Conference turris::womannotes-v1

        Get married in a registry Office.
        
        Get all the interested parties together and agree on  the  bits 
        and  pieces, beforehand.  If you tell the Minister what sort of 
        words you want him/her to say, then he/she will do it. Likewise 
        for the MC, caterers, Music Providers etc.
        
        Q

    Jim,
    Some wedding ideas:
    - Get married where you want -- it doesn't have to be as sterile
      as a registry office. i got married at a local museum.
    - I agree with q that you should avoid surprises by agreeing ahead
      of time on what people should and shouldn't say.  For example,
      our DJ was dying to introduce us as Mr and Mrs... He had enjoyed 
      that part of his wedding, so we needed to explain that we would
      not enjoy that ritual.  On the other hand, once he understood
      what we wanted, he was happy to accommodate us.  We also found 
      a great rabbi who worked hard to make a ceremony that we would
      enjoy. She explained ahead of time what she was going to say, 
      and she was willing to include or exclude almost anything we wanted. 
      We discussed some of the ceremony surrounding the marriage.  We 
      chose to follow a few traditions and ignore others.
    - Walking down the aisle: when i got married, my husband's parents
      walked him down the aisle, and my parents walked me down the 
      aisle. That made it seem much less like I was being handed over;
      instead, it gave the parents a way of participating and feeling
      important.
    - The garter ceremony: I merely explained that Robert could remove 
      my underclothing in public if I could remove his. end of discussion.  
    - Dancing: We didn't do those daddy+little girl dance things --
      rather, we convinced some people to start dancing -- pretty soon
      lots of others joined in. we danced at our leisure later on.
    - The cake ceremony:  We had some pictures taken of us cutting
      the cake in private.  No one else saw the cake until it was
      served. 
    - Some other ideas: find people that you really like and feel
      comfortable with. as much as possible, resist pressure from 
      parents and others.  this is your day.  compromise gracefully 
      when you must.  organize like crazy before hand, but on the
      wedding day itself, hand out little jobs to people (contacts
      for musicians, photographer, caterer; flower pinner, etc)
      so that you need only enjoy yourself. let someone else run
      the rehearsal.  enjoy!
    
      liz

        I modestly admit that Barbara's and my wedding was the best
        and most non-sexist I've ever encountered.
        
        We wrote our own ceremony from scratch (incidentally, it
        was interesting to discover that we'd used a line each from
        the wedding ceremonies of our parents... we hadn't even been
        aware that either had written their own ceremonies, and didn't
        find out until after our wedding).  The only thing modified
        was that the justice of the peace insisted that he needed
        to say "by the authority vested in me by the state of
        Massachussetts, I now pronounce you man and wife" at the
        end for legal reasons... all the references we'd seen insisted
        that wasn't so, but since he only told us this moments before
        the ceremony was due to start, it didn't seem worth arguing.
        
        Nobody "gave" anyone away (barbaric custom)... we started
        out by standing in a small depression in a garden (the wedding
        was in a park) with the JOP, my brother, Barbara's college
        room mate, and our "flower girl" (because we both thought
        it would be really cute to have a flower girl).  My brother
        Ken handed me Barbara's ring, and Donna handed Barbara my
        ring, the flower girl didn't do anything.  The JOP, Barbara,
        and I read sections of the ceremony (actually we said most
        of it, he introduced us, tied segments together, and finished
        up).  Everyone else just watched.  Well, except for Barbara's
        little brother who videotaped (poorly), and a bunch of people
        with cameras who snapped tons of pictures.
        
        Although it was a strictly non-religious ceremony, we couldn't
        resist adding in a short bit we came across somewhere...
        from the creation myth of some African tribe (Togo?).  "God
        created man and woman.  They looked at each other and burst
        out laughing.  Then they travelled the earth together." 
        Cute.
        
        Barbara tossed her bouquet because a) she wanted to, b) it
        seemed reasonably harmless, and c) "everyone" expected her to.
        She didn't even have a garter (partly because I think they're
        ugly, and partly because that "tradition" seems somewhat
        less "harmless" than the bouquet).
        
        At the reception (Sheraton Tara, Framingham), our music was
        provided by our favorite contra dance band (no, they're not
        Central American... they play New England contra dance music),
        and the caller taught several simple dances for those who
        didn't know (which included most of the crowd).  Since both
        sets of parents, and we, dance, we adapted the wedding dance
        tradition by having us three couples demonstrate a dance
        to start things out.
        
        Oh yes, we also explained to everyone that that references
        to "Mr. and Mrs. Butenhof" would be strongly unappreciated.
        We actually had considered explaining that we were *not*
        changing our names on the wedding invitations, and possibly
        strongly suggesting that those who committed the no-no would
        be shot... we were overruled on grounds that that approach
        lacked in tact (:-)), so the word was passed unofficially
        by family prior to the wedding... aside from an Aunt who
        still addresses letters (thankfully infrequent) to "Mr. and
        Mrs. David Butenhof" in spite of numerous reminders, everyone
        did OK.
        
        (another thing I did was warn that if anyone smoked, I was
        leaving... but that belongs in a different notes conference).
        
        Anyway, if that gives you any ideas, you're welcome to them.
        By the way, if you *do* create your own ceremony, there are
        lots of books in the library on the subject.  I never would
        have thought to bother with any, and as I expected most of
        the stuff was pretty bad... but Barbara's mother took out
        a whole bunch and gave them to us, so we figured it wouldn't
        hurt to look though them.  In between the sickening "women
        are slime but I'll take her anyway" stuff were a couple of
        really nice ideas...
        
        Also, select your official (JOP or whatever) early and try
        to go over the ceremony with her (or him)... find out stuff
        like "mandatory lines" early (among other things, you'll
        have time to verify independently that they really *are*
        mandatory), and get everyone familiar.  Our JOP flubbed a
        couple of lines, since he'd never *seen* it until the night
        before (and probably didn't look at it then)... luckily it
        probably wasn't very noticable to anyone but us, although
        one significantly altered the intended sense of the line.
        
        Since we hadn't met him before, we also didn't know who the
        guy was or what he looked like until about 5 minutes before
        the ceremony... we'd seen this strange out-of-place looking
        guy standing all by himself in the park, but it took a while
        to guess who it was... things would have been a little smoother
        if we'd talked to him previously!  (Still, it worked out
        OK).
        
        Oh yeah, my brother and his wife also created their own ceremony
        when they got married.  Looking over .2 in the NOTES$SCRATCH
        buffer up there reminded me, because, although neither family
        has a bit of Jewish history, one of the wedding traditions
        they used was primarily Jewish... stamping on the wine goblet.
        As I remember, supposedly this is to symbolize that the marriage
        would be as hard to break as the goblet would be to reconstruct.
        My other brother saved the goblet and promised to reassemble
        it and present it to them for their anniversary (as far as
        I know, he never did).
        
        	/dave

    If you want a church service performed by a member of the clergy,
    and you aren't tied in to a particular church, try contacting your
    local Unitarian-Universalist church.  It is a liberal religion which
    respects the non-sexist needs today.  Both Nashua, NH and Manchester,
    NH have very good churches (also called societies).  Actually, I
    suspect any of the UU societies in this area are great.
    
    Ellen (an active UU)
    

Jym,

Definitely write your own ceremony.  It was the best premarital counseling 
Lisa and I had.   Onto tips.

Lisa and I came down the aisle together, preceded by groomsmen/bridesmaids
(to give the traditional designation, in the program all were listed
alphabetically under the heading of "Wedding Party") pairs.  To involve our
parents we had them do parental reflections right before the processional.
The topics of these reflections were pretty much left open but ended up
being thoughts on how we had been prepared or prepared ourselves for
marriage, and welcoming of the new son or daughter. (Note, Ask for 5
minutes and you'll get 15.) It was very moving to listen to our parents
speak, though some of the quartet are not very polished speakers (or for
that matter very feministically enlightened). 

Two close (and enlightened) friends delivered meditations on the meaning of 
marriage and the preacher delivered a short sermon based on Scripture we chose.

Shop around for a preacher/rabbi/jop.   We talked to several before we
found one who was willing to work with us on all important points.  He
encouraged us rewrite the Scripture so that the language was inclusive and
let us put inserts which contained favorite hymns with slightly rewritten
and inclusive lyrics into the hymnals.  He also was very willing to have us
write our own vows which I'll tack on at the end of this note mostly
because I'm proud of them but also to give some idea of the
traditional/novel blend of our wedding.   At our request he pronounced us
"husband and wife" and when it came time to present us to the congregation
he said "I give you the family of Lisa Guedea and Byron Glick." 

If the presentation wasn't enough, all our Invitation/RSVP cards had both
names on the return address, as did all the thank-you cards.  This pretty
much got the idea across (except for one aunt, also :-)).

As with other endeavors, it took a lot of time and advanced planning to buck
the sexist tide but we ended up with a ceremony that reflected our thoughts
and feelings about marriage and relationships in general.

The whole process was made much easier by the fact that we were married at
the time of or wedding.   Nine months before we went through any of this we
got married by a women JP (whom we met in advance and with whom we
discussed wording) in a realtor's office.  And as Lisa always points out,
she wore black pants, a grey blouse, and blood red roses. 

Good Luck and God Bless (If you wish :-) ).


Vows. . .


(Together) We bring to this marriage our selves, with the perfections and
the frailties of separate individuals. 

(Byron) Before God and these witnesses, I, Byron, take thee Lisa to be my wife.
I promise to love you and to be faithful to you.

(Together) Together, we seek connection, intimacy, and support, knowing
these require discipline, honesty, and self sacrifice. 

(Lisa) Before God and these witnesses, I, Lisa, take thee Byron to be my 
husband.  I promise to love you and to be faithful to you.

(Together) In this union we expect both continuity and change, retaining our 
individuality as we learn to be partners.

(Lisa) In Exploration and in Security 

(Byron) In Community and in Solitude

(Lisa) In Joy and in Sorrow

(Byron) In Sickness and in Health

(Together) So Long as we both Shall Live.

    I second .4 - I'm getting married at the UU church in Nashua, in
    October - they are very cooperative with the ceremony, and arrangements
    in general.
    
    -dc

	    I sent the same query to the Usenet net.women newsgroup, and
	got this in the mail.  Its author also suggests a Unitarian min-
	ister.  (If I were to use one, I would have to convince my mom
	that the Unitarian Church is *not* the Unification church!)
			<_Jym_>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
We got married by a Unitarian minister (female), and none of that kind
of garbage was used, or even suggested.  Of course, Non-Bostonian
Unitarians are a different breed, and since you are close to Boston,
you might want to be careful to get the non-Bostonian kind (there is
some official word for it, but I can't remember it -- I'm not a member
of either group).

The thing to be sure of is that you have either full sympathy for your
views by whoever is officiating, or you have full prior-approval of
what that person says.  We had the former, which is quite superior to
the latter, since you can relax about what the officator says.  If you
really want to be sure, have the "officiator" (the one who signs the
marriage license) kept out of the ceremony entirely and have you two do
the talking.  I don't like that for several reasons (one of which is
that you have to be cogent and self-possesed at a time when it is
likely that one or both of you won't be), but it is the surest.

I have been to weddings where the officiator said things which the
couple did not want said.  In one case it was something they had
explicitly told him they did not want said.

We just didn't bother with the bouquet/garter routine.  Nobody (besides
the photographer, who wanted a photo opportunity) objected.  The only
non-symetric part of anything was the fact that my procession (wherein
I was accompanied by my mother) came in before hers (wherein she was
accompanied by her father), something which she insisted on (over my
strenuous objections, but one of us had to give, so I eventually did).

We also had a quartet playing classical music, which eliminated concerns
about some band leader/dj getting involved in the "traditional ways",
like the one you described.

Good luck!

	To wed or not to wed, that is the question. Wether tis better
to live in  matrimonial wedlock or  cohabitate in illegal, subversive,
communistic and disgustingly cheap sin. 
	There was a time, deep in our past, when marriage was an intel-
ligent and neccesary thing to partake of. A person might live in a small
community with little to no access to the outside world. One would only
get to  know those in one's immediate  area and that would limit one's
matrimonial choices. You were not allowed to talk to strangers and, be-
sides, people from  other communities were suspect; probably drank and
didn't go  to church. Definitely not marriage material. Keeping in mind
all the pressure and importance  placed upon children to "grow up" and
get married by their parents and peers, not to mention all the brain-
washing they recieved through the media; love stories, love songs, even
fairy tales were loaded with the idea of being "nobody unless somebody
loves you", it's not surprising that they grabbed the most likely pros-
pect close at hand and rushed off to their local chapels and performed
their duty. Remembering again that, with so few prospects at hand, it
made perfect sense to grab the best choice  quickly before someone else
got her/him and they had to make do with a specimen of inferior quality.
Whatever that means. Worse still, you could end up with nobody at all and
since everyone else had "somebody" they always made those who were single
feel unloved and ugly or wanting in some major manner. Who would want to
go though life mocked and shamed as a spinster? Though men, typically and
unjustly, were generally spared the ridicule and debasements, they were
still made to feel out of place on many occasions. Such suffering.
	Now that you'd  made your choice and gone  through those all im-
portant pagan rituals, pronouncing to all your  ownership of each other,
in front of any number of gods and all your friends and relatives and
their children with a dozen cameras and somebody brought a video and this
has got to be the most photographed wedding in the annals of history ????
it was  time to settle down and take care  of the basics of survival. At
that time, it  took at least 2  people (plus kids?) to survive. The male
had been taught since his last  diaper how to  hunt, fish, farm  and tan
hides, both animals and childrens. The female had been taught how to sew,
cook, clean, have  babies and  keep quiet. Obviously, one  just couldn't
survive without  the other.
	 Note that having fun was not one of the items that people were
taught how to do. In fact, it was suppressed. "When are you going to set-
tle down and raise a family?" was a common question asked of anyone over
17 who was still trying to enjoy life. If that person persisted in avoid-
ing her/his matrimonial/social duties and responsibilities then, by the
time she/he was 25, she/he was considered well past prime and found her/him
self totally alone and unhappy because all her/his friends had succumbed
to social pressure and tied the big knot and were spending all their time
"surviving". If one didn't want to feel ostracized and pitied then one had
to join the club or frequent bars and brothels which made you  even more
suspect and pitied due to your wanton, wicked ways. Talk about pressure.
	Considering the basics of survival in earlier times will give you
an idea of the  necessity of marriage. Cooking included more than opening
a jar of spagheti sauce and boiling some water on  an automatic stove for
the pasta and completing the fare with a can of peas and some fresh store
bought  bread. Long before  you spent the day making the  spaghetti sauce,
you had to  grow the tomatoes. Pasta didn't come out of a box but, rather,
had to be hand made. A can of peas  was a cloth covering over your surrey
and fresh store bought bread was flour and  yeast with mothers directions
and a hot oven. No vacuum  cleaner, no toaster, no microwave, no refriger-
ator. Pop hunted, sometimes all day, to kill something from which to bring
home the bacon. There was  no going to MacDonalds or the local pizza joint
for dinner. Need a new  shirt? No problem. Just trade some crops you have
spent 7 months growing  for the material and mom would take  the next week
or so sewing in her spare time (spare time???!) and Voila! designer shirts!
As you can see, survival required at least 2 people.
	There wasn't much in the way of entertainment but  that was ok be-
cause no one  had time for entertainment or, if they did  have time, they
were probably too  tired from surviving to be  entertained. No  movies, no
television, no  vcr's or video  games or radios. Most people  could barely
read and there were no mass  production  printing presses  to produce vast
quantities of books for public distribution anyway. Top this off with trans-
portation  problems and most couples, after a hard  day surviving, retired
early and entertained themselves by having children. Limited birth control
was the norm. More children meant you had to produce more food for surviv-
al which meant more time and more energy. Of course, as the kids got older
they learned to help to survive. The boys, you will remember, were taught
how to hunt and fish and farm and tan hides and listen to their elders and
the girls  were taught  how to cook and clean and  sew and have babies and
keep quiet and to listen to their elders.
	Ahhh, for the good old days.
	Top all this off  with pagan taboos against divorce and pagan aff-
irmations that one just wasn't complete unless one had a marraige partner
and pagan  accusations that anyone  without a marriage  partner must be a
combination of "lonely", "unfullfilled" and "not able  to get anyone" and
the pressure was on for everyone to wed early and stay that way until they
died. Don't forget that up until a mere TWENTY or so years ago, the biggest
taboo of all for a woman was  to have sex if she wasn't  married.  A woman
who was known to have sex with  a man she wasn't married to was considered
a whore and slut by all "decent people", and most men would never even con-
sider her for a wife if they knew  she had a "past" or was thought to be a
"loose woman". Since most women probably decided that it would be far worse 
to be looked down on as a slut or pitied as an old-maid, the most sensible
choice was to try to grab the cutest, or nicest guy around, get married and
make the best of it.  Under those  conditions, most married women  believed
that no matter how bad off they had it, they were still much better off than
single women.
	  It has  only been in  recent years that  unhappily married  women
(in huge  numbers) have  decided that there  might be  an alternate choice;
an independant  life style, supporting themselves and sleeping  with whom-
ever they  feel like. In short,  doing what a  lot of single men have been
able to  do for years. Until birth control and  wide acceptance by society
of unmarried sex, any woman who wanted to make love really needed a husband.
	That was then.
	This is now.
	1985
	The age of self-reliance. Solo-survivability. Macdonalds lives! As
do pizza parlors and White Hens and 7/11's and frozen foods and microwaves.
Need a new shirt? Hop in your car and drive on down to the local department
store, men's shop or women's shop and buy one. Don't have enough cash? Use
plastic. 
	

    i don't think that 30.8 adds any value to this note or this note
    file. is there another notesfile that 30.8 would fit more appropriately
    into?
    jim has asked for some ideas, and possibly for some support. it's 
    unnecessary to try to make him feel like a jerk before he even gets 
    started. i would like to offer jim my congratulations and best wishes.
    
    liz

	    [RE .9]:  Thank you for the support.

	    [RE .8]:  While we recognize that traditional marriage is in
	most cases a sexist institution, my fiancee and I agree that
	marriage _per_se_ does not have to be like that.
	    We see our union as a partnership in Love, where each of us
	will help the other grow.  Having already lived together for
	over three years (none of which can be properly called "disgust-
	ingly cheap sin"), we know it can be that way and will continue
	to be that way.
	    If you'd like to flame about the institution of marriage, a
	new topic would be a more appropriate place for it.

			<_Jym_>

    Didn't mean to piss anyone off..just trying to throw out a view
    that seemed apropo to the subject.... 
    actually, i feel that marraige and sacrificing both lambs and
    virgins are quite out of place today....but....as i have also
    attended "traditional" weddings in the past year and am in grave
    anticipation of yet another....i would suggest leaving out the
    forever and ever stuff....and include things like...."i vow to
    love you until it is no longer convenient"....just kidding...
    again...i better watch out or someone will come after me with
    a chainsaw......the idea you got across in .10 sounds like it
    hits the mark...all anyone person can really ask and offer to
    any other is to help them grow...you have my permission to dis-
    pense wit hthe garter-removal and the flower tossing.
    
    	ps....about the disgusting cheap sex...i certainly don't know
    you so i certainly wouldn't say that about you...it was a reference
    from a memory out of my childhood....it isn't anything that i sub-
    scribe to at all.
    
    	friends?
    

    When I got married just over 9 years ago, we seem to have had a
    rather traditional ceremony compared to the others I read about
    here. I did make sure the minister deleted the "obey" part from
    the ceremony. Other than that, it was a straight-forward, simple,
    "Gathered here before you... to I now pronounce you husband and
    wife." end of ceremony. WE knew we loved each other, and we didn't
    feel the need to declare it all to everyone present. I did wear
    a long white gown, he a black tux. Six others in the wedding party
    were family and best friends. My husband is Catholic, I am
    Congregationalist, but since neither of had been to church in years,
    didn't feel any allegiance to either. We got married on the Air
    Force Base in Biloxi, Miss., in the non-sectarian chapel. It was
    all lovely, a quick ceremony, and then off to celebrate. I did let
    my new husband remove the garter - but I had modestly placed it
    just BELOW my knee - no big skirt lifting in public for me. I think
    everyone would have been a little embarassed. I think anyone culd
    tell by the glow on our faces that we were in love, and committed
    to each other. And it's been nine happy years and two children later,
    and now the ceremony seems just a happy memory - pictures are there,
    of course. I would advice a professional photographer because a
    friend with a 35mm may not get everything you want. Also, I'm pleased
    to be MRS. somebody - I was proud my husband gave me his name -
    what better, more honorable thing can a man give his wife? 
    
    Anyway, we did things fairly traditionally, partly because it was
    most comfortable that way - neither of us would have felt at ease
    if we'd had to recite in front of our small crowd. Good luck to
    you Jym. And remember, even if little things go wrong with the ceremony
    (our best man had no studs in his tux shirt - saftey pins covered
    by the ruffle kept him together, and you can;t even tell in the
    pictures) it's the years after  the ceremony that count the most.
    It's what goes on behind closed doors that are the most important.
    Kathleen Baine

    I know Bed and Breakfast Inns are pretty popular out there, You
    might check into that.
    
    My Husband and I got married last September in a B and B in Carmel,
    California.  We had a small wedding of about 50 people.  Our closest
    friends and relatives stayed in the Inn with us.  (We rented the
    whole place.)  The Innkeeper was wonderful!  We told her what we
    wanted and she aranged it.  She recommended to us a Methodist Minister,
    (We are of no particular denomination, but thought a semi-religious
    ceremony would help to make our bond more complete.  The Methodists
    seem to be the most liberal, non-sexist, and least radical.) who
    performed a short (15 mins.) and lovely ceremony.  There were no         
    promises of obedience, servitude, or humility.  The Innkeeper arranged
    for and prepared all the food for the reception. (Cost to us -->
    Food only!)  Our cake was cheesecake decorated with fresh flowers.
    His brother was best man, my sister was maid of honor.  His brother
    and Him waited downstairs (the ceremony was infront of the fireplace)
    as I came down with behind my sister with my mother and father.
    The best part of the ceremony came when the Minister asked if anyone
    gives the bride away...My father stood up and said "I do not give
    my children away!  I accept a son-in-law!"  I think they had that
    preplanned.
    
    We chose to keep with the tradition of throwing the garter and flowers.
    I put the garter low on my leg and my new husband first looked to
    my father for approval before he removed it.  We had classical music
    playing SOFTLY in the background the whole day.   When all was over
    we all changed clothes and went to the beach to watch the sunset.
    
    THROW AWAY ALL YOUR WEDDING GUIDE BOOKS!!!  I FOUND THEY WERE FULL
    OF STUFF YOUR SUPPOSED TO DO AND NOT DO.  It's your wedding, do
    it the way YOU want to do it!!!!!!!!   Weddings mean big bucks for
    everyone but the guy who has to pay the bills.
    
    My other big word of advice is to involve as few people in your
    wedding as possible who are NOT close family or friends of you or
    your fiance(e), especially entertainers they tend to steal the show
    away from one of the biggest events of your life...
    
    One last thing.......RELAX!!!! (begin doing this consciously about
    3 months before the wedding) I had hives for a long miserable 3
    weeks (they went away 2 hours after the ceremony) before the wedding.
    The pressure is great to organize your wedding other than the way
    YOU really want to organize it.
    
    Sorry I rambled on.
    
    Gina

    I agree with .13.  It is YOUR wedding, and you should do what you
    want to do!! We had a problem with my mother wanting to run the
    whole show.  Of course, it didn't matter to her that we were paying
    for it.  It took some disagreements between us, but I finally managed
    to convince her that I was going to do what I wanted, then I went
    ahead and did it.  And after all her complaining, she loved the
    way things turned out!
    
    We had a fairly traditional wedding because that was what I had
    always wanted.  It was a Catholic wedding, which doesn' t give you
    a whole lot of choices, but the priest was very cooperative, and
    we got to design the ceremony pretty much how we wanted.  He helped
    us to pick the readings, and we made sure we omitted anything that
    sounded like my husband was picking up a new piece of property.
    There was no "obey" anywhere in the ceremony, and he finished with
    "I now pronounce you husband and wife".
    
    I think that you will find that once you know what you want, and
    most importantly, what you don't want, you can get the whole thing
    organized fairly well.  Just make sure that for things you don't
    want (like maybe the garter and bouquet tossing), that you make
    those feelings clear to the band or whoever will be handling those
    events.  We had some things at the wedding that we did not want,
    and I made those feelings very clear.  I did have some slight problems,
    but they were all corrected (no one wanted to deal with an angry
    bride), and no one but my husband and myself even knew that the
    problems existed.
    
    I would advise that you just make sure everything is organized and
    that you have friends and family help you with what needs to be
    done that day.  Then you can relax and enjoy your own wedding!!
    We certainly did!
    
    Good Luck, and let us know how the wedding goes.
    
    Cathy

	I friend of mine became a Justice of the Peace a couple
	of years ago and told me that (in New Hampshire) the entire
	ceremony is optional.  There are NO required words (unless
	you choose a religious ceremony and the church of choice has
	some rules).  I can't remember what the required paperwork
	is (some signatures from bride, groom, witness and justice
	I think) but you don't even need an "I now pronounce you...".

	My friend, the Justice of the Peace, performed a wedding ceremony
	for one of her best friends. (By the way... how many of you
	had to shift mental gears when you got to 'her'?)  The bride
	and groom wrote the script and my friend did the 'performance'.  
	It turned out fine.

				-John A. Wasser

	    Here are a bunch of responses I've gotten from the Usenet
	net.women newsgroup.
			<_Jym_>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!epimass!oliveb!tymix!whitehur
Posted: 27 May 86 15:46:45 GMT
Organization: Tymnet Inc., Cupertino CA

I think it would be nice for both sets of parents to "give up" 
their offspring, to symbolize creating a new family out of two
established families.
       Pamela K. Whitehurst 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtune!akguc!akgua!gatech!gitpyr!jkr
Posted: 7 Jun 86 19:44:17 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

That is just what my wife and I did when we got married over six years ago.
We put together our own ceremony from bits and pieces of other wedding plans
we had seen.  However, Mary Martha did not want to have a chapel full of
people all looking at her as she walked down the aisle so we both entered
from the front of the chapel at the same time, each of us followed by our
parents and then our attendants.  Then her mother and my parents seated
themselves while her father joined the pastor of the church to help preside 
over the wedding.  The pastor told us as we planned the ceremony that he
thought that the Presbyterian Church should adopt the ceremony we had put
together as the standard ceremony of the church.  
 
When I mentioned to my wife that I was going to be posting this article as
part of this discussion she said I should mention that having both sets of
parents participating in the wedding has been part of Jewish tradition for
many years.  I wouldn't know about that but I am including the note as a
favor to her.
-- 
J. Kenneth Riviere   (JoKeR)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!tektronix!teklds!midas!jeffw
Posted: 28 May 86 18:02:51 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR.

The minister that my wife and I went to (Unitarian) had several books with
several suggested texts for weddings. They ran the gamut from moving to
horrible. Since you are probably much more sensitive to sexism than the
average engaged couple, I would suggest getting your hands on a mass of 
these things and plow through them (together, of course). There are some
gems hidden here and there. Don't waste your time gagging over the ones
you don't like (I have a feeling there will be a lot of them) or you'll
never find the gems.

This minister, by the way, responded to the news that we had been living 
together for 2 years by revealing that he was currently doing the same thing.
Interesting person!
					good luck,
					Jeff Winslow
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!tektronix!orca!tekecs!mikes
Posted: 29 May 86 03:12:27 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR

  Jym, you didn't say what if any religious tones you wanted at your wedding,
nor what size of an affair you wanted it to be.  I favor small, simple weddings
myself, though many folks I know think that's a mistake.  My wife and I had a
very small ceremony, with a fairly standard set of vows (though, luckily, none
of this "love and obey," etc. stuff -- we were *both* advised to "love and 
cherish" though).  This is definitely a matter to discuss with whomever will
be doing the ceremony.  Some say "husband and wife," some "man and wife," and
some, I'd imagine, neither one (ours was the former).  You'll also have to 
consider (at least for a minute) the feelings of any family that will be there.
There's the whole business of where and when the parents are seated, who will
be the groom's men and the brides maids (!), etc.  This is why I like small,
simple weddings.  No fuss, no muss, and no uncooked minute rice being thrown 
that will later kill the birds that eat it (no kidding -- if you have to 
throw, throw bird seed).  There are a zillion ways you can do this, but just
remember that this is YOUR wedding.  Don't bend to anyone's desire to have a
traditional wedding just so they can see you snap your new bride's garter off 
of her silken thigh (just the symbolism makes me reel -- anyone for "Ring
Around the Rosie?" :=] (<-- skull face)).  

		Hope it all turns out like you want it.
		Mike Sellers
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!hplabs!qantel!lll-lcc!vecpyr!atari!figmo
Posted: 29 May 86 02:25:02 GMT
Organization: Atari Corp., Sunnyvale CA

Both of us were given away by both parents.  We then stood under the
chupah (canopy for those of you who have never been to a Jewish
wedding). A few religious mumblings (about us being wed under the eyes
of God) followed, the glass of wine (yicky Mogen David or Manischevitz
syrupy stuff -- the rabbi passed the glass to everyone in the party,
we all took small sips, then the rabbi softly enough that only our
best man and I heard "Good stuff, isn't it?" and chugged the glass in
one big swig!), the rings (Mark had gained 40-50 lbs since he had the
ring fit, so it took several minutes for him to put it on!), he
smashed a glass (this is slightly sexist, but traditional) and then we
were pronounced "husband and wife."  No crapola about obeying anyone,
no sexist stuff (husband comes alphabetically before wife :-) ).

They didn't make us shove cake in each other's faces (thank God!  Do
you know how LONG it takes to put that &$*! makeup on???), but they
did have us do the stuff with the garter and the bouquet.  I didn't
mind too much...our best man nearly caught the bouquet (he had made
full use, shall we say, of the open bar, and was in line with the
girls!)!  The person who did catch the bouquet was mulatto (my mother
and most of my parents' friends are nauseatingly rascist); my (non-
rascist) brother caught the garter.  No sick remarks like "higher,
higher" were yelled when Mark took the garter off (although my folks
probably would have liked it); I think we had sufficiently offended my
folks and their moral-majority friends enough that they wanted to get
it over with. :-)

My folks tried to make the wedding like the ones you mentioned with
her being ickily subservient (my mother didn't even have the taste to
tell the paper that I wasn't taking my husband's last name!), and we
did everything we could to "spike" the wedding.  We gave the band a
copy of the sheet music from Rocky Horror Show; we wanted them to play
"Sweet Transvestite" when the melon balls were being passed out.  They
agreed to play "Time Warp," but (if you can believe this) they
"couldn't handle [singing] the lyrics!"  Our best man came through
there, too; since the Time Warp is unrecognizable without the lyrics,
HE grabbed the mike and started doing them, but I've digressed...

The way to get around the garter toss ("higher, higher!") is either to
have her not wear it too high or just not do it at all.  People like
the bouquet toss because it gives someone a souvenir of the wedding
(often there's a single woman with a near-marriage relationship who
stands away from all the other girls and who the bride aims for).  I
recommend writing your own vows if you're really worried about what
will be said (if your religious persuasion doesn't allow that, or if
you don't feel like bothering, they often have a set of vows to choose
from).

The only other sexist thing you might have to deal with is that the
best man is expected to make a speech, but the maid of honor isn't.
If you'd like, have her say something too and have her lead the first
toast to the new couple with him.

Hope I've been of some help.

--Lynn
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!hplabs!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!sdcsvax!sdchem!djo
Posted: 30 May 86 21:18:59 GMT
Organization: Chemistry Dept, UC San Diego

You may want to look into what a Taoist ceremony is like.  That was the last 
wedding that I went attended.  The father did walk the bride down to the groom
and the groom and bride kissed at the end of the ceremony but that was about
the extent of the similarity with a "normal" wedding.  The Taoist priest
explained the ceremony before it began because the whole thing was silent.  
He wielded a knife around the couple to symbolize cutting their ties with the
outside world.  He wound thread between then to symbolize their togetherness.
They bowed three times to show their oneness and respect to nature (they were
married in a gazebo next to a lake).  He sprinkled water in a circle around
them.  I don't remember what that symbolized.  It was very beautiful to have a
silent ceremony (there was more that I don't remember).  It was truly the most
beautiful wedding I have ever attended because there was none of that rhetoric
that I find abhorent.  The whole ceremony was to symolize the couples
commitment to each other and to the world.  

One other thing I've seen at weddings and enjoyed was when the bride and groom
each chose a peom or piece of prose that had special meaning to them and they
read it to each other.  I've felt the tears well up at something like that 
because it was so personal and I come away feeling that I *really shared*
something.  To my mind sharing something personal and meaningful with your
closest friends and family is what a wedding is all about.

Denise O'Jibway - djo@sdchemg
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!ucbvax!dali.Berkeley.EDU!salmon
Posted: 1 Jun 86 04:31:38 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley

     The best way to have the type of wedding you would like
     is to put some time into planning it yourself.

     When I got married a few years ago I went to the public
     library and checked out several books on wedding ideas 
     as well as a few on poetry.  I found reading some of the
     traditional wedding etiquette books very helpful.  They
     showed me the kinds of things I wanted to avoid having
     and could tell the minister to avoid.

     We had a small simple ceremony held outdoors in a rose
     garden.  This avoided any problems of giving the bride
     away.  There was no aisle to walk down and at one point
     the minister just anounced that everyone should gather
     round for the ceremony to begin.  Everyone remained 
     standing in a semicircle around us and the minister.

     We discussed the text of the ceremony in advance with
     the minister who said a few words and read some poetry
     we had picked out.  There was essentially none of the
     traditional wedding vow material used which may have
     left some of the older family members in attendance 
     wondering if we really got married at all. :-)

     Just one more idea since this is getting rather long.
     You might want to consider disigning your own wedding
     invitations in a novel way.  We did this.  Ours was
     in the form of a cartoon which we drew up and included
     something cute in the bubble that only close friends
     understood.  Designing your own invitations is a good
     way to avoid the traditional "Mr and Mrs Soandso invite
     you to attend the wedding of our daughter to Mr and
     Mrs Suchandsuch's son."
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!burl!clyde!cbosgd!apr!las
Posted: 2 Jun 86 20:12:05 GMT
Organization: Advanced Programming Resources, Columbus OH

A non-sexist wedding will require careful preparation of the people involved.
"Marriage professionals" in particular may be prone to operating on automatic
pilot.  They may also surprise you with certain attitudes you never knew were
there.

"Obey" was removed from the wedding vows in the Book of Common Prayer of the
Episcopal Church in 1928, thus making it non-canonical (not in accordance
with church law).  However, you can still find a few who think it's still
in there (or who think it SHOULD be in there).

Advice?  Be patient.  Be thorough.  Be assertive.

Bona fortuna,
Larry A. Shurr (osu-eddie!apr!las || 137c South Towne Ln; Delaware, OH 43015)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!tektronix!tekig5!tekig4!barbarap
Posted: 3 Jun 86 05:41:38 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR.

I recommend the book 'The New Wedding' by Khoren Arisian, Vintage Books,
1973.  It includes extensive selections on creating your own marriage
ceremony, discusses traditions, customs, music and more.

			Barbara Ports
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!phri!cmcl2!csd2!krantz
Posted: 3 Jun 86 20:40:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

Make it a Jewish one.  The ultimate in good taste.

mike krantz
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: [email protected]
Posted: 31 May 86 00:45:05 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

Be warned--sometimes the wedding-official (minister, priest, justice-of-the-
peace, etc.) will add handy little tidbits like honor-and-obey that you never
imagined would pop out of that person's mouth!  Make sure, if you don't want
this, that you discuss it seriously with the person.  Other things to be sure
to communicate are the resulting last names, in case it might not be what
anyone who's speaking at the wedding expects.  You never know what people will
ad-lib!  Don't rely upon what's inscribed upon marriage contracts or typed
upon official state documents--be sure to tell them.  It might save a little
embarassment.

L S Chabot	...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!hplabs!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!sdcsvax!caip!lll-crg!lll-lcc!unisoft!mtxinu!ed
Posted: 2 Jun 86 17:57:18 GMT
Organization: mt Xinu, Berkeley, CA

In some states - including Massachusettes where, if I remember
correctly, the question originated - the official need not perform the
ceremony, but only witness it.  Two friend of mine were married a few
years ago in Mass. by one of their housemates.  The official was
innocuously in the background during the ceremony, signed whatever
papers were required, and then disappeared.  The entire ceremony was
written by the couple and performed by a close friend who *wouldn't*
throw in anything ad. lib.
-- 
Ed Gould                    mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA  94710  USA
{ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed   +1 415 644 0146
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs
Posted: 4 Jun 86 13:12:05 GMT
Organization: The Poto Mitan in the Houmfor

I'll second that. We were married (in NJ) by an Ethical Culture Society
minister. We discussed what we wanted in our wedding with him, and he suggested
we write the whole thing ourselves, vows included. It worked out beautifully.
We can say our wedding ceremony accurately reflected our feelings about each
other and about what marriage meant to us.
-- 
Marcel-Franck Simon		ihnp4!{mhuxr, hl3b5b}!mfs
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!tektronix!orca!tekecs!morganha
Posted: 4 Jun 86 18:17:23 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR

My wife and I married one evening in a friend's home.  Another friend,
presided, we sat and drank a bottle of wine by candlelight and signed
the necessary legal papers.  As you may have guessed, we do not participate
in any of the "organized religions" and felt the use of their facilities
inappropriate, and felt the commitment was private, not public.  For us,
a large ceremony was superfelous.  If you enjoy/need/want lotsa hoopla,
go for it.  If it's family pressure -- you'll have to deal with that in
your own way.

Good luck and happiness,
 
--morgan
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
Posted: 4 Jun 86 18:08:41 GMT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Denver, Co

I once attended a wedding where the couple asked each of their closest
friends (essentially everyone who attended the wedding which was small) to
present whatever they wanted as part of the ceremony.  The wedding was as
diverse as the friends.  There was a guitar duet of "Jesu, Joy of Man's
Desiring" presented as a wish that the couple would "know that joy"; a
variety of other musical numbers that I don't remember any more; some
readings from a variety of sources (often in philosophic conflict with each
other); some simple expressions of good wishes; etc.

The couple made no attempt to exclude any point of view, even though they
disagreed with it, but welcomed each as a genuine reflection of the person
giving it.  (They wrote their own vows.)  Obviously, one of their
priorities was an appreciation of their friends in spite of differences.

Nancy Parsons
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Path: decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!ho95e!slr
Posted: 3 Jun 86 17:00:19 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ

I was "best woman" at my friends' wedding.  It was pseudo-traditional-Jewish,
except that all of the customs for the woman were repeated for the man, and
vice-versa.  For example, traditionally, the woman is supposed to circle the
man seven times.  Well, for this wedding, this was followed by the man circling
the woman seven times.  etc.  etc.

When we were rehearsing for the wedding, the rabbi was giving us the order
for things to happen; then he said, "at this point I'll pronounce you man
and wife."  Fortunately, I caught this, and told the bride, who didn't hear
that slip.  She told the rabbi that she wanted it specifically to be
"husband and wife," whereupon the rabbi said that he would try to remember.
He did remember; if he hadn't and I had been the bride, I probably would
have inclinations to murder.  This just underscores the need for careful
planning mentioned above.
-- 
Shelley Rosenbaum
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

    Better late than never? Can't resist adding my two cents. . .
    
    I walked down the aisle by myself. I was 27, had been living away
    from home for 10 years, and was not dependent (financially or
    otherwise) on my folks. I don't think my father understood it very
    well, but he didn't like our alternative either (we had offered to 
    do it the Jewish way, with each of us walking in with our parents). 
    
    When they ask who gives this woman, we had the question asked for 
    both of us, one at a time, and each set of parents stood up and
    said "We do." It was nice -- I felt like our original families were
    blessing this new family.
    
    We were pretty firm about how we wanted the minister to handle his
    sermon. We gave him the passages -- one of which in from Ecclesiastes,
    about two holding one another up, and keeping each other warm, but
    one alone falling and being cold -- and made it clear what we felt
    the points were that we wanted him to make. We felt that he was there
    to express our views to the people who had come. I know other people
    feel differently -- that the message is from someone more experienced,
    who is speaking to the couple. However, this worked for us. 
    
    The minister was good -- no trouble with husband and wife, or with
    cherish vs. obey. In fact, he told us the only part of the ceremony 
    he did have to say was about the State of Massachusetts. The minister 
    also had a LARGE handout of different things he could 
    use in the ceremony. He was UCC (United Church of Christ), and they 
    are usually pretty relaxed. So, don't look at the minister necessarily 
    as an enemy -- he can be a real ally. We had a much nicer service than 
    we would have without his help.
    
    No garter, and I did not throw the bouquet. I couldn't have borne
    to give it up, and in fact, florists will usually try to sell you two 
    nowadays -- one for keeping and one for throwing. This struck me as 
    silliness crowned with silliness.  
    
    Best of luck, and most of all enjoy yourselves! Having a wedding
    is great fun!
    

	    Our wedding isn't until 21-July-1987, so keep those cards
	and letters coming!
			<_Jym_>

    I went to another of those family weddings last weekend and they're
    all interchangeable in my mind.  They even keep having the reception
    in the same place with the same band.
    
    I can remember the old garter throwing tradition, even caught one
    once, but this bit with shoving the cake in each other's mouths
    has got to be stopped.
    
    Another thing we could all do without is these so called bands that
    do nothing but add a lot of noise so that you can't even talk to
    other people at your table.
    
    Our own wedding was certainly different than anything my family
    had seen before (large Irish Catholic family).  We were married
    in a Unitarian Church and wrote our own service.  Some highlights:
    
    	I baked our cake (separated 108 eggs)
    
    	We arranged the chairs (for 50) in a semi-circle with us and
    	the minister in the center, facing everyone across a low table.
    
    	We played a duet of Simple Gifts on dulcimers (which I made)
    
    	As part of the ceremony, went around the room and introduced
    	everybody.
    
    	As a recessional, bagpiper led everyone out to the lawn where
    	we planted an ornamental tree. (best man dug the hole)
    
    	Reception was pot-luck supper followed by evening of Scottish
    	and English Country Dancing.
    
    	We were about the last ones to leave after putting the chairs
    	away and cleaning up for Sunday service.
    
    	Atmosphere was pretty relaxed.  At one point in the service
    	we all looked at each other and said "what do we do next?"
      

The two best weddings that I've been to were both non-traditional, and
pretty much non-sexist.  The most obvious non-traditional aspects were that
they weren't held in big gaudy places (a park and a K of C bldg), the food
was made by some or all of the guests, they were both outside, the music was
provided by stereos, the couple wrote some or all of what was said, there
was no giving away of anyone.  At the more recent one, when the JP said,
"And I present for the first time, Mr & Mrs Fred Frammitz", no one was more
surprised than the newly-wedded couple!  Apparently, they hadn't talked
with him before.

My advice, from observation but not from experience, is to say things, and have
things said, that are meaningful to yourselves, and to make the celebration
afterwrds be simply a gathering of friends and family to celebrate your
marriage.  I've enjoyed the "parties" much more than the "affairs".

					-- hs

I'm all for parties too.  Our wedding was very satisfying, but because it was a
in a church (described in an earlier reply somewhere) it was pretty formal
(Momma was so happy to see both her boys in tuxes.  We weren't that scruffy
as kids were we?).  Most of the socializing, which to us was a major
reason for having a big to-do, got done in five separate parties thrown over
four days. Had everything from a small dinner party, to the night-before
party which lasted until about six hours before our afternoon wedding.
Worked out well because we had about 150 people around who ranged from no
dancing, no drinking conservatives, to college friends who responded
enthusiastically to a party invitation that started out with a quote from
Hunter S.   Thompson, "Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money, the Shit has hit the
fan." 
    All that did make the week (end?) busier, but as stated before, the 
prime reason we had the church wedding (after being married 9 months
earlier in a very private civil ceremony) was to get together and celebrate
with our friends and family.  It's hard to share it all when you only see 
people to shake their hand in a reception line.  Which brings up a point.
Why are you having a wedding?  Why not just elope?  Answering that question
(and kind of doing both anyway) helped clarify what Lisa and I wanted
include and exclude from our wedding weekend and what form various
activities would take.

First of all, enjoy it!

- Byron

    $ set reply/off_topic 
    
    "...a quote from Hunter S.   Thompson, 'Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money, 
    the Shit has hit the fan.'"             
    
    Which book is that from? I used to think it was just a Warren Zevon
    song.
    
    sm
    
    $ set reply/on_topic
    
    

	    Does the cake_in_the_face have a symbolic meaning?
			<_Jym_>

    Only one I can think of is it was a stupid joke that got out of
    ha. How long has it been around I don't remember it from when
    I was last going to weddings? I think it's a "tradition" that never
    should have started and won't be missed if stopped.
                    

        Perhaps:
        
        People thought it would be neat to feed each other cake.
        
        People noticed that doing so was often messy.
        
        People thought that it was cute and funny that it was messy.
        
        People decided that being messy was "in".
        
        People made this "cute and funny" messiness a tradition...
        i.e., lots of people continued to do it.
        
        People continued this (at best) rather dumb practise because
        it was "tradition".  Things like weddings seem to cause lots
        of otherwise sensible people to become highly tradition-bound.
        
        It'll definitely be missed if it's stopped... any tradition
        is missed when it's stopped, however dumb.  But if enough
        people stop, eventually it will fade from "tradition" status
        and the last holdouts will join us sensible people (:-))
        who never went in for it to begin with... :-) :-0 ;-)
        
        	/dave

It seems like I've been to a dozen wedding receptions since graduating
from high school, and I've yet to see a smooshing incident.  I've seen
a fistfight which nearly took out the entire cake; I've seen a first-time
bartender cut himself while slicing limes and had to avoid the Bloody
Marys because of the red tinge to the lime wedges; I've seen the usher's
boutonnieres stolen from the church; but I've never seen the cake pushed
into someone's face.

How do I get invited to one of these affairs?
				/AHM/THX

    I told my then-to-be husband that if he mashed me with the cake,
    it would be his last official act as married to me because if he
    was INSENSITIVE enough to shove frosting up my nose on that important
    a day to me, I didn't want to be married to him.  And if he had
    THAT BADLY misjudged and misunderstood ME, then he didn't want to
    be married to me!
    
    As a result we did NOT mash the cake.  
    
    Jym, this is a good (if albeit silly) example of that fact that
    you and your sweetie need to set each other's expectations.... 
    Patrick has a real strange sense of humor sometimes and if he had
    mashed me it would have been as much MY fault as his if I had NOT
    told him how I felt about it...
    
    So, instead, when the minister pronounced us husband and wife, instead
    of kissing me, he woogied me and set me off giggling...
    
    bugsy

re .-1

Definition requested: Woogied?

-Rob

    
    RE:  .27
    
    	What, pray tell, is 'woogied' ?
    
    	Is it only something consenting adults should be doing ?
    
    David

    Well, "woogie" is an act... between two consenting adults... and
    is usually totally unnoticed, except in my case it makes me giggle.
    
    The "woogier" sticks his nose into the ear of the "woogied" and
    says, in a very silly, deep, throaty, growly-kind of voice, and
    VERY quickly... "woogie, woogie, woogie..."  I guess it's the 
    combination of hot breath, noses in my ear, and the silly growl
    that makes me giggle...
    
    Anyway, before you rate this one as TOTALLY insane, it is, believe
    it or not, a quote from a movie, and since my husband and I CONSTANTLY
    indulge in quoting movies at appropriate times, it actually had
    a place in the ceremony...
    
    I believe, if I am remembering it correctly, that the quote comes
    from GHOSTBUSTERS when Bill Murray and the guy from the EPA and
    everyone is in the police commisioner's office.... Dan Ackroyd has
    called the EPA guy "dickless" and Bill Murray says," Yes, he's right.
    The man has no dick.." and then when the police commisioner tells
    the EPA guy he was wrong, Bill Murray leans over to the EPA guy's
    ear and says "Woogie, woogie, woogie" in that strange little voice
    JUST to irritate him!!!!
    
    So, when I told Patrick no mashing of wedding cake, he then told
    me that he was going to "woogie" me in front of everyone at the
    church....
    
    And he did....
    
    But the REAL point of admitting that whole embarassing thing is
    that you HAVE to remember that this is YOUR wedding, YOUR day, and
    the person you are marrying is the VERY same person you get that
    silly with!!!
    
    It's a special day to share special things.... and if you want to
    woogie each other on the alter in front of everyone, then by damn,
    start woogieing!!!
    
    I may have gotten the scene wrong in the movie, by the way.. or
    maybe I'm thinking of the wrong movie.... This was actually one
    of Patrick's gems, not mine...  so if anyone wants to scout the
    movie for it I'll get the actually title and scene from Hubs.
    
    And if you doubt the effectiveness of woogieing, just give it a
    shot.  It's very intimate, very silly, and has been known to break
    up the occasional tense moment....
    
    Or, you can do like Mariette Hartley and make little piggy noises..
    still makes people giggle...
    
    bugsy

I was married outside at my parents' house.  First, the maid of honor (my
sister) and the best man (a friend of Glenn's) walked from the front of the
house to the side, where the guests waited.  Glenn then walked with his parents
to the same place, followed by my parents and me.  I had no bouquet to toss; I
carried a white orchid on my mother's prayer book to give my hands something to
do.  My mother knew a bouquet would have me sniffing and sneezing. :-)

We didn't do that garter thing either.  We didn't have an MC and band; my
cousin played "Sunrise, Sunset" on her flute during the "processional" and
part of the ceremony and tried not to cry. :-)

The food was catered hors d'oevres, home-baked desserts, and a traditional cake.
We fed each other cake very neatly, and had to do it again when the flash didn't
go off. :-)

About 4 friends/relatives took pictures. Even the "professional photographer"
was a guest, and didn't charge us for the pictures.  We put most of the pictures
in our own wedding album; I would never want to pick n prints from the total
amount taken.

The whole wedding was very informal; no one wore a tux and my sister wore a
long gown of her choice.  I hope my next wedding is a lot like it. :-)

Jill

    I was married about 3 1/2 months ago in a fairly traditional UCC
    service.  I had always wanted a traditional wedding, and my then-to-be
    husband didn't mind, so that's what we had.  As someone has already
    pointed out, the UCC is a fairly relaxed denomination so their standard
    vows said nothing about obey in them.  In fact, they were identical
    vows for each of us.  No one "gave me away", the question was never
    asked - the vows started "Don, I give myself to you to be your wife..."
    and "Cathy, I give myself to you to be your husband..."  My father
    did walk me down the aisle, when we got to the altar he took both
    my hand and Don's hand and put them together, he kissed me and sat
    down.
    
    We lit the unity candle, but did not extinguish either of the flames
    that lit them.  We had asked the minister to say a homily (a short
    sermon) and there he said that under no circumstances should either
    of us ever extinguish our own light, because without our own, how
    could we ever give light to the other?  
    
    At the end of the ceremony, the minister did not say "you can now
    kiss you bride"... he simply said "now start your new life together
    with a kiss".
    
    As far as the reception and the garter-bouquet, i did throw it,
    and he did take it off of my leg, but we wanted that... after the
    guy who caught the garter put it on the girls leg, (they have been 
    dating each other for about 5 years - NOT planned), they turned
    around and she put the garter on his leg... quite funny actually!
    
    As far as I understand the cake-feeding to each other, it is to
    symbolize nourishing one another, and we both agreed that we *would
    not* smash it!  We didn't.
    
    Both of us felt that it was the most meaningful and fun day in our
    lives - that's the way it's supposed to be!  A *lot* of planning
    went into that day, as many people have already noted, and it most
    certainly pays off.  You're smart to start planning now, we started
    almost a year before the day, so when YOUR day rolls around, relax,
    remember and ENJOY!  
    
    Cathy MacIntyre
    

Jym,

	How are the wedding plans progressing?  Made any decisions yet?

Bugsy

We gave up on it and eloped.
 <_Jym_>

Just kidding.  With all the hassle, though, it's very tempting.

We're getting a Unitarian minister to marry us, since they know so
 much about "offbeat" weddings.  We're still looking for a site to
  get married at, though.

Since the spiritual themes Cheryl and I have in common involve love
 and nature, we want an outdoor wedding.  It would seem that some
  of pavilion in a park would be ideal, since we've got to have 100
   people sit somewhere.  (If anybody knows of such a place in the
    Worcester area, let me know.  Preferably something that could be
     retreated into in case of rain . . .)

We've just started to look at words and such.  Looks like there's
 plenty of good scripts out there already, we've just got to pick the
  nicest-sounding one.  (Not that we've ever seen a wedding with
   such a script.  We've been to a few more, and listened patiently
    to idiocy about women cleaning homes, raising kids, obeying their
     husbands . . . ackk!!!)

We've also got to figure out how to incorporate the introduction of the
 family name into the wedding.  As some of you may remember, our plan
  is to adopt a family name as a second middle name.  I'll be James G.
   Heart Dyer, and the kids will be Hearts.  I'll be professionally
    known as James G. Heart DYER, since Dyer is how I'm now profession-
     ally known, but when dealing with family matters like PTA meetings,
      I'll be James G. HEART Dyer.  Anyhow, we're trying to figure out
       how to introduce the family name during the wedding.

As for music, we're probably going to hire a DJ rather than deal with
 one of those dreadful bands.  A guy at the record store I work part-
  time at recently got married, and I know he has good musical taste,
   so I asked him what he did for entertainment.  He got Sleepy LaBeef
    (sp?), whose repertoire stretches from the 50s to the 80s; so we'll
     be looking into that before we make our decision.

I thought I was going to make it through the decade without wearing a
 tie, but I think I'll be wearing a tie to the wedding . . .

I've got my best man all lined up.  I had to drive out to the middle of
 Iowa to ask him to be the best man (he's marching in the Great Peace
  March - today I could just drive down to New York to see him).

There won't be any garter.  Working on the assumption that certain rela-
 tives might pass out at the sight of feminine legs in their natural
  state, Cheryl has to make the agonizing choice between shaving her
   legs and wearing a long gown.  I've suggested a bouquet that explodes
    in midair, but Cheryl doesn't seem keen on the idea.

The "accepting the other into our family" bit might be tricky, since my
 parents aren't exactly a family and aren't even exactly on speaking
  terms.  Chances are that that problem will be eliminated if my Dad
   doesn't win his drunken driving case on a technicality (he was to
    drunk to use the breathalizer) and ends up in the slammer . . .
     <_Jym_>

    When we got married (two years and two weeks ago), we had the ceremony
    at a Catholic church and the reception at an estate owned by the
    Danvers (Mass.) Historical Society.  It had *beautiful* grounds
    and we were just hoping that the day would be nice enough that people
    could go outside and walk around through the gardens, etc.  As it
    turned out, it was 70-75 degrees out that day with a perfectly clear
    sky (on October 20th!) and we decided that morning to move the whole
    reception outside.  Jym, Danvers is too far from Worcester but there
    are a lot of such estates around if you check with your local
    historical societies.  It's generally more expensive that way (no
    package deals), but I think it's worth it.
    
    Anyway, the priest we had was young and really contributed to making
    our ceremony special and non-sexist.  When we did our vows, he didn't
    make a big deal of it at the time, but at the end of the Mass, he
    asked us to turn around and said he was happy to present "Tracy
    and Paul for the first time as wife and husband.  Please join me
    in congratulating them and wishing them the best." (or something
    like that) at which time everyone clapped.     
    
    For his sermon, he talked about how he had gotten to know us, etc.
    He said that we were two individuals with unique pasts and experiences
    (for a minute, I was afraid he was going to get specific) and that
    we were both bringing the things we've learned, etc. to this marriage.
    He talked a lot about supporting and loving each other--no providing
    for, obeying, or anything else offensive.
    
    He also did not ask "who gives this woman?"  We made it quite clear
    that there was to be talk of the new Mr. and Mrs. Paul Warren.
    
    The band was also made aware that we were to referred to as Tracy
    and Paul.  By the way, the band we had was the Paul Broadnax Trio
    which I strongly recommend.  They play all kinds of music, they're
    very good and they're very reasonably priced.  Paul regularly plays
    at Ephraim's in Sudbury--sometimes solo, sometimes with his trio--
    if you want to hear them play.
    
    If you're sure you want a DJ, I have a recommendation for one in
    the Worcester area.  He's very good and he'll play what YOU want
    to hear.  He's also a friend of mine.  If you want more info, send
    me a mail message.
    
    We only ran into problems in two areas.  One was the photographer.
    I did NOT intend to throw away the bouquet.  I think it's an incredibly
    barbaric and offensive tradition, especially when coupled with the
    garter bit.  (Don't be offended, anyone, but I find the reasons
    behind that tradition real out of place nowadays.)  Anyway, we had
    carefully gone over everything with the photographer including some
    specific shots we wanted.  Well, apparently he left his notes at
    home because he forgot a lot of the pictures.  Inside this estate
    is a beautiful curved stairway and we wanted a picture of Paul and
    me going up those stairs at the end of the day.  Well, it was almost
    time for us to leave and suddenly I notice a swarm of women (all
    of whom happened to be single) at the bottom of the stairs.  It
    seems the photographer told the band to announce the throwing of
    the bouquet because I wanted to do that now.  Rather than make a
    scene, I threw it--and the photographer climbed up on the stairs
    too to take a picture of the bouquet being caught.  So much for
    a picture of the beautiful staircase.  A guest did get a picture
    of the stairway, but it shows me flanked by my husband the
    photographer.
    
    
    The other problem was the newspapers.  We sent an engagement
    announcement to the Boston Globe, the Worcester Telegram-Gazette,
    and the Lynn Daily Evening Item.  The Globe only prints your two
    names.  No problem.  For the other papers, we wrote up our own
    announcement that started "M. Tracy Bryant, daughter of Constance
    and Joseph Bryant of Lynn, and Paul F. Warren, son of Ann M. Warren
    of Worcester and the late Harold F. Warren, announce their engagement."
    We included a note explaining we want it written this way because
    WE are announcing our engagement; my parents are NOT making the
    announcement."  
    
    Anyay, both papers printed "Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Bryant announce
    the engagement of their daughter, M. Tracy, to Paul F. Warren, son
    of..."
    
    When we sent the wedding announcement, we included a note saying
    I would be using the name Ms. M. Tracy Warren, NOT Mrs. Paul F.
    Warren.  All three papers showed our picture with "Mr. and Mrs.
    Paul F. Warren" below.  I have since seen pictures labeled Ms. Ann
    Smith and Mr. John Jones (when the bride is not changing her name)
    or Dr. Ann B. and Dr. John C. Smith, so space is not the problem.
    It just doesn't fit the form they can deal with.
    
    By the way, I recommend having your wedding videotaped.  We decided
    to do so two days before the wedding.  It was hectic making the
    arrangements, but definitely worth it.  You spend so much time and
    money getting ready for this day and it's over so fast.  You will
    enjoy seeing the videotape together afterwards, showing it to people
    who couldn't make it, having records of parents, etc., when they
    aren't around anymore, being able to show your wedding to your kids
    if you have some.
    
    One more recommendation, then I'll shut up.  We had our pictures
    taken the morning of the wedding at the place we were having the
    reception.  (Yes, he saw the bride before the wedding.  But then
    he was with me when I picked out the gown too.)  Once the ceremony
    was over, we could just relax and enjoy the music and food and
    company--instead of spending hours having our pictures taken.
    
    Finally, remember to do what YOU want and to relax and enjoy it
    that day.  We did our wedding the way we wanted and we thoroughly
    enjoyed it.  THAT's what counts.
    
    -Tracy
    

    Here's some ideas from my wedding three years ago.
    
    There was no "giving away of the bride".  My husband David and I
    walked down the aisle together.  We had a Catholic ceremony with
    a Mass, but chose every prayer, reading and blessing ourselves.
    The Catholic Church is trying hard to be "with the times" and provides
    a choice of ceremony content -- we were able to find prayers and
    readings that reflected our personal and spiritual beliefs.  We
    were addressed as "husband and wife" not "man and wife".  The priest
    also "presented us" to the congregation at the end of the ceremony
    as "David and Gloria as they begin their married life together".
    
    That's close to the way we wrote our invitation "David and Gloria (full
    names) along with their families, invite you to join them in the
    celebration of the beginning of their life together, etc." 
    
    We had an INFORMAL reception at a local restaurant/inn we had reserved
    for the day.  Buffet dinner, no disc jockey/band/dancing, only dinner
    music recorded.  We had none of the wedding traditions except for
    a toast by the best man and cutting the cake (no garters/throwing
    the bouquet).  We had a few formal photos taken at the church after
    the ceremony, with my sister acting as hostess for those who arrived
    at the reception before us (no reception line -- we greeted people
    as they left the church, standing on the steps with the priest).
    Other photos were candids taken during the reception.
    
    The "style" of the entire wedding was right for us -- informal but
    indicating our respect for each other.  For "tradition" I wore my
    mother's wedding gown.  
    
    Remember, the wedding should be for the bride and groom -- don't
    worry about pleasing anyone else, not even your parents.  
    
    Gloria
    
    

    re .36 
    
    >The Catholic Church is trying hard to be "with the times" and provides
    >a choice of ceremony content.
    
    Not from what my cousins tell me.  They are now planning a wedding.
    It depends on your parish priest.  There is also a
    not-so-well-advertised "law" that says that you can't cross parish
    lines to another Catholic church (with possibly a more "with the times"
    kind of priest) to get married unless you have the consent of your own
    parish priest.
    
    If I sound bitter about the Catholic church, I am.  I was raised
    very Catholic (parochial school for 12 years).  I am *appalled*
    by the sexist attitudes (sexist even by society's pretty lax standards,
    not just my own very strict ones) of the church and absolutely refuse
    to participate.  If/when I marry, I'll get a JP who does it exactly
    how I want.
    
    	-Ellen
    

	I would like to share here how my wife and I married. We are both
	members of the Baha'i Faith, and it has no clergy. Also it has very
	few rituals, because rituals can make you forget easily what the
	real purpose of a certain ceremony is. At a Baha'i wedding, the only
	requirement is that the bride and groom say the following vow in
	the presence of two witnesses:

	"We will all, verily, abide by the will of God."

	Everything else in the wedding program can be decided by the couple.
	We decided on some readings from the Bible and from the writings
	of the Baha'i Faith, and also on some classical music. The whole
	ceremony had a very spiritual character, and there was absolutely
	nothing sexist about it. Actually, one of the Baha'i Teachings is
	the equality of the sexes, which is an accepted (if not well prac-
	ticed) principle today, but it was already proclaimed in the Middle
	East over a hundred years ago, and very revolutionary at the time.

	There is no requirement that in a Baha'i wedding, the bride and groom
	must both be Baha'is. It is even possible if neither marriage partner
	belongs to the Baha'i Faith.

	Han Eijsink

    Re .36 ("don't worry about pleasing anyone else, not e0ven your
    parents") -- keep in mind that you are the hosts of an invited
    gathering, so you always have an obligation to satisfy, or at least not
    to offend, your guests. In particular, if your parents are paying for
    any part of the affair, you'd be wise to keep them happy. Having
    re-read Miss Manners, I think she'd agree. If your guests aren't going
    to have a nice time at your wedding, why invite them? 
    
    (That's the only thing I take exception to -- the wedding in .36
    sounds beautiful.)
    
    I attended a wedding of a high school friend who married a naval
    officer. In a traditional Navy wedding, as the party leaves the
    church, the groomsmen form an arch of crossed swords for the couple
    to pass under. Lovely. Also according to tradition, the guy on the
    end gets to swat the bride right on the bustle with his sword as
    she goes by. 
    
    Not so lovely. My friend requested that this part of the tradition be
    omitted. The groom agreed. The men said they agreed. Well, she got
    swatted anyway. What could she do but grin and bear it... sometimes you
    can't win. 
    
    					Val
    
    

Seeing as how every wedding I've been to has offended me, I would say that
 the axiom about not offending the guests isn't very well applied.  Then
  again, I'm sure it's more a matter of narrow vision:  it may just never
   have occurred to the participants that not everybody is heterosexual or
    Christian or thinks that men should be the bosses of marriage.

We're making every effort not to offend anybody, but I think it's a fair
 bet that we'll confound just about everybody . . .
  <_Jym_>

    30.0 ("...inspirational words about the wife obeying the husband,
    and being  inferior in the eyes of God...and the husband being
    charitably nice to her nonetheless."
    
    
        
        
    My husband and I got married a little over three years ago. We had
    a church wedding, I won't call it tradtional, but rather biblical.
    There are alot of things that are in a tradtional wedding that are
    not ever mentioned in the bible and no where did the pastor say anything
    about me having to obey my husband  All this talk about obeying your 
    husband and being inferior NEVER appears in the bible at all. 
    
    What the bible does say which people seem to remember is "Wives,
    submit to your husbands as to the Lord" (Ephesians 5:22) and the
    verse that is usually forgotten is "Submit to one another out of
    reverence for Christ" (Ephesians 5:21) Marriage, the way that God
    intended it to be is not a master-slave relationship at all...

    So please don't blame the Bible or God for the garter toss,wives
    obey your husbands,etc... These all I think are part of tradition
    but not God's point of view.

    re -1:
    
    >"Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord."
    
    From my American Heritage Dictionary (1983, DEC-issue):
    submit: 1. to yield (oneself) to the will or authority of another.
    
    Doesn't sound a lot different from "obey" to me.  And I sure as
    heck wouldn't say it at my wedding were I to have one.
    
    	-Ellen

    re -1,-2
    The point of -2 is that the Bible verse, I believe, means that
    you should model your relationship with your spouse (as a Christian)
    on your relationship with God and Christ, and this is true for both
    parties in a marriage. I believe the verse has been distorted by
    male clergy to make women feel that by denying their husbands they
    were defying God. This will not matter to those who are not Christians
    but I know it was a relief to me (and other Christian feminists) to
    realize that I could be a woman and a Christian and not have to
    accept interpretations of scripture that made me a second class
    citizen.
    
    Bonnie

    
    Re: 30.42 American Heritage Dictionary definition of the word submit.
    
    I am leary to accept a definition from a dictionary for a word that
    is taken from the scriptures. An example where that doesn't work
    is with the word love. When you go back to the original language
    it was written in, There are three or four different words used
    to describe different types of love. In translation,  the word love
    was used in all of those instances. When I look up love in the same
    dictionary that you have, I don't see any definition that comes
    close the original definitons.
    
    Just out of curiousity...I have access to materials that can give
    me the definition from the original greek text. I'll look it up
    so that we can compare the two.

    
    RE: 30.43
     That is the point that I was trying to get across!
    
    

    I was scanning through the easy notes list today, saw this conference
    and thought that I would pop in an see what was going on. As I read
    through the wedding notes, I recall the wedding my wife and I had.
    We worked together for about 8 months, had lunch often, stereotyped
    boy/girl dating, and were married a couple of weeks later. We were
    both 20 years old and very poor. I sold an old '57 Ford street rod
    I was fixing up to buy my new bride a wedding ring. She in turn
    took her next pay check to buy me the matching wedding ring. 
    
    We got the blood test, license, and the preacher all in one day.
    I was married in blue jeans, and she in shorts. Our minister sounded
    like an auctioneer rattling off our marriage vows. We both promised
    to "Love honor and cherish" (who wants to be married to a "YES"
    person all of their life). 
    
    We started off our new life together with all of the essentials.
    I had a rifle, shotgun, fishing rod, stereo, and a 12" black and
    white TV. She had a lamp, parsons table, bean bag and a quilt. We
    spent our first night together sleeping on the floor.
    
    Everyone that we knew said that it wouldn't last. We didn't have
    enough money, and hadn't dated long enough. It is really nice to
    prove people wrong. Last April 25th, we celebrated our 7th wedding
    anniversary. If possible, I love her more now, 7 years later, than
    I did then. we have seen bad times and good times, but we have seen
    them through together. We aren't perfect and I have never seen a
    couple yet that didn't disagree at least once in a while, but we
    can always settle our differences. We treat each other like equals
    and expect the same treatment.
    
    As for the old "obey" that used to be in most wedding ceremonies,
    I don't think it is necessary. Sometimes having "no boss" is the
    best boss of all.
    
    Mike Letterman   (Happier married than single!!)
    

    HELLO!! 
    
    I am new to this notes file.  I read this note and all the replies
    and I have a number of questions for all of you.  I am currently
    a single parent of an 11 year old (going on 40....) daughter and
    will be getting married for the second time on April 29, 1989. There
    doesn't seem to be a lot written about second weddings, or at least
    I haven't found very much.....any resources would be helpful.
    thanks....
    
    Now - onto my specific questions....
    
    (1) Jym,  how was your wedding on July 21, 1987.  This note stopped
    in May of 1987 without an update.  I'm curious as to how many of
    the suggestions/resources you used and how it all went.
    
    (2) Does anyone know of a JOP in this area that will do the ceremony
    that you want and not the cut and dried legal one?
    
    (3) re: .5  Byron, may I use a few of the lines from your vows?
    Andy and I really liked them and would like to borrow them if it's
    okay with you....
    
    (4) RE: professional photographers - any ideas of who to use in
    this area?  Neither of us is originally from here and have no idea
    of who to hire.  Can you give some hints and experiences with local
    photographers?
    
    (5) Have any of you ever attended a second wedding?  Does the father
    of the bride "give her away" again?  I don't want to hurt my dad's
    feelings, but I feel a bit awkward as it's the second time around....
    
    (6) re: .34 - Jym,  How did the DJ work out?
    
    (7) re: .35 - Tracy,  Who did you use to videotape your wedding?
    Any ideas who in this area is good at it and not too expensive?
    
    (8) We're thinking of having the ceremony and the reception at the
    Sheraton Boxboro.  I'm going to see them on Saturday to discuss
    it with them.  We'd like to have the ceremony near the garden area
    there and then go into a banquet room for the reception.  We'd have
    about 75 people there maximum.  Has anybody ever used the Sheraton
    Boxboro?  How was your experience with them?  Would you recommend
    them to me?
    
    That's it for questions for now.  Thanks for listening.........
    
    	      -	Diane
    
    

    
�    (4) RE: professional photographers - any ideas of who to use in
�    this area?  Neither of us is originally from here and have no idea
�    of who to hire.  Can you give some hints and experiences with local
�    photographers?

       This area being? (from the node name I presume it is Mass/NH).
       You might also try the TLE::PHOTO conference as the subject has I
       believe been discussed there in the past. Also several of the
       contributors there are [semi]professionals (One contributor is
       the secretary of the NH Professional Photographers association -
       he is I believe a contractor for DEC at MK).

       /. Ian .\

       (PS: I am a professional photographer but I wouldn't touch a
       wedding with a 20 foot barge pole. And I can't recomend from my
       wedding as a couple of amateurs covered it for us)   

       /. Ian .\

    in re .46
    
    Jym left Dec a while ago and is still not married tho he and his
    SO are still planning on it...
    
    if you are interested I can tell you how to contact him.
    
    Bonnie

    re:  .46
    
        [re: (2) JOP]
    	My husband and I were married by a JOP from
    	Nashua, NH. She was GREAT. Instead of the usual
    	"legal" jargon, she recited an old Indian
    	(read "native" Indian) poem. It was beautiful
    	and really *made* the whole ceremony. If
    	you'd like more info, send me mail.
    
    pat
    

    in re .47
    
    The area is the Marlboro and Stow, MA area.  Thanks for the leads,
    Ian.  Will check them out.
    
    in re .48
    
    I don't need to contact him if he's not yet married.  I don't know
    him personally and was only interested in how many of the wedding
    suggestions he used and how they worked out.  Thanks for the offer
    though, Bonnie.
    
    
    Diane

    Hi, Diane,
    
    I can VERY highly recommend a JOP from Holliston... her name
    is Susan Green.  She's listed in the book/directory assistance.
    She will invite you to her house, let you look through copies
    of other peoples' ceremonies, and will help you every step of
    the way.  She let Les & I borrow some of her books and papers
    (the only copies she had in her possession!) and was wonderful.
    
    I can also share our ceremony with you if you'd like.....
    stop by when you have a chance... you know where to find me :-)
    
    /donna
    

    I didn't exactly have a second wedding, since my first fiance had
    the foresight to break up with me before the ceremony, but since I
    had a daughter from that relationship, and I had been on my own
    for a number of years, a great many things from a typical wedding
    ceremony were not appropriate for us. 

    We wrote our own ceremony, with help from the pastor.  "Help"
    doesn't mean that he told us we couldn't do things -- he looked up
    text, found a glass for crushing underfoot (we took turns
    stomping), and so on. 
    
    We used aspects of both the traditional Christian and Jewish
    ceremonies.  We especially liked the Jewish procession, in which
    the PARENTS of BOTH bride and groom escort the couple to the
    altar.   I attended a wedding in which both sets of parents were
    divorced and all four of them were remarried.  First came the
    groom's father and his new wife, then the groom's mother and her
    new husband, then the groom, then the bride's father and his new
    wife, then the bride's mother and her new husband, and finally the
    bride.  They had half a dozen flower girls, one in front of each
    parental pair -- a good way to work in nieces and nephews and
    kids, if you have them. 

    --bonnie

	re: "giving the bride away" a second time...

	It might be appropriate if your father had again become a major
	source of financial and/or emotional support.  In fact, in the latter
	case it might be a nice gesture of recognition and thanks.

	However, have you considered including your daughter in the ceremony
	beyond the role of a bridesmaid or whatever?  No, not having *her* 
	"give you away" - it evokes all the wrong images (you're NOT going 
	away, moreover, she's NOT losing you to your new husband...).  However, 
	she could walk in with you and stand near you during the ceremony - 
	perhaps even having some small part in it.  This might not be 
	reasonable for all kids/situations :-), but it symbolizes nicely your 
	future plans to all be joined together as a "family"... 

	Good luck, and best wishes for happiness!
		Helen

       Re .47 and specifically the PS. I have just re-read it and find
       that the PS looks a bit harsh. Sorry about that it wasn't
       intentional. I was just trying to avoid somebody noticing that I
       am a pro and wondering why I didn't volunteer ... I have indeed
       done a couple of weddings for very close friends as wedding
       presents, but my commercial rate for doing the job is
       deliberately chosen to make it extremely unlikely hat anybody
       would ask me to do one. I have several reasons for this...

       i) It is a once in a lifetime event. If anything goes wrong you
       can't reshoot.

       ii) It is very uncontrolled: I much prefer studio conditions

       iii) Wedding outfits often have terrible (from a photographic
       point of view) colour and monochrome contrast problems making
       them extremely difficult to photograph well (the extreme case is
       a bride in white and a groom in a black tux on a bright sunny
       day).

       iv) There are a lot of people to satisfy: if you hide Uncle Joe
       on the back row of a group photo because he's 6'10" tall he may
       be upset ... :-)

       v) It's hard work

       vi) Amateurs will offer to do it for peanuts and customers expect
       pros to cut margins to the bone to compete with the amateurs.

       When I first started in the business (as a 16 year old
       apprentice) I worked for a firm that covered weddings in
       monochrome using a 5x4 plate camera with a Polaroid back. We got
       5x4 proofs instantly. We sent a van with a photographer, and
       assistant and a make-up artist. We had the proofs pinned up half
       way through the reception and could take orders for individual
       pictures immediately. And we weren't cheap! (prices then - 1960's
       in England - were in the region of �500 for three monochrome
       albums). Anyway enough of this rathole...

       I also have a question sort of related to the base topic...

       My wife and I are currently joining a Lutheran Church, and since
       our wedding was a civil ceremony we are planning on having the
       vows repeated and consecrated in church, hopefully on our first
       anniversary. I am curious if anybody here has any suggestions for
       this kind of thing.

       /. Ian .\

    
    We had a professional photographer, but we also asked a couple of
    friends who enjoy taking pictures to "snap away" that day.  We asked
    one of them to make sure she took a picture of each table of guests,
    so we would have a picture of everyone there.  We put together a
    second book of wedding pictures that aren't as professional, but
    more fun.  I think this really works because these people know who
    is most important to you (to make sure they're in some pictures),
    what types of candids you would enjoy, etc.  We're really glad we
    had professional photos, but we would recommend this approach as
    well.                                              
    
    I don't remember the name of the "videotaper" off hand (he's from
    Lynn), but I'll check it out and send it to you.
    
    Tracy
    

       re pictures:

       A few more random thoughts...

       People will take pictures at a wedding whether you want them too
       or not. In fact they can be the bane of the professional
       photographers life (it becomes something of a vaudeville joke
       when the pro sets up a large formal group and half a dozen stray
       guests push in to "just get one of those"). However if you have a
       couple of guests coming that you know are competant amateurs then
       you can come up with a good overall game plan. 

       First talk to the amateurs and ask if they'll take pictures for
       an informal album: candids and things... Assuming they will, then
       go talk to the pro. Be up front with him/her that a couple of
       friends are covering the informal things, and hence a lot of the
       reception shots. The pro can do the formal shots, which need
       planning. This will actually make life easier for him since the
       candids can be a pain in the neck if you don't know the people
       involved.

       Two additional things you can offer to do to make the pro's life
       easier: first offer the services of an usher or an adult
       bridesmaid to help control both the formal groupings ("where did
       Uncle Joe go, we need him for the next shot") and the bystanders.
       Secondly the formal photography is about PLANNING. Out of
       desparation based on years of experience many pros just wing it
       on the day, setting up the formal groups as they go. However a
       predrawn list of the key family groupings will help (the
       photographer will still allow for a few extra spur of the moment
       things).

       If you get a good relationship with the pro, and he clearly
       understands that the amateurs are not going to kill his profit
       margin by supplying pictures to all the guests (I've seen this
       happen - the basic albums are really just to cover costs from the
       pro's perspective - it's the orders for additional prints that
       are the profit laden gravy on the deal) then he may be prepared
       to let you have some blank sheets for the wedding album. If he's
       real friendly then he may even (for a fee) mount the prints for
       you (dry mounting is not as easy as it sounds if you don't have
       the right gear). I know of one pro [in England so it won't help
       here] who will even take the amateur's film and process and print
       it if it is pre-agreed. Remember that at least part of the
       perceived lower quality of amateur work is the quality of the
       processing and printing in the average laboratory. Also small (eg
       6x4) prints look less impressive than the 7x5, 10x8 or larger
       that would be normal for professional presentation work.

       Remember the photographer is above all else a business person:
       they may very well be amenable to a mutually profitable
       relationship.


       /. Ian .\

    A friend of mine had her formal pictures taken at the dress
    rehearsal the night before the wedding, then relied on friends
    for the wedding-day shots.  
    
    Her pictures are beautiful and it was one less thing to worry
    about fitting into that supremely busy day.
    
    --bonnie

       Since we are talking about a second marriage (are we? or have we
       started talking about wedding photography - perhaps photography
       needs a subject of it's own).

       Some friends of mine decided that they weren't at all concerned
       about the usual taboo on the groom seeing the bride in her dress
       prior to the service, and decided to have a professional do a few
       studio pictures of them (together with the matron of honour and
       best man and a few very close relatives - I'm sure it was a very
       jolly party at the photographer's as they took a few bottles of
       champagne with them to fend off boredom :-) They had these
       mounted as 10x8 framed prints, and chose two to have made up as
       20x16 mounted prints for wall hanging: they didn't have an
       album. They then assembled a wedding scrapbook from various
       freind's contributions.

       This in a sense was my motivation for not having a pro cover our
       wedding: I don't like the formal album, which, let's face it,
       often winds up gathering dust at the bottom of a draw. 

       Other odd ideas to consider (whether the pictures are pro or
       amateur): how about including a few pictures of the bridal
       shower/batchelor party? or a few from the honeymoon? (a number of
       the staff photographers attached to wedding chapels in Las Vegas
       include a picture of the happy couple in bed together or in a
       bathtub together, as part of their standard repertoire). Pictures
       of the bride and bridesmaid trying on their dresses can be nice,
       as can pictures of the bride having her hair dressed (though wait
       till the hair styling is actually finished if terminal
       embarassment is to be avoided in later years).

       A piece of advice I was once given about suitable pictures for
       inclusion in a wedding album was "never include anything that the
       couple's children may find hilarious in 30 years time" - my
       Grandmother was extremely embarassed by the pictures of her in
       her "going away outfit", [flapper styles ...] and as a result her
       album was locked away were my cousins and I couldn't find it.

       /. Ian .\

    We had our formal pictures taken ahead of time also.  We met at the
    estate where we were having the reception, had most of the pictures
    taken, and went to the church from there.  I knew that my dress,
    make-up, hair would still be okay that way, and I knew that once
    the ceremony was over we would just want to relax and ENJOY ourselves!
    (After all, we were paying a lot of money for this here party!)
     I also hate it when I go to weddings and you spend half the day
    waiting for the bridal party to show up.  It seems so rude!
    
    As I mentioned, besides the formal pictures, we put our own album
    together.  Someone had given us a really nice leather album as a
    gift and we included in it: our engagement announcement (from the
    newspaper), the invitation to and pictures of the shower, a copy of 
    the marriage certificate, a wedding invitation (complete with stamp 
    so we can laugh at how cheap they were back then!), informal pictures 
    from the wedding, pictures from the party after the wedding, the 
    honeymoon itinerary, pictures and postcards and souvenirs (eg., a 
    menu) from the honeymoon, our wedding announcement (from the
    newspaper) and a sample of our thank you cards.  We really enjoy 
    going back and looking at that. 
    
    
    
    
    

    I couldn't agree with .55 more!  No matter who you get for a
    professional photographer have your amateur friends help.  We had
    a professional and one amateur friend taking pictures.  
    
    The  amateur came to the rehearsal to take pictures there
    and at the dinner.  The morning of the wedding he was able to take
    pre-wedding shots of the groom and his ushers.  (You don't get these
    with just one photographer).  When the professional was getting
    the pictures of the mom's and grandmom's walking down the aisle the
    amateur got pictures of me and my bridemaids fidgeting in the lounge.
    There is just so much going on one person just can't catch all of
    the action.    
    
    AND... OUR PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHER EITHER LOST OR RUINED a roll
    of film.  Of course this roll was the one with the whole wedding
    party on it...my parents and his parents.  Of course.  So if all
    those nosey relatives didn't butt in and take a few pictures we wouldn't
    have any of those shots at all.  Professionals are great but they
    do make mistakes.
    
    So we have two albums, the professional album which is nice and the
    non-professional album which tells the whole story.  It contains the
    pictures the amateur took and all the relatives took from the showers,
    the bachelor party , the rehearsal, the rehearsal dinner, the day
    before the wedding beach party, pre-wedding of the groom and ushers,
    the wedding, and the honeymoon.  You can never have enough pictures to
    choose from!  The more you have the more vivid the memory. And a year
    later I'm still getting prints from slow relatives! 
    
    Have a wonderful wedding!
    
    Suzanne

    We went to a professional photographer two days before the wedding
    and had some closeups taken of just us, with a large format camera
    in a studio setting, so we could have very large non-grainy prints
    made (some of which hang in our bedroom along with our ketubah (Jewish
    marriage contract) and a framed copy of our invitation, and some
    of which went to the relatives).
    
    Then we had a friend who is a semi-professional photographer do
    all the phots the day of the wedding - which he would have been
    doing anyhow (I think he was bron with a camera attached to one
    hand...), except that we paid for the film, developing, and prints.
    This worked out great.  Our friend and his "assistant" (his girlfriend,
    now his wife) brought several 35mm camera bodies loaded with different
    sorts of film (no flashes allowed during the ceremony) and several
    various sorts of slave strobes and other camera gear.  Since they
    knew most of the guests and a fair number of the relatives, they
    did a great job.  The best picture of the lot is a "grab shot" of
    the second waltz at the reception, with me dancing with my father
    (a terrible dancer, actually...) and my husband dancing with his
    grandmother - it took some fast footwork to get that shot!  You
    really can't tell the difference between the 35mm prints and the
    large-format ones except the few that we had printed bigger than
    8"x10".  Also, we had the wedding pictures back in only about three
    days, and could immediately select the ones to go in the album to
    be custom-printed.  The album is not as formal as what the pro would
    have produced, but I didn't want formal, anyhow.
    
    We also saved a bunch of money, as you might expect.

To be sure, a pro is expensive.  But I am real glad we went that way.
The guy we got:

    1)	Showed up with an assistant.  They took back-up pictures, and were
	able to get different viewpoints of the ceremony.  (The assistant
	was in the balcony.)

    2)	Knew exactly what was supposed to happen and when.  He practically
	led us through the entire ceremony.  (It is hard to think clearly
	on a day like that.)

    3)	Knew which kind of flower went in the lapel of which person.  I
	almost wore the wrong one.

    4)	Used a radio-controlled slave flash at the reception.  This avoids
	false triggering from amateur snaps.  He got some really good
	effects using this slave, like a back-lit shot of our first dance.

    5)	Volunteered the use of his van (for a fee) should the limousine
	not show up in time.  (We had hired a 1938 Packard, complete with
	driver decked out like a 1930's gangster.)

    6)	Regaled us with stories of things that have gone wrong at weddings.
	One of his favorites involves the groom getting drunk the night
	before, and in the middle of the ceremony (in a hot church) getting
	sick all over the minister and passing out.  He says he sees this
	happen about twice a year.

	There was also the groom (drunk, of course) who, during the cake
	ceremony, smooshed the cake all over the bride's face and hair.
	She ran from the room and hid in the rest room until the groom left.
	The next day she had the marriage annulled.

    
    We were married last August and our photographer (professional)
    was also excellent.  He has excellent aesthetic sense and created
    stunning pictures.  He's also a great guy and was a great help
    to us during the wedding and the planning.  We had just moved to
    the area and he and his wife gave us good tips on caterers and a
    JP.  In fact, the whole thing turned out to be quite a family type
    affair, we ended up using the same JP who had married the photographer
    and the caterers who the photographer uses for his showings.
    
    It was nice having someone to talk to about the wedding stuff who
    had been through it before, like having a consultant without having
    to pay for one.  He also had some great stories about other weddings
    (successes and disasters.)
    
    All of which is to say, not all professional photographers are out
    to rip one off or be slime monsters.
    
    alison
    

    The information in this note has suddenly become important to me. Now
    that Margaret and I are planning to get married (Ok, let's all get it 
    out of the way now. Everyone, all at once: "What!?" "You're kidding!"
    "Huh?" "Why? When? You!? Really?"), we need to find out about all of
    these things.

    There've been some suggestions here about things to do and things not
    to do, but right now we're looking for a location and a JP to do the
    ceremony. We'd like a place near home, which is Maynard. It has to be
    handicapped accessible, and have nice grounds, because we'd like to do
    this before the weather turns cold (or are we asking too much to plan
    this in only a few months?). The JP has to be interested in working
    with us to design the ceremony.

    Any ideas? 

					-- hs 

    Congratulations, you two! 
    
    						=maggie

    I finally remembered to look up the name of the guy that videotaped
    our wedding.  It was Creative Video Consultants (CVC).  Their mailing
    address is P.O. Box 366, Swampscott, MA 01907.  The phone number
    is (617) 596-0067.  Hope this helps...
    
    -Tracy