Feminist analysis of the royal wedding

[DontdoitKatie]

This is one of the times when you realise how very lonely seeing things through a feminist lens can make you.

Patriarchy in all its glory.

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

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.

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

"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...

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!

"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.

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

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

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.

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).

I'll be sure to tell my daughter on her wedding day, that having her dad by her side as she walks up the aisle is creepy.
What utter rubbish.

Oh, I missed the handmaid bit! Full Order of Service

she may have worked it out for herself by the time she gets married.

This is the thread I had been waiting for!

I know it is far too much to expect the BBC to actually show some gender equality in the the way the commentary is structured, but TimeWasting picked up on a very interesting thing. All the important guest and historical commentary was done in a solemn voice by Mr Commentator. We were told who is the richest royal around and all kinds of important dates and events. Then, when it came to the frocks, two women were dissecting this 'great day for British fashion'. Quite a clear role division - historical facts, money, heritage and everything else that matters - Mr Commentator. Dresses - women. How utterly depressing.

oh good point Youngblowfish!

I don't think most brides are given away by their fathers, they are supported by them as they enter the church/venue. I've known brides go down isle with both parents. They certainly weren't "giving her away"