Feminist analysis of the royal wedding

I found the bit about being blessed with children blah blah blah a bit antiquated (rarely go to church weddings these days and had forgotten how much emphasis there is on reproduction) but the bit that made me nearly fall off my chair was a reference to "handmaiden". Farkin' hell what was that all about?!

On the whole I think church wedding is always going to be the epitmony(sp??) of patriarchy by it's very nature so didn't expect any better.

For those who asked: no, didn't have a church wedding. Was not given away and I wrote our own vows. And the celebrant was a woman but that was just because she was the closest humanist celebrant to the venue who could make it. Wouldn't have been bothered if it had been a man.

Did wear white dress but no veil. I thought Kate's dress was beautiful and I loved the John Rutter music (only bit I would've had at my wedding but having a choir almost as big as the congragation would have been a bit odd).

We had many traditional elements in our wedding. My Dad did give me away, but it was very much more me leading him down the aisle to where I was going to acquire my husband.
I wish I'd made a speech though.
It took some strength of will to convince the women at the dress shop that no, I wouldn't be wearing heels. And then I even started growing my nails in the run up, but quickly got over that little bit of conditioning.
DH wears a ring though, this is a mutual arrangement.

I wasn't thinking about feminism at the time though, who knows how different it would be if we were doing it now.

it is creepy.
and the fact that some people feel it is perfectly normal is even creepier.

it's the touches of Quaker in our upbringing PrinceH.

"We walked up the aisle together - I can't imagine doing it differently. It would make it seem like an arranged marriage"

That's fine, you had the wedding you wanted - I know that nothing would keep our DD from having her dad walk her up the aisle, please don't use insulting words like creepy for a situation that most people feel is perfectly normal.
I know several women who would have given anything for their Dad to have given them away, had they been alive.

I actually don't know how anyone can bear to have words spoken at their wedding that they don't mean. It takes away the integrity from the event. If it's only religious gobbledegook then don't have a church wedding!

"So did none of you have a traditonal type wedding then, did your dads not give you away at the altar?"

Hell no. I don't think my dad would have been any more comfortable with that idea than me. Sure, he's proud of my academic, professional, sporting achievements etc.. My wedding was just a public acknowledgement of a legal and social contract between me and H. It's a good excuse for a party but I don't see why anyone should be "proud".

PS My earlier point on this thread re the name issue was a total misunderstanding. I wrongly thought that Justine Thornton and Ed Miliband were already married and she had insisted on being addressed by her own name on the wedding invite while everyone else was happy to be Mrs John Jones. I've now been reliably informed that Miliband/Thornton only announced their intention to get married so her title in the invite list is just a reflection of her single status. I thought she was being modern and brave...

Do they train the vicars to talk in that monotone so we become hypnotised and tune out the actual words with our conscious minds?

we did same as you PrinceHumperdink. There was no way on earth I would have taken part in the theatre of 'giving away', much as I love my dad. Fortunately he had never particularly dreamed of giving his daughter away and didn't have a problem with it.

No more DontDoItKatie, it's too late for that now. It's "She has made her bed and now she must lie in it". In fact she seems positively enthusiastic about doing exactly that, so good luck to her. Love it or hate it, the system keeps going because everyone cooperates.

Perhaps because most people see religious gobbledegook as the utter nonsense it is and don't give any credence to it?

I love the idea that because Kate looks lovely there is simply no more to be said. Do you think if she hadn't looked pretty a feminist critique would be allowed?

Jenny, perhaps there was some intent behind the engagement ring?

That was at the prayer Aye quoted.

So did none of you have a traditonal type wedding then, did your dads not give you away at the altar?
I really don't feel there is anything remotely wrong with having your father perform this wedding duty, very few, if any people in this day and age, would see it as him handing over his property.

I can't wait until the day my DH gives our DD away on her wedding day, why can't you see it for what it is? - a beautiful and proud moment.