I belive that any wedding where the bride is kept hidden before the ceremony while the groom gets to greet the guests, is sexist.

I have one possible theory why the tradition of keeping the bride hidden before the wedding does not give way as easily as other wedding traditions. Namely, the superstition that if the bride and groom see each other on their wedding day before the wedding, that the marriage will have bad luck. I don't for one moment believe this superstition. However, even if the bride and groom don't believe this superstition and wish to be both present to greet guests before the wedding, they have to contend with other family members who may try to keep the bride hidden until the wedding. And if family members can prevent the bride from getting to the wedding in advance, they can keep the bride hidden, against the wishes of a couple who may desire otherwise.

There may be other reasons why the tradition of keeping the bride hidden before the wedding does not give way as easily as other wedding traditions. I'm interested what people have to say, and any other comments that people might have about wedddings and sexism.

[ 09 December 2007: Message edited by: Left Turn ]

I didn't consider it sexist because we didn't attach any sexist reasons to doing it that way. The main reason that it's done that way, I think, is so that the bride can be the centre of attention as she's walking down the aisle.

Of course, I wore a veil, too, which I'm sure was very sexist. I just wanted it because I liked how it looked. I wasn't going to have one because I was worried about it being pretty sexist, but then I thought, what the hell, it's not like I'M traditional. It just goes nicely with my dress.

Besides, I think a small part of me wanted to see whether he'd handle the lifting of the veil smoothly, or whether he'd flub it up when it was time to kiss me.

But I think most of us are pretty far removed from those sorts of ideas now. That said, I have no problem with updating the ceremony and being non-traditional. If I were ever to do it again (god forbid), I think it might be kind of nice to walk up the aisle with the groom. [Edited to add - ha, I totally posted this BEFORE seeing Caissa's post!]

That is, walk up the aisle of the hallway to the JP's office. To elope.

[ 10 December 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

And yet, I did it, because I just liked the idea of walking down the aisle with my father, and well, I don't know. I probably wouldn't do it that way again now.

[ 11 December 2007: Message edited by: Pride for Red Dolores ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pride for Red Dolores:the tradition that really bothers me is the fathera "giving away" the bride. this probably has to do with giving away her virginity

---

Spot on, I think, and nowadays with the advent of "purity balls" with the father and daughter getting all dressed up and going to a ball together, can one say creepy often enough? And this is where the girl signs a contract to remain pure until marriage and gives her father a key that he will give to her husband at the time of her marriage, to me this only is a symbol that represents the "chastity belts" of old.

But you're right, there has been a lot of press about "charity" balls lately.

Feministing posted about them earlier this week after the Chicago Tribune posted this:

quote:

---

"It's like I'm devoting my virginity to my dad, saying that I will stay pure because it is the Christian thing to do," said Lindsay Anne Schell, 18, a freshman at Bradley University in Peoria. "The rose shows the world that you are devoting your purity to God and to your father."

In an age of "sex buddies," "friends with benefits" and "sexual friendships," father-daughter purity balls have become an increasingly popular trend among conservative Christians in the campaign for abstinence instead of condoms. Since the first event was held in Colorado Springs in 1998, the concept -- that holding on to one's virginity until marriage is ordered by God -- has spread to 48 states.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pride for Red Dolores:why not dedicate your purity to your mother ?

---

Well, first off I say, why dedicate it to anyone else other than yourself, if that is what you are into? Nobody else has to live with any consequences, that may come from having sex, other than oneself in any end result.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pride for Red Dolores:I forgot about the fact that women's main resource has to be controlled by men to assure heredity-

---

Having said that, I do believe controlling a woman's progenity is about controlling a resource, or rather was in the first place about that. And perhaps in some ways still is.

quote:

---

that likely why one doesn't dedicate one's purity to one's mother- all purity is controlled by men. After all, we're such a lustful, bunch how could anyone but a man control us ? The whole idea that women aren't sexual comes from the absolute paranoia that we are, and the loss of the above control and breaking out of our gender role.

---