Symbolic ceremony due to marriage requirements n mexico

redoryx · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
My cousin is getting married in Cuba but had her legal ceremony here in Canada. It makes perfect sense when she explained it to me. The sheer outrage seen on this thread of doing anything other than the status quo of what's "expected" is mind blowing. I think getting legally married in your home country before a wedding abroad makes perfect, legal sense if that's how they want to do it. I think sometimes the expectations of etiquette and doing things "properly" get in the way of common sense and logic.

No. No it doesn't because your wedding IS when you get married. you can't get married and then after a wedding later. They are one in the same.

jacques27 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
My cousin is getting married in Cuba but had her legal ceremony here in Canada. It makes perfect sense when she explained it to me. The sheer outrage seen on this thread of doing anything other than the status quo of what's "expected" is mind blowing. I think getting legally married in your home country before a wedding abroad makes perfect, legal sense if that's how they want to do it. I think sometimes the expectations of etiquette and doing things "properly" get in the way of common sense and logic.

No, she's not getting married in Cuba. She is play-acting in Cuba because she's already married. That's what she did in Canada. Get married. You can't get married twice without divorcing or annulling in between.

So what she is doing is saying that being married in Canada isn't good enough. The privilege of being able to call herself a spouse to her beloved just ain't cutting it for her. So, she's playing dress-up in order to have a picture perfect vision fulfilled and making a mockery of her actual wedding (the day she wed her spouse...in Canada) in the process. Was that the logic that made so much sense to you?

She could have:

Planned a picture perfect, albeit colder, wedding in Canada and been legally married the same day
Planned a picture perfect wedding in Cuba and respected the marriage requirements of that country by putting in a modicum of effort into following them and been legally married the same day instead of using Cuba as a dress-up prop
Gotten married in Canada and honeymooned in Cuba

And then probably like 3 or 4 more options I'm not even thinking of. Just doing a 5 minute google search, it looks like it involves gathering some documents, getting them translated into Spanish and having them notarized, and sending them to Cuba at least 3 weeks in advance. That doesn't seem that hard - a little futzy, yes, but not hard. There's not even a waiting period once you get there or any blood tests, that I can see.

Jells2dot0 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
My cousin is getting married in Cuba but had her legal ceremony here in Canada. It makes perfect sense when she explained it to me. The sheer outrage seen on this thread of doing anything other than the status quo of what's "expected" is mind blowing. I think getting legally married in your home country before a wedding abroad makes perfect, legal sense if that's how they want to do it. I think sometimes the expectations of etiquette and doing things "properly" get in the way of common sense and logic.

Yes, please do tell.

Here is the scenario of my wedding, if I had married here in the US prior to my ceremony in Australia or just kept to what I actually did (married legally in Australia):

US marriage:

1) take time off work to go to courthouse

2) fill out and sign papers at courthouse

3) take time off work to go to Australia

4) have ceremony in Australia

5) come home and have marriage cert waiting for me

6) change my name using US marriage cert

Australian marriage

1) fill out papers required by Australia and mail them in

2) take time off of work to go to Australia

3) have ceremony in Australia; sign marriage cert during ceremony

4) come home and send for marriage cert

5) few weeks later marriage cert arrives in mail

6) change my name using Australian marriage cert

It was easy- I got legally married in Australia as a US citizen all in one ceremony and used my Australian marriage cert to do all of the legal work to change my name. Sounds like logic and common sense to me!!!

notdoingitbythebook · April 2015

She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.

Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

plainjane0415 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

What were her circumstances though? I don't understand.

Jells2dot0 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

If their friends knew of their previous circumstances and the couple was honest to their guests about it, then that is great! Granted, it wasn't a wedding at that point- it was a celebration of marriage, or vow renewal- but at least the couple went into it being honest about their situation. It's when the couple hides their circumstances and pretends their marriage never happened that irks people.

Look- shit happens. If your friends had a wedding planned in Cuba and then something came up and they had to change their plans and get married in Canada first, then okay, that is fine. As long as they told their guests about it and said "Hey, we had something come up, we had to make it legal ahead of time, but still want to have a symbolic ceremony in Cuba. We'd still love for you to join us." That is all good! People are understanding. They get it. The couple was honest, which is key. So many posters on here think their guests don't understand their "special circumstances" so they lie and keep their trip to the courthouse for insurance or visas secret. It's a relationship killer, IMHO, when it comes out 10 years down the road.

kmmssg · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.

BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.

I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Maggie0829 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

Ahh yes, the whole "extenuating circumstances which means it had to happen" excuse.

And actually it is a great way for the guests to weed out who is and is not a true friend because, you know, true friends won't lie to you or feel the need to play dress up because their "extenuating circumstances" didn't allow that the first time around.

People need to start acting like adults when they make adult choices.

notdoingitbythebook · April 2015

Maggie0829 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.
Ahh yes, the whole "extenuating circumstances which means it had to happen" excuse.

And actually it is a great way for the guests to weed out who is and is not a true friend because, you know, true friends won't lie to you or feel the need to play dress up because their "extenuating circumstances" didn't allow that the first time around.

People need to start acting like adults when they make adult choices.

She is acting like an adult and making the best decisions she can based upon the family issues that have come up that changed her plans. She's not playing dress up (how insulting to insinuate that) and she's not lying to anyone. Just because she is taking care of the legal stuff before she flys out to her wedding does not make her wedding anything other than a wedding.

And yes, I do think that someone who would otherwise go to a destination wedding for someone but then refuses because the legal stuff is taken care of before is a shitty friend. I don't see it as the other way around (but then again, if they do, I guess it's a good way to weed yourself out of the couple's lives since you mustn't be a good friend if you're going to degrade a ceremony as "dress up pretend time".

I feel no reason to mention her situation specifically on a board to strangers who will undoubtedly dismiss them as her being immature and lying to people so that she can be a pretty pretty princess, which couldn't be further from the truth.

chibiyui · April 2015

Jells2dot0 said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

If their friends knew of their previous circumstances and the couple was honest to their guests about it, then that is great! Granted, it wasn't a wedding at that point- it was a celebration of marriage, or vow renewal- but at least the couple went into it being honest about their situation. It's when the couple hides their circumstances and pretends their marriage never happened that irks people.

Look- shit happens. If your friends had a wedding planned in Cuba and then something came up and they had to change their plans and get married in Canada first, then okay, that is fine. As long as they told their guests about it and said "Hey, we had something come up, we had to make it legal ahead of time, but still want to have a symbolic ceremony in Cuba. We'd still love for you to join us." That is all good! People are understanding. They get it. The couple was honest, which is key. So many posters on here think their guests don't understand their "special circumstances" so they lie and keep their trip to the courthouse for insurance or visas secret. It's a relationship killer, IMHO, when it comes out 10 years down the road.

All of the above, but especially the bolded.

Shit happens. Adults deal with shit and are honest about shit. If the "legal part" doesn't matter as much as people say it does, then whats the big deal about telling your guests? I fucking love parties, and love to attend them. Just be honest about it. If circumstances made it so you couldn't be legally married at your planned time and venue, freaking tell me! I'll still show up and be happy for you. It will still be awesome, if you as a person want to keep that as your anniversary, cool.

But don't LIE to me and claim if I was really your friend I'd understand. Bitch if you were REALLY my friend you'd tell me.

banana468 · April 2015

So you think that a wedding is an event that isn't where to people are wed?

Exactly what do two people DO at a wedding if they can already be married before they get there?

notdoingitbythebook · April 2015

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

plainjane0415 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

notdoingitbythebook · April 2015

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.

In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

Maggie0829 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

Maggie0829 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.
Ahh yes, the whole "extenuating circumstances which means it had to happen" excuse.

And actually it is a great way for the guests to weed out who is and is not a true friend because, you know, true friends won't lie to you or feel the need to play dress up because their "extenuating circumstances" didn't allow that the first time around.

People need to start acting like adults when they make adult choices.

She is acting like an adult and making the best decisions she can based upon the family issues that have come up that changed her plans. She's not playing dress up (how insulting to insinuate that) and she's not lying to anyone. Just because she is taking care of the legal stuff before she flys out to her wedding does not make her wedding anything other than a wedding.
And yes, I do think that someone who would otherwise go to a destination wedding for someone but then refuses because the legal stuff is taken care of before is a shitty friend. I don't see it as the other way around (but then again, if they do, I guess it's a good way to weed yourself out of the couple's lives since you mustn't be a good friend if you're going to degrade a ceremony as "dress up pretend time".
I feel no reason to mention her situation specifically on a board to strangers who will undoubtedly dismiss them as her being immature and lying to people so that she can be a pretty pretty princess, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm sorry but I do not consider someone who dresses up as a bride AFTER she has already been married because of "extenuating circumstances" is acting like an adult. Instead I think she is acting like a little child wanting to get her way.

And a redo ceremony is "dress up pretend time" because they are already married! So them reciting vows and pretending to get married again is all an act.

But I guess this is what the world has come to. A bunch of young adults (not all of course) who think they are entitled to everything regardless of how ridiculous it makes them look.

plainjane0415 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it. Simple as that.

Well quite simply, I disagree with what your friend is doing. She is not having 2 weddings, because she is already married whether she likes it or not, whether she identifies with it or not. What you are attending for her is not a wedding.

It is insulting to value a party over the "legal part" as you call it, because in the end what matters is the marriage, not the party, white dress, and fancy furnishings.

But you do you. A'int nobody stopping you.

banana468 · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.
In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

Is your cousin in that culture? Because here in the US, my Catholic ceremony and my legal ceremony were one and the same. In fact, I wouldn't have been able to walk down the aisle without the marriage license because they see that it IS the legal ceremony.

And when couples want to have their vows convalidated in the church, they don't look kindly at brides who want to turn the day into a big one with the white dress and hoopla. So you're not really making a great argument here.

The legal ceremony is a pretty big deal. It's such a big deal that some Knotties aren't even able to have one in their home state. So to say that it ISN'T a big deal is a huge insult.

You also haven't clarified how a JOP wedding can be a wedding but it isn't a wedding if you want to have more people at your wedding and it's easier to just call that your legal ceremony.

That sentence hardly made any sense. Do you think your logic does?

chibiyui · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.

In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

When in Rome.....

I'm not as caught up on Canadian laws, but in the states religious ceremonies are legally binding. There is no reason to do them separately.

Getting married in Italy? Do the courthouse (in Italy) and then your church ceremony, like the Italians do. Getting married in the states? Do it all at once. Getting married in Mexico, man up and do the blood test like the locals.

Jells2dot0 · April 2015

So, I'm trying to figure this out.

At first, you made it sound like your friend was honest with everyone and told her guests that she had to take care of the legalities at home. But, then you continued ranting on and on about how rude we all are and it makes me think she kept the legalities part to herself. So, which is it?!

Your "friend" had her "reasons" to do what she did. She had to make adult decisions based on her circumstances at the time. We have all been there and done that. So, own up to it. Accept those decisions. She should tell everyone what happened and why she had to do it. Those who love her and support her will understand. And those who love her and support her- like you- will still attend her celebration of marriage in Cuba to celebrate their union. Some people may need to reprioritize, but you often see that with DWs anyway. They are expensive and some people just cannot swing them, especially if they are not an actual wedding.

ETF- punctuation is hard today

MobKaz · April 2015

Dreamergirl8812 said:
Symbolic wedding ceremonies were somewhat common in my kindergarten. Justin, the boy I liked, suddenly "married" another girl.

Fuck you Ashley.<
notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

"It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of". JUST. Use of that particular word in that sentence is probably one of the most offensive and ignorant word choices you could use.

It's JUST freedom. It's JUST my right to speech. It's JUST my right to wed. Say that to someone who isn't afforded the liberties of freedom, free speech, or the ability to wed the person of their choosing.

flantastic · April 2015

LOL that there is a TK "cookie cutter" plan for weddings.

Our requirements are pretty simple:

A wedding must be an event where two people actually get married, a process which is primarily legal in nature, so wherever the legal bit happens, there also is the wedding.
Invite guests, or don't.
If you do invite guests, make sure you treat them well, which includes both seeing to their comfort and being honest with them.
Don't expect other people to do your own shit for you as you prepare for something that was your own decision to do.
Don't expect people to pay for your own shit for you, although many are willing to offer a gift in celebration of your marriage.
Be an adult and own your decisions.
If the circumstances of your life lead you to decide to have your wedding without guests, you are free to throw an awesome party later, for any reason, as long as you're not lying to people and you are treating them well. (I don't think there has yet been an instance on this site where someone was literally forced into a marriage, so if you have a wedding, you decided to do it.)

Did I miss any corners of the cookie cutter?

ETA:

Don't try to dictate the behavior of other adults out of some misguided idea that it is YOUR MOST SPECIAL DAY.

kmmssg · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.
In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

What the Hell is "being legalled"? I think the term you are looking for is "being married."

If someone goes to the JOP (like my entire side of the family did for generations) they are married. They are married when immigration calls, when the insurance company calls, when the military calls, etc. They are married. If they lie to people about already having gone to a JOP and getting married they are liars. If they have integrity and tell their family and friends about it, that's fine in my book.

JennyColada · April 2015

ITT: "I am not married, but I am just married enough to collect any benefits of being married."

LondonLisa · April 2015

For everyone explaining how it works for them because of "their circumstances", I just have one question: What are the understandable circumstances for lying?

Why did they HAVE to have a ceremony in Cuba/ Mexico/ Wherever? Why couldn't you just get married in a place where you could legally do it? What reason can you offer that isn't surrounding "because we WANTED to have a ceremony there".

The definition of a speshul snowflake is someone who conflates needs with wants. And yes, one should be subjected to demeaning terms when they lie to their guests and make them spend money.

To the 8 days of holiday woman, do you think you are the only person on the planet with limited vacation days? If I took one of my limited vacation days to go see a friend get married, I want to see them actually get married. If I found out later that I could have actually saved my vacation time/ money by going to the courthouse to see them get married instead of all this money on a Mexican holiday I probably did not need nor want, I would be livid. You are incredibly selfish if you are using your vacation days as an excuse to not actually get married without thinking of other's vacation days. I'll bet you 100 million of Her Majesty's pounds sterling that people will be angry that you weren't open with them. Maybe not to your face, but it will fundamentally change the way people view you: as a liar.

onefootinthebayou · April 2015

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.
In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

Just curious as to whether or not you would admit that your cousin is married after doing the legal stuff? Again, this is a yes or no question: is your cousin married before going to Cuba? I've yet to hear a straight answer from a single person who tries to justify these PPDs.

redoryx · April 2015

onefootinthebayou said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.
In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

Just curious as to whether or not you would admit that your cousin is married after doing the legal stuff? Again, this is a yes or no question: is your cousin married before going to Cuba? I've yet to hear a straight answer from a single person who tries to justify these PPDs.

This. It always turns into "Well, they don't think they are married, so..."

Trust me, if they are having a PPD, we know what they think. As someone who knows they signed the paperwork, what do YOU think.

LondonLisa · April 2015

redoryx said:

onefootinthebayou said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

plainjane0415 said:

notdoingitbythebook said:

kmmssg said:

notdoingitbythebook said:
She felt it was the right course of action given her circumstances and no one feels like it's a "pretty princess day" (could we get any more demeaning with that term?). There were extenuating circumstances that meant it had to happen. Their wedding in Cuba is no less a wedding just because they take care of the legal stuff here. But I understand that's not how things are done in the world of The Knot.
Honestly, with all the snark in this thread and talk of people refusing to attend if the legal stuff happens previous to the destination makes it sound like a destination wedding with legal stuff taken care of previously is a good way for the couple to weed out friends who aren't really friends.

You know, I really don't give a rat's ass about this stuff as long as the couple is honest will all guests that they were married on the home turf first. As long as you do that, I really don't care.
BUT...me deciding to save my vacation time and money for a reenactment does NOT DEFINE WHETHER OR NOT I AM A GOOD FRIEND. That definitely takes the cake for stupid this morning.
I don't care who you are - I have limited vacation time and money and if you aren't one of my favorite nieces or nephews I will not be there. I will send a gift and I will continue the same relationship and support we had prior to the marriage. Me spending thousands of dollars to attend a reenactment doesn't make a make me a poor friend. Get real.

Fine. Everyone has limited vacation time. Hell, I have three family weddings this year (including my own) and yet I'm able to schedule enough days to be where I need to be. Is it a matter of priority? Yes. Her being legal before doesn't change her wedding or whether I'd go or not. It's just the legal stuff that's taken care of. But we all have our priorities. One of mine is not calling people liars or degrading them with terms like "pretty princess day" or "playing dress up" because their wedding doesn't fit the cookie cutter plan that The Knot seems to demand.

A wedding is where 2 people get married. This is not 2 events. The "legal part" (which is insulting to those who may have had a JOP ceremony btw since you are so inclined to tell us how insulting PPD is b) is your wedding. Whether that be JOP or a big fancy church wedding or what ever. You don't get 2 weddings.

Quite simply, I disagree. And the JOP wedding is the same thing as being legalled, at least in my (admittedly) limited experience, so no it's not insulting. Some people choose to just have that, some people choose to add more to it.
In many cultures, two weddings are the norm with only one of them being of the legal variety, so to be so stringent to say that no one gets two weddings is wrong.

Just curious as to whether or not you would admit that your cousin is married after doing the legal stuff? Again, this is a yes or no question: is your cousin married before going to Cuba? I've yet to hear a straight answer from a single person who tries to justify these PPDs.

This. It always turns into "Well, they don't think they are married, so..."
Trust me, if they are having a PPD, we know what they think. As someone who knows they signed the paperwork, what do YOU think.

Exactly- what happens if (God Forbid) something happens to one of them after their "paperwork" but before their symbolic ceremony.

Under their rational the survivor should turn to the life insurance company and say "Here is your cheque back, we didn't consider ourselves married so I am not entitled to this money as it is for surviving spouses only".

Why do these things only work 1 way???

XrebeccaX · April 2015

We had a DW and we had to do quite a bit of work/pay more money in fees AND do some extra traveling to make a legal marriage. I wouldn't have done it another way, the wedding was the whole point of the trip!

And it was the ONLY way I would have felt okay about inviting people to fly thousands of miles/take time away from work and family/etc to be there. As it happened there were plenty of people who didn't come because people have lives and my wedding was not of paramount importance to anyone except, you know, my husband and I (and perhaps our parents).

It's because of these symbolic ceremonies that I still get asked "okay but when did you REALLY get married" or "but you got married in the US, right?" or "did you guys do the legal part before or after?" Gahhhh

Symbolic ceremony due to marriage requirements n mexico

Re: Symbolic ceremony due to marriage requirements n mexico

Choose Another Board

Search Boards