Author Topic: BWW after a decade of living together...  (Read 11631 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Poppea

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2458
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #105 on: July 22, 2013, 09:42:29 PM »

If I were the OP I too, would have a problem with a "shower" after 10 years, 3 kids and a house. 

The purpose of a bridal shower is to help a couple trying to establish a household, not to help upgrade one.  That why many look down on baby showers for a second or third child, the baby stuff has already been set up.

It feels like a gift grab because it is one.


I would have absolutely no interest in attending a bachelorette party for a couple that had cohabited and produced 3 kids either.  In that case I'm sure the bride knew what to expect on her wedding night and had long said goodbye to "singlehood".  I'd happily attend a girls only dinner though.

Just as second babies can politely have a "meet the baby party, but not a shower, a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife can be feted, but it is more tasteful in a different form.

This sounds an awful lot like you're saying that Happy Couples who have slept together are not allowed the same kind of celebration as those who haven't.

I think you're deliberately looking for that.

I sure didn't take that away from her comment.

I'm not sure how else to interpret "a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife".

Thats only part of my sentence. 

"a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife can be feted, but it is more tasteful in a different form."


"Not allowed" and "more tasteful" are not the same thing.



Aeris

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 9638
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #106 on: July 22, 2013, 09:43:46 PM »

If I were the OP I too, would have a problem with a "shower" after 10 years, 3 kids and a house. 

The purpose of a bridal shower is to help a couple trying to establish a household, not to help upgrade one.  That why many look down on baby showers for a second or third child, the baby stuff has already been set up.

It feels like a gift grab because it is one.


I would have absolutely no interest in attending a bachelorette party for a couple that had cohabited and produced 3 kids either.  In that case I'm sure the bride knew what to expect on her wedding night and had long said goodbye to "singlehood".  I'd happily attend a girls only dinner though.

Just as second babies can politely have a "meet the baby party, but not a shower, a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife can be feted, but it is more tasteful in a different form.

This sounds an awful lot like you're saying that Happy Couples who have slept together are not allowed the same kind of celebration as those who haven't.

I think you're deliberately looking for that.

I sure didn't take that away from her comment.

I'm not sure how else to interpret "a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife".

Thats only part of my sentence. 

"a bride that is new to the title but not the functions of a wife can be feted, but it is more tasteful in a different form."

That was the part of your sentence Toots apparently believed I had somehow misinterpreted. I don't think she and I had any explicit disagreement about what the last part of your sentence meant.

thedudeabides

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 512
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #107 on: July 22, 2013, 09:44:38 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

Poppea

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2458
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #108 on: July 22, 2013, 09:44:50 PM »
Wait, so you're arguing that if a couple lives together or mates, their later wedding is somehow less special?

I'm not really *arguing* that. I don't think that my own *personal* reaction needs to be shared by anyone else.

But yes, it's not as exciting to me. I'm pleased for them, but I'm not going to join in the same giddy foofah that accompanies the marriages of people who are starting *out* married.

You must not get excited about very many weddings these days.

I haven't finished reading all the replies. But a quick comment.

Of the 4 weddings I've attended in the last 4 years, none were for couples who had lived together or had children prior to their marriage. And the youngest of the couples were 27. The 5th wedding I'm attending next month is also with a 30 yr old non-cohabitating couple.

It does feel different. And I feel the same as Toots. If you've already started your life together and started a family, I don't see the need for a BWW.  To me, a wedding is to say, come celebrate as we start our life's together. I don't know what a huge celebration after a couple of maids is supposed to say.

How about that we're joining the realms of the legally and socially married to demonstrate our lifelong commitment to one another, just like every other couple who marries?

But that feels like they are diminishing the commitment they made to each other while starting a family. Weren't they already committed for life when they had their first child?

Maybe? Maybe not? I'm not sure how we're supposed to know what kind of commitment they made to one another when they had kids.

Exactly.  When a couple gets married, they state their intentions loud and clear for everyone: We're in this for the long haul, socially, legally, possibly religiously, officially.  They're saying, unambigously, what their intentions are.

But didnt they say that when they chose to have multiple children together? Maybe that's why I don't get it. If I have a child, especially multiple ones, with someone, I have committed my life to that person. There are children now involved and I'm not still trying out the relationship. To me, having a child with someone is as or more binding than any legal or religous ceremony.  Well, unless I'm doing an anonymous donor and then there no current or future commitment.

But you're just talking about what it means TO YOU to have kids with someone. You have absolutely no way of knowing if that same type of commitment, or intent to commit, is there for someone else with kids.

Maybe the kids were all accidental, and they decided that keeping them was the best option, even though they weren't ready to commit for life, officially. Maybe the kids were intentional, but they still weren't ready to commit for life, officially. Who knows?

A house, ten years together and three kids and they weren't committed?  Ick.

Poppea

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2458
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #109 on: July 22, 2013, 09:47:21 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

Since no one know you IRL I think you should make your decisions based on what makes you happy not the anonymous members of a forum.

lady_disdain

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5862
    • Contemporary Jewelry
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #110 on: July 22, 2013, 09:53:54 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

I wouldn't. Your relationship is up to the two of you and I wish you both all happiness.

Hmmmmm

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6465
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #111 on: July 22, 2013, 09:55:46 PM »
Wait, so you're arguing that if a couple lives together or mates, their later wedding is somehow less special?

I'm not really *arguing* that. I don't think that my own *personal* reaction needs to be shared by anyone else.

But yes, it's not as exciting to me. I'm pleased for them, but I'm not going to join in the same giddy foofah that accompanies the marriages of people who are starting *out* married.

You must not get excited about very many weddings these days.

I haven't finished reading all the replies. But a quick comment.

Of the 4 weddings I've attended in the last 4 years, none were for couples who had lived together or had children prior to their marriage. And the youngest of the couples were 27. The 5th wedding I'm attending next month is also with a 30 yr old non-cohabitating couple.

It does feel different. And I feel the same as Toots. If you've already started your life together and started a family, I don't see the need for a BWW.  To me, a wedding is to say, come celebrate as we start our life's together. I don't know what a huge celebration after a couple of maids is supposed to say.

How about that we're joining the realms of the legally and socially married to demonstrate our lifelong commitment to one another, just like every other couple who marries?

But that feels like they are diminishing the commitment they made to each other while starting a family. Weren't they already committed for life when they had their first child?

Maybe? Maybe not? I'm not sure how we're supposed to know what kind of commitment they made to one another when they had kids.

Exactly.  When a couple gets married, they state their intentions loud and clear for everyone: We're in this for the long haul, socially, legally, possibly religiously, officially.  They're saying, unambigously, what their intentions are.

But didnt they say that when they chose to have multiple children together? Maybe that's why I don't get it. If I have a child, especially multiple ones, with someone, I have committed my life to that person. There are children now involved and I'm not still trying out the relationship. To me, having a child with someone is as or more binding than any legal or religous ceremony.  Well, unless I'm doing an anonymous donor and then there no current or future commitment.

But you're just talking about what it means TO YOU to have kids with someone. You have absolutely no way of knowing if that same type of commitment, or intent to commit, is there for someone else with kids.

Maybe the kids were all accidental, and they decided that keeping them was the best option, even though they weren't ready to commit for life, officially. Maybe the kids were intentional, but they still weren't ready to commit for life, officially. Who knows?

A house, ten years together and three kids and they weren't committed?  Ick.
I've been trying to write a response that doesn't go too far into personal values, but have been unable. So I'll just agree with Poppea. One child un-committed can be an accident. Multiple? Poor planning is the nicest way I can say it.

*inviteseller

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1821
  • I am Queen Mommy
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #112 on: July 22, 2013, 10:02:04 PM »
I personally don't care what kind of wedding any couple has..to me if they want after all this time the BWW, fine.  But they should realize there are somethings that aren't quite right..3 showers?  Showers are to help the couple set up their home..after 10 years that should be established.  Registering for things, and expecting large wedding gifts?  No, you are already established.  So throw whatever party you want, but understand that after 10 years, it is not so much congratulations as finally!

thedudeabides

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 512
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #113 on: July 22, 2013, 10:06:59 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

Since no one know you IRL I think you should make your decisions based on what makes you happy not the anonymous members of a forum.

My point simply was that there has been at least one thread in the recent past where people got up in arms over a couple claiming to be married without actually having had the ceremony, yet here in this thread, people are saying that to them, it's not any big thing when people bother to get married after living together for an extended period of time, because really, they're just thinking "finally" instead of "congratulations."  It's an utter belittling of the fact that people choose to commit to marriage based on nothing more than taking longer than others to choose to do so.

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 30648
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #114 on: July 22, 2013, 10:21:11 PM »
I don't see the conflict in the reactions that you do.

The up-in-arms-ness was about the deception.

I do see people who get upset about not being treated as though they're married when they're not, about not being considered a "real" couple, about other people judging whether they're committed or not. And yet, there's the argument that when they get married, suddenly they're committed, or more committed--but then what were they before?

That lack of logic and consistency is actually why I personally am not a fan of living together without being married.

Part of the "fizz" of the celebrations around people who are getting married is that their *lives* are going to change a lot. Just as they do when people have graduations or confirmations--something is supposed to change in their lives. Or something *has* changed very, very recently.

But with someone who's been married for so long--to the tune of not one but THREE children--well, not much is really changing in their lives. They may be making a more legal commitment, but their lives are really not going to be that different.
   So an acknowledgment, yes, of course, to this solemn and binding commitment. And happiness and celebration for them, sure. But let's not go overboard.
   But it's not a life change. They don't have any adjusting to do; they've been living in the state of togetherness that a married couple lives in, and for a very LONG time.

Aeris

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 9638
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #115 on: July 22, 2013, 10:27:36 PM »
I personally don't care what kind of wedding any couple has..to me if they want after all this time the BWW, fine.  But they should realize there are somethings that aren't quite right..3 showers?  Showers are to help the couple set up their home..after 10 years that should be established.  Registering for things, and expecting large wedding gifts?  No, you are already established.  So throw whatever party you want, but understand that after 10 years, it is not so much congratulations as finally!

Is there a "Finally!" section of wedding cards I have missed in the Hallmark aisle? The bolded is a fairly offensive sentiment. A couple waits a few years longer than some other couple, and suddenly they don't even get 'congratulations'?? Just 'finally!'? That's utterly heartless and extraordinarily condescending.

There's not actually any etiquette rule that I'm aware of that decrees that showers are only allowed for 'unestablished' people anyway. I've been to quite a number of wedding showers over the past few years, and not a single one has been for a bride that was still living at home with her parents, or even in her first year out of their home.

And as has been asked before: what does it mean to be 'established'? If you aren't supposed to have a shower if you are 'established', does that mean if you don't meet your mate until you are 40 that, tough luck, no shower for you?

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7351
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #116 on: July 22, 2013, 10:29:11 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

The problem is the difference between what a couple considers their relationship and how that is perceived by the surrounding community.

Over and and over again, I have heard how people don't need "a piece of paper" to have a life together.  I agree!  You don't have to get married to make a life together.

But, after living together and making a life together, going through a step that you skipped doesn't obligate the community to behave the same way as if it was a couple who were just starting out.

In contrast to the previous threads that had a problem with people getting legally married, say, less than a year before having a BWW, I don't see it as a problem.

But, if you are going to live in a stable relationship, have children and in every way share your life with someone, I am going to treat you the same as any other couple who is married.  I wouldn't use the terms husband or wife but in every other way socially...

Do you want to be treated differently?  Do you want me to consider that your relationship, though very similar to married couples is somehow not as permanent?  Not as important?

How do you want me to treat you differently from people living in the same way with the only difference being a piece of paper?

Aeris

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 9638
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #117 on: July 22, 2013, 10:32:14 PM »
I don't see the conflict in the reactions that you do.

The up-in-arms-ness was about the deception.

I do see people who get upset about not being treated as though they're married when they're not, about not being considered a "real" couple, about other people judging whether they're committed or not. And yet, there's the argument that when they get married, suddenly they're committed, or more committed--but then what were they before?

That lack of logic and consistency is actually why I personally am not a fan of living together without being married.

Part of the "fizz" of the celebrations around people who are getting married is that their *lives* are going to change a lot. Just as they do when people have graduations or confirmations--something is supposed to change in their lives. Or something *has* changed very, very recently.

But with someone who's been married for so long--to the tune of not one but THREE children--well, not much is really changing in their lives. They may be making a more legal commitment, but their lives are really not going to be that different.
   So an acknowledgment, yes, of course, to this solemn and binding commitment. And happiness and celebration for them, sure. But let's not go overboard.
  But it's not a life change. They don't have any adjusting to do; they've been living in the state of togetherness that a married couple lives in, and for a very LONG time.

For the bolded: You don't have the right to make *any* of these determinations for someone else. Not at all. I know a number of couples who married after living together for some time, and for every single one of them they felt that their relationship changed markedly when they made the official step of getting married.

Their lives may well change dramatically, and you don't get to say that's not so.

Aeris

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 9638
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #118 on: July 22, 2013, 10:36:03 PM »
You know, you guys have convinced me.  In an age when roughly half of all marriages end in divorce anyway, why should I bother marrying my girlfriend?  We'll just live together and make a family and tell everyone that we're husband and wife without going through the ceremony and public declaration.  Nobody here would have a problem with that, right?

The problem is the difference between what a couple considers their relationship and how that is perceived by the surrounding community.

Over and and over again, I have heard how people don't need "a piece of paper" to have a life together.  I agree!  You don't have to get married to make a life together.

But, after living together and making a life together, going through a step that you skipped doesn't obligate the community to behave the same way as if it was a couple who were just starting out.

In contrast to the previous threads that had a problem with people getting legally married, say, less than a year before having a BWW, I don't see it as a problem.

But, if you are going to live in a stable relationship, have children and in every way share your life with someone, I am going to treat you the same as any other couple who is married.  I wouldn't use the terms husband or wife but in every other way socially...

Do you want to be treated differently?  Do you want me to consider that your relationship, though very similar to married couples is somehow not as permanent?  Not as important?

How do you want me to treat you differently from people living in the same way with the only difference being a piece of paper?

It's simple.

Couple A: Meets. Dates. Falls in love. Gets Married.* Moves in together.

Couple B: Meets. Dates. Falls in love. Moves in together. Gets Married.*

*Treat these events the same.

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 30648
Re: BWW after a decade of living together...
« Reply #119 on: July 22, 2013, 10:41:01 PM »
I don't see the conflict in the reactions that you do.

The up-in-arms-ness was about the deception.

I do see people who get upset about not being treated as though they're married when they're not, about not being considered a "real" couple, about other people judging whether they're committed or not. And yet, there's the argument that when they get married, suddenly they're committed, or more committed--but then what were they before?

That lack of logic and consistency is actually why I personally am not a fan of living together without being married.

Part of the "fizz" of the celebrations around people who are getting married is that their *lives* are going to change a lot. Just as they do when people have graduations or confirmations--something is supposed to change in their lives. Or something *has* changed very, very recently.

But with someone who's been married for so long--to the tune of not one but THREE children--well, not much is really changing in their lives. They may be making a more legal commitment, but their lives are really not going to be that different.
   So an acknowledgment, yes, of course, to this solemn and binding commitment. And happiness and celebration for them, sure. But let's not go overboard.
  But it's not a life change. They don't have any adjusting to do; they've been living in the state of togetherness that a married couple lives in, and for a very LONG time.

For the bolded: You don't have the right to make *any* of these determinations for someone else. Not at all. I know a number of couples who married after living together for some time, and for every single one of them they felt that their relationship changed markedly when they made the official step of getting married.

Their lives may well change dramatically, and you don't get to say that's not so.

But the way in which that relationship is changing is in an internal, highly private, very intimate arena that is *not really any of my business.* In all the exterior ways that are acceptable for me to be privy to, their lives aren't changing that much.

Which is why I would react with less "fizz" for those couples. Not with NO gladness, of course not! I value the institution of marriage too much to have no reaction, or god forbid a negative reaction. Just with less indulgence.