They're married. He can have sex with her whenever he likes'?
Perhaps the reason for the low conviction rates is difficulty proving the rape took place.
If two people are in bed together (as married people usually are) and the man rapes his wife, it can be perhaps difficult to prove it was NOT unconsensual.
Perhaps people are thinking, 'Yes, he did rape her. But how to prove it given the circumstances' ?
If this is the case, how to alter things?
I do not know.

I also do not see that marriage has to be patriarchal. If two people are in a equal, everything fair, straight-down-the-middle, respectful relationship, signing a piece-of-paper (marriage) is not necessarily going to change the nature of that relationship.

I just don't get this OP to be honest.

"during the speeches she looked very uncomfortable. I have never seen her so quiet and when it was clear that she didn?t like what was being said"

This is sad, but it is not the norm. I loved the speeches at our wedding.

"it seemed very strange that there was no opportunity for her to own the floor in her own style"

Plenty of brides make speeches. Nothing was stopping your friend except her own choice.

"(tall, handsome, very rich, in a very well paying job) ... this sort of man seems almost inevitably to bring the expectations that his wife will take a very traditional and subservient role"

Rubbish. I know plenty of such "top of the pecking order" men - including my own DH - who do not expect this. On the contrary, they tend to want an equally successful wife who they will have more in common with. Your friend's DH is just a sexist tosser, it's got nothing to do with how successful he is.

Seems to me it's not that you don't like weddings. It's that you don't like this particular man.

I agree that much of the history and traditions surrounding weddings is sexist. However, it is possible to strip that away and retain a central basic concept which is not sexist: marriage is a promise to form a partnership with someone, to stay with them no matter what, and to try to do your best by them.

marantha, you say marriage is 'objectively' a legal construct. I have explained to you that for me and DH (as for many people), the legal issue was not relevant. If we'd had the choice, we'd not have bothered with the legal bit at all. If we'd 'only' been married in church, would you try to say we weren't really married?

I don't disagree agree with you, dittany, about the middle east and ownership of women.
I think we are fortunate in the UK not to experience this.
But if there is an element of oppression still alive in marriage in the UK today,
I think it is more down to the interpersonal relationship of the couple involved -who holds the purse strings and so on, than the fact of the marriage itself.
After all, it is very much possible to be in oppressive 'living apart' relationships and cohabiting relationships.

I agree with you, dittany that it was invented for less pleasant reasons than love and I think it was invented for more hard-headed reasons like financial/ property ownership than any romantic notions.

LoudRowdyDuck,
I appreciate fully that to some people marriage is a religious thing- don't deny it and good luck to them.
Just as to some people it is a way of getting a better social position in life.
Just as for some people it is a way of making a big occasion of a wedding and showing off.

But the point is this: the above is each individual person's interpretation -for want of a better word- of what marriage is.

And nothing wrong with the three interpretations of marriage above- I'm not sitting in judgement, each to his own.

But there is no getting away from the fact that from an objective viewpoint marriage is a legal construct.
It is the one thing that is common to the three examples above (at least in UK).

It is the one thing that is common to a couple who get married for £100 or 100k or a couple who are marrying for convenience or, indeed, a couple who marrying out of pure love and devotion.

Well, I'm a Catholic and the RC wedding service doesn't have 'who gives this woman' or 'obey' in the vows, they are identical for men and women and are about loving and cherishing.

As marriage in the RC church is a sacrament (I'm not about to debate the truth of that one or not!) it's not so much about property or chattels it's more of a coming together to be one with God.

I was told by my priest that the white dress was nothing to do with virginity but signified the purity of God's love, so the thing about the Victorians and display of wealth is quite interesting! (I was 25, btw so was that ok for my ivory medievally-beaded dress? The bridesmaids wore sea-green Laura Ashley...)

At the wedding breakfast DH and I made a speech jointly and gave out prezzies to those who'd helped us organise things. Our best man is terminally shy so he said "I read a book about what the BM is supposed to say, and apparently I have to thank the bridesmaids and compliment them. So, thank you, Bridesmaids, you all look beautiful!" and sat down again. My dad is another non-public speaker so he mumbled a bit and sat down.

I didn't take DH's name officially for ages, it was only when I finally reached the end of my tether with my toxic father that I decided I'd use it instead of his...

I do dislike the industry that weddings seem to have become in the last 10 yrs or so (been married for 20 and did it Up North so seem to have escaped the horror of matching ribbons and wedding favours to the 'theme') and I can't help but feel that these mahoosive over the top displays are not so much about the couple's love for each other as their/their parents' social standing, but each to their own.

I too would be interested to know why the 'dynamic, active, imaginative and intelligent' woman chose to go along with a service and reception like that?

Did people hold crowns over her head?

I learn something new every day.

No, just Russian Orthodox wedding. 'Tis traditional.

LoudRowdyDuck, are you Mary Queen of Scots?

Nice.

My bridesmaids were already worrying about holding a metal crown over my head for half an hour - they had enough to do!

But we digress.

I do think that the fact that details like these aren't something you can easily erase from weddings, though.

I had bridesmaids to worry about the logistics. I was more worried about looking dreamlike!

Btw, was a cathedral-length veil not incredibly awkward? I would be so nervous about tripping over the thing!

at boffin.

Well, I am quite happy to cover my head and have no problem with it - but I knew damn well I wasn't wearing a veil! But then I had MN to teach me to think about these things.

I had a bit of a salutary moment when I realised that the anti-scarf me, the anti-burqa me, the anti-hijab me, had happily swanned into church to get married wearing a cathedral length veil. Yes, I had covered myself symbolically and not even noticed.

Luckily I am not allowed to be subservient at home.

I agree with that post, vezzie.

I also think that while the legal implications of marriage are important, and for many people the primary reason for marrying, they're just not the focus for some. DH and I, as it happens, had to be married in the registry office because his church won't perform the religious ceremony if the legal contract isn't already in place (this is for immigration reasons - you don't want any confusion over legal status if your church deals largely with foreign nationals). But if we hadn't had to do the legal bit, I doubt we'd have bothered shelling out for it. We'd just have had the religious ceremony.