(no subject)

[keelywolfe]

I have a sheepish addiction to advice columnists, mostly, I think, because I'm staggered at the questions people ask. Dude, if you can't figure that out for yourself, how to you function in society???

Anyway, in today's Dear Abby, a person questions why they still do formal bridal photos, because the W-E in wedding stands for WE and the groom and bride will always take photos together, signify their equal households... blah blah blah. Abby goes on and on about her answer but frankly, I can do it in one sentence.

Because the bride paid $3000 for her damned dress and the groom is renting his tuxedo, that's why!! If I'd paid that much for my wedding dress, I'd have a thousand pictures in it! I could buy two flatscreen TVs for that much money so yes, I would have a bunch of photos!

I mean, seriously...

(And besides, we all know that when a man and a women get married, the household chores, child rearing, etc is instantly equal, right?)

ETA: Went to take a shower after I posted this and the more I thought about it, the more I figured that two women who wanted a formal wedding really get screwed on the expenses if they both want to wear a dress, although certainly their bridal photo would satisfy the Letter Writer's need to have both partners in the picture. Seriously, TWO $3000 wedding dresses? Ouch. So I've come to the conclusion that everyone should just rent a tux. Everyone. Even the guests. It'd be hella cheaper.

Comments

[sharona1x2.livejournal.com]

You should send a reply to her about that. If you ever watch Say Yes to the Dress (my secret addiction), you'll see that $3000 is not that expensive compared to what many of the gowns cost. I'll bet there are still a lot of brides whose wedding is paid for by her parents, too.