Does anyone else not really have a problem with PPDs?

annathy03

On PPDs in general, I agree with Lia, Moonlight, and a few others. If you want to throw a reception/party to celebrate your marriage with a wider circle, by all means go right ahead. It's the reenactment- especially if you're dishonest with your guests about already being married- that doesn't sit right with me.

loca4pook

honestly? they don't bother me, but I guess I only went to one and her circumstances made total sense to me.

 

The way I look at it, they are still spending the same kinda money to host me and celebrate with ,me either way, so why on earth would i care?  It's not like they are making any more money off my gift by doing it that way.

 

 

Jen4948

It bothers me when people claim that their legal marriage ceremony isn't sufficient for them to consider themselves "married" but they go ahead and file joint tax returns and claim the other legal benefits of being "married" that I as a taxpayer am subsidizing.

It bothers me when people lie about their true marital status in order to help themselves to big white weddings with all the bells and whistles when they have already had a secret legal ceremony, because it's lying to the world about what they're celebrating and reducing the "marriage" to the bells and whistles. 

If it's important to you (generic) to have both, then wait until you can have them at the same time.  If you can't wait, then grow up and accept that a big white wedding isn't possible for you.  Sometimes life does that.

LavenderHoneyBee

LauraKitsune13 said:

cruffino said:

honestly, this issue just doesn't stir up any emotion in me. i guess i think that what goes on between two people is their private business and not mine. i would give the same gift regardless if it was a regular wedding or a PPD. i would just rather not judge other peoples' situations. 

Right? 

Life is too short for judgmental and vitriolic tirades regarding the lives of others.

Ditto (tritto?) me. It just doesn't bother me. I figure that the couple has a personal reason for doing what they did (maybe it was health related? or military related). Regardless, if they want to host a party where I can come toast to the happy couple, fine by me.

NerdyLucy

walgrrl said:

I don't think PPDs bother me nearly as much as they bother most people.  I think it's a little silly, kind of pointless, and I could never see myself doing it.  But, it doesn't bother me if that's what someone decides to do.  But then, I'm a very "Live and let live" kind of person.  I don't really care what anyone else does as long as they're not hurting others in the process.

This is how I feel.  I wouldn't do it, and I don't really get it, but I'm really not that offended either.  People do all sorts of things that I don't like or agree with it, and if I were to make a list of such things, this would be at the bottom.

BarbLovesDave

StageManager14 said:

 

If you and your partner rush down to the courthouse tomorrow and get married for the legal benefits, and then have an October wedding because that is what you're planning?  Yep, it's rude as hell. 

What you're proposing isn't a likely scenario at this point, but if it was done solely because you feared the right to enter INTO marriage would be taken away but not the rights OF marriage if you were already married?  Then, that to me is an exception because it is unfair oppression by others that is creating the situation.

This is exactly what happened in 2008. From May - Nov, 2008, same-sex weddings were legal in California. People I know were beginning to plan weddings.

Then, with Prop 8 qualifying for the ballot and early polling indicating it might pass (which it did), many same-sex couples accelerated their wedding planning in order to be legally married in California before it became, again, illegal. Once Prop 8 passed in Nov 2008, the existing same-sex marriages were still legal marriages in California, but no new same-sex marriage licenses were issued.

(As I mentioned before, I personally attended two such weddings, and heard of others. Both weddings were hastily arranged. No fancy invites, just word of mouth. I think I was invited to #1 about a week ahead of time, then was invited to #2 at the reception for #1. I was at the door handing out programs during #1, simply because no one thought who might do it. I was there early, I saw the stack of programs, so I picked them up and started saying "Hello, welcome to our church. Here is a program. The sanctuary is that way, restrooms are over there..." )

Right now, Prop 8 has been overturned in the momentous Supreme Court decision, as well as a similar decision to overturn DOMA. The supporters of Prop 8 have filed lawsuits to again force the state to not issue same-sex marriage licenses. Most experts agree that the chances of these lawsuits succeeding are slim, however, there is that small chance. Legal same-sex marriage in California is not, by any means, a done deal. Not yet. We're getting there, I hope and pray.

So. What would a same-sex couple here in California do? Exactly as this PP is doing. Plan a beautiful wedding for a date in the near future, giving time for planning, etc., as would any couple wishing to have all their family and friends witness their vows. I would also stay on top of the news and if there was any hint that the Prop 8 lawsuit might turn against me, I would SURE AS HECK drop everything and run to the nearest courthouse with my partner in tow. I would then continue with the planned event, making sure all know the truth of the prior legal marriage.

AJuliaNJ

I see 2 major types of PPD's: one where you get married overseas or somewhere and then come back and immediately have a ceremony and reception for everyone. The other would be a redo wedding where a couple has a JOP, decides it's not good enough, and has a PPD like a year later.

I'm not bothered by the first type as long as the couple is honest about it. I've known (or known of) several couples who got married in another country and then came back and had a ceremony and reception here, too. I never knew anything was wrong with this until I came here.

I would be more likely to judge (even if they were honest) if the PPD took place a year later as kind of a redo wedding. I think the PPD would have to happen within weeks for it to be okay.

gmcr78

I've been to one of these.  The couple wanted their wedding date to be a particular holiday, so they did the courthouse thing that day and then 2 days later had their church ceremony and reception.  I don't know if it was widely known that they were technically already married, but I would assume so since I knew about it and it didn't seem to be a big secret.  I thought it was kind of dumb, but I wasn't offended.

I'm about to go to another this fall. The couple wants their wedding date to coincide with their dating anniversary date.  So they'll go to the courthouse, and then 2 days later they'll do the big ceremony and reception with everyone.  Same kind of situation-as far as I know it's not any secret.

I don't get offended by the military situations or other such issues.  It may be against etiquette, but it doesn't offend me personally.

The ones I find offensive are the ones a lot of PPs have mentioned, where the couple either got married in secret and they're trying to fool their guests, or the ones where the couple just decides they don't feel their smaller ceremony was good enough.

Redbride801

I can't speak for stage, but to me

rhawndas said:

So let me throw a little twist in this scenario. 

My fiance and I are a same sex couple living in California. We just recently got the right to get married in California. Although she proposed to me last November, and we have been planning our wedding for October 12th of this year, we did not know for sure if our actual wedding date would be legal for us. If we catch wind at all that something will be overturned again, you can bet your butts that we are going to rush down to the courthouse to get married. We absolutely still plan to have a commitment ceremony on Oct 12th and still have the party that we have been planning and paying for all year. We do plan to do the first dance, father daughter dance, cake cutting, etc., all of which has been planned out already. In fact, our invitations will be going out by the end of July that state that we are getting "married" on Oct 12th. 

So I would like to know, would that be considered incredibly rude if we rushed out to get married if our rights were going to be taken away and then still had the ceremony and party as planned?? 

Thanks for your opinions. 

Do it and don't be ashamed about it one bit!!! I would actually encourage you to do that if there was a threat of you not being able to go through with it. Obviously be honest with your guests about it beforehand, but this is a TOTALLY different situation.

audreyecu61

With 23 first cousins I'm sure I've been to a few PPD just didn't know about it.

Not sure it is honest to do a PPD. I will say if I were Gay, I'd do the exact same thing that many couples did and get married before the right was taken away from me.

 

melissanjoe21

They don't bother me at all.

duckyyy

I'm actually participating in a PPD and it doesn't really bother me. Here's the situation :

I'm in a very Catholic country where many people honestly do not consider themselves married unless their marriage is blessed by the church. Now, I do make the distinction between "blessed by the church" and "big princess day" and find it a bit distasteful when PPD brides might not. But the point being that, many people here do not find PPDs offensive at all.

So my friend got engaged earlier this year and immediately begins planning a church wedding for early next year. They have the church and venue booked and everything. Then, her fiance's family, who are Chinese, tell them that their wedding day is inauspicious and that, according to the family fortune teller, the ONLY, single auspicious wedding date This year or next is in June and that they would have to get married on this exact day, less than a month away. Friend is from a very Catholic family and the church wedding is important to her. But the auspicious date is extremely important to fi's family.

This isn't ideal, but to please his family, They manage to get the licences and have a civil ceremony in June, immediate families only. But because she doesn't believe herself truly married until the church ceremony, they will not be living together as a married couple until that has taken place. It is at that church ceremony that I am a bridesmaid. Also, the tax laws here don't grant benefits to married couples with both spouses working (unless they have kids.) They would be paying the same taxes add two single people.

Anyway, I understand my friend's situation and am not offended, though that isn't the way I personally would have gone, myself.

QueerFemme

The same sex wedding is really the only exception to PPDs being rude, in my opinion. And even then, it CAN be rude. 

We were married last September with all of our family & friends surrounding us.  When the state started issuing marriage licenses again, we went down and got married last Friday. Just the two of us, and one friend, who also happens to be our photographer. 

HOWEVER, I know people that had big fancy weddings that weren't legal, and now that it's legal in CA, they are planning a big re-do.  I'm sorry. that is RUDE AS HELL.  I also know someone else getting married at the courthouse next week that is planning their big PPD for October, 2014.  Again, RUDE AS HELL.   

If the court was about to issue another stay, and you want to rush down before the last license is issued, fine.  I wouldn't have an issue with that.  But, that isn't happening in CA. 

I'm seriously considering starting a queer wedding etiquette blog.  Now that us queers can get married in some states and it actually matters on a federal level, there is about to be rude shit happening everywhere around me.

Pepper6

The only aspect of these that actually offends me and pisses me off is if the couple lies about already being married.  Otherwise, they don't bother me per se, but I still don't really see the point of them.

The only instances where they make sense to me is for same sex couples facing actual legal considerations like @rhawndas mentioned, but that's still only if there's a possibility that the right to marry would be in jeopardy before the planned wedding takes place.  Not if someone gets married now to get the legal benefits of marriage, and then does a ceremony later even though nothing changed on the legal front (again, the latter wouldn't offend me, I just think it's weird and pointless) 

I also understand if the couple is doing two different religious ceremonies.  I had a Catholic friend that did their full religious ceremony here, who married an Indian girl, so they did another ceremony in India for her extended family with all their traditions too.  They still didn't lie about the fact that they were legally married in the states though. 

wittykitty14

@QueerFemme, you'd write a kick ass blog, and I'd totally read that!

rkbo

haha, @QueerFemme, thats funny, ya, we are thinking that nothing will change here in Cali. and we will be able to get married for the first and only time in October  

QueerFemme

And @stagemanager14    your post above clarifying the supreme court ruling totally made me wanna gay marry you again, if I wasn't already gay married and you weren't straight married.   I love people that know what the hell they are talking about.

It irritates me when people say "the surpreme court ruled on prop 8".  no.  they actually didn't.

Belle0720

While I definitely get all of the reasons why people find PPDs rude, in most cases it just doesn't really bother me as long as they aren't lying about already being married. I care more about being properly hosted.

For example, I was a bridesmaid for a PPD where the couple is from two different countries so they had a small city hall wedding with his family in Europe and then came here to have a religious wedding with her family. It was weird that they were technically already married, but I understood that they both wanted to celebrate with their families and there was no chance of that if they picked one country over the other. What annoyed me about their PPD was that they were asking everyone to do a bunch of stuff for them stressing people out unnecessarily, requested the bridal party to be at their house by 11 and didn't feed us until 4 when we finally got to the reception venue, had all 150 guests wait outside of the church after the ceremony in the hot sun smushed together so that they could get giant group pics, stopped hosting beverages after cocktail hour (no I don't want to pay $3 for a tiny cup of diet coke), etc.

Whether it's a wedding or PPD, please host your guests properly. Don't ask someone to make 600 cookies the week before your wedding. Don't show up to your rehearsal 45 minutes late. Don't charge people to buy soda at your wedding. End rant.

rajahmd

StageManager14 said:

BarbLovesDave

StageManager14 said:

Well, no, that isn't what happened.  The Supreme Court did NOT overturn Prop 8, they dismissed the case on the grounds that the group that brought the suit (supporting Prop 8) had NO LEGAL GROUNDS to pursue the case.  Between the ruling against DOMA and the dismissal of Prop 8, there is virtually no chance that California will have this problem again.

And, for the record, I phrased my post the way I did specifically because what I said is NOT exactly what happened in California in 2008.  Gay couples who were already married still had no legal rights once Prop 8 passed. It didn't just say who could get a marriage license, it defined what California recognized as a marriage.  So, even if couples HAD rushed off to have PPDs then, it would not have helped.  Hence why I said, if you think the right to ENTER INTO marriage is going to be denied in such a way that the rights OF marriage will still be upheld.

Same-sex couples married in California from May-Nov, 2003, were still considered legally married by the State of California post-Nov 2008. They were not entitled to federal marriage benefits (military, social security, etc) thanks to DOMA.

I understand exactly what the Supreme Court decisions regarding same-sex marriage were. I understand exactly that the Prop 8 lawsuit was dismissed because the state officials (Jerry Brown, Kamala Harris, etc) refused to defend it and those who did defend it were deemed to be without standing. It was not a clear-cut win. There is a lawsuit now filed to stop the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses. Most experts believe this has almost no chance of success. I hope and pray same-sex marriage is here to stay in California.

Just today, I read on Facebook that a friend of mine was able to dump her $400/month personal health insurance because she can now be covered under her wife's federal employee benefits. This change is due to the overturn of DOMA, not to the Prop 8 lawsuit. This woman was a bride in one of the two same-sex weddings I personally witnessed in 2008.

As I said in the earlier post. I absolutely agree with a PP who said she and her girlfriend are planning a nice wedding, but if there is any hint of the end of same-sex marriage license issuance in California, they will run not walk to a courthouse and get married, then have the ceremony as planned. Although I usually think false weddings are ill-advised, this is one circumstance where it's understandable. I would do the same thing. Opposite-sex couples do not live in fear that their civil rights can be curtailed with little or no warning. Anyone planning a wedding for late Nov, 2008, would have been in exactly that situation.

Back to one of the couples I personally know. My friend told me that for the past 5 years, they have to prepare multiple tax returns. This is all with the advice of a tax lawyer who specializes in same-sex tax and legal issues. They prepared a married/joint federal return and a married/joint state return that was sent in to the Calif Franchise Tax Board. (I do the same. Calif requires a copy of the federal 1040 with the Calif return. I do my own taxes; I know.) Then, they had to prepare two "single" federal tax returns that were sent to the IRS. Whoo-hoo! No more of that. Next year, "only" two returns: Married/joint for the FTB and IRS.

BarbLovesDave

rhawndas said:

haha, @QueerFemme, thats funny, ya, we are thinking that nothing will change here in Cali. and we will be able to get married for the first and only time in October  

I totally hope so, too. You are in my thoughts as we approach October.

QueerFemme

@barblovesdave

What lawsuit are you talking about that is currently taking place?  The Prop8 sponsors petitioned the Justice Kennedy after the 9th Circuit court lifted the stay, but he immediately declined to hear the petition or put the stay in place.  I don't know of any other suit pending to stop the issuance of licenses.  

BarbLovesDave

One more comment. I just remember I, too, just learned of a false wedding!

July 4, we were at a picnic for Dave's car club. Our anniversary was the past week, so folks were telling us Happy Anniversary, how long has it been? , etc.

Some guys at our table started talking about how long they had been married. (Some older, retired Model A wing nuts.) One guy said he had two anniversaries. Why two?

"We went to the JOP and got married, then she wanted a big hoo-haw so we had the big hoo-haw a month later. Thus, I have two anniversaries."

How long married? 55 years.

I didn't say anything about a false wedding. Water under the bridge. I just remembered as I was reading this thread just now. Anyone married 55 years can pretty much say what they want.

BarbLovesDave

QueerFemme said:

@barblovesdave

What lawsuit are you talking about that is currently taking place?  The Prop8 sponsors petitioned the Justice Kennedy after the 9th Circuit court lifted the stay, but he immediately declined to hear the petition or put the stay in place.  I don't know of any other suit pending to stop the issuance of licenses.  

What? I did not know that, and I've been following the news closely. I read the LA Times every day. Wow. Thanks for letting me know.

It's a done deal now. I am, literally, punching air with my fists here at my desk.

QueerFemme

@barblovesdave

Yep. it was almost immediately after he got the petition on Gay Pride Sunday.  It never had a chance.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/30/politics/scotus-same-sex-marriages-continue/index.html?iref=allsearch

BarbLovesDave

StageManager14 said:

I too, am curious about this, since I also know of no suit that has been filed. And as far as married couples prior to Prop 8, they got to keep SOME benefits, but not all and not those that many consider most important. Hospital visitation could still be contested, custody issues still happened, and many companies halted same sex spousal benefits, which caused a huge legal shitstorm for a lot of people because they needed a DP to get back on, but whether or not you could get one while also technically legally wed to that person was a "gray area". They were married, yes, but the state did not enforce any of the supposed protections when called into question because according to their state constitution, they didn't recognize those marriages. But please explain to me again the difference between DOMA and Prop 8, because obviously you are so much more knowledgable on the subject than I am. ETA: and if you KNOW the difference between overturning a case and dismissing it, please feel free to make the distinction next time. Don't get pissed because YOU misspoke and someone took you at your word.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-prop-8-backers-make-emergency-effort-to-block-samesex-marriages-20130629,0,1828948.story

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sponsors-of-prop-8-file-petition-to-stop-samesex-marriages-20130629,0,6899719.story

 

Apparently you already know the difference between DOMA and Prop 8.

 

 

QueerFemme

RetreadBride said:

I will go to a second "pretty princess day" with joy in my heart for any gay couple who had a blowout "wedding" with every bell and whistle EXCEPT a legal, valid marriage license and wants to do it over FOR REAL once their state legalizes gay marriage.

THAT isn't a "pretty princess day." It's not a vow renewal.  That IS a case of "two weddings."

Hell, I'll even go to another shower and bach party and buy more gifts.

Shit!  I shoulda done that !  I didn't have a shower the first go-round.  I should have thought of this!

QueerFemme

@retreadbride   Well, we had the big wedding last September, and our legal wedding last Friday...  so, if I have a shower or PPD now, wouldn't that really make me a hot damn mess!?   LOL 

 

QueerFemme

RetreadBride said:

You and your wife look pretty hot in that picture.

  Why thank you !     I think we look pretty fuggin cute too !

lovesclimbing

I have a friend who is very conservative Christian.  She and her husband believed in courtship and betrothal as opposed to dating and engagement.  When they got betrothed, they legally got married and then had a PPD a year or so later on their "wedding" date.  Their reasoning was because back in Bible times, betrothals were very serious and breaking one required an actual divorce and a legal process.  They wanted their betrothal to be like that of Bible times and require a divorce to break it off so that's why they legally got married before their "wedding".

I do not judge that because their reasoning was solely religious - nothing about health insurance or benefits or pregnancy or anything like that.  They did not live together or act like married people and they did not take advantage of any married benefits during their betrothal period.