Is the traditional wedding now a preserve of the middle classes?

[mids2019]

I was visiting family, many of whom would be described as traditional working class, and many had children with partners with never considering marriage. The reasons seemed to be that of apathy, thinking marriage was archaic and irrelevant ('piece of paper') and importantly cost which to many young people is exorbitant.

The older generations were in despair for the daughter's without the legal assurance at least of marriage when there are children and also a little sad that would never see their children married possibly with the traditions of walking their daughters down the aisle if a church wedding for instance.

Middle class families I know are cognizant of the fact that marriage legally offers a financial bedrock to a women when starting a family and many with generational wealth can spend money on a wedding that includes all the paraphernalia, dresses, suits, venues, meals, disco......

Has there now become real divides in the way we view marriage?

Weddings today are nothing like they were in the 70s and 80s. People used to have a church/register office then a function room at a rugby club, Labour club, church hall etc. The problem now is that the expectation is very high. The kinds of weddings I’ve been to in recent years, in hotels and country houses, were previously the preserve of the more affluent. My sister got married 8 years ago and her wedding cost over £30,000. They took out bank loans. It’s mad.

I think what concerns me especially from a woman's perspective is that unless a wedding is the full on type then they basically don't want the dry admin of simply registering a marriage which to my mind is not the soundest of advice. Without social pressure I see men using cost to get out of the 'lock' of marriage and a number of young women eventually kind of concede to starting a family as they have been puruaded that marriage like a holiday in the Maldives is out of their financial reach. Also we don't have the same social/religious pressures of yesteryear.

Are you talking about marriage or weddings?

I don't think wanting to get married is specific to a class bracket. However, weddings seem to be getting more expensive all the time. Every wedding I've been to as an adult has cost more than £20,000 (I know because it seems to be the done thing for the couple to discuss it with guests). So I can imagine some people are priced out of having the wedding they want.

We eloped. I highly recommend it. Low cost, no drama, happily married.

I suspect it’s a mix of factors.

First of all, there is now obviously no stigma associated with having children without marriage. That is obviously a good thing. BUT there is the other extreme of people starting relationships and having children without any sign of commitment or concrete plans about the future. And that’s obviously a very bad thing.

Secondly, social media has changed people’s perception of what a normal wedding might look like, with wildly unrealistic expectations.

I also think you need to factor in naivety. I'll be honest, I got married in my early 20s and it certainly wasn't because either of us were in any way savvy. If I think about it: 1) At that point we genuinely didn't believe we would ever split, 2) I think we assumed if we ever did split, we had no reason to believe we wouldn't be amicable and 3) I never intended to stop working so we didn't consider future financial imbalances.

I didn't realise the issues that could arise without the protection of marriage until I was quite a bit older, so it wouldn't surprise me if that's the case for many other people.

Yes, in my experience people don't think about marriage because they won't get the wedding they want so there is an element of why bother (or even shame they can't afford the wedding that they feel is an expectation).

Richard Curtis films abound with images of the archetypal middle class wedding (four weddings and a funeral) and it made me feel that this once universal institution was maybe a middle class event (primarily due to cost).

Maybe there is a need to sell marriage (opposed to weddings) in a post religious society?

There also really seems to a disturbing view that some men believe that fidelity isn't expected without wedlock (you didn't make any vows mate.......). Infidelity obviously had the same emotional impact whether in wedlock or not but it is worrying that some men view a lack of a marriage bond to somehow relieve them of the responsibility of fidelity. Maybe schools should hammer home the message there is no such things as a common law spouse. OK we all know marriages aren't all perfect but there are some basic protections there financially (especially for women).

Some one I know who works in this industry says that the most expensive weddings are chosen by those who you’d think could least afford it. Maybe that creates higher expectations. Plenty of middle class families have modest weddings.

The middle class woman I know have tended more towards the low key, quiet weddings that didn’t cost £40k.
Big weddings are still de rigeur in many other cultures too. Most of my acquaintances are Indian/Pakistani and it’s much harder for them to opt out of the massive events.

Amongst my relatives I know who don't earn huge salaries there is an attitude of 'if it's not a huge traditional event with dresses, cars etc. why bother?). The young women are the wedding but not the simple advantages of weddings......I love my bloke and we're happy, nothing is going to split is up so why bother with a piece of paper.

I agree with you. I know several young couples some with children who are perpetually engaged, who I would say are working class. There are no wedding plans at all. In all of them, the woman has pushed the man to propose, happily calls him fiance, then that's as far as it goes. Once I asked, ah how's the wedding planning going, have you set a date, and was met with looks from the woman and her parents, and changing the subject, as though it was a difficult situation. So apparently bloke had proposed without actually intending to be married...

I think there's definitely an attitude of if it's not for full white wedding of £30k, why bother.

However I also have middle class friends who are having babies and buying houses without the marriage. I asked one whether they would be doing the quick registry office job before baby came and she said no, it wasn't important to them. We'll wait until we can afford the big wedding she said.

I think some girls have grown up with the whole princessy fairytale and a big wedding is something they want, I know I did. I also think that a lot of us hear vague references to common law marriage in the US and some just assume that the concept is universal.

On a practical level some of us do face familial expectations too. I think some put off weddings whilst trying to figure out how to manage complicated family drama or the fall out of a smaller event. A few generations ago parents seemed to do more of the wedding organising and I think it's a tough transition for some.

That's not my experience. DH is from a really working class background and most of his (many) cousins are married and had quite big weddings. I'm from a more middle class background but lots of my family have chosen not to get married.

Both sets of friends from university have a mix of married and non married couples.

This is my experience too. The more middle class DFs seem to have more low key weddings.

YABU. Weddings in the 60s/70s and I'm sure further back weren't all the same, there was a class element there - the more wealthy might have had a sit down meal and those who couldn't afford that/didn't want had a finger food buffet with crisps and sandwiches. There is certainly no requirement now to have a certain type of wedding. In fact I'd say it's more MC to do things low key with fewer guests. If you care about the institution of marriage, or at the very least the protection it lends, there is no need to spend tens of thousands.

It's interesting. A lot of the older generation I think are a little disappointed and worried about their children's choices (though maybe it was ever thus) in that they worry about unmarried mothers and know they may never have any wedding photographs or memories. Amongst those that don't have large savings there is also I think a sense of shame that they couldn't put on the wedding that they envisaged.

I think the worrying thing was the young male attitude of getting out of something of they avoid the commitment of marriage. Even having a child to some men isn't a binding commitment and without legal protection women imho are screwed.

are women in a position now to be assertive and demand marriage from a man of they wish to commit and raise a family? As marriage loses popularity then maybe women don't feel they can assert their desire for marriage (the fact that traditionally men propose doesn't help either )

"Single" non-working mums without savings are generously supported by the government and incentivized to start having children from the very young age - this way they can get their own free housing straight out of school.
And the parents can get twice more money this way if the father claims benefits separately. Noone is really checking.

The other aspect is - when parents are divorced, the child is dragged 50/50 between 2 houses by default, with their need for a stable environment being disregarded by the government. I don't think it's the case when the parents have never been married?

There is definitely an attitude of why bother if you can’t afford a massive showpiece wedding.

its very common for young working class people to get married with traditional weddings.

Depends on the couple, still popular around here, and they cost what you allow them to, my DD’s was under £3000 mine was about £5k, my nephew has a £5k budget whereas my dsd has bought the princess for the day dream, they are still looking at £££ venues. People don’t rush these days

There was always a level of disappointment if you couldn't have the type of wedding you wanted, but people were much more stoical and realistic about it. Taking large loans was considered very irresponsible and being in debt shameful. And having a baby out of wedlock was the height of scandal, so if you wanted to live together and go on to have a family marriage was the only way. There was a lot less emphasis on being the centre of attention and "all eyes on the bride".

The other thing that I think has driven up wedding costs and expectations is guests living all over the place and having to travel. I wouldn't have felt right having a short wedding reception with just snacks for refreshment when my guests were having to travel cross country and arrange hotels.

I was chatting about this with an older colleague who was saying when she was young you'd never get the whole family travelling to weddings. At most you'd send one person to represent and they'd be put up somewhere.

It's an interesting point about the non working single mum as we know one who in transition because of may be a lack of marriage and being 'loved up' to a loser Theo thought it fine to bail out on fatherhood and without being married pretty much free to move to a distant city and restart his life. I think the poor woman with the child has every expectation the bloke would be the bread winner (in the trades) and she would be a great SAHM.

You’re confusing weddings and marriages.

@JustAlice I don’t understand what you mean when you say “The other aspect is - when parents are divorced, the child is dragged 50/50 between 2 houses by default, with their need for a stable environment being disregarded by the government. I don't think it's the case when the parents have never been married?”

As far as I know, being previously married or not makes no difference with custody arrangements.