Okay, this one REALLY bugged me...

[audiolove]

I guess I perceived her submission in a completely different way.  I think the writer attempted to make her story comical and dramatic; however, it backfired on her and annoyed the readers.

Here is the way I took her message....

Times are different.  I thought that the issue with the parents was not that they couldn't afford to pay for the wedding was that they didn't want to pay for it.  In saying that, I can understand how the groom felt it would be insulting for his family members to travel all that way to only have a reception of coke and cake.  Before I get flamed for my reasoning, how many ehell submission have we read where the writers' complained about food shortages, tacky venues, music selections (the hokey pokey and birdie dance anyone), etc.? especially after they spent so much time and money to be there. For those of us who dreamed about our wedding day and what we wanted, I think that many of us would have preferred something other than what her parents were suggesting.  With that being said, it sounds like she had the wedding she wanted minus the flowers and was able to do it rather inexpensively.  

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with getting married and having the reception at the courthouse, I think the shot gun wedding comment was based on stereotypical ideas.  My grandma actually dragged my pregnant seventeen year old aunt with her hooligan boyfriend to the courthouse to be married.  (The flip side, they're still married over 40 years later and are awesome people).  When we think of a Las Vegas wedding, I bet the image that comes to many people's mind is some small wedding chapel with an elvis impersonator.  While in all actuality Las Vegas hotels can provide some of the most beautiful wedding venues.  

The white wedding dress comment and her virginal status I think was stated to reiterate how it most definitely was not  a had to wedding.  I think she was attempting to be humorous.

Just my two cents...

[Twik]

I suspect part of the bride's concern was the "shotgun" wedding appearance.  While most social groups nowadays have no problem with BWWs for brides who may have to cut and run for the delivery room during the reception, I can sympathize if in her milieu, the only normal reason for a "quickie" wedding with scarely any work put into it is that one "has" to get married (for pregnancy or perhaps some other non-romantic reason), and doesn't want to attract any unnecessary attention. If I were getting married in a situation like that, I might become defensive that I was marrying for choice, not to legitimize a prospective child, or obtain health benefits, or whatever.

I must admit, the wedding her parents originally proposed sounded like the one in "The River":

We went down to the courthouse,
And the judge put it all to rest,
No wedding day smiles, no walk down the aisle,
No flowers, no wedding dress.

That doesn't excuse trying to force the parents to pay for more, but I must admit in her shoes I'd have liked my parents to act like they at least wanted me to have a pretty wedding (even if they couldn't afford it), rather than one best summed up by "no wasted effort, time or money".

[audiolove]

I'm still trying to figure out how to post someon'e else's comment when I am replying to it.

Anyway, Twik, I like how you put things.  You stated exactly what I was trying to say regarding her parents.

[DottyG]

I'm still trying to figure out how to post someon'e else's comment when I am replying to it.

Click the QUOTE link at the top of the post.  Be sure to edit out anything extra that doesn't need to be in your reply (ie, don't quote stuff that isn't applicable to what you're wanting to respond to).

And, BE SURE to put your comments AFTER the [/quote] that you see.  Otherwise, your comments will appear to be included in the other person's text.

[audiolove]

I'm still trying to figure out how to post someon'e else's comment when I am replying to it.

Click the QUOTE link at the top of the post.  Be sure to edit out anything extra that doesn't need to be in your reply (ie, don't quote stuff that isn't applicable to what you're wanting to respond to).

And, BE SURE to put your comments AFTER the

that you see.  Otherwise, your comments will appear to be included in the other person's text.
[/quote]

Thank you

[DottyG]

I'm still trying to figure out how to post someon'e else's comment when I am replying to it.

Click the QUOTE link at the top of the post.  Be sure to edit out anything extra that doesn't need to be in your reply (ie, don't quote stuff that isn't applicable to what you're wanting to respond to).

And, BE SURE to put your comments AFTER the

that you see.  Otherwise, your comments will appear to be included in the other person's text.

Thank you
[/quote]

LOL!  I didn't think about the possibility of that happening when I posted the instructions!

You understood it, though, right?  Even with the glitch that happened?

[Bob Ducca]

As far as the "entitled to a white dress" goes, why couldn't she have worn a white dress in the courthouse?  Friends of mine have worn lovely white suits or dresses for a wedding, still in the traditional white, but simple.

[kingsrings]

I was also turned off by that whole "undisputed right to wear white at my wedding". I don't know you, I don't need to know that about you, and I don't see what trumpeting your virginity has to do with ANYTHING in this story.

Yeah, this part really irked me too.  So she wants some kind of award for marrying someone she's never had sex with.  I think she ought to have her head examined, myself.  But that's just me.

I applaud her for her morals and feel the same way, but agree that it is nobody's business but the couple's, and certainly shouldn't be announced at the ceremony or reception (yes, I have heard of this being done).

[kingsrings]

Oh, come on.  If someone makes the decision to wait until marriage and accomplishes that goal and actually has a sexual attraction to their fiance, I would certainly call the "victory" hard-earned!!!!  Especially these days.  It might not be everyone's decision, but I won't fault the writer for being proud of accomplishing something that yes- IS difficult.  And I certainly won't mock her for it, and I can understand why she didn't want her wedding to look "shotgun" (although there was a very simple way around that- a long enough engagement makes it plenty obvious it's not a shotgun wedding).

-----

I would be very worried if either of my kids was a virgin for their wedding -- because I assume that it denotes a problem with sexuality or intimacy --

of course it doesn't always and some people think the state of their bottoms is very very important and a moral issue -- and go on to have fabulous sex lives once married --

but it is often a red flag that the groom is not that into sexual intimacy or has some serious hangups and since it is fairly unusual in our culture today, one has to wonder just what motivates it -- I would hazard that for many of those who haven't had sex together before marriage that it wasn't 'difficult' to abstain

I have been a virgin bride and didn't make that mistake the second time -- while my first husband was enthusiastic but incompetent in bed, I have a couple of high school classmate friends who ended up finding out their virtuous husbands were g*a*y several years into their marriages -- not fun when you have a toddler or two and find out your husband is getting it on with one of your own colleagues

I couldn't disagree with you more. Some of choose to abstain from sex before marriage because of our religious beliefs. A person's sexuality has nothing to do with whether they abstained from sex or not before marriage. It doesn't mean that there is something wrong with us. That is a very personal decision, and it's truly just the business of the couple involved (yes, even if they are your own kids-and why would you check into that anyway?).

[Lunadiana75]

Virginity is not something that is "earned", "hey 10 more hours of hard labor and I get my virginity!"  You are born with it!

If she wants to be proud of abstaining before marriage, good for her.  Why announce it to the world? Honestly, we don't care.  This is between you and your future husband only.

[Twik]

You know, I think I feel sympathy for this girl because I'm not getting "bridezilla" vibes here; I think something else is going on under the surface. The following is assuming, of course, that what's in the story isn't a gross distortion on what actually happened (a risky bet, but what else can one do?).

The writer seems somehow to be very emotionally fragile. I get the sense that she's desperately tried to get her parents' approval, and never felt that she succeeded. Now, she's finished law school, she didn't get pregnant, she's found a husband, she's even "earned" a white dress - she's done everything a "good daughter" is supposed to do to make her parents proud of her. And what's their response? That she should have the least expensive, least effort-consuming wedding that's possible. I don't think she's really upset about a BWW (certainly $2000 isn't likely to achieve a big one) - I think she was hoping they were going to go, "Darling, we're so proud of you - of course we'll throw a wonderful wedding for you, so everyone else can see how proud we are as well". The money wouldn't be as important as a little bit of gushing. Even if they're stone broke they could make her feel appreciated, and I don't think she does feel it.

Now, it appears that they themselves weren't into spending time or money on their own wedding, so I doubt they're even aware of why she's really upset, and perhaps she doesn't know herself. I think she's emotionally needy, they're emotionally cold, and the two styles aren't mixing.

[Lisbeth]

Twik, I got that impression too.

The writer isn't a bridezilla but hoped for more enthusiasm from her parents for her wedding, and feels like all she got was "Here. [small amount of cash handed to her along with back of hand] Now go away and leave us alone." It sounds to me like her parents care more about not having to be bothered themselves with any activities or expenses than about anything she wants.

But I'll agree that putting her "pride in being able to wear white" on her wedding day is TMI for me.  As far as I'm concerned, any bride can wear white, black, or magenta if she wants to.  I'm not interested in her sex life as long as she keeps it to herself.

[absinthe]

the whole thing could have been solved by wearing a t-shirt that said "VIRGIN" to the courthouse.

or, as is still done in muslim countries, hanging the blood-stained marital sheet on the front gate the next day.

[kiero]

Yes...  that "hard-earned" bit bothered me a lot too.  Is she implying that she maintained her "right" despite being gorgeous and having a lot of offers; or is she implying that she once knifed a would-be r*pist?  Either way, I just find that a tad offensive. 

And hey, I looked stunning in my white dress, even though I'd been cohabiting with Old #1 for two years before the wedding!    (For Old #2, since we got married in winter, I wore a nice forest-green suit.)

     - saphie

I was a virgin when I got married.  So was my DH.  And it was hard to stick to it.  Both of us felt strongly about waiting until we were married.  But still - there were evenings at my appartment when we would come up with all sorts of 'reasons' why we shouldn't wait.  But we did.

I think that the offensive part of this is that it's no one else's business.  The white thing is bogus.  There is nothing about white which reserves it for virgins.  And just because she was a virgin doesn't mean she's better than anyone else.  I made my choice to wait - but I respect other people's choices not to.  Part of being an adult is having the right to make those choices. 

[Lunadiana75]

Very well said Kiero.