Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Disengagement



Posted by Kate | February 28, 2007 9:02 AM

I wish ReadyMade magazine would do a wedding issue.

Posted by Brendan | February 28, 2007 9:06 AM

Don't know about divorces, but she likes red carperts?

See pictures here


Posted by sijeka | February 28, 2007 9:07 AM

They're just trying to meet a demand. There are an awful lot of rich gals in this country who have been mistakenly led to believe that they are princesses and deserve a Royal Wedding. This has been the case for fifty or sixty years, but it's really taken off recently.

150 years ago when weddings were invented "fancy" meant a house full of flowers (few were married in a church). Now, thanks to the malign influence of De Beers, the slavers who invented the wholly bogus "tradition" of the diamond wedding ring, and a generation of professional planners, it means carefully calculated $50,000-plus party.

And little girls start learning how to spend that money when they're three. By the time they're old enough to be sold to the man of their choice, they've got it down to a T. These magazines are NECESSARY. Running a big wedding is extraordinarily difficult, not just because of the complexity and cost, but because the primary participant, the bride, is expected and encouraged to be certifiably mentally ill for up to a year beforehand. If she's not, it's taken as a sign she doesn't care enough.

Of course, the money would be much better spent on a house or a mutual fund, for their future. These princesses all have a difficult time adjusting to the post-princess era, when they discover to their horror that the only people on earth who give a shit what they think, including their husbands, are the clerks in the shops at the mall.

Posted by Fnarf | February 28, 2007 9:11 AM

Someday, this horror will all belong to gay men.

Posted by mason | February 28, 2007 9:16 AM

With the threat to marriage from the gays all these breeders are trying to get their dream weddings in before us homos ruin the sanctity of it all.

Next up...

Homonuptual Magazine

Posted by monkey | February 28, 2007 9:20 AM

I'd sooner buy Civil Union magazine.

Posted by Smarm | February 28, 2007 9:27 AM

certifiably mentally ill is right. If you're not sure whether you ought to marry your intended, a magazine quiz is really going to help you out? Yeesh.

Posted by SeattleExile | February 28, 2007 9:30 AM

Dammit, what the hell am I gonna do without the quiz on page 26?!?

Posted by Noink | February 28, 2007 9:37 AM

Marriage is great, and the rights & benefits should be available to all, but the whole wedding thing is a total fucking nightmare. Especially the diamond. I work in an office and it is all I can do not to vomit when Ms. 20-something clueless robot comes in to show off her diamond. I swear next time I won't be able to resist asking how many 12 year olds had their arms chopped off for her precious rock.

And that is just the beginning. I could go on all day, but I'll spare you.

Also, "These princesses all have a difficult time adjusting to the post-princess era, when they discover to their horror that the only people on earth who give a shit what they think, including their husbands, are the clerks in the shops at the mall"... hilarious!

Finally, Dan, you gotta post the "Quiz on page 26".

Posted by Mike in MO | February 28, 2007 9:40 AM

accessories, flowers, fancy dinners, special outfits, getting to be the center of attention-- why in the hell aren't profit-driven corporations lobbying the shit out of people to legalize gay marriages? i mean, HELLO not only would they get to market to every new gay couple wanting to marry, but to all those we've-been-together-a-while Double Income No Kids couples as well?
i'm surprised that those who are republicans for "fiscal reasons" can't see why gays getting married is a big 'ol CA-CHING!

Posted by marriage is a gay industry | February 28, 2007 9:56 AM

Diamond engagement rings weren't *completely* unprecedent before DeBeers. Maximillien of Hapsburg gave Margaret of Burgundy a diamond before marrying her and preceding to run her territories into the ground. Lovely precedent, don't you think?

Sapphires: more traditional, much cheaper, and damn prettier, in my opinion.
As to the other aspects of Engagement, I had a bridal shower because my mother started having a nervous breakdown when I didn't want to bother. She was good enough to make me the dress I wanted, though: although she thought it make me look fat, but what the heck, I got my ideal wedding dress out of one bedsheet and two hours' listening to her criticisms.

Posted by katherine | February 28, 2007 10:03 AM

Would you take wedding advice from someone who's only had one wedding??

Posted by Laurel | February 28, 2007 10:18 AM

The prior example of the Most Evil People On Earth (i.e., any kind of European royalty, unless it's spammers) does not make for a "tradition", no matter how big a hardon you have for Princess Di.

Posted by Fnarf | February 28, 2007 10:31 AM

Well the only reason there will be gay marriage will be to open the doors to a massive gay marriage industry. It is all about money. If you think hetro marriage is tacky well look out because gay marriage will blow it out of the water.
Gay marriage or hetro marriage it is all tacky programing.
I think pet marriage is next. After all the pet industry is getting just as tacky. People dress pets buy jewelry for them even burry them in pet cemeteries. Why not buy a male and female (Male male for gay mans pet wedding) pets and spend thousands to marry them. Dogs are probably the best choice since putting a cat in a wedding dress with all the crinoline would be a nightmare.

Posted by Brian | February 28, 2007 10:36 AM

Ugh. Back in my hotel catering days, I stayed as far away from the weddings as humanly possible. They are horror shows, and no matter what you do, someone is going to be unhappy.

The most depressing part was the pre-payment aspect: People who HAD to be married at the Olympic Hotel would sometimes come in with four or five credit cards to spread the balance over.

Add to that the bitchy brides and manipulative mothers-of-the-brides, the ruthless wedding planners, the inevitable day-of-wedding dramas, the drunk guests, the obnoxious deejays, etc, etc, etc, and you couldn't get me near the wedding-industial complex. I was happy to stick to the charity functions.

btw, The funniest thing about the weddings was the number of people who told me that they'd had a wonderful first wedding at the Olympic. A lot of them said it was the best part of the marriage :-)

Posted by catalina vel-duray | February 28, 2007 10:42 AM

This was fun to read after spending a morning doing history homeschool stuff about the fall of the Roman Empire.

Posted by amazonmidwife | February 28, 2007 10:57 AM

Check out if you want to read literally hundreds of deliciously horrifying stories of selfish, tacky, terminally materialistic brides and brides-to-be.

Although I don't think it's automatically terrible for the couple to go ring-shopping together. There's a difference between "I'm going with you so I can tell you exactly what to buy for me and how much you'll be spending on it" and "We should make this decision as a couple because it's a major purchase that we'll be living with for a really long time." It's the same logic as buying a dishwasher together. I guess part of the rationale in the latter case is that the couple will be combining their finances anyway, if they haven't already.

Posted by Sarah | February 28, 2007 10:59 AM

Sarah: the difference is the dishwasher can actually accomplish something. All a diamond does is reflect light.

Posted by Mike in MO | February 28, 2007 11:39 AM

puh-leez fnarf. think before you jump up to hear yourself talk.

sorry but they are not meeting demand, they are creating it and manufacturing consent along the way. seriously -- i've never heard any woman say anything close to "where is the magazine that will teach me how to be engaged?"

not even the invented discourse of cosmo, the wedding magazines, and their ilk ever ran any ad or sales campaigns like it.

Posted by chuckles | February 28, 2007 12:05 PM

Well it's certainly a good idea to "surprise" your fiancee with a ring that cost two-months salary, and she winds up hating it.

Posted by keshmeshi | February 28, 2007 12:14 PM

My sister got married three years ago. She wanted nothing to do with all the wedding hoopla. But, her husband-to-be was totally into it. He planned most of the wedding that included many crazy little things like a Rolls Royce to take them from wedding to reception. A lot of money was spent, and he paid for all of it.

One close friend got married about a year ago. Her parents were willing to pay for a huge wedding, or give them a down payment for the house. My friend wanted the house, her husband-to-be wanted the huge wedding. They did the huge wedding. But, unlike my bro-in-law he did not do most of the planning or paying.

Now another friend is about to get married. She AND her husband would rather have a down payment on a house. Her parents are willing & able to pay for a huge wedding. But, her parents will not pay for a down payment on the house. The parents want the wedding. They are doing a wedding and will save their own money for the house.

All that being said, if I were rich I would be so into all the glamour and glitz. The guy I'm dating recently said that he thinks that big weddings are foolish and a waste of money. The rational part of me agrees, who the hell would go broke on a wedding? But, if I were rich and I could donate an amount equal to that that I spent on the wedding (to ease my guilt) I would so do it.

My point--not all women are crazy! In fact all of my married friends/family are quite sane. And in some cases it was the men who got caught up in the wedding fantasy. My mom asked for a sewing machine instead of a wedding ring. As she thought wedding rings were stupid and sewing machines were useful.

Posted by Papayas | February 28, 2007 12:21 PM

Wedding stuff is quite the craze right now (maybe it always has been?). We just created a game called "Dream Day Wedding" that is specifically tailored for the women that dream of their *perfect* day... if you're one of those, check it out:

Posted by Robert | February 28, 2007 1:19 PM

the funny thing is that most people don't give a shit about the actual wedding at all. what people really care about is the reception, the party. why not save yourself all the trouble? take a vacation to hawaii, get married by yourselves on the beach, and then take all the money you saved and throw a party for all your friends to come and congratulate you. its usually the reception where people get skimpy on things...but that's the part you should do right. everyone loves a party.

Posted by funny thing is.. | February 28, 2007 1:51 PM

i agree with 10; you gotta post that quiz, dan. i'm already married 10 yrs., no wedding at all, and i want to find out if i made a mistake, maybe divorce his ass, sell the kids and use the dough to rope a new dope and DO IT RIGHT THIS TIME, DAMMIT. with the big dress, ice sculpture, ice ring, iced tower cake. how else can i know i'm happy?

Posted by ellarosa | February 28, 2007 11:00 PM

I have a great idea Dan. We can publish a magazine "How to Save Money on Weddings." Of course, the first piece of advice would be "don't waste your money buying stupid magazines that tell you what to do," and hence we'd put ourselves out of business on the first issue.

Oh well - it was a great partnership while it lasted.

Posted by Mary | March 1, 2007 2:42 AM

Wedding magazines? That's sick. Why can't they stock a ridiculously large selection of porn magazines, like every other normal newsagent in a service station or near a station? ;)

There's no way I'm going to pay lots of money for a wedding, opposite sex or otherwise, assuming I actually get married anyway..

Posted by Peter | March 1, 2007 4:45 AM

This is the sort of tripe that tries to make people feel like they are "less than" in every way. If you are too poor for a wedding for 100, let alone an engagement party for 100. If your boyfriend didn't propose to you like a scene from the movies. If your diamond isn't massive enough. It's such garbage and so frustrating!

My sister recently got married and there were 18 total people there, including the bride and groom. Short ceremony in a park, nice dinner. It was by far the coolest/best wedding I have ever been to.

I can only hope I have the sense to keep it small scale like that. But now I don't know if I should even be considering marriage... where oh where is that quiz?

Posted by Rachel | March 1, 2007 8:34 AM

My wife and I got married in Las Vegas with just a few people there -- and even that was too many. Our proper reception wasn't until months later, against our will -- the real reception was a Tullycraft and Rizzo show in the parking lot of a Home Depot in Henderson, NV the next night.

Posted by Fnarf | March 1, 2007 8:36 AM

My wife and I eloped twelve years ago. It was the best decision we ever made. We saved a ton of money, passed on all the "traditions" foisted on us by the wedding industry and threw a great party for friends later.

After watching so many people pointlessly freak out over the years, I highly recommend eloping. Trust me, your mother will get over it. Then, she can start agitating for a child.

Posted by Carson | March 1, 2007 9:56 AM

ReadyMade did a wedding issue. It was pretty cool. It had a cake made of Ho Hos.

I helped my husband pick out the ring, but it was only $30. We spent $300 dollars for our wedding, total. I made most of the decorations and we had the ceremony at the garden of a local museum (which was a free venue!)

Posted by Andrea | March 1, 2007 5:05 PM

It's a fucking epidemic. Friends of mine have spent entire conversations picking out dresses, picking out shoes, picking out cakes. It's almost hilarious how much the groom -- her supposed true love -- does not figure. One has since moved onto to thinking about children's names, whether she'd take her husband's name, and picking out kitchens.

The most bizarre thing is that they're all single, and have never had the long-term relationship to justify even beginning to think about these things.

Posted by Gloria | March 2, 2007 5:18 AM

Fnarf @14. I hope that was a generalized 'you,' or you didn't actually read my comment.

My one heavily-dropped-hint regarding rings to my now husband: no diamonds. Everything else aside, I don't even find them as pretty.

Posted by katherine | March 2, 2007 6:34 AM

xvcdu zpxalgyf xqle tzwq ianldbk hupax wbnakfh

Posted by wfcnd muochbi | March 2, 2007 7:51 PM

jsazwlbk rlfmytvp jowhkefpu sjzughia zetik joqzti mxyp

Posted by rkonfj mzics | March 2, 2007 7:52 PM

After he proposed, my fiance gave me a budget, and I spent weeks researching diamond provenances, cuts, "light return," settings... I ended up with the features in a ring that were important to me (cut, sparkle, color return), and a beautiful vintage-inspired setting. And I came in under budget.

Not all that "romantic" according to all the movies and magazines -- but he knew I wouldn't be happy with such a big purchase unless I got to research it beforehand myself. And he was relieved that he didn't have to try to guess blindly what I would have really wanted.

It's all about knowing your partner.

Those magazines are obscene.

Posted by leukothea | March 3, 2007 8:05 AM

I have a co-worker who I like just fine but who speaks of little else beyond planning her wedding. I try to be tolerant, because, as I said, I like her. She's so happy to be getting married. However, it's really fatiguing. What begins to gnaw at me is the sense of entitlement behind her lengthy and detailed monologues, like it's her birth-right to go on endlessly about all the little details, as if it's actually interesting to everybody else. I just can't help feeling alone and stranded in the "land that feminism forgot." It's just depressing to watch another woman living up to such a key sexist stereotype. The only thing that's worse is all the fuss and inflated sense of entitlement surrounding babymaking these days.

Posted by mcat | March 3, 2007 11:17 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).