Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Why do women still get "given away"

142 replies

ledkr · 26/06/2011 18:10

I went to wedding yesterday and was surprised to see the woman being given away by her father.I havent been to that many weddings and dont think ive ever been as near the front before but the father actually placed his daughters hand into her grooms.
Yuck.
I am married and was certainly not given away.
It got me thinking that i guess as this is part of a traditional ceremony that many women go along with this archaic custom.
What a shame.
Am i just being picky?

OP posts:
Bunbaker · 27/06/2011 07:17

"and don't consider the important stuff at all."

But to many people what you consider important isn't. I agree with exoticfruits. I didn't have "issues" about being given away. In fact my dad made the congregation laugh when the vicar asked "who gives this woman away?". My dad said "I do, willingly". I also took my husband's name.

I am confident enough about myself that I don't need to worry about other people perceiving what they think of as being repressed. Incidentally, we are celebrating out 30th wedding anniversary next month and I still have fond memories of that day. So many of the guests are no longer alive, my parents included and I treasure my memories.

Tortoiseonthehalfshell · 27/06/2011 07:22

There's nothing 'insecure' about not wanting to be treated as property.

My Mum walked down the aisle (well, I say aisle. Across the garden, really) with me, since there's no-one whose company and support I value more. No handing over the hand, though.

Cattleprod · 27/06/2011 08:28

Really Bunbaker? You don't consider changing your name for (potentially) the rest of your life important? Because I've met plenty of women who thought that was just 'what you did'. Sure, whether you were given away or not, or whether your DH asked your dad's permission, or whether you were referred to as 'man and wife' can all be forgotten in time. Your name remains a constant reminder. I really think it is a little bit more important than how many yards of silk are in your bridal underskirt and whether you have roses or tulips in your bouquet. Sadly a lot of brides put far more thought into the latter.

MrsCog · 27/06/2011 09:23

My DH didn't ask permission as such, but did mention that he'd be proposing, more because he couldn't gauge how much of a traditionalist my Dad is! My poor Dad though is bloody awful at keeping secrets and as a result wasn't able to speak to me for a couple of weeks!

I did think about names quite a lot, but felt strongly that me DH and our (hopefully) children should all have the same name to bind us as a family, and I preferred DH's surname to my old one so it was a fairly easy decision.

hatwoman · 27/06/2011 09:30

dh and I walked down the aisle together. It's not just the actual giving away bit I don't like, from a feminist pov, it's also the walking down the aisle bit, while h-to-be waits at the front. It's clear that all eyes are meant to be on the beautiful bride. it's all a bit parade like to me and I really don't like it.

hatwoman · 27/06/2011 09:34

to those who say this is about individual confidence and/or that things like name-changing and being given away are inconsequential : I think that, for the vast majority of women who don;t/didn't want this stuff (me included), it's not actually about them, as individuals - it's the symbolism - the reminder that for centuries women have been viewed as chattels. none of us are scared that by being given away, we, as individulas, will become chattels. we just don't want such symbolism in our weddings.

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 27/06/2011 12:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MackerelOfFact · 27/06/2011 12:59

I'm not married, but if I were to marry I think I would want to walk down the aisle with my Dad. I value his blessing because we love and respect each other and his opinion is important to me, not because he owns me. Ditto my Mum, but she's far less sentimental and wouldn't care much for aisle-walking.

CountBapula · 27/06/2011 13:06

HRH I agree with you on the wedding ring as a symbol of commitment, and DH and I wear ours proudly. But I chose not to wear an engagement ring because that was traditionally a sign of ownership, and men aren't expected to wear them.

I agree with you too that having the same surname as my DC is nice.

blackcurrants · 27/06/2011 15:35

I'm always interested by the women who said "I changed my name because I wanted us all to have one family name" because this is definitely what I want, too - one family name is much simpler.

But why, in these situations, do we never read "we both wanted us all to have one family name so DH changed his name to mine."
?

Oh yeah. Patriarchy.

Patriarchy's like the matrix, sometimes. You don't even see it!

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 27/06/2011 15:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 27/06/2011 16:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

blackcurrants · 27/06/2011 16:49

I have a (male) friend who 'took' his wife's name.

The uproar from his family, specially his grandfather (supposedly because he's the 'last of his line') was intense. And these are right-on Californians. But they couldn't cope with him changing part of his identity - and giving up part of himself.

but had his wife done it, do you think anyone would have really cared?

That's my 'sexism' test. "If this was applied to a man, would anyone care?" - and in this instance it's handy.

adamschic · 27/06/2011 17:06

I got married in 1983, my brother (dad had died) walked down the aisle with me but didn't give me away. I wanted the modern version so no obeying and we were pronounced husband and wife together. I did change me name as I hated my maiden name. Changed it back to my maiden name once we divorced 4 yrs later and I have been single since.

Was peed off to that my mum had to fork out for the wedding, his parents were piss poor but wanted lots of their friends invited.

I was a feminist then and still am and should never have married him.

Original poster
ledkr · 27/06/2011 18:42

I think its lovely for a specisl person to walk you down the aisle,its the handing over of the bride i didnt like,id not noticed it before but i was at the front so did.I also wnet down the aisle with my df as we had lived together for yrs and had 3 dc's so it seemed right. Ive re married since and kept my exh name to be the same as dc's This was more to limit the impact upon dd aged 6 who was asking "will you still be my Mummy/Daddys wife?" Ithought the last thing she needed was me having dh's name and not hers.iyswim.It then meant mine and dh's baby was referred to as "baby...insert exh's name" but dh wasnt bothered.

OP posts:
exoticfruits · 27/06/2011 23:16

There's nothing 'insecure' about not wanting to be treated as property.

There is a huge issue of insecurity if a lovely tradition of a father having one of his few, very special moments makes you feel like property! You can't have a very good relationship if he makes you feel like that.
Why would you, if you have a normal, loving father/daughter relationship?

exoticfruits · 27/06/2011 23:18

I am glad that I had DHs name too-as he died shortly afterwards it was lovely. I can never understand why I should want to make a unit with my brothers and his DCs rather than my own DH and DCs.

exoticfruits · 27/06/2011 23:19

Sorry-their DCs not his.

suzikettles · 27/06/2011 23:22

I've never been to a wedding where the bride was "given away", and I've been to a lot of weddings. Maybe it's different in Scotland?

Walk down the aisle accompanied by a family member or significant person (I've seen that be father, mother, brother, best friend and husband to be) sure, but when they got to the bottom of the aisle the father or whoever just sat down and the bride joined her partner.

Same with speeches. I can't actually remember the last wedding I went to where there wasn't at least one woman, be that the bride or bride's mother or bridesmaid making a speech.

I would say these were all pretty traditional weddings in pretty traditional surroundings - ie either church or registry office.

exoticfruits · 27/06/2011 23:27

CofE give them away-a tradition (lovely for dads)-nothing more.

CaptainBizarro · 28/06/2011 03:29

exocticfruits - as I said earlier in the thread, my Dad walked with me down the aisle (but didn't give me away), but I can still understand why some people have an issue with it.

Not on a personal level (I'm sure plenty of women who object to it have perfectly lovely relationships with their Dads), but for 'bigger picture' reasons, e.g. the symbolism of what it represents as hatwoman said, and the history behind it.

For some people it is, understandably, very important and nothing to do with insecurity - I think that's a very unfair accusation - nothing would ever change if we didn't question these sorts of things over time.

nooka · 28/06/2011 03:52

I have been really surprised about how much more traditional/patriarchal the CoE service is/was than the Catholic service which doesn't have either 'who gives this bride' or any mention of obeying.

I walked up the aisle with my father, and I think we both enjoyed it. I wore my mother's wedding dress because I thought she'd like that (I don't think she did at all though). dh and I gave speeches.

My BIL asked my father for permission to marry my sister. We all (including my father) thought that was very bizarre.

allhailtheaubergine · 28/06/2011 05:57

I have a question for those saying it is easier / simpler / important to all have one family surname: I have a different surname to my husband and children. It has never once caused even the vaguest trouble. Is this something that I am yet to come up against? I don't understand how it is easier?

I don't really get the idea about it being important to have one family surname for the sake of unity either. I have a different surname to them - the thought of that making me less a part of my family is laughable. My husband has dark hair while we are all blonde - does this make him less a part of the family? Should he get out the bleach so people perceive us as a homogenised unit?

exoticfruits · 28/06/2011 06:45

I have had a different surname from one of my DCs, it wasn't a problem except often just easier to answer to his surname.
However, since DH died really young he didn't leave much, having his name was a real comfort.

It think that people read way too much in giving away-it is lovely to walk down the aisle-I would have given anything to have had my father alive to do it. The wording is nit picking IMO-no one really thinks that you are being 'given'. Anyone could do it, in my case I had my brother, but I could have chosen my DS or my grandmother or my best friend.
If you looked into half the traditions you wouldn't do it!

The choice of surname is completely unimportant and personal choice.
In my case I would hate to be out for the day with extended family and be sharing my nephew's name and not my DSs -but that is personal choice.

Being a feminist, to me, means freedom of choice and letting people get on with their own choice without reading things into it that are not there. I am Mrs-simply because I can't stant Ms. If others like it that is fine, I call them Ms, but don't see why anyone has to be criticised or justified-or why you can't simply go to a wedding and enjoy the day without having to take umbrage because you think that a nice moment for fathers means the woman is his property. Perhaps the order of service should come with wording 'I do not think my DD is my property' to appease the nit pickers!!

Bunbaker · 28/06/2011 07:25

Grin exoticfuits. I agree. I never felt that I was my father's property. In 1981 when I got married I was happy for my father to give me away. I think there is far too much overthinking and "chip on the shoulder" type of stuff going on. The symbolism about being given away wasn't and isn't important to me.

"I really think it is a little bit more important than how many yards of silk are in your bridal underskirt and whether you have roses or tulips in your bouquet. Sadly a lot of brides put far more thought into the latter."

In a way you are right. I didn't take much interest in planning the actual wedding and sorting out the dress. I wanted it to go well, but I view a wedding day as just one (special) day of my life whereas marriage is for keeps (hopefully). It never occurred to me not to change my name and I had no reason not to. I don't feel that I am my husband's property either.