Inappropriate Clothing

[Ex-zombie]

Watching the Oscars last night reminded me of one of my biggest pet peeves: individuals who dress inappropriately for formal occasions. It’s the Academy Awards! Wear a tuxedo! I know I probably sound like a really old person. Maybe it was my upbringing but I just don’t understand the motivation for dressing down for formal occasions.


My daughter’s wedding in October was a formal affair. Here are a list of clues that should have helped the guests be aware of this fact.

1. The wedding and reception were held in the evening. Beginning at 6 pm to be exact.
2. In the wedding invitation that was sent out on the reception card it said, “A formal reception will follow at…..”.
3. Both the wedding and reception were held at expensive locations.
4. Family members were aware from conversations with my daughter exactly how much the bride’s dress was costing($1400.00).


Yet there were three male guests who showed up in blue jeans and t-shirts. My mother-in-law showed up in a casual shirt and skirt. I wanted so badly to toss them right out.

Showing up to a formal event in informal clothing doesn’t make you look cool or rebellious. It just makes you look like a rube who doesn’t have a clue how to dress. Formal occasions are not the place to show off your individuality concerning social customs.

[Dingfod]

Note to self: Turn down any Ex-zombie invitations to formal affairs.




I'm just afraid I wouldn't meet your standards.

[Ex-zombie]

It is possible I am just too sensitive to this issue.

In my job I do the hiring. It irritates me to have people come in for an interview dressed inappropriately. I once had a guy up for a supervisor position come in dressed in a stained t-shirt, jeans, and shower sandals. :eek:

[Ex-zombie]

Turn down any Ex-zombie invitations to formal affairs.


I would make an exception for you warren. You can wear that grass skirt if you want.

[livius drusus]

I don't think it was oversensitive of you to have been upset at the people who yanked their standard jeans and t-shirt out of the hamper, sniff-tested them and decided the lack of total funk was formal enough. I doubt rebellion has anything to with it. I think it's sheer thoughtlessness, and as such disrespectful.

I used to be (and still am) grossed out by the number of tourists who would seek entry into a church in Rome wearing tube tops and Daisy Dukes. Nothing says I don't give a shit about your customs quite like the echoing shuffle of flip-flops on inlaid marble floors.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Ah, but what makes dresses better than tube tops? Why are clothes that are time consuming to put on and uncomfortable more "fancy" than a pair of non damaged jeans and a clean shirt? Our culture says so that's why.

[Ex-zombie]

It takes no more time to put on a dress shirt and slacks or a dress than to put on casual clothes. Dress clothes when properly fitted are not uncomfortable to wear.

I just realized I might have given the wrong impression putting in the cost of the wedding dress. I put the cost in the post because I still can't believe a dress could cost that much. Everytime I think about it I get dizzy and have to put my head between my legs.

[livius drusus]

Ah, but what makes dresses better than tube tops? Why are clothes that are time consuming to put on and uncomfortable more "fancy" than a pair of non damaged jeans and a clean shirt?

A dress is in no way less time consuming to put on or more comfortable than squeezing yourself into a tube top, trust me. The issue here for me is whether you give enough of a crap about people to know and respect the things they give a crap about.

Our culture says so that's why.

So? Does that make it any less offensive to flip someone's culture the bird?

[Dingfod]

I used to be (and still am) grossed out by the number of tourists who would seek entry into a church in Rome wearing tube tops and Daisy Dukes. Nothing says I don't give a shit about your customs quite like the echoing shuffle of flip-flops on inlaid marble floors.You ain't getting into the LDS church's Temple Square in Salt Lake City dressed like that, the temple security folk will eject you faster than you can say Joseph Smi...

[Dingfod]

I would make an exception for you warren. You can wear that grass skirt if you want.Thanks, but I was actually kidding. I do dress rather casual most of the time, but I do know how to dress for the occasion ... if I have to.

[livius drusus]

You ain't getting into the LDS church's Temple Square in Salt Lake City dressed like that, the temple security folk will eject you faster than you can say Joseph Smi...

They don't let you into St. Peter's either, but not all of Rome's tens of thousands of churches have that kind of security. I've seen people get henpecked out the door by some of those badass nuns they assign to a church for its upkeep and whatnot. The latter is far scarier.

[maddog]

I understand about customs and appropriateness. I do my best not to offend others' customs, and I also enjoy seeing people in formal clothes at formal occasions.

OTOH, I think people often make too much out of what OTHER PEOPLE are wearing.

In part, this stems from my hard-won recognition through years of therapy that I DON'T have control over what OTHER PEOPLE do, and wishing that I did causes me useless suffering. For my life to be happier, I need to give up trying to control other people. This is hard, because I come from a long line of control freaks. My mom was a champion control freak; she made our childhood a virtual prison. But I'm learning that I need to focus on what I'm doing, not on what THEY're doing.


Also, maybe I'm oversensitive because, when I was a kid, I was teased, put down, shoved around and excluded because of the clothes I wore. Well, they were what I had, and I was lucky to have them. Requiring the "right clothes" as the "price of admission," and actually throwing people out or preventing them from participating in something because they didn't "dress properly," emphasizes class divisions, and keeps the undeserving "them" away from the so-much-superior "us." I prefer egalitarianism. It's the person that matters to me, not the externality of what they are wearing.

I have also always HATED a lot of what is forced to be "appropriate" for girls and women -- the shoes are made so that you couldn't run to save your life if you had to, and being forced by convention to wear dresses and skirts makes girls and women vulnerable. My personal opinion about women's fashion is that it's largely a conspiracy perpetrated by men to keep women as subjugated sex objects.

I understand what y'all are saying, but we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

#330

[Ex-zombie]

I understand what you are saying maddog. The people who showed up at my daughter's wedding were not underprivileged. They all had the means to wear formal clothing, they simply chose not to. I would not have the same expectation of a person of limited means.

[livius drusus]

Requiring the "right clothes" as the "price of admission," and actually throwing people out or preventing them from participating in something because they didn't "dress properly," emphasizes class divisions, and keeps the undeserving "them" away from the so-much-superior "us." I prefer egalitarianism.

I don't think that's even remotely applicable to the tourists who show up at churches with miles of flesh exposed. People so poor they can barely afford clothing at all do not wear tube tops and hot pants. The usual dress code requires that shoulders and thighs be covered, and in some places, interdict pants on women. That's it.

You can call it old-fashioned or prudish, but it's not about class divisions at all, imo, and the lines of pilgrims and refugees from war zones who come from the worst possible circumstances and never have difficulty donning appropriate church attire underscore this.

I have also always HATED a lot of what is forced to be "appropriate" for girls and women -- the shoes are made so that you couldn't run to save your life if you had to, and being forced by convention to wear dresses and skirts makes girls and women vulnerable. My personal opinion about women's fashion is that it's largely a conspiracy perpetrated by men to keep women as subjugated sex objects.

I agree that women's shoes generally suck and I prefer pants when working myself, but I don't buy the sex objects conspiracy thing. For one thing, fasion's been around a long time, and men have had to wear some seriously fucked up shit at various times. For another thing, as with all modern consumer industries, the fasion industry "conspires" first and formost to keep women as subjugated spending objects, imo.

[godfry n. glad]

I'm going to play the other side of this.

I dress so I'm comfortable. Everyone I know knows this. If they don't want somebody showing up without white tie and tails, they don't invite me.

I absolutely refuse to wear a leash (aka necktie) unless I choose to do so. I even have an appropriate length red dog leash that I can tie into Windsor knot to press the point home.

I worked for five years as an economic development research specialist. I had to wear a tie and sports jacket at minimum every day. I got called on the carpet for wearing a nice turtleneck sweater with my sport coat one day. I consider wearing this kind of crap indoors all day to be the height of sartorial stupidity. Who needs to wear a jacket sitting at a desk all day? I have very, very low opinions of the customs that make such stupidity obligatory.

I feel the same way about attending, as a guest, particularly one who bought a gift, at a stinkin' wedding. If the groom and his sidekicks want to make themselves hideously uncomfortable for the duration of the ceremony, then they are just fine doing so, but they should not expect each and every guest to come dressed to the nines.

Of course, I have a very low opinion of weddings that are floor shows for the bride's mother or any other than the bride and groom. My wedding ceremoney was my bride and I, the marriage commissioner (@ $25 and $.25/mi CDN), the photographer we hired (who served as one witness) and the manager of the bed and breakfast where we married in the library (and she was the second witness). My wife wore her hand-knit and pearl beaded linen sweater, with a French lace skirt bought at Goodwill and lace Chinese shoes. I wore a tropical weight wool suit, with vest and tie. It was, as my wife called it, "the most planned elopement on record." It was a first marriage for both of us, and we were both in our early 30s.

We both recommended this as a great way to get married without all the bullshit.

So.... I'm not too sympathetic about your grousing about how some guests came. They were happy enough for you to show...be glad.

godfry

[Ex-zombie]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about how they want their own wedding to be. My daughter's wedding was planned exactly how she wanted it to be. There was no debt involved. The wedding and reception were paid for easily. I don't get your attitude about how your wedding was superior to my daughter's. Is it because more money was spent? Why would that be morally repugnant?

The guests who showed up in casual clothing shouldn't have bothered to come.

[viscousmemories]

I grew up in a family that believed fashion consciousness was a luxury of the rich and spoiled. The vast majority of my clothes were hand-me-downs or fresh out of the charity bin. This wasn't a problem in early grade school because everyone else was fairly poor too. However, the Jr. High I went to consisted mostly of upper-middleclass kids who got all new designer whatever at the start of each schoolyear, while I continued to dress like a tramp. This wasn't by choice, we just didn't have the money to get a bunch of new clothes and even if we had, nobody in my family (least of all me) had any fashion sense at all. Clothing was strictly utilitarian.

The end result of this was that I never really learned how to dress well, and so never really tried. I came to view people who paid any attention to fashion at all as vain and superficial, and limited myself primarily to jeans and t-shirts, with the occasional polo-type shirt. When I had a job that required me to wear a button-down shirt and tie I usually wore black pants, dark, solid-colored shirts and fairly plain ties (until I found the Jerry Garcia collection). Again, this wasn't because I thought I was stylin' in this garb, it was because I had no fashion sense at all and figured the safest bet was to dress inconspicuously, lest anyone notice me.

I've been to a lot of weddings, including those of five of my sisters and two of my brothers. I was probably underdressed for at least a few of them. I know I didn't own any nice clothes or have the money or inclination to buy new clothes for the occassion, and even if I had I wouldn't have known what to buy or how to dress. I'll have to look through old pictures but I'll be surprised if I wasn't in jeans and a polo shirt for at least one or two of them. And y'know, I was probably duly ashamed of myself but I didn't know what to do about it, so I just played it off like I was (as usual) just snubbing my nose at convention.

Anyway I know EZ already said these people should've known better and I can accept that, I was just inspired to babble on about my own deep-seated insecurities born of poverty and lack of fashion sense throughout my youth and into adulthood. It's because of this that I'm far less critical of other people who dress inappropriately or even just unattractively. Even Dick Cheney.

Then again, I've also learned in recent years that it doesn't take a lot of money or a team of Hollywood fashion police to help one dress semi-stylishly, and I have a lot more respect for cultural tradition than I had previously. So on that basis I think if someone should know better (say a politician in a major spotlight, like Dick Cheney) then they should absolutely be called to the mat for their failure to respect tradition.

[godfry n. glad]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about how they want their own wedding to be. My daughter's wedding was planned exactly how she wanted it to be. There was no debt involved. The wedding and reception were paid for easily. I don't get your attitude about how your wedding was superior to my daughter's. Is it because more money was spent? Why would that be morally repugnant?

The guests who showed up in casual clothing shouldn't have bothered to come.

Who said it was morally repugnant? I certainly didn't.

I said I think that all the bullshit your daughter had at her wedding....expensive this, expensive that, and a wedding dress that garners appreciation based upon how expensive it is...it sounds like a celebration of how wealthy somebody is, rather than a celebration of joy at the beginning of a life of commitment together. That's what it important in my eyes, not a shitload of seemingly obligatory customary bullshit that the wedding industry has young women blinded as to "absolutely needing".

If you and your daughter bought it hook, line and sinker, then more power to you....I personally think they'd have been better off saving all that money for a downpayment on a starter home, or a honeymoon, or, as in my case, the subflooring for the attic loft suite.

And, I agree... those who came, shouldn't have. I certainly wouldn't have, even if I HAD gotten an invitation. Formal? Bleeeeeacccch!

godfry

(ps - next wedding, if there is one, hire Joan Rivers and her demon spawn to stand and make catty remarks as your guests arrive....)

[Beth]

I pissed a bride off once. I was in the middle of a move, was invited to a wedding spur of the moment, and all of my clothes were packed away but a dress I had left out for church. I wore a cream, lace dress, three inches above the knee, with the pearl choker that I think is in my profile pic and pearl and diamond drop earring, hair up in a French twist. The wedding was supposed to be very formal and cream should have been an appropriate color for a formal wedding. I had informed the groom's mother on invitation that all of my stuff was packed and in transit and that was the only dress suitable for the wedding that I had kept out for church (Easter), I was informed that it was fine, other women wore cream, as well. The bride saw me and was furious and commented on the nerve of my decision to wear what I had. After that incident of trying to match the formal occasion, I no longer care whether I dress formal enough. I would have been better off wearing a casual pant suit or even a sweater and jeans than being accused of upstaging the bride. Honestly, I normally just avoid weddings all together now, unless they involve immediate family.

I agree that it is best not to attend a wedding in jeans, but I also think the dress etiquette rules are outdated or so much more relaxed now that people don't know what is appropriate.

Also, about some people not being able to afford to dress well for a wedding. Everytime I attend a wedding, I must buy my children new clothes, my husband a new tie and possibly a shirt, new shoes to replinish worn shoes, and if I am lucky, I get a new dress and shoes. Every wedding I attend costs me at least three hundred dollars just to dress my family, not to mention a gift. That is rediculous. I let my son wear nice jeans to church, I would probably quit balking and fighting him and let him don a pair of JNCOs or SouthPoles and not trip out about it, if it was combined with a nice shirt. That alone would save me about a hundred bucks.

[Dingfod]

Weddings of any size are just a big crock anyway, a relatively recently contrived addition to our culture. The bad thing is, the grandiose wedding bullshit is spreading even unto third world nations. What next, McDonald's?

[Dingfod]

Beth, you would upstage the bride if you wore a burlap sack.

[TomJoe]

Showing up to a formal event in informal clothing doesn’t make you look cool or rebellious. It just makes you look like a rube who doesn’t have a clue how to dress. Formal occasions are not the place to show off your individuality concerning social customs.

Hopefully the embarrassment of looking completely classless will serve as a reminder next time they're invited to such an event. I know that's small comfort to you, now that your daughters wedding is over, but ...

IMO, there really is no excuse in heading to events which are almost always formal (ie: weddings) and not wearing the appropriate attire. For men, obtaining a sports coat is no big deal, and can be done rather cheaply if one pays enough attention to sales, bargain racks, and invests some time in finding a decent tailor. A tie is likewise an easy item to come across without breaking the bank, and the same can be said for a pair of dress shoes.

[TomJoe]

Why are clothes that are time consuming to put on and uncomfortable more "fancy" than a pair of non damaged jeans and a clean shirt?

Uhhh ... exactly how do you get dressed? :wink:

Whether I'm wearing a pair of jeans and t-shirt, or wearing a suit and tie, it takes me around the same amount of time to get dressed. Tying a tie is no complicated feat, and slipping on a coat takes no time at all, plus I doubt the extra few seconds it takes to put cufflinks (if you got 'em) will cause you to be late for your engagement.

As for uncomfortable ... well, my suits are about as comfortable to wear as anything else I own. Personally, I abhor the feel of jeans (unless they are on the extra, extra baggy side and then they just look plain stupid) so I wear khaki pretty much all the time anyways ... plus, since I typically shop at Wal-Mart or Old Navy, jeans to me are more expensive than a decent pair of dress pants.

[Ex-zombie]

If you and your daughter bought it hook, line and sinker, then more power to you....

I really don't think my daughter bought into anything. There were specific reasons for what she wanted for her wedding.

She loves the outdoors. She spends her weekends camping and hiking during the summers. She chose to have her wedding in a garden.

She was born in and spent the early years of her life in Italy. She speaks fluent Italian. In our area there is one location that sports a Tuscan interior with marble floors. It was her choice for the reception.

I know she picked a formal wedding due to the fact that all three weddings she had ever attended were informal. She saw it as a way to reflect her personality. The only reason the wedding grew to such a size was due to her extensive list of family and friends.

[Ronin]

While I agree with Ex-zombie (and others) that one should dress up (or down) depending upon the occasion and/or requirement stipulation of any ceremony/location one is invited to...I also find that "fancy" clothes are more time consuming to put on. From the routine of dealing with separate hangers for slacks, formal collared shirt and coat vs. hopping into jeans from the floor and pulling on t-shirt from the chair...it just eats away at time.

:time:

Also, I have always been less inclined to go to certain events simply because they are formal. In fact, it is so out of character for me to want to "put on the ritz" that when an occasion forces itself upon me I feel utterly pretentious and fake and uncomfortable.

In addition, I hate ties...they are stupid and make absolutely no sense to me either practically or stylistically. When I work the dayshift I am required to wear a suit and tie...and it is an insufferable two months.

:sadcheer:

Simply put...I'm a natural born jeans, t-shirt and shades guy.

:slick:

[Ex-zombie]

I did not expect the wedding guests to come in tuxedos or suits. Some men came in long sleeve shirts and slacks. That was perfectly acceptable.

[Beth]

I see nothing wrong about ExZombie's daughter having a formal wedding. That is her choice and more power to her that she got that opportunity. She looked absolutely gorgeous in her pic and I think she looked extremely happy. :)

My wedding was supposed to have been formal, but it seemed that very few actually dressed in formal attire- those who did were the family member who could well afford it, many of our friends could not. It did not really matter to me in the end, the people we loved and cared about were there and it did not ultimately matter to me that they showed up in jeans or cowboy boots, some of the people who attended really could not afford the burden of buying formal wear.

[lisarea]

That's one of the reasons I avoid weddings, actually. I can read all that stuff about appropriate styles of formal dress for different things and I still don't understand it well enough to apply it. I suppose if that were the only reason I avoided weddings and other formal type things, I could get someone to help me or something, but I'd just as soon avoid them myself.

In fact, one of the reasons I always liked living in Colorado is that, at least traditionally, such things aren't a big deal. There was a restaurant I used to go to sometimes, pretty upscale, with excellent food, a pianist, crisp tablecloths, crystal, silver, and the attendant prices, and no dress code, stated or implied. They even had a disclaimer right on the menu saying that this is Denver, and if you are upset by seeing fellow diners in jeans, hiking boots, and flannel, you might prefer some other city instead.

It's less like that now than it was then, with the recent influx of people who moved here during the tech boom, but I always loved that about Denver.

I do recognize that others don't feel the same way, and I wouldn't ever want to offend someone by dressing inappropriately for an event they planned or anything, but I've probably done it accidentally. And I do like feeling like I can go have dinner in a good restaurant and things like that without inadvertently offending anyone.

[godfry n. glad]

If you and your daughter bought it hook, line and sinker, then more power to you....

I really don't think my daughter bought into anything. There were specific reasons for what she wanted for her wedding.

Good for her.

She loves the outdoors. She spends her weekends camping and hiking during the summers. She chose to have her wedding in a garden.

Sounds wonderful.

She was born in and spent the early years of her life in Italy. She speaks fluent Italian. In our area there is one location that sports a Tuscan interior with marble floors. It was her choice for the reception.

So why wasn't the reception a toga party?

I know she picked a formal wedding due to the fact that all three weddings she had ever attended were informal. She saw it as a way to reflect her personality. The only reason the wedding grew to such a size was due to her extensive list of family and friends.

And yet, I think your expectation that everyone come dressed up, particularly to a garden party wedding, is o'erblown. The more people invited, the more likely you are to have those who consider clean jeans to be "formal". The former governor of our state always, and I mean always, wore cowboy boots and faded Levis. If he "dressed up", he put on a string tie, or...on rare occasion...a regular tie, and a sport jacket; complete with the faded Levis and cowboy boots. And he was an emergency room physician, so it's not like he didn't have the cash....he just didn't feel constrained by what other people considered to be "formal."

Like lisarea, the city I live in has very, very lax standards for this kind of thing. I've attended innumerable outdoor weddings (parks and gardens). I've even been asked to officiate as one. If you attend the symphony here in Portland, be prepared to see the ratty Levis right along side the "dressed to the nines" types.

Here a "potluck" is considered an acceptable venue for a wedding reception, too. My NYC MIL would have died of embarrassment at such an idea, but she wasn't invited. We had a great time with friends. And my family threw a separate bash.

I just think young women need to think carefully about why it is they deem certain things as "absolute musts" for wedding ceremonies.

Just out of interest, did she demand a diamond wedding ring? Or did she settle for some other stone...or merely a plain gold band?

godfry

[Ex-zombie]

My daughter was too busy being happy to care what anyone wore. My spouse thinks I'm just being old fashioned. To me it isn't about being comfortable or doing whatever you feel like. It is about what the person holding the event wants. It seems that people wanted to force upon my daughter what she "should" have done.

My mother-in-law ranted and raved about what a waste of money the whole thing was. The day before the wedding she had my daughter in tears. Perhaps that is one of the reasons people showing up in casual clothes pissed me off. I felt as though they were telling my daughter what she wanted didn't matter.

It's funny to have people say my daughter bought into something. We heard that line as well irl. My daughter didn't buy or read a single bridal magazine. She had never attended a formal wedding nor been a part of a wedding. This was simply something she wanted. She had family coming from all over the country and she wanted everyone to have a nice time. I think that is what bothered her so much about what her grandmother said.

[inland wave]

If you think wedding dresses are expensive.......try prom gowns!

[Ex-zombie]

Just out of interest, did she demand a diamond wedding ring? Or did she settle for some other stone...or merely a plain gold band?

Are you deliberately trying to paint my daughter as a mindless, spoiled drone?

She has a plain band that is engraved with a message from her husband.

[Beth]

EZ, my gramma would consider a casual shirt and a skirt to be formal, the skirt making it formal, but I remember, my gramma borrowed a dress from my aunt, her sister, and showed up in a dress that you would see women wear in church on any given Sunday. To me, if I wore it, it would have been casual, but on her, I was stunned. I had never seen her in a dress in my life and I thought she was beautiful. How did your daughter expect her grandmother to dress?

I feel bad that your daughter had to hear such criticism from others. Thing is, was the bride making demands on others? I have taken part in weddings, even walked out of participating in them because the bride became Bridezilla. Was the criticism something just from ouut of the blue or were tempers flared? Was your daughter embarrassed of her grandmother? Anyway, you and your daughter are entitled to feel as you do and I don't think expectations are particularly old fashioned.

And I am definitely not trying to paint your daughter as anything. I was just trying to look at the whole picture, so please don't be offended.

Oh, if I thought it could have been afforded, I woulda asked for a heavy-ass diamond wedding band.;) I see nuttin wrong with that. :D

[Beth]

If you think wedding dresses are expensive.......try prom gowns!
Groan. As a mother of an nine year old, I don't even want to begin thinking about this and all the trappings of a prom. :eek:

[Ex-zombie]

What my mother-in-law wore to the wedding couldn't be considered formal by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she made a point at the reception of pointing out that she wore the skirt to work in the garden.

I may have given the impression that I lavish money on my daughters. That is not the case. My oldest daughter began working part-time when she was fifteen years old. She bought herself a used car two years later. She worked full time and put herself through college. These are a few of the reasons I had no qualms about her wanting a formal wedding. She has been a responsible, hard working person.

[TomJoe]

What my mother-in-law wore to the wedding couldn't be considered formal by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she made a point at the reception of pointing out that she wore the skirt to work in the garden.

If you don't mind my asking ... what was your wifes response to her mothers "boasting"?

If you think I'm being too nosey, it's no biggie. I'm sure there is a family dynamic which you may not want to reveal. Speaking from personal experience, I had a mother-in-law who would have been more prone to attempting to outdress her own granddaughter, rather than showing up looking like she just walked out of her garden, and then gossiping about how her son-in-law was a cheap bastard for not ensuring that his daughter was the center of attention.

[Beth]

What my mother-in-law wore to the wedding couldn't be considered formal by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she made a point at the reception of pointing out that she wore the skirt to work in the garden.
Ah, I understand now. The grandma was insulting the wedding. Shame on her to brag that she wore it to work in the garden.

I may have given the impression that I lavish money on my daughters.
I certainly didn't get that impression at all. I don't see how giving a daughter or son a formal wedding to be spoiling or lavishing money upon them. My cousing got a twenty-five thousand dollar wedding~twice! The brother got one, too. Another cousin has a more intimate wedding at ten grand and her first wedding was around twenty. Many relatives and friends have huge shindigs, I don't see that as particularly spoiling them.

That is not the case. My oldest daughter began working part-time when she was fifteen years old. She bought herself a used car two years later. She worked full time and put herself through college. These are a few of the reasons I had no qualms about her wanting a formal wedding. She has been a responsible, hard working person.
Sound like she is and that you taught her well and have very good reason to be proud of her, hon.

[Dingfod]

You don't' see how that money could've gone to better use?

[godfry n. glad]

My daughter was too busy being happy to care what anyone wore. My spouse thinks I'm just being old fashioned. To me it isn't about being comfortable or doing whatever you feel like. It is about what the person holding the event wants. It seems that people wanted to force upon my daughter what she "should" have done.

No... I think she should have thought through what she wanted and why.

My mother-in-law ranted and raved about what a waste of money the whole thing was. The day before the wedding she had my daughter in tears. Perhaps that is one of the reasons people showing up in casual clothes pissed me off. I felt as though they were telling my daughter what she wanted didn't matter.

Mayhaps. I think your MIL should keep her mouth shut. But that's just me.

It's funny to have people say my daughter bought into something. We heard that line as well irl. My daughter didn't buy or read a single bridal magazine. She had never attended a formal wedding nor been a part of a wedding. This was simply something she wanted. She had family coming from all over the country and she wanted everyone to have a nice time. I think that is what bothered her so much about what her grandmother said.

From my experience, every wedding has at least one crank. At least hers was her grandmother, instead of her future MIL.

Note the line in your quote I bolded. IMHO, if that's what she wanted, she should NOT have held a formal reception. There are many, many people who are not comfortable in a formal setting. Either she wanted everyone who came to have a nice time, or she wanted every one to come formal. She could not have both. As for granny...she came didn't she? So what if she wore her garden clothes? Who's that reflect upon other than her?

godfry

[TomJoe]

You don't' see how that money could've gone to better use?


Exactly what is the monetary threshold for when people feel entitled to say: You could have put that money to better use.

Is it one grand, ten grand, twenty grand? How about five hundred bucks, or maybe thirty?

IMO, if you earned the money, you can spend it however you damn well please. If you save up all your money for a year, just to buy a lifetime supply of Slim Jims, well... fucking awesome for you! As for me, it's none of my damn business.

[Beth]

You don't' see how that money could've gone to better use?
Well, of course I do, but I also think that maybe a big wedding is a cultural thing in some families, thus very important. A big wedding is not important to me, thus a waste, but to others it is big. It is a hallmark in many people's lives, if I could afford to offer my daughter a dream day then I would love to give it to her.

With me, I hope that we could offer our children a down payment for a home, rather than a huge wedding. But then, I am very capable of doing a lot of the wedding decoration work to majorly cut expenses and can even make wedding cakes. :)

[Ex-zombie]

If you don't mind my asking ... what was your wifes response to her mothers "boasting"?


My wife was not privy to that "boast". She probably would have laughed. I seem to be the only member of the family who was bothered by the casual dress.

godfry:
My daughter thought that the nice time would include the formality of the event. In my daughter's whole life no family member or family friend has had a formal wedding. My daughter saw it as an opportunity to have an event that no one she knew had participated in. She thought everyone would be excited about it and would look forward to it.

My apologies. I haven't a clue how to get quotes from different members into the same post.

[TomJoe]

My wife was not privy to that "boast". She probably would have laughed. I seem to be the only member of the family who was bothered by the casual dress.

Well, you are her dad. Not that I am a father, but from my family experiences, my dad has always been protective of my sister. I don't think it odd for you to be peeved by things which ran counter to what your daughter had hoped for.

However, if this was the worst disaster that occured at your daughters wedding, I think that you were probably extremely fortunate. :)

[Ex-zombie]

IMO, if you earned the money, you can spend it however you damn well please. If you save up all your money for a year, just to buy a lifetime supply of Slim Jims, well... fucking awesome for you! As for me, it's none of my damn business.

I should have hired you TomJoe to say what I mean. I'm not very good at getting my thoughts down.

If my daughter had sucked me dry for years without any consideration for anyone else or if she was a lazy mess I would have done everything possible to deny her the formal wedding. That was not the case.

All money spent is money wasted according to someone else's standards.

[godfry n. glad]

godfry:
My daughter thought that the nice time would include the formality of the event. In my daughter's whole life no family member or family friend has had a formal wedding. My daughter saw it as an opportunity to have an event that no one she knew had participated in. She thought everyone would be excited about it and would look forward to it.

Well, I guess with 20/20 hindsight, you now know that is highly unlikely. The chances of everyone coming as you expect is roughly inversely proportional to the number of invitees. There are many of us out there who've been there, or close to there, and never, never want to go back. Me, for instance. If I get an invitation to anything that states it's "formal" or "black-tie" or "white-tie"....I will NOT attend.

As for me, I think a successful wedding is one where nobody has a breakdown, nobody chews anybody else out, no arguments and everybody who wants to get laid, does. If the marriage lasts the test of time, that's the real measure.

Oh... and just for good measure: champagne sucks, big time.

godfry

[maddog]

The usual dress code . . . in some places, interdict pants on women. That's it. To me, that itself is quite a lot, esp. because of my views about what "women's clothing" does to women. Also, the reason they have such "dress codes" in church is, I thought, because it's supposed to show respect to God. I've never been sure why an omnipotent, omnibenevolent deity cares what people wear. And it isn't usually God who is upset or who's enforcing dress codes, it's human beings. (Actually, I've never been sure, either, why such a being would care that you have to go to a special building.)

You can call it old-fashioned or prudish, but it's not about class divisions at all, imo, and the lines of pilgrims and refugees from war zones who come from the worst possible circumstances and never have difficulty donning appropriate church attire underscore this. I think it depends on why someone is entering a church. Even if "appropriate" wear to "go to a church" isn't necessarily a class issue, the existence of "formal wear" and "formal occasions" is.

If you're in a church because you're attending a service as a member of the congregation/communion, that's one thing. If the church is closed to all but members, then they can do what they want. If it's open to the tourist public, then you can expect tourists to be tourists. If you're in a church as a refugee, well, I've seen plenty of war zone refugees who were barefoot and in shorts, or even naked. When they have a war zone in the San Fernando Valley, you will see the refugees huddling in the churches in flip-flops and tank tops. And whether one has clothing that has minimally appropriate coverage to enter a church is a different thing from requiring formal wear as the price of admission to some social event. Then the formal clothing IS about status, wealth and class distinctions.

I have also always HATED a lot of what is forced to be "appropriate" for girls and women -- the shoes are made so that you couldn't run to save your life if you had to, and being forced by convention to wear dresses and skirts makes girls and women vulnerable. My personal opinion about women's fashion is that it's largely a conspiracy perpetrated by men to keep women as subjugated sex objects.

I agree that women's shoes generally suck and I prefer pants when working myself, but I don't buy the sex objects conspiracy thing. For one thing, fasion's been around a long time, and men have had to wear some seriously fucked up shit at various times. For another thing, as with all modern consumer industries, the fasion industry "conspires" first and for[e]most to keep women as subjugated spending objects, imo.I agree that there's a money aspect to it, but that's not all it is. Why do men's fashions stay the same, if it's only about money? Men have more money. I think you're right about keeping women as subjugated spending objects, but to me that's simply a secondary aspect of keeping women as subjugated sex objects. If it's all about spending money on clothes, well, men still have more money than women, so it's a lot of men's money buying those clothes. Why will men spend that money for stupid women's fashion? I can think of some reasons that are spelled S-E-X. That women have to spend more resources on clothing for the sake of "fashion" and "appropriateness" means that women have even less economic freedom, on their lower incomes, than men do. It may not be a conspiracy, but I don't see it helping much.

In addition, I wasn't talking about the entire history of fashion; I was talking about what a struggle it's been for women and girls in recent decades to shed dresses and skirts. My feelings about it are quite personal, and stem from my earliest experiences. When I'm wearing a dress or skirt, I NEVER feel comfortable, not for a single minute. You can feel -- and actually be -- "exposed" at ANY moment. A gust of wind. Ordinary actions such as walking, turning, or sitting. Whether you are going up a flight of stairs. There are so many actions that you are prevented from doing. You can't play, you can't climb, you can't run. And then there are the deliberate acts of others pulling up your skirt to expose you. People think it's so "cute" to expose girls' panties -- well, I never found it "cute" at all. That's one reason I have always hated that Marilyn Monroe picture with a furious passion. It was deeply embarrassing and humiliating. Why is it so embarrassing ? -- because there's sexual innuendo and provocation in it. And girls and women are the prey. That vulnerability to exposure and attack is always there, for me. It never goes away. And the shoes prevent you from escaping. Maybe I'm paranoid. But that is the way I feel.

Another problem I have, and this is again very personal to me, is shoes in general. I have extremely sensitive nerve-endings all over my skin, such that a single point of pressure hurts, a lot. When a doctor or my personal trainer uses their hands to manipulate a part of my body, they have to be careful to use the palm of their hand or to spread the pressure, NOT to use their fingertips to grip, because the single-point pressure is very painful. Similarly, I have had a great deal of difficulty finding a bicycle saddle I can tolerate. The stiff-rail kind are too hard, no matter how much gel padding is in the saddle. I need shock-absorbing springs, and even then the pain is a difficulty for me. I'm very tender-footed. My feet blister easily. I once tried to toughen my feet by walking barefoot to the mailbox every day for three months. It hurt just as much on the last day as on the first. It hurts me to walk on blades of grass; they really feel like "blades" stabbing my feet. I can't do a lunge on a linoleum floor in my bare feet because the pressure is too great. I can't even go barefoot inside the house. I also have plantar fasciitis, a very painful condition in my right heel/foot. The only thing that makes walking tolerable at all is the gushy-cushiest air- or gel-chamber-soled shoes I can find, plus gel heel pads or cups inside the shoes, and thick padded socks. Every single pair of shoes I own are clunky-looking athletic shoes, because they are the only ones I can even tolerate wearing. I have a hard time finding all-black ones for work. What kind of clothes look good with clunky athletic shoes and thick padded socks?

I've been tempted to show up at a "formal" occasion in my own tuxedo, but somehow I get the feeling that, even though that "counts" as "formal dress," it would still be viewed as "inappropriate." And, of course, there would always be the shoes.

So, yes, you could say I have issues, and even dilemmas, about clothing. Deep personal issues, political issues, social issues, economic issues. Having been made fun of and humiliated and trapped by clothes from my earliest memories has colored my thinking a lot. My experiences led me to a sort of egalitarian color-blindness norm about clothes. I shouldn't have been treated badly because of the clothes I wore. Therefore, the rule I learned was that it shouldn't matter to me what kind of clothes other people wear. It's virtually to the level of a moral rule, for me. I shouldn't judge a book by its cover. That's where I'm coming from.

ETA: whoa, this thread has gone on quite a bit between the post I'm answering, and this one.
EZ, while I do have strong personal feelings about clothing, I'm not oblivious to cultural norms. Although I am somewhat idiosyncratic and unconventional, I do recognize standards of "appropriateness," and, I reiterate here, I do my best not to give offense. I understand your feelings. I agree with you that a wedding is a celebration with friends and family, and in such circumstances, I would certainly take into account the wishes and desires of the honoree. My own hierarchy of values is a little different on the specific issue of clothing, however, for, as I've attempted to explain, very personal reasons. I'm not suggesting that you or your daughter "should" have done anything other than what you and she in fact chose.
#331

[godfry n. glad]

IMO, if you earned the money, you can spend it however you damn well please. If you save up all your money for a year, just to buy a lifetime supply of Slim Jims, well... fucking awesome for you! As for me, it's none of my damn business.

I should have hired you TomJoe to say what I mean. I'm not very good at getting my thoughts down.

If my daughter had sucked me dry for years without any consideration for anyone else or if she was a lazy mess I would have done everything possible to deny her the formal wedding. That was not the case.

All money spent is money wasted according to someone else's standards.

Well, that's them Jesuits for ya. They're in the bidness. They want to see all that stuff. The more dropped on the wedding, the higher the church fee and the priest's honorarium.

[TomJoe]

Well, that's them Jesuits for ya. They're in the bidness. They want to see all that stuff. The more dropped on the wedding, the higher the church fee and the priest's honorarium.

Yep, you know us Catholics ... all in it for the almighty dollar.

I guess it would be pointless for me to state, that if one cannot afford the suggested stipend ($300 here at my parish) for use of the church building and the services of the priest, it's waived. I'd like you to find a botanical garden, or private wedding place that'll do that.

Plus, I can't recall the last time I saw a wedding reception at the church. I was an altar server for a decade, and I served many a wedding in my time, so much so that it was a summer job for me for a couple of years. We'd usually get paid $10 a wedding, some people splurged and gave us $20. Funeral payments were handled by the funeral directors, and they paid us $10 a funeral too (I don't know why I mentioned this ... maybe I'm just thinking back on the days when I had a well paying job).

However, after all those weddings ... not a single reception was held at the church itself, which meant that with all this money spent on weddings, very little of it was spent at/on the church itself.

Unless of course the priest gave the new couple a lesson on their duty to tithe on their wedding gifts. However, I was never privy to any such conversation.


All of which is really an aside to the OP. Arguing about the way the Catholic Church runs things, in this thread, is a total derailment, and probably wouldn't have been mentioned if not for the fact that I happen to be Catholic ... which doesn't mean jack in this thread at all.

[godfry n. glad]

Well, that's them Jesuits for ya. They're in the bidness. They want to see all that stuff. The more dropped on the wedding, the higher the church fee and the priest's honorarium.

Yep, you know us Catholics ... all in it for the almighty dollar.

Well... It doesn't have to be "dollars". It can be whatever is the going currency. They didn't get all that gold and marble by having priests, cardinals and the pope mine it.

I guess it would be pointless for me to state, that if one cannot afford the suggested stipend ($300 here at my parish) for use of the church building and the services of the priest, it's waived. I'd like you to find a botanical garden, or private wedding place that'll do that.

It's called a city park. Or a private garden. I had friends marry in my tiny back yard because they liked the flowers. There are lots of alternatives that can be used other than churches. Indeed, I'd personally recommend that anyone considering marriage stay far, far away from any religious institution. They just want to attach all sorts of other strings to the deal....the Roman Catholics being by far the worst, particularly when one of the couple is not Catholic. But then, keep in mind I'm an agnostic atheist.

Plus, I can't recall the last time I saw a wedding reception at the church. I was an altar server for a decade, and I served many a wedding in my time, so much so that it was a summer job for me for a couple of years. We'd usually get paid $10 a wedding, some people splurged and gave us $20. Funeral payments were handled by the funeral directors, and they paid us $10 a funeral too (I don't know why I mentioned this ... maybe I'm just thinking back on the days when I had a well paying job).

However, after all those weddings ... not a single reception was held at the church itself, which meant that with all this money spent on weddings, very little of it was spent at/on the church itself.

Well, that's heartening news. My understanding is that in most cases, this is because other functions are often planned. Or, the head priest has heard too much from the janitorial staff about cleaning up after weddings....My friend, the former Jesuit priest, told me there was more vomit after weddings than any other church function.

Unless of course the priest gave the new couple a lesson on their duty to tithe on their wedding gifts. However, I was never privy to any such conversation.

Yet...is not guilt a major aspect of catholicism, at least the Roman variety? Would not someone pungling out multi-tens of thousands of dollars on a huge church wedding feel like a schmuck fobbing off the church with $300 bucks? Gimme a break....


All of which is really an aside to the OP. Arguing about the way the Catholic Church runs things, in this thread, is a total derailment, and probably wouldn't have been mentioned if not for the fact that I happen to be Catholic ... which doesn't mean jack in this thread at all.

No, but does go a long way as to showing one's motives for not standing in the way of big, church weddings.... 'Course, I only know you're Catholic because you told me you were a Jesuit. Which I don't doubt at all.

And, it's not a total derailment, it's a partial derailment.

godfry