On 2002-07-21 06:12, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

In theory, if the first marriage was never consumated; it would be perfectly acceptable to wear that white dress again, in theory. HTH


p.s. If the dress wasn't a "symbol" of purity; wear it as often as needed.
[/quote]

"Hey Honey, I am going to wear the dress I married the last guy in, because we never did it. You don't mind being reminded this isn't the first time I have been married do you? I know it's supposed to be a day about new beginnings, and specificlly our new start, but I want to save a couple of hundred on the dress, even though we are spending even more on the stupid table favors you hate anyway."

If a woman said that to me, I'd say "Sure, no problem. Have a nice walk down the isle yourself because I won't be there".

It is between the wedding couple. I can't imagine either one wanting her to wear it.

On 2002-07-21 06:12, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

In theory, if the first marriage was never consumated; it would be perfectly acceptable to wear that white dress again, in theory. HTH

p.s. If the dress wasn't a "symbol" of purity; wear it as often as needed.

"Hey Honey, I am going to wear the dress I married the last guy in, because we never did it. You don't mind being reminded this isn't the first time I have been married do you? I know it's supposed to be a day about new beginnings, and specificlly our new start, but I want to save a couple of hundred on the dress, even though we are spending even more on the stupid table favors you hate anyway."

If a woman said that to me, I'd say "Sure, no problem. Have a nice walk down the isle yourself because I won't be there".

It is between the wedding couple. I can't imagine either one wanting her to wear it.

On 2002-07-21 06:12, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

In theory, if the first marriage was never consumated; it would be perfectly acceptable to wear that white dress again, in theory. HTH

p.s. If the dress wasn't a "symbol" of purity; wear it as often as needed.

"Hey Honey, I am going to wear the dress I married the last guy in, because we never did it. You don't mind being reminded this isn't the first time I have been married do you? I know it's supposed to be a day about new beginnings, and specificlly our new start, but I want to save a couple of hundred on the dress, even though we are spending even more on the stupid table favors you hate anyway."

If a woman said that to me, I'd say "Sure, no problem. Have a nice walk down the isle yourself because I won't be there".

It is between the wedding couple. I can't imagine either one wanting her to wear it.

On 2002-07-21 13:42, Earthshine wrote:

"Hey Honey, I am going to wear the dress I married the last guy in, because we never did it. You don't mind being reminded this isn't the first time I have been married do you? I know it's supposed to be a day about new beginnings, and specificlly our new start, but I want to save a couple of hundred on the dress, even though we are spending even more on the stupid table favors you hate anyway."

If a woman said that to me, I'd say "Sure, no problem. Have a nice walk down the isle yourself because I won't be there".

It is between the wedding couple. I can't imagine either one wanting her to wear it.

Earthshine, I can perfectly imagine some ditzy woman wanting to "recycle" her first wedding dress by wearing it on her second trip down the aisle! It's in the same bag of bolts as a woman talking about all the guys she's slept with, and expecting her boyfriend or fiancee to somehow be OK with it. Duh!

Marraige is supposed to be about new beginnings. But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why, considering it is already bad enough that both people involved usually HAVE pasts at all. Adding insult to injury make no sense to me.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

Uh, what's with the multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple posts?

:???: :???:

By the way, sometimes women recycle their wedding dresses by passing them on to their daughters. Obviously, the mothers' marriages were consumated! I'm not sure what Miss Manners or etiquette rules on this.

I picked up my wedding dress at a thrift shop because I wanted to do the whole white gown veil thing but was not interested in spending $1000 for a dress I would wear once. I've often wondered about the history of that dress!

Oops, sorry. Must've hit the "Submit" a little too hard on that one. :smile:

We got married in the afternoon, using the church basement as a reception hall, employing a classical guitarist instead of a more-expensive DJ, using the church keyboardist for music, having a luncheon reception for about 85 guests with only enough champagne for a toast and a punchbowl. We did not hire a professional videographer, and the dress (while beautiful) was modest. Half of the flowers in the church were left over from Easter, which had been a week before.

Things STILL added up. People smiled at us and commented how nice and simple it was, and wish their wedding was like this. Nevertheless, it ended up being between 5 and 10K.

An average wedding today costs about 3-4 times this--i.e, evening reception with band or DJ at the country club, professional videographers and photogs, 200 guests.

No they don't come cheap.

We 'encouraged' local family to supply things like food, booze, and music. Our wedding was in a (converted) barn, which I think ran $700 for 1/2 day. My wife got her dress for ~$600, and considered that an awesome deal. It appears the single biggest cost to us was the photographer. I understand (though have been somewhat queasy about asking outright) that we paid in the neighborhood of 2 grand . At the same time, the pictures came out really well -- especially compared to the ones taken by family (no offense).

On 2002-07-22 06:21, Jenny Genser wrote:
Uh, what's with the multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple posts?

:???: :???:

Yeah. Mine multiposted too. strange. sorry.

By the way, sometimes women recycle their wedding dresses by passing them on to their daughters. Obviously, the mothers' marriages were consumated! I'm not sure what Miss Manners or etiquette rules on this.

I picked up my wedding dress at a thrift shop because I wanted to do the whole white gown veil thing but was not interested in spending $1000 for a dress I would wear once. I've often wondered about the history of that dress!

I don't see a problem with wearing your mothers dress and the purity issue. It was worn by a woman who was 'pure' before marriage, and is again being worn by a woman who is 'pure'...whatever that means in this day and age....

Kevin: As to a woman rubbing a guys nose in her sordid past, why marry a woman who is going to be like that? Why should a woman marry a man who would do the same in some other way? Be honest about your past, and then move on I say. Why be with someone who is willing to hurt you? That's just asking for a lifetime of sh*t. I don't care how much you feel you 'love' them, if they don't care enough about you to try and consider your feelings then what the f*ck good are they?

On 2002-07-21 20:55, Marc Lamb wrote:



"But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why..."

No brainer, here... it's because wishy washy men let them.

I suppose that is true, Marc. Never one to throw good money after bad, I pride myself on not being one of them by moving on in very short order, whenever such a red flag rears its ugly head. Still, one cannot control what all those wishy-washy men do, say and feel, nor the equally wishy-washy response of the (mostly Xer) women. As such, the bullshit rolls on and on and on.

On 2002-07-21 20:01, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:


Earthshine, I can perfectly imagine some ditzy woman wanting to "recycle" her first wedding dress by wearing it on her second trip down the aisle! It's in the same bag of bolts as a woman talking about all the guys she's slept with, and expecting her boyfriend or fiancee to somehow be OK with it. Duh!

Actually, the reaction to that sort of thing varies. Some guys are OK with it, some can't stand it, some fall between. I assume the same is true of women, but I don't know, never having been female myself.

Marraige is supposed to be about new beginnings. But I've met more than my share of females who really do want to keep rubbing their men's noses in their own sordid pasts. I can't for the life of me understand why, considering it is already bad enough that both people involved usually HAVE pasts at all.

Hmmm...point of curiousity, would it bother anyone more or less that their bride/husband to be was a widow/widower rather than divorced? That's still a past, afterall...

On 2002-07-22 08:50, Earthshine wrote:

I don't see a problem with wearing your mothers dress and the purity issue. It was worn by a woman who was 'pure' before marriage, and is again being worn by a woman who is 'pure'...whatever that means in this day and age....

Kevin: As to a woman rubbing a guys nose in her sordid past, why marry a woman who is going to be like that? Why should a woman marry a man who would do the same in some other way? Be honest about your past, and then move on I say. Why be with someone who is willing to hurt you? That's just asking for a lifetime of sh*t. I don't care how much you feel you 'love' them, if they don't care enough about you to try and consider your feelings then what the f*ck good are they?

Interesting food for thought...what is 'purity', at least among Boomers and Xers, nowadays???

Well, if purity in any form exists today (and that is very much open to question....) i'd say "purity of the heart". For me, what that means is that if I were to walk down the aisle again I would have to feel that my intended sees me as the one true love of her life, head and shoulders above the rest, bar none. Regardless of whether she's been married before and divorced or widowed, how many guys she's dated, slept with or been in love with, the love that she and I share must be so deep as to render all past relationships moot, trivial, so never-existent by comparison that the idea of mentioning them is in fact ridiculous. IOW, other men may have touched her body, but NO ONE has ever truly touched her soul.

(Sigh).....I suppose that is what everyone really wants-- a soulmate. And therein lies the essential problem with pasts, at least from a man's perspective. To be frank, the more sexual baggage a potential mate carries, the less likely I'd be to see myself as The One True Love Of Her Life. Beyond a certain threshold, it would become very difficult to see myself as anything other than just another guy she would sleep with. Why? Simply put, being with a woman with too much baggage doesn't make you feel special at all, just the latest in a long line of loser guys.

I imagine that this is a little like what many Silent women felt like back in the High, when society turned a blind eye to men's wild-oat sowing so long as they didn't get caught (too many times). However, not being female, i can only speculate.

I wonder also if this issue (or a comparable one for the day) is why my grandfathers, both Prophet/Nomad cuspites like myself, married women 15-20 years younger than themselves (late-Lost/early GI)???


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kevin Parker '59 on 2002-07-23 01:44 ]</font>

Back to the wedding topic. Has everyone here seen Monsoon Wedding? That was my wedding -- well, except the part about the marriage being arranged, not knowing the groom at all, and still messing around with the ex-boyfriend. I guess the movie had to have *some* plot, or it would just look like my wedding video!

The whole thing was crazy and completely out of control. By the end of the week I was pretty much like, OK, tell me where to stand and when the camera is on so I can smile. Everyone has an opinion as to what should happen, and everyone has a part to play in either the wedding, or the series of events leading up to the wedding.

But the thing to keep in mind is that it's done for the families, and not for the benefit of the bride and groom, who are pretty much an excuse for the bride's family to throw a big lavish party for friends, family and the community. And the marriage itself becomes more like the joining of families and communities and less like the joining of two individuals, at least for a week anyway! Then, everyone goes back to their own lives.

Why am I deathly afraid of relationships?
I don't want one, and everybody thinks I'm weird. My philosophy is that with a girlfriend, 75% of my free time is gone, much of my energy is wasted on keeping her entertained or around, and all my future plans now include her because we wouldn't want to doom the relationship right?
So basicly, I have no control over my free time or future.
And I can't rent the movies I want to.
And what do I get out of a relationship?
Sex, some massages, and the occasional hug on a lonely night.
Apparently I also get *love* which by the end of the relationship I will decide was a fleeting illusion.
I might date (laugh at me) someone who isn't obsessed with making a permanent relationship with me (hence the 35 year old woman that simply CANNOT get hitched to a 22 year old) and will see the relationship for what it is (sex, massages, the occasional hug on lonely night and *love*).
But i value my freedom and free time, and I just cant see the benefit of compromising it so I can couple off and spend my time being a consumer couple.

Chet, what's so weird about that?

On 2002-07-23 12:30, Neisha '67 wrote:

But the thing to keep in mind is that it's done for the families, and not for the benefit of the bride and groom, who are pretty much an excuse for the bride's family to throw a big lavish party for friends, family and the community. And the marriage itself becomes more like the joining of families and communities and less like the joining of two individuals, at least for a week anyway! Then, everyone goes back to their own lives.

As a bride you felt it was for the families and not you? I thought all women looked at it as "her" day? The family and the woman herself.

Also, if the Bride and Groom are paying for it, as we had discussed more and more Xers are doing, then to hell with what everyone else wants. If they want to pay for something, that might be different, but I still think the wedding is for the people getting married first. The fulfilling of the social contract is important, but only secondary to the emotional/spiritual/legal contract between the people saying "I duz".

Back to the purity issue, I think you have some good ideas there Kev. A soulmate might be what we are all looking for. Maybe that trumps Generational theory and all the posting in the world. :smile:

Earthshine, you haven't seen Monsoon Wedding, have you? Go see it. It's a hoot, and it will give you a better sense of what an Indian wedding is really like. And no, the bride pretty much has no say as to the details of the festivities. The aunties take over the whole thing and boss the bride and groom around. Angeli will back me up on this, as will the movie.

My wedding was quite entertaining in that way. At one point, one of Kurt's aunties jumped up on stage in the middle of the ceremony to straighten his garment!
Fortunately for me, being a bride has never been a particular goal of mine, so I could care less. My sister was quite a bit more stressed out about her wedding. My husband and I dated for five years before we got married. We finally got engaged because, back in 1993, my husband casually mentioned to my mom that we probably would get married sometime in 1995. Mom decided this was enough for her, called the aunties and got the machine rolling! (It also helped that we had just started living together and Mom needed some explanation for the aunties.) To this day, neither my husband nor I can recall if our anniversary is July 2 or July 3, because, frankly, it wasn't *our* day, it belonged to my mom and all of our aunties! Weird, huh? Go see the movie!

Is the idea of "soulmates" a soon-to-be-outdated Xer concept? The Millenials seem like they'd be less likely to think of themselves. (Actually, they seem like natural chumps in the romance department--always marrying the damsel in distress).

On 2002-07-23 18:14, Xer of Evil wrote:

On 2002-07-23 17:25, Chet wrote:
I might date (laugh at me) someone who isn't obsessed with making a permanent relationship with me (hence the 35 year old woman that simply CANNOT get hitched to a 22 year old) and will see the relationship for what it is (sex, massages, the occasional hug on lonely night and *love*).

Hmm ... where did you say you live?

:smile:

XoE

well, why *can't* things work between a 22 year old and a 35 year old? Who makes these stupid rules? Why does a man always have to be older than a woman and why is an age difference over 5-10 years some sort of taboo? I think it's stupid and pointless.

Besides, even if a long term relationship wouldn't work (and they sometimes can and do), you can still have fun with each other.

As for you, Justin, you're typical of men your age...and not just Xers either. Few 22 year old guys really want to settle into domesticity. Neither did Boomer guys. Okay, there are exceptions like Justin '77 or my married twentysomething nephews, and yeah, maybe it's a more popular thing to settle down earlier today, but still...you're not unusual. Enjoy your freedom while you can.

XoE, :wink: Hehehehehehe.
If I was 35 and single I would want to roll in the haystack with him too! :grin::

Or maybe just single. Age be damned.

Just my 2 cents.


_________________
We're all created from an act of love, so why is there so much hate?



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Heliotrope on 2002-07-23 19:16 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Heliotrope on 2002-07-23 19:31 ]</font>