A Feminist Wedding? No Such Thing.

2Q==

Strap yourself in. This article is one of the most muddled and terrifying things I have ever read. It sounds like it’s a satirical piece from The Onion. There is so much cognitive dissonance, so much Stockholm Syndrome, so much sucking up to the patriarchy and such proud assertion of so little insight. This article and the mentality enables patriarchy while the writer claims to be a feminist firebrand.

5 Ways I Made My Wedding Feminist

Repeat after me THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FEMINIST MARRIAGE. Saying you had a feminist marriage is like claiming to be a Catholic Feminist. You can’t make marriage ‘feminist’ any more than you can make the Catholic Church feminist.

Marriage (Love Jail; a legal contract to promote social order in order to oppress women which women are lured into by the promise of being Princess For A Day and satisfying feeling of being owned) is a medieval deeply patriarchal institution that enables, promotes and fertilises sexism, misogyny, discrimination and inequality, no matter how many ‘feminist readings’ you put into it. It should be illegal to have any feminist readings at a wedding if people do they should charged with false advertising in the same way if people sold cigarettes with pictures of healthy new born babies on the packet.

Purple washing’ (I just made that term up as purple is the colour of feminism) marriage makes you a handmaiden of patriarchy. ‘For example, while I originally wanted to walk down the aisle alone, in a nod to my independence, giving my dad his moment and avoiding hurting his feelings was much more important to me’

What the actual fuck? She didn’t want to hurt her daddy’s feelings by doing what she wanted on a very significant day which was to proudly stand up for her beliefs (or so she says)? It was more important to cave into her dad’s hurt feelings and her own need to please, her need to not ruffle feathers or rock the boat than do what she wanted?

Here’s a flash for you. Feminism is all and only about challenging and subverting women’s self worth being tied up with pleasing, not ruffling feathers and not rocking the boat.

‘The idea of wearing virginal white bothered me. But finding a non-white dress was a lot harder than I thought, as they are still rare.’ ARE YOU FOR REAL? Has she never heard of a dressmaker or tailor who makes WHATEVER YOU WANT IN WHATEVER COLOR YOU WANT?

‘I ultimately decided on an ivory dress, which felt like a compromise’. I’m making a leap here but this indicates she felt she had to purchase a dress from a bridal shop and from nowhere else because if she wore a dress or gown purchased anywhere else the magic wouldn’t work? Let’s assume she only thought she was allowed to wear a dress from a bridal shop. When she walked past ALL THE COLORFUL BRIDESMAID DRESSES thinking ‘I don’t want to wear white’ it never dawned on her she could wear a bridesmaid’s dress or ask them to make a bridal gown of her choosing in one of the colors she saw the bridesmaid dresses were in.

No veil. Fuck the patriarchy. I’m a feminist. ‘The lifting of the veil is another symbol of property transfer’. Let’s unpack this doozy. So she was okay with marriage as a symbol of ownership. She was fine with the symbol of transfer of ownership of her dad walking her down the aisle. She didn’t mind the ring which is the most common sign that you are someone’s property. but she balked at the veil. Because it’s a ‘symbol of property transfer’. WOW! What a hero. That’s sticking it to the man.

Veils have been worn for many, many reasons over centuries; to ward off the evil eye, to pay homage to a sacred space, to indicate virginity etc. Bridal veils are now one thing and one thing only. A fashion accessory. So she went without the veil. Let me guess, this wasn’t hard. It wasn’t a sacrifice at all. She just didn’t want to wear a veil. File this one under she makes decisions emotionally and backs them rationally. She didn’t want to wear a veil but has ‘purple washed’ it to support her faux feminist narrative.

I’m not sure what’s more bizarre, that she thought not taking her husband’s name was in some way radical or progressive or that she even mentioned it. Not doing something illogical, crazy and desperate like changing your name to your husband’s and selling it as a feminist choice reveals what level of internalized misogyny and lack of critical thought process this woman and all the people agreeing with her have.

No I am not going to applaud something as ‘not as bad as it used to be’ as feminist. It’s not feminist. I’d have more respect for someone who just changed their name, called themselves Mrs. My Husband’s Surname, got a joint bank account, stayed home and became a slave and an incubator. I’d have far more respect for a stay at home mother and wife who when asked why she chose what she chose responded, ‘I didn’t give it any thought’ than someone who asserts to have not only given it some thought and writes an article about her feminist wedding when it was clearly of festival of ‘Keeping The Guys Happy’.

Seeing as though her nuptials were so feminist I am sure she asked him to marry her and she bought him a ring. Nah, that didn’t happen. Bet she got a bended knee popped the question moment and a velvet box. It wouldn’t surprise me if he even asked her father first for ‘her hand in marriage’.

20 million dollars says the children will get their dad’s surname.

The only way of making a wedding feminist is by not getting married. Which doesn’t mean you can’t have a wedding. Wedding yes. Marriage no.

Go Back