**Evabee** LONG

squirrly

I saw your add on to the unpopular opinions post, and had a few thoughts.

First off - my FI is in the Army, has deployed, is getting out this year, and will be in the National Guard after.  Although his risk of deploying between when we got engaged and when our wedding is scheduled has been very slim due to the specific job he is in, we were prepared for that possibility and would have adjusted our wedding plans accordingly.  To me, it would be necessary to marry before he deploys in order to have the Army recognize me and be willing to talk to me, provide me info, etc. (I have a good job and don't need insurance or anything else from the Army that could come with getting married.)

Had we planned a 'hurry up' wedding, it would have been our only wedding.  We might have had a blow-out welcome home for him after his redeployment, but no white dress, no vows, etc.  Just party.

My biggest pet peeve with the JOP now and princess day later is the lying.  WAY too many girls, particularly on the MB board, want to lie about it to their friends and family.  Starting your married life with a lie seems like a bad plan to me.

Given how hard some people struggle to get the right to marry legally in this country, it irritates me to no end when people who JOP justify lying by saying that they won't really be married until they do the "do over" because they just signed a piece of paper.  Um, no.  The piece of paper is what makes you MARRIED in this country. 

The second most common reason for the early JOP is money.  Too many people want the increase in BAH, and essentially want to use that to pay for the princess day.  That's wrong and deceitful to me.  They often combine that with lying, at which point I see red.

Ultimately, if you're doing it for good reasons (due to immigration laws you find out today that you have 14 days to marry or somebody gets deported, FI is deploying and the military won't acknowledge you for something important, etc.) and not for insurance, extra pay, or so that you can have sex earlier, I don't really care. 

To me, I'd feel married once we signed that piece of paper and I couldn't really get as excited about the re-do later on, and we've heard on here from a lot of other people about that too, so I have a hard time believing brides when they say they want that meaningful moment.  Really, they just want the party.  So - do it.  Just omit the ceremony. 

Does that help? 

danieliza1127

Wow, really well said and I'm not even that much of a stickler on the two wedding debate.  But everything you said makes really good sense to me.

shellydiane820

That was refreshing to read.  I aplaud you.

duckie1905

Very well said, bravo!

kate51485

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_evabee-long?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:9Discussion:4135ae36-7fea-4cfa-8e4c-d022ab911c87Post:d067d84a-8a74-4eaf-9aec-ec52f216f518">**Evabee** LONG</a>:
[QUOTE]To me, I'd feel married once we signed that piece of paper and I couldn't really get as excited about the re-do later on, and we've heard on here from a lot of other people about that too, so <strong>I have a hard time believing brides when they say they want that meaningful moment.</strong>  Really, they just want the party.  So - do it.  Just omit the ceremony.  Does that help? 
Posted by squirrly[/QUOTE]

This is the only thing that I think is exclusive to each individual bride and sometimes even to both people.  I know for my sister, going and signing the piece of paper with an unfriendly judge just didn't seem very lovely the longer she thought about it.  They had a ceremony and reception, but it was small - maybe 40 people?  And when they went to the JOP no family or friends were there, so it was a chance to finally celebrate with their loved ones.  I think one can be excited about that.

Otherwise, very well put.  The biggest thing is just secrets and lying.  There's no need.

squirrly

The MB board has been without a mod since the switch, so I've been trying to read extra over there till KA found one, and I'm certain I lost brain cells from doing so.  The vast majority are so young and so clueless and so not ready to get married.  And because this issue is SO common over there, it gets me peeved easily. 

Plus, I think evabee is a smart cookie - too smart to fall prey to the typical crap I mentioned.  So, if I come off as harsh on this one but make people think - I'm ok with that. 

squirrly

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_evabee-long?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:4135ae36-7fea-4cfa-8e4c-d022ab911c87Post:4401aa1f-f430-4b13-b61c-9bcce11921e9">Re: **Evabee** LONG</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to **Evabee** LONG : This is the only thing that I think is exclusive to each individual bride and sometimes even to both people.  I know for my sister, going and signing the piece of paper with an unfriendly judge just didn't seem very lovely the longer she thought about it.  They had a ceremony and reception, but it was small - maybe 40 people?  And when they went to the JOP no family or friends were there, so it was a chance to finally celebrate with their loved ones.  I think one can be excited about that. Otherwise, very well put.  The biggest thing is just secrets and lying.  There's no need.
Posted by kate51485[/QUOTE]

Kate, anything is possible.  It just seems to be very, very infrequent that people actually have that experience after the fact.  Too often, people THINK they will, but ultimately the ceremony doesn't mean what they wanted it to because they already felt married.  There are certainly exceptions, not denying that, but I just don't think that's how it works out for <strong>most </strong>people.

kate51485

Oh I definitely hear ya, there are some days that even to me (the ultimate sentimentalist) the unfriendly judge sounds very appealing when planning is getting on my nerves.

TurtlesAllTheWayDown

Yeah, Eva explained her reasons when she first came here and they seemed pretty good. She wants a Catholic convalidation, her FI is deploying to Afghanistan, they'll be announcing their marriage and then doing a vow renewal/reception when he gets back. I definitely give 2 weddings the side-eye, but I was pretty impressed by her rational mind.

The whole "special moment" thing is why I would feel SO guilty having two weddings. If I knew I was already married, it wouldn't feel as special. I can't wait to look at FI at our reception and realize that he is actually my husband. If we JOPed before the "wedding" it really would just feel like a fake party.

temerityjane

Squirrly, you have said everything that I have tried to explain to friends and family and military board brides and blog readers and blog writers and everyone else WAY better than I ever could have and with way less f-bombs.

My mom was totally heartbroken that I had the "military" clause put into all of my contracts and the idea that all big white wedding plans would be scrapped if we have to do the JOP thing (we're almost through this cycle of orders, then no worries, woo!), but I feel exactly as you do about the two wedding thing, with an additional pile of chafing whenever "but civilian brides just don't understand" is thrown in on top.

Nicely said.

temerityjane

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_evabee-long?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:4135ae36-7fea-4cfa-8e4c-d022ab911c87Post:f52a920e-f289-4c58-8ff4-10489f92ede8">Re: **Evabee** LONG</a>:
[QUOTE] If I knew I was already married, it wouldn't feel as special. I can't wait to look at FI at our reception and realize that he is actually my husband. If we JOPed before the "wedding" it really would just feel like a fake party.
Posted by msmerymac[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>This, too. It's not a big reason, compared to all the other reasons, but if I had already been married for a while, I just could not get a boner for the whole thing. No excitement or anticipation or nervousness or anything that would separate a "wedding" from just a little back and forth of words and a party. I allow that some other women may feel differently on that point, but I would not feel at all the same about the second ceremony/reception.

</div>

squirrly

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_evabee-long?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:4135ae36-7fea-4cfa-8e4c-d022ab911c87Post:f52a920e-f289-4c58-8ff4-10489f92ede8">Re: **Evabee** LONG</a>:
[QUOTE]Yeah, Eva explained her reasons when she first came here and they seemed pretty good. She wants a Catholic convalidation, her FI is deploying to Afghanistan, they'll be announcing their marriage and then doing a vow renewal/reception when he gets back. I definitely give 2 weddings the side-eye, but I was pretty impressed by her rational mind. The whole "special moment" thing is why I would feel SO guilty having two weddings. If I knew I was already married, it wouldn't feel as special. I can't wait to look at FI at our reception and realize that he is actually my husband. If we JOPed before the "wedding" it really would just feel like a fake party.
Posted by msmerymac[/QUOTE]

I just never heard her say why they wanted to be married before he deploys.  I know why I would want to be, but a lot of the things that people site are things you can get around.  Life insurance, notification if he's killed, etc.  It's more paperwork, but it can be done.  The things that would matter to me are specific to us. 

Anyhow, like I said - if I come across as harsh but get people to think through things, it's ok.  Whether it's evabee or a lurker. 

caseyandlizzie

My old roommate had been dating a guy in the army for awhile and she ended up getting pregnant and they got engaged. They had planned to have a wedding after the baby was born but before he was to deploy again. Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way as his deployment was majorly pushed up. They ended up marrying at a JOP with no family there and she has regretted it since. She really did want to have a wedding to be able to celebrate with everyone who supported them, and had planned on having another "wedding" once her husband came back, but realized that she was already married and it would not hold that same feeling or idea as getting married the first time with friends and family would have.
 

evabee

Ahhhh thank you everyone! I have been at work and missed this wonderful (and fantastically civil) discussion. Blast!

As msmerymac said, I don't want to do the do-over. If I do a follow-up ceremony at all it will be a convalidation ceremony (which is a blessing from the Catholic church). FI and I are still deciding whether or not our reasons for wanting to get married before he leaves outweigh the actual wedding day being with my whole family, etc, so this has not been finalized yet, and you all have given me a lot to think about.

Our reasons for marrying a little earlier than expected have to do with some family issues on his side, which I'd rather not blather all over a public forum (sorry!), but that don't involve money or sex or insurance. In addition, he's expressed to me that he would like to marry me before he goes overseas and I'm doing my best to respect that without losing the ceremony/party that's important to my family. I do understand what you mean about people getting married early for money--it's rampant in the military-- but we both make enough to take care of ourselves and we don't have any children or mortgages or anything.

My question was actually not in reference to myself. I feel very comfortable with my proposed solution for myself and FI (thanks in part to the ladies who responded to my older post!). I was asking because I see that it's a continuing battle, and while I wouldn't choose a do-over for myself, I see no harm in allowing a divorcee a second pretty princess day (if that's what she wants) and I don't understand why we wouldn't extend that courtesy to someone who wants to marry the man of her dreams all over again in front of her family.

THAT's what I'm confused about... I just don't think it's fair to rag on JOP brides who want the "wedding" and turn a blind eye to second marriages. I'm not saying I have a problem with second marriages, I just don't get why they're treated differently, that's all. 

Thank you so much! All of these opinions are very valid and well thought out! Cheers!

squirrly

Yay - glad you got here today. 

On the 2nd wedding thing.  . . I think it's beause they're actually getting married.  New husband and all.  It's logical to me that they would be excited about that and want to celebrate that and all.  But the do-over. . . they already got married.  To each other.  What's left to be special?  Andplusalso it usually goes with one or more of the money/sex/insurance/etc. items.  They got married early for that and now want it to be special.  Weird.

aggiebug

I do agree that most posters do 2 weddings for the worng reasons, but I do understand why some couple choose to have 2 "weddings". 

For me the signed certificate does not signify a marriage.  It signifies that the government sees 2 people in civil union.  This civil union give the spouse rights that they couldn't have without the paper. The example I see used most often is the rights of a military spouse to be notified of their husband or wife when overseas.  I get why people want that security, and especially with some of the crazy ILs in this world I get why couples JOP it before their deployment.

My marriage would be a marriage in my eyes when we are married in the church, before God.  I am also have many beliefs about marriage including abstaining from sex before being married , and that would not be broken until my marriage in the church. 

This is not my situation and I get the OP POV and it was well said, but I can see both sides of the coin.

evabee

Yeah I understand that for sure. Sometimes I just feel bad for those brides. My cousin and his wife (both in the service) JOPed before they had a wedding because they wanted to get stationed near each other, but I am so glad they had an actual wedding a year later because I felt truly honored to hear their vows and be there for such a special moment in their lives. I guess it really just depends on your motives and how your family feels!

evabee

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_evabee-long?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:4135ae36-7fea-4cfa-8e4c-d022ab911c87Post:a131c692-1bf4-460f-8ec9-3c00ef7861cd">Re: **Evabee** LONG</a>:
[QUOTE]For me the signed certificate does not signify a marriage.  It signifies that the government sees 2 people in civil union.  This civil union give the spouse rights that they couldn't have without the paper. [...] My marriage would be a marriage in my eyes when we are married in the church, before God.
Posted by aggiebug[/QUOTE]

<div>This is exactly what I believe. I think signing the paper is a legal marriage which people have done, throughout history, for a variety of reasons, the least common of which is love. The religious ceremony is you and your SO standing up in front of your family, friends, church community, and your God and professing your love and commitment to each other. When you say your vows to FI you are promising, giving your word to everyone present that you will uphold your end of the bargain. It's a big moment in my opinion and it has nothing to do with whether or not you are contractually obligated to each other.</div><div>
</div><div>They are completely separate in my mind, but alas I can't afford to do both.</div><div>
</div><div>EDIT: I do believe you define your marriage however you choose to define it. If the legal marriage makes you feel married.. congrats! you are married! I would venture to guess that for most people it's the ceremony (religious, in the courthouse, or none of these) that makes them feel married, and I think that means just as much as the person who feels married because of common law.</div>