• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Budget Weddings

Rehearsal Dinner: Do I need one?

2»

Re: Rehearsal Dinner: Do I need one?

  • Isn't a PPD basically the exact opposite of a gay couple having a non-legally binding ceremony because it's not available to them?

    PPD: couple has a legal binding ceremony that "doesn't count" and then has all the trappings later, usually while lying to their guests that the first legally-binding ceremony never happened.

    Gay ceremony when gay marriage is illegal (and later becomes legal): all the trappings of a ceremony but just without the legally binding part. The legal part comes later, without all the trappings (or with!) but no one is lied to about pretending the first part didn't happen. 
    justsieahoyweddingshort+sassyeileenrob
  • edited March 2018
    banana468 said:
    1) My comments and many of those posted here refer to those living in the United States.  While these are international boards the large majority of members are referring to US laws.    That's also going to pertain to your comment with #2.  

    3) I'm familiar with the laws that employers are still able to discriminate against   members of the gay community.   That has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.  
    It does when having a legal gay wedding could get you fired from your job. Having gay marriage be legal doesn't do shit for you if you can't get married without also immediately losing your ability to support yourself. 
  • edited March 2018
    eileenrob said:
    banana468 said:
    Pretty sure as a gay woman, I'm allowed to decide for myself whether comments saying that only legally sanctioned marriages are valuable are offensive or not. That's incredibly offensive. Many of us held marriage ceremonies, that, while not legally sanctioned by our oppressive and homophobic governments, were deeply and personally important to us.
     I also don't believe that all the straight people getting upset about the destruction of sanctity of marriage are actually upset on our behalf.

    If you're so incensed about the rights of gay people, please spend your time doing something useful and practical, like advocating for safe shelters for our youth, who are disproportionately overrepresented in homeless populations.
    No.   You're not.

    We're talking PRESENT DAY.   And here in the US (assuming that's where you live) in PRESENT DAY where gay marriage is legal, we can certainly say that calling something a wedding when it isn't is actually offensive.   You could have had a horse in this race if we were talking years ago.   And if you're referring to marriages that took place when the legal wedding wasn't legal then of COURSE that non-legally binding ceremony was important - it was the only thing that would have been available to a couple living in a world where their own government did not allow them to have the same benefits of heterosexual couples.   

    If any couple in question is living in a country where same sex marriage is still not allowed then sure - a non legally binding ceremony is the only thing that they can pursue.


    Please read carefully here.   The OP isn't gay.   She's Catholic.   She's calling the Catholic wedding the "not real" wedding and the wedding that is neither religious nor legal the "real wedding".   Real how?   Real because that's when they put on a performance?   Real because there's a white dress involved?   Sorry - no.  

    We get it.   You storm into multiple threads guns a blazing and issue your not so thinly veiled insults like you're the spokes person for a community and the regulars are uneducated.  It's not working. 

    1) I do not live in the US, but thanks for playing.
    2) I did read the OP's situation. My objection, was to CMGraigan's post that painted all non-legal wedding ceremonies with one brush.
    3) You know...that gay people can be legally fired for getting married even though the marriage is legal, right?
    To the bolded- why are you being so rude?  One-sided snark is never a good look.

    What we’re all saying is that a pretend “wedding” after you’ve already been married, in which you’ll be deceiving guests, is tacky and wrong.  None of us are against a gay couple in a place that bans gay marriage having a walk-down-the-aisle commitment ceremony/vow exchange/what-have-you... the two biggest no-no’s of a PPD (it’s a phony dress up day, and guests are being deceived) aren’t present.


    I’m sorry that your country’s laws exclude you, it still disgusts me that it took the US so many years to get their act together. 
    This is rich coming from a board where the prevailing comment whenever someone complains about how rude the frequent posters are is "you don't get to choose how someone responds to you".

    The reading comprehension on this board is so poor. Re-read CMGraigan's posts, notice that her rhetoric was not differentiated between the PPD things that y'all get worked up about and gay people's ceremonial marriages. You can do it!
    MandyMost said:
    Isn't a PPD basically the exact opposite of a gay couple having a non-legally binding ceremony because it's not available to them?

    PPD: couple has a legal binding ceremony that "doesn't count" and then has all the trappings later, usually while lying to their guests that the first legally-binding ceremony never happened.

    Gay ceremony when gay marriage is illegal (and later becomes legal): all the trappings of a ceremony but just without the legally binding part. The legal part comes later, without all the trappings (or with!) but no one is lied to about pretending the first part didn't happen. 
    No one is saying they're the same. I objected to CMGraigan's comments because the exact same things are regularly said to gay people about their ceremonial marriages.
  • Pretty sure as a gay woman, I'm allowed to decide for myself whether comments saying that only legally sanctioned marriages are valuable are offensive or not. That's incredibly offensive. Many of us held marriage ceremonies, that, while not legally sanctioned by our oppressive and homophobic governments, were deeply and personally important to us.
     I also don't believe that all the straight people getting upset about the destruction of sanctity of marriage are actually upset on our behalf.

    If you're so incensed about the rights of gay people, please spend your time doing something useful and practical, like advocating for safe shelters for our youth, who are disproportionately overrepresented in homeless populations.
    My sister is a lesbian who had a PPD and I was very salty about it, BECAUSE of the long legal fight the LGBT+ community has had in the US for the right to legally marry. She poo-pooed the entire legal aspect of her marriage and focused on the "pretend" ceremony. They got legally married before her destination wedding and she has repeatedly said she plans to not celebrate their legal ceremony but they'll consider the date of their PPD their anniversary. 

    I'm not saying that only the legal ceremony matters; I have friends who had marriage ceremonies before their marriage was legal in the US that weren't (couldn't be) legally binding. But that's no longer the case (IN THIS COUNTRY). But in present-day US (where the OP likely is), yes, the legal aspect is kind of the whole point of getting married.
    Yeah, your sister probably won't get enough salt from other people about her gay marriage throughout her life. She probably really needed you to add more to it.
    As a lesbian, she definitely needed you to explain her own communities' battles to her. Super necessary.
  • banana468 said:
    1) My comments and many of those posted here refer to those living in the United States.  While these are international boards the large majority of members are referring to US laws.    That's also going to pertain to your comment with #2.  

    3) I'm familiar with the laws that employers are still able to discriminate against   members of the gay community.   That has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.  
    It does when having a legal gay wedding could get you fired from your job. Having gay marriage be legal doesn't do shit for you if you can't get married without also immediately losing your ability to support yourself. 
    And???

    In either case whether it's a gay sham wedding or legal wedding if the employer can discriminate and wants to then the legal marital status doesn't matter if they can discriminate based on sexual orientation. 

    Knock the trolling off.   
    ahoyweddingshort+sassy
  • banana468 said:
    banana468 said:
    1) My comments and many of those posted here refer to those living in the United States.  While these are international boards the large majority of members are referring to US laws.    That's also going to pertain to your comment with #2.  

    3) I'm familiar with the laws that employers are still able to discriminate against   members of the gay community.   That has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.  
    It does when having a legal gay wedding could get you fired from your job. Having gay marriage be legal doesn't do shit for you if you can't get married without also immediately losing your ability to support yourself. 
    And???

    In either case whether it's a gay sham wedding or legal wedding if the employer can discriminate and wants to then the legal marital status doesn't matter if they can discriminate based on sexual orientation. 

    Knock the trolling off.   
    The point is that a legal wedding outs you in the workplace in a way that a fake one does not, because your legal status changes.

    Gay people talking about issues that concern us is trolling now. Got it.
2»
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards