How do you morph a centuries old traditional institution into precisely what you want it to be just like that?
I can’t help it. I chuckled my way through this earnest account of a girl’s struggle to incorporate feminism into her wedding. (An off-white gown? Money to charity? Wot? Because no traditional woman would ever do that.)
Emboldened, I blogged again – this time about the ways I was incorporating feminism into the wedding. I wrote about keeping my last name and buying a not-quite white dress from a store that gives all the money to charity. I blogged about the struggle Andrew and I had getting engaged in the same month that California overturned same-sex marriage rights. We had actually discussed not getting married until everyone could; instead, we decided to use our impending marriage as a way to talk about same-sex marriage among our friends and family. In our engagement announcement, for example, we asked anyone considering getting us a gift to instead donate to an organisation fighting for same-sex marriage rights. It felt good, feminist even, to write about an institution so wrought with sexism and discuss ways to make it our own.
You know, if I were to stop laughing, I’d say, sure, one must know and understand what any tradition means before participating, in order for said tradition to be meaningful.
However, let’s pretend you have always found a particular tradition offensive, and have railed against it publicly–it is at least a little bit funny when you just drop it all and join in. Albeit in a random, haphazard way, accompanied by plenty of neurotic anxiety.
by 
I’m for gay marriage, and I think the whole “we won’t get married until gay people everywhere can get married” thing is dumb, dumb, dumb. It’s not like it accomplishes anything. No one’s going to exclaim, “Oh my God, Jessica Valenti and her boyfriend won’t get married until gay people can? We’ve got to change those laws right away, guys!”
People who think marriage is “an institution so wrought with sexism” shouldn’t bother getting married.
Oh dear!
“There is no such thing as perfect when you are a feminist
getting married.”Fixed.
Maurader, you said it well and I have only one thing to add: Andrea, I think you were supposed to write “womyn,” not “girl.”
Gee, I hope this person and her fiance will not think of owning a house or a car until people everywhere have the right to a house and a car.
If marriage is so wrought with sexism and inequality, then what benefit is there really in trying to “make it your own”? What even draws you to it? One can easily make up their own institutions surrounding the legal basis.
The fact that is peeking shyly behind the contempt in this person’s writing is that there is something good about marriage that some people are forced to hate (and mischaracterize) because of the philosophical positions they’ve taken. They think that they can still have the same thing, though they besmirch its purity.
I also find her desire to see this “institution of oppression” become more inclusive to be highly ironic.
I believe individual marriages fail because of the individuals, and succeed because of the requirements of the institution. If you believe marriages succeed because of the individuals and fail because of the requirements of the institution, then WHY do you want to be yoked under such an institution? The cognitive disonance is puzzling.
Andrew, you are a thinker of great clarity.
Sorry,Matthew, I don’t know what fickle brain bubble made me call you Andrew!
Thanks Mrs. Lu. The strange thing is, for some reason everyone who mistakes me, mistakes me for an Andrew. What’s up with that? 🙂 This is the first time someone has done so who hasn’t seen me though.