Getting married after getting married: the insurance-panic edition
May 21, 2013 3:25 PM Subscribe
Help me, etiquette mavens of AskMe!
Fiance and I are in the midst of planning a wedding for this fall, but we just found out that he's losing his health insurance soon. How ok is it to have a courthouse ceremony now, but still hold a "real" wedding in the fall?
My fiance and I are in the midst of planning a wedding for September-ish (no deposits yet; the planning was in the early stages), but we just found out that his insurance from his work might be terminated within the next month. So the obvious solution is to move up the wedding date, right? The thing is, I will be devastated if I have to give up my whole-family, big-dress, dancing-and-partying-for-hours-in-a-beautiful-venue wedding for...a rush, a courthouse, four people, and no reception. I only get one wedding in my life, and I want it to be a real, big-deal one.
We're not desperately emotionally tied to the day we sign the papers being the same as the day we have the party to celebrate it, so one possible solution is to do the courthouse now and have our "real" wedding as planned, in the fall. The courthouse wedding would be merely that - no gifts, no reception, no guests other than our parents, no big deal. We're considering doing it so quietly that we won't even tell people who aren't close family that we've done it. Basically, I want to shift absolutely everything other than signing the legal papers - from the announcements to the invitations to the "real" vows to the party - to center around the fall date. The fall ceremony would be secular and low-key in nature, more a short opportunity to explore how we love each other than to dot paperwork i's and cross legal-requirement t's.
I'm worried, though, that if people know we've had a courthouse ceremony, the fall wedding is going to be considered socially unacceptable and that we're somehow going to be viewed as attention-grubbers (or worse, gift-grubbers) for holding something we call a "wedding" so much after (about 3 months, give or take) the "real" ceremony.
Assume standard (northeastern) American etiquette rules here (we're New York-based): Is this a realistic worry, or can I have my big wedding with a clear conscience? Can we just not tell people about the courthouse ceremony, and let them have the impression that the fall wedding is the only wedding? Is there a page in Miss Manners about this that I've missed?
(I know etiquette, especially wedding etiquette, can be a divisive discussion topic, but can I please ask that you guys go easy on me as far as assumptions and judgment? I'm already struggling with some semi-related wedding drama issues, and I'd like to not hate myself any more at the end of this than I already do.)
My fiance and I are in the midst of planning a wedding for September-ish (no deposits yet; the planning was in the early stages), but we just found out that his insurance from his work might be terminated within the next month. So the obvious solution is to move up the wedding date, right? The thing is, I will be devastated if I have to give up my whole-family, big-dress, dancing-and-partying-for-hours-in-a-beautiful-venue wedding for...a rush, a courthouse, four people, and no reception. I only get one wedding in my life, and I want it to be a real, big-deal one.
We're not desperately emotionally tied to the day we sign the papers being the same as the day we have the party to celebrate it, so one possible solution is to do the courthouse now and have our "real" wedding as planned, in the fall. The courthouse wedding would be merely that - no gifts, no reception, no guests other than our parents, no big deal. We're considering doing it so quietly that we won't even tell people who aren't close family that we've done it. Basically, I want to shift absolutely everything other than signing the legal papers - from the announcements to the invitations to the "real" vows to the party - to center around the fall date. The fall ceremony would be secular and low-key in nature, more a short opportunity to explore how we love each other than to dot paperwork i's and cross legal-requirement t's.
I'm worried, though, that if people know we've had a courthouse ceremony, the fall wedding is going to be considered socially unacceptable and that we're somehow going to be viewed as attention-grubbers (or worse, gift-grubbers) for holding something we call a "wedding" so much after (about 3 months, give or take) the "real" ceremony.
Assume standard (northeastern) American etiquette rules here (we're New York-based): Is this a realistic worry, or can I have my big wedding with a clear conscience? Can we just not tell people about the courthouse ceremony, and let them have the impression that the fall wedding is the only wedding? Is there a page in Miss Manners about this that I've missed?
(I know etiquette, especially wedding etiquette, can be a divisive discussion topic, but can I please ask that you guys go easy on me as far as assumptions and judgment? I'm already struggling with some semi-related wedding drama issues, and I'd like to not hate myself any more at the end of this than I already do.)
100% totally okay. I'm from the same cultural background and I know for a fact that at least four of the weddings I've attended in the last couple of years happened weeks or months after the legal part - and health insurance was a major factor in at least two of those.
You're good to go. Congrats!
posted by Tomorrowful at 3:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
You're good to go. Congrats!
posted by Tomorrowful at 3:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
My sister and her now husband did this for exactly the same reasons and then went on 6 months later to have their big "real" wedding. Only the families and a few random friends knew and you can tell as many or few people as you like.
Also depending on where you work a civil union may work for you too. My now wife and I did that a good year or so before our actual wedding just so I could get her on my insurance.
posted by Captain_Science at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013
Also depending on where you work a civil union may work for you too. My now wife and I did that a good year or so before our actual wedding just so I could get her on my insurance.
posted by Captain_Science at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013
It's totally fine to do both. Relax. If anyone gives you any shit just remember you're not the problem.
posted by fluffy battle kitten at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by fluffy battle kitten at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I know that etiquette states that you should absolutely not call a later ceremony/reception "a wedding" but screw that noise. I've known two people who had to do a civil service in advance and their later weddings were just as joyful and beautiful and meaningful as any other. You could always label it like "a celebration of our marriage" or something like that, and I would let your close family know, but go for it and enjoy. Congratulations!
posted by jetlagaddict at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by jetlagaddict at 3:29 PM on May 21, 2013
I suppose New York might be different, but I went to an amazingly fun, beautiful, emotional, meaningful wedding two weeks ago for a couple who got married at the courthouse last October.
The only reference to their legal status was "wow, that must take your stress level down a lot".
posted by Kakkerlak at 3:30 PM on May 21, 2013
The only reference to their legal status was "wow, that must take your stress level down a lot".
posted by Kakkerlak at 3:30 PM on May 21, 2013
Can we just not tell people about the courthouse ceremony, and let them have the impression that the fall wedding is the only wedding?
I don't think it's ever appropriate to lie to people, even if by omission ("let them have the impression").
posted by ftm at 3:35 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think it's ever appropriate to lie to people, even if by omission ("let them have the impression").
posted by ftm at 3:35 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
You can't have two weddings, which is essentially what you're doing by separating the ceremony and the reception so far in time.
What you can do is have the party on the later date that you want, but invite people to it as if it were just a large, huge party, making no references to any weddings, and including no ceremony.
Yes, you should send out announcements afterwards. People may see that as gift-grubbing, but that's actually their problem, all you did was show them the courtesy of telling them you got married for fuck's sake.
You definitely won't be seen as gift-grubbers because of your registry, because you aren't having one. I mean, apart from everything else, nobody's invited to your wedding, so there's no grounds for a registry, right? What you have instead, is a list of things you would like, which you keep under your telephone table. When someone calls you up to ask you what you want, you say "Icouldn'tpossiblythatwouldbemostkind. But, we are going to be having a huge party in October, just save the date for that, your presence at that is more important than your presence ha ha!" Then, if they get shirty and tell you to just admit what you want, you say, "well gosh, we honestly don't need anything and the thought really hasn't crossed our minds, but since you insist a Morphomatic 3000 toaster in the Teal and Ecru colour scheme would be a lovely surprise, you know, the one with four slots and not three, and you can get it at Macy's, or so I heard. But really, gifts are the furthest thing from our minds!" While you are saying this, you are, under the table, checking off the Morphomatic 3000 on your list, with the name of the caller scribbled next to it.
I know most people are going to say "it's your wedding, do whatever the hell you want, everyone on the East Coast cavity-searches their wedding guests for gifts during the ceremony and nobody ever gets offended, except for shallow snobs whose feelings don't matter," but... Well, that's not what you asked. I'm glad you care about more than just what you can get away with.
posted by tel3path at 3:36 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
What you can do is have the party on the later date that you want, but invite people to it as if it were just a large, huge party, making no references to any weddings, and including no ceremony.
Yes, you should send out announcements afterwards. People may see that as gift-grubbing, but that's actually their problem, all you did was show them the courtesy of telling them you got married for fuck's sake.
You definitely won't be seen as gift-grubbers because of your registry, because you aren't having one. I mean, apart from everything else, nobody's invited to your wedding, so there's no grounds for a registry, right? What you have instead, is a list of things you would like, which you keep under your telephone table. When someone calls you up to ask you what you want, you say "Icouldn'tpossiblythatwouldbemostkind. But, we are going to be having a huge party in October, just save the date for that, your presence at that is more important than your presence ha ha!" Then, if they get shirty and tell you to just admit what you want, you say, "well gosh, we honestly don't need anything and the thought really hasn't crossed our minds, but since you insist a Morphomatic 3000 toaster in the Teal and Ecru colour scheme would be a lovely surprise, you know, the one with four slots and not three, and you can get it at Macy's, or so I heard. But really, gifts are the furthest thing from our minds!" While you are saying this, you are, under the table, checking off the Morphomatic 3000 on your list, with the name of the caller scribbled next to it.
I know most people are going to say "it's your wedding, do whatever the hell you want, everyone on the East Coast cavity-searches their wedding guests for gifts during the ceremony and nobody ever gets offended, except for shallow snobs whose feelings don't matter," but... Well, that's not what you asked. I'm glad you care about more than just what you can get away with.
posted by tel3path at 3:36 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I think that if you do it and tell people, you will get raised eyebrows from some of the older members of your family. If you care about that, don't do it.
Miss Manners would not approve.
State of slight confusion: My wife's best friend got married nearly a year ago. The bride wore beautiful white wedding dress and carried flowers. A small number of friends were in attendance and a meal followed. Pictures were taken and posted online. The problem? This ceremony took place at a courthouse (there were insurance issues that needed to be addressed ASAP). So, this spring, a bit over a year later, they are holding a "real wedding," complete with another ceremony (and large reception). My wife thinks this is perfectly normal, but it seems odd to me. Is this the new normal? Thanks for your reply.
Miss Manners: It's not a "real wedding," because these people are already married. But there are many who regard weddings as a chance to indulge in ego-fests and want as many as possible (without the trouble of divorce), so they stage re-enactments.
posted by bq at 3:36 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Miss Manners would not approve.
State of slight confusion: My wife's best friend got married nearly a year ago. The bride wore beautiful white wedding dress and carried flowers. A small number of friends were in attendance and a meal followed. Pictures were taken and posted online. The problem? This ceremony took place at a courthouse (there were insurance issues that needed to be addressed ASAP). So, this spring, a bit over a year later, they are holding a "real wedding," complete with another ceremony (and large reception). My wife thinks this is perfectly normal, but it seems odd to me. Is this the new normal? Thanks for your reply.
Miss Manners: It's not a "real wedding," because these people are already married. But there are many who regard weddings as a chance to indulge in ego-fests and want as many as possible (without the trouble of divorce), so they stage re-enactments.
posted by bq at 3:36 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Absolutely. I did it. I don't think we told anyone except the friends who signed the certificate as witnesses (hurrah PA Quaker weddings).
I vote don't tell anyone.
posted by supercres at 3:37 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I vote don't tell anyone.
posted by supercres at 3:37 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
How ok is it to have a courthouse ceremony now, but still hold a "real" wedding in the fall?
Totally and completely fine. What you are doing is not rare. People do what they need to do for legal reasons, and everyone understands that.
Heck, my grandparents did that back in the 40s to put my grandfather on a lower-priority category in the draft and had the real wedding later (which for religious reasons was considered the moment when they were "really" married).
posted by deanc at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Totally and completely fine. What you are doing is not rare. People do what they need to do for legal reasons, and everyone understands that.
Heck, my grandparents did that back in the 40s to put my grandfather on a lower-priority category in the draft and had the real wedding later (which for religious reasons was considered the moment when they were "really" married).
posted by deanc at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
I know several couples who've done this. In my opinion it's perfectly ok to do both, but one couple I know took some shit from family members when they had an expensive "destination" wedding following their courthouse legal ceremony - stuff along the lines of "I spent all that money to fly to Jamaica and they were already married?" Getting flak like that wouldn't bother me one bit, but it might bother you or your SO, so brace yourself for that possibility.
posted by deadmessenger at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by deadmessenger at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013
My mom and stepfather got married for similar reasons in the county clerks office in January 2012, nine months before their actual wedding, and nobody knows except me and my boyfriend (and now, all of the internet).
posted by elsietheeel at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by elsietheeel at 3:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Totally OK. I have friends who held an early courthouse wedding due to timing of getting her on to his military benefits, and they had the big dress-and-cake ceremony six months later. Everybody was happy (and insured!).
What you can do is have the party on the later date that you want, but invite people to it as if it were just a large, huge party, making no references to any weddings, and including no ceremony.
My friends very much called it a wedding, and very much had a religious officiant (they and their families are all very religious and having a ceremony was extremely important to them). No one at the wedding/event/party/whatever objected.
posted by scody at 3:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
What you can do is have the party on the later date that you want, but invite people to it as if it were just a large, huge party, making no references to any weddings, and including no ceremony.
My friends very much called it a wedding, and very much had a religious officiant (they and their families are all very religious and having a ceremony was extremely important to them). No one at the wedding/event/party/whatever objected.
posted by scody at 3:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: I know two couples in the NYC area who have done exactly this, except with longer periods before the ceremony/party/gifts. (I've also heard of the reverse, with party first with legal formalities delayed.) Everybody will understand both the necessity of getting the legal marriage settled and the desire to still have the traditional wedding. Folks should be nothing but happy for you.
If it's all the same to you, I would just be fine with everybody knowing you've done the civil ceremony first. Then you won't worry about giving away the secret and, really, people will understand why and not judge you.
I like etiquette rules but I don't understand the "not a wedding" position. Often couples with different cultural backgrounds have two ceremonies. I would hope we can still call both of those a wedding.
posted by rustcellar at 3:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
If it's all the same to you, I would just be fine with everybody knowing you've done the civil ceremony first. Then you won't worry about giving away the secret and, really, people will understand why and not judge you.
I like etiquette rules but I don't understand the "not a wedding" position. Often couples with different cultural backgrounds have two ceremonies. I would hope we can still call both of those a wedding.
posted by rustcellar at 3:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
but one couple I know took some shit from family members when they had an expensive "destination" wedding following their courthouse legal ceremony
If I spent money to fly out to see two people get married and then I found out I wasn't going to see them get married, I would find myself feeling extremely frustrated.
posted by ftm at 3:40 PM on May 21, 2013
If I spent money to fly out to see two people get married and then I found out I wasn't going to see them get married, I would find myself feeling extremely frustrated.
posted by ftm at 3:40 PM on May 21, 2013
Think of it this way: after most traditional wedding ceremonies (the ones I've been to anyway), the officiant pulls the couple aside while everyone else is heading to the reception and they sign the marriage certificate. That's all that you're moving up.
Really, though, I wouldn't tell anyone at all, except some close trusted friends to be witnesses. If you tell family, it will get around, and it will piss someone off.
posted by supercres at 3:41 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Really, though, I wouldn't tell anyone at all, except some close trusted friends to be witnesses. If you tell family, it will get around, and it will piss someone off.
posted by supercres at 3:41 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Definitely fair and understandable (health insurance is no joke), but it's important to tell people the truth. They'll most likely find out anyway, and they'll be pissed to not hear it straight from you. Spread the word that you're already legally married, then go ahead and do everything the way you would if you weren't legally married. If you do choose not to tell people, tell no one. People cannot keep secrets, particularly ones related to marriage (or babies).
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I would find myself feeling extremely frustrated
Why? Does your enjoyment of what's essentially a party hinge that much on the legal (and it really is only legal) status of their relationship? I'm not being snarky; I'm genuinely curious.
posted by supercres at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Why? Does your enjoyment of what's essentially a party hinge that much on the legal (and it really is only legal) status of their relationship? I'm not being snarky; I'm genuinely curious.
posted by supercres at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Do it and don't tell anyone except those with a need to know. Seriously the legal status of your union is no one's business. Marriage has many legal, culture, personal and religious destinations. You're getting married under the law now and married before your community in the fall (or god if that's your thing).
Incidentally I know some idiots who had a destination wedding that almost didn't happen because of the country's crazy marriages laws for foreigners. I could not believe they didn't just get married legally before or after rather than go through the crazy stress of trying to get "legally" married in a country they would probably never step foot in again. It nearly ruined the whole thing.
posted by whoaali at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Incidentally I know some idiots who had a destination wedding that almost didn't happen because of the country's crazy marriages laws for foreigners. I could not believe they didn't just get married legally before or after rather than go through the crazy stress of trying to get "legally" married in a country they would probably never step foot in again. It nearly ruined the whole thing.
posted by whoaali at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Can you have your fiance added to your insurance as a domestic partner, then just proceed with the full wedding as planned?
It's definitely worth a chat with HR and/or your insurance company -- and his, in case he's eligible for COBRA etc.. Many health insurance plans let a participant convert their company-provided coverage to a "solo" plan as well. It'd likely (but not necessarily) be a little more expensive, but I'd definitely recommend you at least know you've evaluated all the options. If it's just the matter of a couple of months, he could also probably just get a catastrophic-type individual plan, too (I'd try Kaiser and BlueCross for some initial estimates).
Regardless, congratulations!
posted by argonauta at 3:44 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
It's definitely worth a chat with HR and/or your insurance company -- and his, in case he's eligible for COBRA etc.. Many health insurance plans let a participant convert their company-provided coverage to a "solo" plan as well. It'd likely (but not necessarily) be a little more expensive, but I'd definitely recommend you at least know you've evaluated all the options. If it's just the matter of a couple of months, he could also probably just get a catastrophic-type individual plan, too (I'd try Kaiser and BlueCross for some initial estimates).
Regardless, congratulations!
posted by argonauta at 3:44 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Just joining the chorus of people who know couples that have done this for various reasons.
posted by greta simone at 3:44 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by greta simone at 3:44 PM on May 21, 2013
I'd do the courthouse thing and not tell anyone, maybe not even your parents if they can't help blabbing to others. I don't think there is any reason why this needs to be a Thing, but if you are worried for DRAMAZ reasons that it will turn into one, I just can't see why it's anyone else's business but yours and your future spouse's.
posted by charmedimsure at 3:51 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by charmedimsure at 3:51 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's mid May and you don't have a date, concrete plans or any deposits for a big September wedding? I think you may want to completely reframe your thinking. In my experience, you're not going to be able to book a big thing wedding to take place in 4 months, unless you're planning something unconventional.
Another thought, is there any way he can pay for COBRA until you're married? Domestic partnership? Then you don't have to stress about it.
But if it comes to having to get married to get him on your insurance because there are no other options and lying to your guests about it, I wouldn't lie. This is really a personal decision but I would feel uncomfortable to be purposely misleading my guests and as crazily superstitious as it may sound, it puts bad juju on the marriage that you're lying to loved ones from the beginning.
posted by kinetic at 3:52 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Another thought, is there any way he can pay for COBRA until you're married? Domestic partnership? Then you don't have to stress about it.
But if it comes to having to get married to get him on your insurance because there are no other options and lying to your guests about it, I wouldn't lie. This is really a personal decision but I would feel uncomfortable to be purposely misleading my guests and as crazily superstitious as it may sound, it puts bad juju on the marriage that you're lying to loved ones from the beginning.
posted by kinetic at 3:52 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I just checked and one couple who accelerated the legal ceremony definitely referred to the big ceremony with many guests (and bride in white dress) as a wedding on the invitation, and I can assure you they considered what the Right Thing would be. I didn't hear any hint of complaints.
posted by rustcellar at 3:54 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by rustcellar at 3:54 PM on May 21, 2013
Why? Does your enjoyment of what's essentially a party hinge that much on the legal (and it really is only legal) status of their relationship? I'm not being snarky; I'm genuinely curious.
Well, don't we assign value to seeing people get married? Isn't not the whole point of making an occasion of it? And isn't that why we're recommending that people stage a fake ceremony?
If we don't, and it's just about the party, then why the heck do we need to lie to people?
posted by ftm at 3:55 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Well, don't we assign value to seeing people get married? Isn't not the whole point of making an occasion of it? And isn't that why we're recommending that people stage a fake ceremony?
If we don't, and it's just about the party, then why the heck do we need to lie to people?
posted by ftm at 3:55 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
This is insanely common given the health insurance landscape in the U.S., and I think anyone who would be offended, frankly, is a giant asshole who's letting their own disconnection from economic reality get in the way of basic decency. It's often called "getting weddinged" on the internet, and you can find a ton of reassuring advice on the subject by googling for that term.
posted by animalrainbow at 3:56 PM on May 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by animalrainbow at 3:56 PM on May 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
Best answer: When I got married, the only people there to sign the paper were my spouse, the officiant, and me, and no one asked us about it; it's the less interesting part of getting married, and I don't feel like people care about it much. I wouldn't lie about it, but if it does come up, I feel like the less of a big deal you make it out to be, the less of a big deal it will seem to other people. Just think of it as doing the paperwork in advance, and treat it as such. (And congrats!)
posted by pitrified at 3:57 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by pitrified at 3:57 PM on May 21, 2013
We had the government wedding in January for insurance-type reasons and are having our "real" wedding, with the ceremony we actually want (as opposed to the one the county likes) next month, when the weather will be better. (The weather had had better be better, or we're screwed.)
Also, having the government part of it out of the way takes away a layer of complexity that is unexpectedly nice.
posted by small_ruminant at 3:59 PM on May 21, 2013
Also, having the government part of it out of the way takes away a layer of complexity that is unexpectedly nice.
posted by small_ruminant at 3:59 PM on May 21, 2013
I think it depends on how religious you/your family is.
If your big september wedding will involve a priest, a rabbi, some sort of religious officiant, then that is your wedding date- it is the date that you are joined in the name of your religion, and that will be the main event. (followed by cake,dancing etc)
If you are not planning on having a religious element to your wedding, then I could see the marriage starting at the time of your courthouse date, and framing the big party as your reception.
I've seen both work just fine. It's also not a big deal at all.
posted by larthegreat at 4:02 PM on May 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
If your big september wedding will involve a priest, a rabbi, some sort of religious officiant, then that is your wedding date- it is the date that you are joined in the name of your religion, and that will be the main event. (followed by cake,dancing etc)
If you are not planning on having a religious element to your wedding, then I could see the marriage starting at the time of your courthouse date, and framing the big party as your reception.
I've seen both work just fine. It's also not a big deal at all.
posted by larthegreat at 4:02 PM on May 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
We did this, with no regrets. Our anniversary is the day we had the ceremony in front of friends and family. It was wonderful and we didn't have to worry about the cost of the emergency oral surgery that had happened 3 months before the wedding day, which would have cost close to what the wedding did if he hadn't been covered.
posted by Nimmie Amee at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Nimmie Amee at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Best answer: Will your wedding be religious at all? If so many traditions consider the wedding ceremony the "actual wedding" so then there's really no issue; you are inviting friends+family to come celebrate your wedding in a religious sense, not a civil sense, and you could even imagine saying so.
If not, maybe you can come up with a phrase to indicate that this is a social wedding, wherein you take vows to each other in front of your nearest and dearest, but it is not the legal wedding. I'm not sure what distinction other than religious/civil would work here; you want something like social/legal.
Maybe you could even say something in the invitations like "we signed the papers already, but we won't really be married until we get to celebrate with you".
In my age group this is insanely common; I've had friends who have had multiple wedding-related occasions for tons of reasons, including health insurance, immigration issues, having a very small destination wedding with larger ceremony back home, having weddings on two continents for family members who can't travel that far, having receptions in multiple places so as many people as possible could come. Occasionally someone would get upset, usually an older relative, but pretty much everyone saw that as them being overly conservative and holding to outdated traditions.
So unless your Great Aunt Martha is going to pitch a fit, I wouldn't worry at all; and if she is going to pitch a fit, I'd be sure to tell everyone in advance so that the fit-pitching is well over by the time of your lovely wedding in the fall.
posted by nat at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
If not, maybe you can come up with a phrase to indicate that this is a social wedding, wherein you take vows to each other in front of your nearest and dearest, but it is not the legal wedding. I'm not sure what distinction other than religious/civil would work here; you want something like social/legal.
Maybe you could even say something in the invitations like "we signed the papers already, but we won't really be married until we get to celebrate with you".
In my age group this is insanely common; I've had friends who have had multiple wedding-related occasions for tons of reasons, including health insurance, immigration issues, having a very small destination wedding with larger ceremony back home, having weddings on two continents for family members who can't travel that far, having receptions in multiple places so as many people as possible could come. Occasionally someone would get upset, usually an older relative, but pretty much everyone saw that as them being overly conservative and holding to outdated traditions.
So unless your Great Aunt Martha is going to pitch a fit, I wouldn't worry at all; and if she is going to pitch a fit, I'd be sure to tell everyone in advance so that the fit-pitching is well over by the time of your lovely wedding in the fall.
posted by nat at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
It's super totes okay and lots of people do it for all sorts of practical reasons. If you find it meaningful and important to hold the ceremony even if you've already signed the paper, your loved ones will find it meaningful and important too.
Besides, it can be kind of a relief to get the getting-married part out of the way. Months from now, you'll be stressing over wedding-planning minutiae, and you can think, "well, no matter how this day goes, we'll definitely be married. Phew."
If it comes up, you can mention that due to unforeseen events you had to take care of the legal stuff first, but you still wanted to go through the ceremony as scheduled. You can consider the ceremony your "real" wedding and celebrate that anniversary.
posted by Metroid Baby at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013
Besides, it can be kind of a relief to get the getting-married part out of the way. Months from now, you'll be stressing over wedding-planning minutiae, and you can think, "well, no matter how this day goes, we'll definitely be married. Phew."
If it comes up, you can mention that due to unforeseen events you had to take care of the legal stuff first, but you still wanted to go through the ceremony as scheduled. You can consider the ceremony your "real" wedding and celebrate that anniversary.
posted by Metroid Baby at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2013
Send out informal hold the date cards that say something like, "We are getting married on June 4th. Reception to follow on September 21st. Please hold the date.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 4:05 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by JohnnyGunn at 4:05 PM on May 21, 2013
Best answer: And isn't that why we're recommending that people stage a fake ceremony?
For many people, the "big" ceremony is more real than the creation of the legal bundle of rights and responsibilities. This can be for religious reasons. It can also be because commiting to someone else in front of your whole community of loved ones is a nearly metaphysical, sacramental event even if you're not religious. I'm honored by the invitation to wedding ceremonies regardless of when the legal niceties take place because it's an acknowledgment that the guests are part of what makes this new social relationship real, in addition to other parts (from first dates on to getting the marriage license).
posted by rustcellar at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
For many people, the "big" ceremony is more real than the creation of the legal bundle of rights and responsibilities. This can be for religious reasons. It can also be because commiting to someone else in front of your whole community of loved ones is a nearly metaphysical, sacramental event even if you're not religious. I'm honored by the invitation to wedding ceremonies regardless of when the legal niceties take place because it's an acknowledgment that the guests are part of what makes this new social relationship real, in addition to other parts (from first dates on to getting the marriage license).
posted by rustcellar at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
Tacky, don't do it. Marriage is hard enough without starting it with a deceit. Can he be uninsured for a few months? If his job is cutting out benefits, there is a chance that they will be downsizing soon as well. You may need your big party money for basics as well.
posted by myselfasme at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by myselfasme at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013
What is going to be your anniversary? Also, if you tell anyone, you should assume everyone will know. The only way to keep a secret is to not tell anyone.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by JohnnyGunn at 4:06 PM on May 21, 2013
Best answer: a fake ceremony?
All ceremony is "fake". There's the wedding ceremony -- for family, community, each other, etc -- and the legal part. The OP's planned courthouse "wedding" is a legal proceeding. I've never witnessed a couple signing their wedding certificate, so technically, I've never seen first-hand a couple get legally joined. What's the difference?
Would you rather witness a couple pledge themselves to each other, or see them sign a piece of paper? The first one, right? Now take away the piece of paper that traditionally accompanies such pledging. Again, what's the difference? You might as well be annoyed you didn't see their first date, first kiss, or the first time they said "I love you". Or when they signed a lease/mortgage or opened a joint bank account.
The tradition seems rooted in times when the wedding was the first time the couple had sex, kissed, or even met. Then you really are witnessing something momentous. And I certainly wouldn't want to imitate that.
On preview, what rustcellar said.
posted by supercres at 4:07 PM on May 21, 2013 [21 favorites]
All ceremony is "fake". There's the wedding ceremony -- for family, community, each other, etc -- and the legal part. The OP's planned courthouse "wedding" is a legal proceeding. I've never witnessed a couple signing their wedding certificate, so technically, I've never seen first-hand a couple get legally joined. What's the difference?
Would you rather witness a couple pledge themselves to each other, or see them sign a piece of paper? The first one, right? Now take away the piece of paper that traditionally accompanies such pledging. Again, what's the difference? You might as well be annoyed you didn't see their first date, first kiss, or the first time they said "I love you". Or when they signed a lease/mortgage or opened a joint bank account.
The tradition seems rooted in times when the wedding was the first time the couple had sex, kissed, or even met. Then you really are witnessing something momentous. And I certainly wouldn't want to imitate that.
On preview, what rustcellar said.
posted by supercres at 4:07 PM on May 21, 2013 [21 favorites]
If you will have the religious ceremony -- and if the religious ceremony matters to you -- at the bigger celebration, then you're totally in the clear and don't need to mention the civil ceremony beforehand. But in general, you should, if not state outright that this is the second ceremony, not imply otherwise.
It's fine, just don't lie about it. People understand insurance issues, but lies piss them off.
posted by jeather at 4:08 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's fine, just don't lie about it. People understand insurance issues, but lies piss them off.
posted by jeather at 4:08 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: Having a vow renewal / reception in the fall is fine, but there are absolutely people who will be offended if you do that without telling them. And, well, being lied to about what you're supposed to be celebrating is kind of an icky feeling.
There's nothing particularly shameful in an insurance marriage, but making it a big secret makes people feel uncomfortable. So go ahead and have these things as you need to have them, but don't lie to your family and friends. They are your family and friends, they will support you. That's why you love them.
posted by jacquilynne at 4:10 PM on May 21, 2013
There's nothing particularly shameful in an insurance marriage, but making it a big secret makes people feel uncomfortable. So go ahead and have these things as you need to have them, but don't lie to your family and friends. They are your family and friends, they will support you. That's why you love them.
posted by jacquilynne at 4:10 PM on May 21, 2013
Tacky, don't do it. Marriage is hard enough without starting it with a deceit. Can he be uninsured for a few months?
Marriage will be way harder to start out if he gets sick or injured without insurance during those few months.
posted by scody at 4:11 PM on May 21, 2013 [33 favorites]
Marriage will be way harder to start out if he gets sick or injured without insurance during those few months.
posted by scody at 4:11 PM on May 21, 2013 [33 favorites]
This happened with a couple I knew (in NYS) - they got married in secret in February for insurance reasons, and then had a ceremony (which was called a wedding, with all the trappings and frippery and frilliness thereon) in August.
No one knew anything about it until about a year or so later, and it rubbed many people (honestly, myself included) the wrong way.
posted by Lucinda at 4:11 PM on May 21, 2013
No one knew anything about it until about a year or so later, and it rubbed many people (honestly, myself included) the wrong way.
posted by Lucinda at 4:11 PM on May 21, 2013
Absolutely untacky in my part of the world and completely common (Mid-Atlantic American yuppie). Some old fogies might have a problem with it, but the general position among friends who have done exactly this is that avoiding a lapse in health insurance is more important than Aunt Martha clutching her pearls.
And really, 99.999% of everything do with weddings involves some level or another of social white lies. What's one more, particularly one that MAKES THE LIVES OF PEOPLE GETTING MARRIED EASIER AND BETTER?
posted by joyceanmachine at 4:12 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
And really, 99.999% of everything do with weddings involves some level or another of social white lies. What's one more, particularly one that MAKES THE LIVES OF PEOPLE GETTING MARRIED EASIER AND BETTER?
posted by joyceanmachine at 4:12 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I flew to Maine to go to my nephew's wedding. I would not have gone except that I was the closest family member to him, and I could not see him getting married in his wife-to-be's hometown without having his family represented. I spent more than $500.00, had a great time seeing a state I had never been to. I didn't find out until a couple of weeks after that they had gotten married a couple of month's prior. I'm still not sure how I feel about that, I'm mostly positive I would have just sent a nice gift and saved myself several hundred dollars.
OTH, I have a couple of friends who did the whole big wedding thing. But right up until the big day, they could not come to agreement about finances. He was very much in debt when they met and was not making the progress that made her comfortable enough to legally entangle her finances with his. They did not postpone wedding, they went through with it, but did not sign the papers. And told no one. Their relationship survived, he got all his finances in order and they did the courthouse thing on the one year anniversary of their "wedding". So they get to keep the same anniversary day and the number of people who know the real deal is on one hand.
posted by Jazz Hands at 4:15 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
OTH, I have a couple of friends who did the whole big wedding thing. But right up until the big day, they could not come to agreement about finances. He was very much in debt when they met and was not making the progress that made her comfortable enough to legally entangle her finances with his. They did not postpone wedding, they went through with it, but did not sign the papers. And told no one. Their relationship survived, he got all his finances in order and they did the courthouse thing on the one year anniversary of their "wedding". So they get to keep the same anniversary day and the number of people who know the real deal is on one hand.
posted by Jazz Hands at 4:15 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Oh, this is fine and done all the time. I am an old fashioned weirdo about all kinds of wedding stuff and I have no problem with this. Your wedding is your wedding, the license is just paperwork.
posted by KathrynT at 4:16 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by KathrynT at 4:16 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: We got legal-married for visa reasons over a year before our "real" wedding. We didn't broadcast it, but we were honest with everyone we invited to the later wedding. People still flew from around the world to come to our wedding (which included a religious ceremony). No one gave us crap for it.
I am not religious but it was still definitely a Big Freaking Deal to stand up in front of friends and loved ones and commit to someone. Our legal ceremony has its own fond place in my heart, but our wedding definitely still felt like Our Wedding.
And we did call it a wedding but we worded the invitations as "come celebrate the wedding of [us]!" Rather than "you are invited to the wedding of". Maybe unnecessarily nitpicky but we wanted to be as honest and up front as possible.
posted by olinerd at 4:17 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I am not religious but it was still definitely a Big Freaking Deal to stand up in front of friends and loved ones and commit to someone. Our legal ceremony has its own fond place in my heart, but our wedding definitely still felt like Our Wedding.
And we did call it a wedding but we worded the invitations as "come celebrate the wedding of [us]!" Rather than "you are invited to the wedding of". Maybe unnecessarily nitpicky but we wanted to be as honest and up front as possible.
posted by olinerd at 4:17 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
This is a 100% valid and normal thing to do. We'd probably have done it if I hadn't been able to get health insurance through my school. I have been to weddings that, for insurance or immigration reasons, had already been legal for several months (or years) - including one that was overseas, which I spent like a thousand dollars to go to. I didn't care at all. The legal stuff has to happen when it has to happen, you know? I can't imagine begrudging someone still wanting a party that all their friends and family attend. If you're worried about it, just keep it quiet. And yeah, maybe invitation wording like "celebrate the marriage of" or something.
posted by goodbyewaffles at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by goodbyewaffles at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013
What you can do is have the party on the later date that you want, but invite people to it as if it were just a large, huge party, making no references to any weddings, and including no ceremony.
Or not. My husband and I were legally married in the garden of a Toronto B&B with eight of our friends and family. We had a Big Fat Scottish Wedding two months later in the totally traditional format: chapel, aisle, big dress, officiant, dinner, wedding cake, dancing. The only difference was that our Edinburgh officiant didn't actually marry us because we were already married.
Distress caused to any party: zero.
posted by DarlingBri at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Or not. My husband and I were legally married in the garden of a Toronto B&B with eight of our friends and family. We had a Big Fat Scottish Wedding two months later in the totally traditional format: chapel, aisle, big dress, officiant, dinner, wedding cake, dancing. The only difference was that our Edinburgh officiant didn't actually marry us because we were already married.
Distress caused to any party: zero.
posted by DarlingBri at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
We haven't been keeping our legal marriage a secret- we just haven't told everyone.
We don't really view it as the "real" marriage- just the government one. The REAL one is the one with the support and mingling of your tribes.
posted by small_ruminant at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
We don't really view it as the "real" marriage- just the government one. The REAL one is the one with the support and mingling of your tribes.
posted by small_ruminant at 4:18 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Also my parents thought it was a big deal that we were legally married and sat their siblings and parents down solemnly to tell them what we'd done to ensure they wouldn't be all upset if they came to the wedding and found out it wasn't "real". They all laughed it off, even the more socially conservative of the family, and called to congratulate us. Don't be put off by what people might think -- they may surprise you!
posted by olinerd at 4:20 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by olinerd at 4:20 PM on May 21, 2013
Best answer: My neighbors did this. They were already planning to get married, when they found a house they wanted to buy. The husband-to-be was a little more religious than the wife-to-be, and he wanted to know, at least between the two of them, that they weren't shacking up. So they had a courthouse wedding and didn't tell anyone except his parents (and us, their new neighbors/friends).
They held a religious ceremony and their dream reception a year later, as per the original plan. For some reason they chose to announce at the reception that they'd already been married for a year. I think they thought it would be a funny surprise for everyone, but it was sort of anti-climactic; the room was noisy and a lot of people didn't hear them, and the ones that did were sort of confused and didn't understand what they'd just heard. So maybe don't do that. Just let your reception date be your anniversary date in other people's minds.
I have another friend who was planning to get married, when immigration status of his fiance became an urgent issue (related to her employment). They went to the courthouse that day. They went on to have a formal ceremony with family and friends in his hometown, and another such ceremony in her home country.
You are forming a new family, and you have to do what's best for your family. I personally wouldn't advertise it, since it leads to confusion for others, but otherwise I think it's just fine, and I wouldn't be offended if I learned in the future that I had essentially attended the reception, instead of the "official" legal ceremony.
posted by vignettist at 4:20 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
They held a religious ceremony and their dream reception a year later, as per the original plan. For some reason they chose to announce at the reception that they'd already been married for a year. I think they thought it would be a funny surprise for everyone, but it was sort of anti-climactic; the room was noisy and a lot of people didn't hear them, and the ones that did were sort of confused and didn't understand what they'd just heard. So maybe don't do that. Just let your reception date be your anniversary date in other people's minds.
I have another friend who was planning to get married, when immigration status of his fiance became an urgent issue (related to her employment). They went to the courthouse that day. They went on to have a formal ceremony with family and friends in his hometown, and another such ceremony in her home country.
You are forming a new family, and you have to do what's best for your family. I personally wouldn't advertise it, since it leads to confusion for others, but otherwise I think it's just fine, and I wouldn't be offended if I learned in the future that I had essentially attended the reception, instead of the "official" legal ceremony.
posted by vignettist at 4:20 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Totally fine. And I've had four weddings, to the same person.
posted by gingerbeer at 4:23 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by gingerbeer at 4:23 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
No problem at all. If anyone objects to it tell them to spend the energy on writing to their senator/representative/president and ask for health insurance to be fixed so nobody else has to do this in the future.
(My brother had a legal ceremony just before their kid was born, then a giant religious wedding + party six months later in another country. Everyone knew this and I certainly didn't hear anyone calling it tacky, but I would have laughed at them if I had).
posted by jacalata at 4:24 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
(My brother had a legal ceremony just before their kid was born, then a giant religious wedding + party six months later in another country. Everyone knew this and I certainly didn't hear anyone calling it tacky, but I would have laughed at them if I had).
posted by jacalata at 4:24 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Frankly astonished at all the "It is a lie! Be ashamed! Keep it a secret! Or don't pretend it's really a wedding!" reactions.
Folks, the wedding ceremony itself is not legally binding. "I now pronounce you" are not magic, legally binding words. The signing of the marriage license is the legally binding, "real" part - and that particular moment is generally not part of the ceremony. You can go to a dozen weddings and never see "The moment" at which a couple become legally married.
Ceremonies are just that: Ceremony. They are not real, or fake, except that we treat them as such. A wedding ceremony is a couple, uniting themselves for life, in the presence of their friends and family. This does not become in any way, shape, or form invalidated if the signing of a piece of paperhappens five minutes later or five months earlier. Either way, the ceremony and the legal paperwork are utterly unrelated.
posted by Tomorrowful at 4:26 PM on May 21, 2013 [43 favorites]
Folks, the wedding ceremony itself is not legally binding. "I now pronounce you" are not magic, legally binding words. The signing of the marriage license is the legally binding, "real" part - and that particular moment is generally not part of the ceremony. You can go to a dozen weddings and never see "The moment" at which a couple become legally married.
Ceremonies are just that: Ceremony. They are not real, or fake, except that we treat them as such. A wedding ceremony is a couple, uniting themselves for life, in the presence of their friends and family. This does not become in any way, shape, or form invalidated if the signing of a piece of paperhappens five minutes later or five months earlier. Either way, the ceremony and the legal paperwork are utterly unrelated.
posted by Tomorrowful at 4:26 PM on May 21, 2013 [43 favorites]
I actually think it's fine to do this - have two ceremonies and be discreet. I'd consider not telling anyone, personally.
But if you feel misgivings, that it will undermine your special day and it will cast a shadow on the proceedings, maybe look into buying health insurance for him for six months through COBRA (or whatever.) If it's important to you, you could even borrow money from your parents for it.
If that part -- the 'realness' of it, is very important, maybe look into those other options.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 4:28 PM on May 21, 2013
But if you feel misgivings, that it will undermine your special day and it will cast a shadow on the proceedings, maybe look into buying health insurance for him for six months through COBRA (or whatever.) If it's important to you, you could even borrow money from your parents for it.
If that part -- the 'realness' of it, is very important, maybe look into those other options.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 4:28 PM on May 21, 2013
People do this ALL THE TIME. Have a private legal ceremony at the courthouse. There's no reason to announce what's happened - only you and your witnesses need to know. Ask them to keep it to themselves. If they can't be trusted to do that, they don't need to be there. Your government paperwork day isn't a big deal. Don't make it into one via declarations lest others find a way to make it about themselves and get mad (how people find a way to get mad about stuff like this is beyond me).
Have the romantic, meaningful, special wedding you've been planning. Getting married is about so much more than paperwork. Don't make getting married about the date that the paperwork was officially filed with the government for insurance reasons. Make it about your pledges, declarations, commitments, blending families, and love for one another. That's what matters and that's what people want to share with you on the big day. You're not a fraud and your wedding will be no less real or genuine than those of people who sign their paperwork on the same day.
Congratulations!
posted by quince at 4:29 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Have the romantic, meaningful, special wedding you've been planning. Getting married is about so much more than paperwork. Don't make getting married about the date that the paperwork was officially filed with the government for insurance reasons. Make it about your pledges, declarations, commitments, blending families, and love for one another. That's what matters and that's what people want to share with you on the big day. You're not a fraud and your wedding will be no less real or genuine than those of people who sign their paperwork on the same day.
Congratulations!
posted by quince at 4:29 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Wow, yeah, I am also AMAZED that anyone would care about this. There are the legalities, and then there is the social aspect. The part that seems important to me is having all your friends and family there while you get up and pledge your love/commitment/etc to each other. That IS the real wedding.
If people are going to get all weird about it, don't invite those people. They are being ridiculous.
posted by exceptinsects at 4:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
If people are going to get all weird about it, don't invite those people. They are being ridiculous.
posted by exceptinsects at 4:38 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Best answer: We did this, for several reasons, only one of which was getting health insurance asap.
1) We felt that the promises & declarations we made at the religious/community ceremony were what made us married, not signing a piece of paper for the government or the words of a minister.
2) I resented the fact that the state we lived in wanted to control us by enforcing a waiting period, counseling, and a large application fee. So when we found ourselves traveling in a state (CO) that allowed us to take care of the "legal paperwork" aspect for $10 when we walked in the courthouse one afternoon, that was awesome. All we needed was a witness (the town clerk) to sign the paperwork & certify that we were who we said we were.
3) I can't even remember the exact date we signed the papers. Because THAT WASN'T WHEN WE GOT MARRIED. I remember our wedding date. That was the day the magic happened.
4) If someone wants to get all pissy & hurt because we did the paperwork early, fuck 'em. They clearly don't know us very well or understand what is important to us. We didn't tell people because there wasn't anything to tell. Do I announce to the world that I've sent in my property taxes or renewed the tabs on my car? No. Only one person (my mom) asked about seeing us sign the certificate & we just said we'd already taken care of the paperwork.
Do what is best for you. Congratulations!
posted by belladonna at 4:41 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
1) We felt that the promises & declarations we made at the religious/community ceremony were what made us married, not signing a piece of paper for the government or the words of a minister.
2) I resented the fact that the state we lived in wanted to control us by enforcing a waiting period, counseling, and a large application fee. So when we found ourselves traveling in a state (CO) that allowed us to take care of the "legal paperwork" aspect for $10 when we walked in the courthouse one afternoon, that was awesome. All we needed was a witness (the town clerk) to sign the paperwork & certify that we were who we said we were.
3) I can't even remember the exact date we signed the papers. Because THAT WASN'T WHEN WE GOT MARRIED. I remember our wedding date. That was the day the magic happened.
4) If someone wants to get all pissy & hurt because we did the paperwork early, fuck 'em. They clearly don't know us very well or understand what is important to us. We didn't tell people because there wasn't anything to tell. Do I announce to the world that I've sent in my property taxes or renewed the tabs on my car? No. Only one person (my mom) asked about seeing us sign the certificate & we just said we'd already taken care of the paperwork.
Do what is best for you. Congratulations!
posted by belladonna at 4:41 PM on May 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
My husband and I were domestic partners before we got married. It was partially for health insurance reasons and partially because he and I were both a bit unsure about the whole idea of marriage. We did this in NYC and checked ahead of time that it would work for insurance.
I think that this compromise would be okay with those people who are upset about the "fake" wedding and, if your insurance works with domestic partnerships, would also let you guys be insured.
Congratulations on your upcoming marriage.
posted by sciencegeek at 4:42 PM on May 21, 2013
I think that this compromise would be okay with those people who are upset about the "fake" wedding and, if your insurance works with domestic partnerships, would also let you guys be insured.
Congratulations on your upcoming marriage.
posted by sciencegeek at 4:42 PM on May 21, 2013
A wedding is about committing to each other in front of your family and/or community, which is exactly what you'll be doing.
My husband and I had a courthouse wedding a few weeks before our 'real' wedding. We didn't tell anyone and it was totally no big deal. You're not obligated to tell anyone, really. The day we signed papers was pretty devoid of emotion- it was a necessary thing so we could handle some immigration issues. The hubs and I both feel that our wedding day / anniversary is the date of our wedding, not the day we signed papers. I say do it and don't tell a soul.
posted by PorcineWithMe at 4:48 PM on May 21, 2013
My husband and I had a courthouse wedding a few weeks before our 'real' wedding. We didn't tell anyone and it was totally no big deal. You're not obligated to tell anyone, really. The day we signed papers was pretty devoid of emotion- it was a necessary thing so we could handle some immigration issues. The hubs and I both feel that our wedding day / anniversary is the date of our wedding, not the day we signed papers. I say do it and don't tell a soul.
posted by PorcineWithMe at 4:48 PM on May 21, 2013
Not sure about the ethics of your social group, but consider this alternate example:
As a queer person, I (like many other people I know) once had a wedding with absolutely zero legal standing. Yet, we called it our wedding, and everyone who came recognized it as such. The injustice of our current (lack of) health care system shouldn't stop you from having the wedding that is most meaningful to you, while still protecting the physical safety of your partner by providing that person with health insurance, just as the unjust lack of a legal structure for two gay people to be married shouldn't have (and didn't) stop me from having a wedding in the way that was most meaningful to me.
As another side example, I have a pair of straight friends who were married about 5 years ago, had a big, amazing wedding with all their family and friends, and to this day still haven't gotten legally married. They didn't advertise this fact, but they didn't hide it either. It wasn't that important to them.
posted by latkes at 4:53 PM on May 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
As a queer person, I (like many other people I know) once had a wedding with absolutely zero legal standing. Yet, we called it our wedding, and everyone who came recognized it as such. The injustice of our current (lack of) health care system shouldn't stop you from having the wedding that is most meaningful to you, while still protecting the physical safety of your partner by providing that person with health insurance, just as the unjust lack of a legal structure for two gay people to be married shouldn't have (and didn't) stop me from having a wedding in the way that was most meaningful to me.
As another side example, I have a pair of straight friends who were married about 5 years ago, had a big, amazing wedding with all their family and friends, and to this day still haven't gotten legally married. They didn't advertise this fact, but they didn't hide it either. It wasn't that important to them.
posted by latkes at 4:53 PM on May 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Here is what would be tacky: having both, inviting people to both, and expecting to get presents both times. This is demonstrably not what you are doing. I cannot believe there are actually people who think a goddamn party is more important than health insurance, in a country where medical issues can bankrupt middle-class families.
Congratulations on your wedding, no matter how many you end up having!
posted by elizardbits at 5:02 PM on May 21, 2013 [24 favorites]
Congratulations on your wedding, no matter how many you end up having!
posted by elizardbits at 5:02 PM on May 21, 2013 [24 favorites]
I was coming in to say pretty much just what elizardbits said.
So yeah. Do what you need to do (especially if it's what you've outlined above) and be happy.
posted by cooker girl at 5:17 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
So yeah. Do what you need to do (especially if it's what you've outlined above) and be happy.
posted by cooker girl at 5:17 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
State of slight confusion: My wife's best friend got married nearly a year ago. The bride wore beautiful white wedding dress and carried flowers. A small number of friends were in attendance and a meal followed. Pictures were taken and posted online. The problem? This ceremony took place at a courthouse (there were insurance issues that needed to be addressed ASAP). So, this spring, a bit over a year later, they are holding a "real wedding," complete with another ceremony (and large reception). My wife thinks this is perfectly normal, but it seems odd to me. Is this the new normal? Thanks for your reply.
Miss Manners: It's not a "real wedding," because these people are already married. But there are many who regard weddings as a chance to indulge in ego-fests and want as many as possible (without the trouble of divorce), so they stage re-enactments.
Yeah, no, that is a completely different situation than the one in badgermushroomSNAKE's question - these people are actually having TWO WEDDINGS. I can absolutely see finding that tacky. BadgermushroomSNAKE, however, only intends to have one "wedding" - she's just having it a few months after the paperwork is signed. This is totally ok.
posted by naoko at 5:20 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Miss Manners: It's not a "real wedding," because these people are already married. But there are many who regard weddings as a chance to indulge in ego-fests and want as many as possible (without the trouble of divorce), so they stage re-enactments.
Yeah, no, that is a completely different situation than the one in badgermushroomSNAKE's question - these people are actually having TWO WEDDINGS. I can absolutely see finding that tacky. BadgermushroomSNAKE, however, only intends to have one "wedding" - she's just having it a few months after the paperwork is signed. This is totally ok.
posted by naoko at 5:20 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: I came in to make the civil/religious ceremony/ecelebration distinction as well. Most religious weddings I have attended have a wedding (at the church) and then everyone piles into their cars and goes to the reception (at some place like a restaurant or hotel), sometimes 2-4 hours later. Some guests don't attend both parts.
You are basically doing this, but several months apart. I would not keep your wedding a secret, but I wouldn't feel the need to explain in great detail to everyone what is happening.
If you want a religious ceremony, you get civil married now, then have your religious ceremony and reception on a date in the future.
If you don't want a religious ceremony, get civil married now and then have your reception several months later. Or get civil married now, have another public vow exchange, and a reception several months later. If you're worried people will feel duped or angry with you (which I agree is mostly their problem, but if you can avoid the problem, why wouldn't you?), make sure your invitations are for a "reception to celebrate the marriage of You and Partner".
In my opinion, and in my experience, people want to be happy at weddings. They want to be there to share in the love and happiness of people who matter to them. They get angry when there are weird expectations or burdens placed on their ability to share in the love and joy (like spend $$$$ and your limited PTO to fly to our exotic destination for our wedding or come to four gift-required pre-wedding events or pretend we don't have three kids together already!). So when you say to them "We want to exchange vows in front of the people we love and we want a big party to celebrate, but we can't do that until next year, even though we've already filed our license--we hope you will join us anyway", people who get pissed off are just being unkind.
We actually had the opposite happen at our "wedding"--Most guests were shocked when we and an officiant gathered everyone together mid-reception to watch us exchange rings, sign the license and offer a toast; they had assumed we were already married and just wanted to get dressed up and celebrate.
posted by crush-onastick at 5:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
You are basically doing this, but several months apart. I would not keep your wedding a secret, but I wouldn't feel the need to explain in great detail to everyone what is happening.
If you want a religious ceremony, you get civil married now, then have your religious ceremony and reception on a date in the future.
If you don't want a religious ceremony, get civil married now and then have your reception several months later. Or get civil married now, have another public vow exchange, and a reception several months later. If you're worried people will feel duped or angry with you (which I agree is mostly their problem, but if you can avoid the problem, why wouldn't you?), make sure your invitations are for a "reception to celebrate the marriage of You and Partner".
In my opinion, and in my experience, people want to be happy at weddings. They want to be there to share in the love and happiness of people who matter to them. They get angry when there are weird expectations or burdens placed on their ability to share in the love and joy (like spend $$$$ and your limited PTO to fly to our exotic destination for our wedding or come to four gift-required pre-wedding events or pretend we don't have three kids together already!). So when you say to them "We want to exchange vows in front of the people we love and we want a big party to celebrate, but we can't do that until next year, even though we've already filed our license--we hope you will join us anyway", people who get pissed off are just being unkind.
We actually had the opposite happen at our "wedding"--Most guests were shocked when we and an officiant gathered everyone together mid-reception to watch us exchange rings, sign the license and offer a toast; they had assumed we were already married and just wanted to get dressed up and celebrate.
posted by crush-onastick at 5:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Depending on your company, you may be able to add your fiancé as a "domestic partner," it's not limited to same sex couples. Usually bigger companies that are multi-state will allow them, regardless of state, because some states require the ability to do this. It's worth investigating!
posted by katypickle at 5:30 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by katypickle at 5:30 PM on May 21, 2013
We are a total outlier here so take this as you will, but back before California started its march to marriage equality, gingerbeer and I got domestically partnered without really telling anyone (it was signing paperwork! Woo!). Then we had a couple of small weddings - one got annulled by the state and the other was out of the country - that we invited no or few people to. Then we had a not-legally-binding commitment ceremony with a guest list and catering and a photographer that for all the world looked like A Wedding. Then we got married again at City Hall, this time planning a bit more ahead so we could invite a few folk.
Maybe it's just a gay thing, but nobody said shit about feeling bad that our commitment ceremony didn't "count" and they wished they'd been able to watch us sign paperwork, because that was the important thing. If anyone thought it, it was very quietly.
A Wedding may be a family and community event, but the marriage is yours, and if I were you I wouldn't want to risk starting it under a load of medical debt. I mean, maybe nothing happens between his insurance ending and the wedding. Probably nothing would. But why risk it?
posted by rtha at 5:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Maybe it's just a gay thing, but nobody said shit about feeling bad that our commitment ceremony didn't "count" and they wished they'd been able to watch us sign paperwork, because that was the important thing. If anyone thought it, it was very quietly.
A Wedding may be a family and community event, but the marriage is yours, and if I were you I wouldn't want to risk starting it under a load of medical debt. I mean, maybe nothing happens between his insurance ending and the wedding. Probably nothing would. But why risk it?
posted by rtha at 5:39 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah, you are not planning two "weddings" in the sense of that Miss Manners example. Surely there are ways you could word an invitation to avoid giving the false impression that the legal marriage was taking place on the day of the big gathering. "To celebrate our marriage" or something like that. That some people get bent out of shape about this has always seemed odd to me, seeing that in many places it is common to have e.g. a civil and a religious ceremony.
I got legally married a week before the wedding to which we invited people, because the officiant, a judge, could not perform the ceremony in the state where we'd booked the wedding. It never occurred to us that this would be a problem. The judge and everyone in his chambers acted like this was very very common. I will warn you that when we ran into friends right after our visit to the judge, they said, "Did you just get married? You look like you just got married." Hiding it is bad policy and someone will find out.
Best wishes!
posted by BibiRose at 5:56 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I got legally married a week before the wedding to which we invited people, because the officiant, a judge, could not perform the ceremony in the state where we'd booked the wedding. It never occurred to us that this would be a problem. The judge and everyone in his chambers acted like this was very very common. I will warn you that when we ran into friends right after our visit to the judge, they said, "Did you just get married? You look like you just got married." Hiding it is bad policy and someone will find out.
Best wishes!
posted by BibiRose at 5:56 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Best answer: I cannot believe there are actually people who think a goddamn party is more important than health insurance
I don't think anyone here thinks that. If someone sends out invitations that indicate that say "We got married! We're having a party on such and such a date!", their friends should come and be happy for them.
We can talk about how it's 'just a legal marriage' or how we didn't 'consider it real', etc., and I think that's great. But if we have guests who do not share the same views, they should be given full disclosure and allowed to make their own choice about the event. Dissembling in order to get people to come doesn't seem ethical to me, regardless of what kind of tiptoeing is involved in said dissembling.
And if someone who knew the full situation - be it simple or complicated - wasn't going to come, do we really want that person there, anyway?
posted by ftm at 6:00 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I don't think anyone here thinks that. If someone sends out invitations that indicate that say "We got married! We're having a party on such and such a date!", their friends should come and be happy for them.
We can talk about how it's 'just a legal marriage' or how we didn't 'consider it real', etc., and I think that's great. But if we have guests who do not share the same views, they should be given full disclosure and allowed to make their own choice about the event. Dissembling in order to get people to come doesn't seem ethical to me, regardless of what kind of tiptoeing is involved in said dissembling.
And if someone who knew the full situation - be it simple or complicated - wasn't going to come, do we really want that person there, anyway?
posted by ftm at 6:00 PM on May 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Anyone who would prefer that you subject yourselves to serious instability or hardship for months, for the sake of marginally enhancing the symbolic value of a ceremony on one day, is not enough of a well-wisher to be worth inviting to your wedding.
posted by John Cohen at 6:21 PM on May 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by John Cohen at 6:21 PM on May 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
I think it's pretty clear from this thread that some people will not be okay with this, and some people will just not care. You're simply not going to be able to please everyone, so, I suggest you do whatever makes you and your intended feel best.
posted by sm1tten at 6:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by sm1tten at 6:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
I don't really care about this but I definitely get why other people would care. I don't think lying is a good idea.
A friend of mine and her first husband did this (I believe for insurance reasons, though it was a long time ago, who remembers), and her sister and father (and me, really only a moderately close friend at the time) knew, but as far as I know her mother *still* doesn't know, years and years later, that the ceremony she attended was not the legal ceremony. I think that was badly done on my friend's part (and probably done in part to spite her mother, which makes it worse, though her mother is reeeeeally difficult).
Look into whether you can get him added to your insurance as a domestic partner or something (you probably can't unless it's open enrollment time, but it won't hurt to check).
posted by mskyle at 6:37 PM on May 21, 2013
A friend of mine and her first husband did this (I believe for insurance reasons, though it was a long time ago, who remembers), and her sister and father (and me, really only a moderately close friend at the time) knew, but as far as I know her mother *still* doesn't know, years and years later, that the ceremony she attended was not the legal ceremony. I think that was badly done on my friend's part (and probably done in part to spite her mother, which makes it worse, though her mother is reeeeeally difficult).
Look into whether you can get him added to your insurance as a domestic partner or something (you probably can't unless it's open enrollment time, but it won't hurt to check).
posted by mskyle at 6:37 PM on May 21, 2013
But if we have guests who do not share the same views, they should be given full disclosure and allowed to make their own choice about the event.
I didn't have a note on the invitation announcing that Mr. belladonna & I had been living together for a couple months; should I have done that in case it made the wedding "less real" for someone?
I guess I just don't run in circles where people give more weight to a signature on a piece of paper than they do to heartfelt vows in the presence of friends & family. If you want to support our marriage and share our joy on the day we publicly pledge to share our lives and form a new family, wonderful! If that is any less real to you because a piece of paper was signed before the ceremony rather than after, I really think that's pretty messed up. (Heck, the minister who spoke at our ceremony said he actually wished everyone would do it this way, because he disliked being forced to serve as a government agent when performing what he viewed as a spiritual task.) But maybe I'm just a liberal hippy with a general dislike of government interference.
posted by belladonna at 6:37 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I didn't have a note on the invitation announcing that Mr. belladonna & I had been living together for a couple months; should I have done that in case it made the wedding "less real" for someone?
I guess I just don't run in circles where people give more weight to a signature on a piece of paper than they do to heartfelt vows in the presence of friends & family. If you want to support our marriage and share our joy on the day we publicly pledge to share our lives and form a new family, wonderful! If that is any less real to you because a piece of paper was signed before the ceremony rather than after, I really think that's pretty messed up. (Heck, the minister who spoke at our ceremony said he actually wished everyone would do it this way, because he disliked being forced to serve as a government agent when performing what he viewed as a spiritual task.) But maybe I'm just a liberal hippy with a general dislike of government interference.
posted by belladonna at 6:37 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Fine, here's some more M M.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-07-23/lifestyle/35237685_1_civil-ceremony-anniversaries-bridesmaids
posted by bq at 6:45 PM on May 21, 2013
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-07-23/lifestyle/35237685_1_civil-ceremony-anniversaries-bridesmaids
posted by bq at 6:45 PM on May 21, 2013
Fine, here's some more M M.
You'd need to do a lot of reading between the lines to say she's expressing outright disapproval there.
posted by John Cohen at 6:52 PM on May 21, 2013
You'd need to do a lot of reading between the lines to say she's expressing outright disapproval there.
posted by John Cohen at 6:52 PM on May 21, 2013
This happens all the time here, usually because of the military, (we are near Ft. Bragg )and people approach it in different ways. (I have played at some of these smaller weddings, and I also work at a florist and people dash in at the last minute for a bouquet. )
It is totally fine to have a courthouse wedding quietly and then have your big shindig later and totally up to you regarding who you tell. Anyone who objects can just mind their own beeswax.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:12 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
It is totally fine to have a courthouse wedding quietly and then have your big shindig later and totally up to you regarding who you tell. Anyone who objects can just mind their own beeswax.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:12 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I shall add my anecdotes to the pile: I know one couple who got married in a courthouse for exactly the same reasons you describe, and then had a ceremony several months later. They did not keep it a secret and nobody cared, and we all still teared up at their vows and ate cake and hugged them and brought presents because we love them and yay weddings.
I know another couple who had a wedding ceremony but are not yet legally married because if they got married, one half of the couple's federal student loans would be in jeopardy due to joint income. So they had a ceremony, wear wedding rings, and will do the legal paperwork whenever that partner is done with school. They did not keep it a secret and nobody cared, and we all still teared up at their vows and ate cake and hugged them and brought presents because we love them and yay weddings.
posted by bedhead at 8:48 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I know another couple who had a wedding ceremony but are not yet legally married because if they got married, one half of the couple's federal student loans would be in jeopardy due to joint income. So they had a ceremony, wear wedding rings, and will do the legal paperwork whenever that partner is done with school. They did not keep it a secret and nobody cared, and we all still teared up at their vows and ate cake and hugged them and brought presents because we love them and yay weddings.
posted by bedhead at 8:48 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
As a queer person I've attended the weddings of my very queer friends. They have all been astoundingly beautiful and very real professions of very real love. None of the couples were legally wed. Were they any less real? Did I care that I was witnessing a 'fake' wedding. Hell to the no.
My sister had to have a quickie courthouse wedding before having the big ceremony a year later. Not a single person felt they were at a fake wedding.
Bring on the wedding bells. I care not about legal status. I care about blessing the union of two beloved people. That will never happen on a piece of paper. (Yes, legalized gay marriage is important for a host of reasons but the absence of the legal papers does not make their unions a fraudulent performance.)
posted by barnone at 9:31 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
My sister had to have a quickie courthouse wedding before having the big ceremony a year later. Not a single person felt they were at a fake wedding.
Bring on the wedding bells. I care not about legal status. I care about blessing the union of two beloved people. That will never happen on a piece of paper. (Yes, legalized gay marriage is important for a host of reasons but the absence of the legal papers does not make their unions a fraudulent performance.)
posted by barnone at 9:31 PM on May 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm very surprised that people are saying the papers are often/usually not signed at the ceremony. Every wedding I've ever been to, there's been a bit immediately after the vows where the couple sits at a table and signs the official paperwork with witnesses, usually while music plays or whatever.
Look, do what you want, but be honest about it. Contrary to what everyone else is saying, I think the wedding stops being only about what you and your partner want when you, you know, invite guests. To me, a wedding is very much about the moment when two people become married - both legally and religiously. Because that's always been the case, where I live. If you're wedding is not that, I think you should tell people exactly what you're inviting them to. (For what it's worth, I'd still go, I'm not a bad horrible judgmental non-friend yadda yadda: but do me the courtesy of full disclosure).
But I live in a country with socialized healthcare, so maybe that's part of it.
posted by Salamander at 9:31 PM on May 21, 2013
Look, do what you want, but be honest about it. Contrary to what everyone else is saying, I think the wedding stops being only about what you and your partner want when you, you know, invite guests. To me, a wedding is very much about the moment when two people become married - both legally and religiously. Because that's always been the case, where I live. If you're wedding is not that, I think you should tell people exactly what you're inviting them to. (For what it's worth, I'd still go, I'm not a bad horrible judgmental non-friend yadda yadda: but do me the courtesy of full disclosure).
But I live in a country with socialized healthcare, so maybe that's part of it.
posted by Salamander at 9:31 PM on May 21, 2013
I've been to two weddings where the actual legal marriage did not immediately precede the reception. My cousin was married a couple years ago and he wanted my father to officiate. My dad can't legally marry anyone and takes his religion too seriously to become an internet minister, and they didn't want to accidentally end up not legally married in some shady internet minister screw-up anyway. So, they got married in a private, court house ceremony about a week before the "real" wedding. My dad made a small mention of it in the ceremony ("I don't really have the power to marry them, luckily the state already took care of that.") As far as I could tell, no one cared.
Quite a long time ago, a friend got married and had a reception. Somehow in all their planning, they forgot to book a church, and so they ended up holding the reception a week BEFORE the actual marriage ceremony. And then they had a second, private ceremony in a different religion. Again, no one took umbrage.
If you're worried about being totally honest, I like JohnnyGun's idea of mentioning the legal wedding on your save-the-date card.
posted by looli at 9:35 PM on May 21, 2013
Quite a long time ago, a friend got married and had a reception. Somehow in all their planning, they forgot to book a church, and so they ended up holding the reception a week BEFORE the actual marriage ceremony. And then they had a second, private ceremony in a different religion. Again, no one took umbrage.
If you're worried about being totally honest, I like JohnnyGun's idea of mentioning the legal wedding on your save-the-date card.
posted by looli at 9:35 PM on May 21, 2013
Are you sure you need to be married to share insurance? I'm on my fiance's insurance in California and it's no big deal.
However if you need to get the papers signed now, do it. My boss did the same for the same reason as you. If anyone gives you crap, invite them to pay for your fiance's health care in the interim.
posted by radioamy at 10:05 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
However if you need to get the papers signed now, do it. My boss did the same for the same reason as you. If anyone gives you crap, invite them to pay for your fiance's health care in the interim.
posted by radioamy at 10:05 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Adding my voice to the chorus of totally fine. My sister and her husband did this for the same reason. They were planning an August wedding, but then her husband got a really good job in another state and moved up there. My sister worked in a school and didn't want to leave her job until the end of the school year, a few months after he was to start his new job. So over her spring break, they went to Las Vegas and did the quickie wedding thing with no guests, then had the religious ceremony with guests in August. Everyone knew the story and nobody had a problem with it. (In fact I think my parents would have been a lot less understanding if she'd let her insurance lapse for the couple months between the end of the school year and their planned wedding date!) They consider the day of their religious ceremony as their anniversary.
posted by SisterHavana at 10:14 PM on May 21, 2013
posted by SisterHavana at 10:14 PM on May 21, 2013
My friends in the Netherlands had a legal wedding to which guests were not invited, and a big church wedding complete with party one week later. This was because church weddings have no legal status in the Netherlands but it was the church wedding that was important to them.
Your case isn't quite the same. An important aspect of your commitment to each other is your shared finances, so the legal aspect is not simply about "a piece of paper" but about your caring for each other in sickness and in health into the future. I am surprised by the number of people who think it's shallow to value this side of it as much as the party and white dress.
I am not suggesting you put yourself through months of financial risk because I'm too shallow to care about your party, I am saying you can absolutely do what you want and satisfy the demands of etiquette if you both announce the wedding an downplay the wedding aspect of the party you will have months later. People will pick up on the implications of it anyway.
Everyone knows someone who's done something like you're asking and they all did it because they thought it was to their advantage. That's not traditional etiquette, which is what you asked about. People do all sorts of things, with or without being offensive to others in their lives, but your question wasn't "do other people do this" but "is this in line with etiquette" which is a system not for being shallow and judgmental but for honouring the values and customs of a diverse community. To take an extreme example, plenty of people treat their partners mean to keep them keen, and that's common practice and approved of or at least acquiesced to by probably most people other than us uptight MeFites, but it's not polite or respectful despite being common practice. I am in no way suggesting that having a ceremony so far apart from your reception is comparably bad to meanness to one's partner, I'm saying that the answer "other people do it and it bothered nobody except some shallow people whose feelings don't count" isn't answering this as an etiquette question.
posted by tel3path at 11:18 PM on May 21, 2013
Your case isn't quite the same. An important aspect of your commitment to each other is your shared finances, so the legal aspect is not simply about "a piece of paper" but about your caring for each other in sickness and in health into the future. I am surprised by the number of people who think it's shallow to value this side of it as much as the party and white dress.
I am not suggesting you put yourself through months of financial risk because I'm too shallow to care about your party, I am saying you can absolutely do what you want and satisfy the demands of etiquette if you both announce the wedding an downplay the wedding aspect of the party you will have months later. People will pick up on the implications of it anyway.
Everyone knows someone who's done something like you're asking and they all did it because they thought it was to their advantage. That's not traditional etiquette, which is what you asked about. People do all sorts of things, with or without being offensive to others in their lives, but your question wasn't "do other people do this" but "is this in line with etiquette" which is a system not for being shallow and judgmental but for honouring the values and customs of a diverse community. To take an extreme example, plenty of people treat their partners mean to keep them keen, and that's common practice and approved of or at least acquiesced to by probably most people other than us uptight MeFites, but it's not polite or respectful despite being common practice. I am in no way suggesting that having a ceremony so far apart from your reception is comparably bad to meanness to one's partner, I'm saying that the answer "other people do it and it bothered nobody except some shallow people whose feelings don't count" isn't answering this as an etiquette question.
posted by tel3path at 11:18 PM on May 21, 2013
Everyone knows someone who's done something like you're asking and they all did it because they thought it was to their advantage. That's not traditional etiquette, which is what you asked about.
Emily Post and Judith Martin have defined etiquette as "the sensitive awareness of the feelings of others" and "the little social contract we make that we will restrain some of our more provocative impulses in return for living more or less harmoniously in a community." Any friend or family member who seriously feels that their community's harmony has been disrupted by the OP/fiance's perfectly reasonable desire to protect themselves from the potential risk of the financial devastation that would accompany a medical disaster without insurance, while still wishing to carry forward with the lovely celebration they have long been planning, is in fact the one who is refusing to demonstrate a "sensitive awareness of the feelings of others."
In other words, OP: no, your plan is not rude. But others might wind up being rude in response anyway, because sometimes there's no pleasing everyone.
posted by scody at 11:46 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Emily Post and Judith Martin have defined etiquette as "the sensitive awareness of the feelings of others" and "the little social contract we make that we will restrain some of our more provocative impulses in return for living more or less harmoniously in a community." Any friend or family member who seriously feels that their community's harmony has been disrupted by the OP/fiance's perfectly reasonable desire to protect themselves from the potential risk of the financial devastation that would accompany a medical disaster without insurance, while still wishing to carry forward with the lovely celebration they have long been planning, is in fact the one who is refusing to demonstrate a "sensitive awareness of the feelings of others."
In other words, OP: no, your plan is not rude. But others might wind up being rude in response anyway, because sometimes there's no pleasing everyone.
posted by scody at 11:46 PM on May 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Except that, as I've said, I don't think the community's harmony would be disrupted by the OP's desire to, as I would put it, commit to her and her husband's caring for one another in sickness and in health. Nor to celebrate that commitment some months later. She has asked if there is a polite way to do what she wants to do. There is.
It's also not "rude in response" to answer the question as posed.
posted by tel3path at 11:53 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's also not "rude in response" to answer the question as posed.
posted by tel3path at 11:53 PM on May 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think you're being rude in response (though I think your characterization of the situation as something people do because "they [think] it's to their advantage" is unnecessarily belittling). I think any friend or family member of the OP who might take umbrage at an on-paper wedding now and a celebratory wedding later (as several in this thread have said they would do) are the ones who would be demonstrating rudeness in response.
posted by scody at 12:06 AM on May 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by scody at 12:06 AM on May 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
Well, if they corrected the OP they would be rude in response, but that's always the case, isn't it?
I've known couples who were resident in two countries and had a wedding in one followed by a blessing ceremony in the other. Clearly they were bending over backwards to be inclusive and not make anyone have to travel. Nevertheless, the blessing ceremony was a bit of an anticlimax, and that's just the way it was. If I'd been invited to what I thought was a wedding and only later found out it was a blessing ceremony for a wedding that had taken place a month prior, I would have felt just that little bit conned. Not enough to take extreme umbrage and challenge the groom to a duel or anything. Just somewhat manipulated and wondering why they didn't call it a blessing ceremony up front. But in any case, it wouldn't have been my place to say anything. Heck I've ha people be outright offensive - ask for money, ask me to self-cater all my food and drink - and not said anything, and even these things were more or less offensive to me depending on my relationship with the couple (for various reasons I actually didn't mind being asked for money), but in no way would it ever have been my place to say what I thought.
And when I say people do certain things because it's to their advantage, I don't mean to be snarky about it. It's just that every time there's a question about "I want to do X because of reasons, is it ok for me to do x?" or "someone asked me to do x, I feel funny about it, amI just being petty?" X is always something that's to the X-doer's advantage and the reasons are always that X is to my advantage. And people always respond with "they probably want x because it is to their advantage in y ways." Nobody ever asks if it's Ok/proper/nice to do something that goes against their own interests. But the answer has to be "find the most polite way that works best to your advantage" not "it's to your advantage therefore it's polite no matter how you handle it".
In this case I can't see how getting married, keeping it secret for months and then having what everyone thinks is the first wedding, is all that respectful, never mind how feasible it is. The OP isn't left with two choices - that, or live in penury and health deprivation for the rest of their lives. All they have to do is admit to being legally married and not explicitly call the subsequent party a "wedding". Let's face it if the fact of being married were really so irrelevant there'd be no temptation to hide it.
posted by tel3path at 2:09 AM on May 22, 2013
I've known couples who were resident in two countries and had a wedding in one followed by a blessing ceremony in the other. Clearly they were bending over backwards to be inclusive and not make anyone have to travel. Nevertheless, the blessing ceremony was a bit of an anticlimax, and that's just the way it was. If I'd been invited to what I thought was a wedding and only later found out it was a blessing ceremony for a wedding that had taken place a month prior, I would have felt just that little bit conned. Not enough to take extreme umbrage and challenge the groom to a duel or anything. Just somewhat manipulated and wondering why they didn't call it a blessing ceremony up front. But in any case, it wouldn't have been my place to say anything. Heck I've ha people be outright offensive - ask for money, ask me to self-cater all my food and drink - and not said anything, and even these things were more or less offensive to me depending on my relationship with the couple (for various reasons I actually didn't mind being asked for money), but in no way would it ever have been my place to say what I thought.
And when I say people do certain things because it's to their advantage, I don't mean to be snarky about it. It's just that every time there's a question about "I want to do X because of reasons, is it ok for me to do x?" or "someone asked me to do x, I feel funny about it, amI just being petty?" X is always something that's to the X-doer's advantage and the reasons are always that X is to my advantage. And people always respond with "they probably want x because it is to their advantage in y ways." Nobody ever asks if it's Ok/proper/nice to do something that goes against their own interests. But the answer has to be "find the most polite way that works best to your advantage" not "it's to your advantage therefore it's polite no matter how you handle it".
In this case I can't see how getting married, keeping it secret for months and then having what everyone thinks is the first wedding, is all that respectful, never mind how feasible it is. The OP isn't left with two choices - that, or live in penury and health deprivation for the rest of their lives. All they have to do is admit to being legally married and not explicitly call the subsequent party a "wedding". Let's face it if the fact of being married were really so irrelevant there'd be no temptation to hide it.
posted by tel3path at 2:09 AM on May 22, 2013
Mountains and molehills apply. You make whatever arrangements suit you and offer honest invitations to the ceremony or celebration as you see fit. The people who care for you will turn up and celebrate with you. People may ask why there is a delay in which case you tell them. People who care for you will not give a tinkers toss. The people who don't care for you simply don't matter.
posted by BenPens at 3:56 AM on May 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by BenPens at 3:56 AM on May 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: I'm really surprised by all the objections to this. Not only is it totally fine in my book, but as your friend or loved one, I would be so saddened to hear that you went without either insurance or a traditional wedding because you were worried about how it would be seen.
I know quite a few people who have done this, and most have kept it quiet (I found out after the fact or was in the small circle of people who knew.) My response every time was 'good on them for being practical and working as a team to solve a problem.' I felt every bit as happy and excited for each of them, and their wedding ceremonies were every bit as real as they would have been otherwise.
Congratulations and good luck!
posted by punchtothehead at 5:35 AM on May 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
I know quite a few people who have done this, and most have kept it quiet (I found out after the fact or was in the small circle of people who knew.) My response every time was 'good on them for being practical and working as a team to solve a problem.' I felt every bit as happy and excited for each of them, and their wedding ceremonies were every bit as real as they would have been otherwise.
Congratulations and good luck!
posted by punchtothehead at 5:35 AM on May 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
I am doing this, in NYC, for military benefit reasons.
Mostly it's fine, except be prepared that some family members will be insulted if they are not invited to the Actual Legal Ceremony. I did not anticipate this because just signing a piece of paper, and drama ensued.
posted by corb at 5:53 AM on May 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Mostly it's fine, except be prepared that some family members will be insulted if they are not invited to the Actual Legal Ceremony. I did not anticipate this because just signing a piece of paper, and drama ensued.
posted by corb at 5:53 AM on May 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Your case isn't quite the same.
To me, it seems the same. There's the paperwork part, which is important, and then there's the community aspect, which also seems important to the OP.
I've been to a second-local-ceremony-because-the-first-one-was-overseas wedding and it did not feel like an anticlimax to me at all.
See? Very subjective. Basically, you have to figure out who among your guests, if any, will feel cheated that they don't get to watch you "really" get married, how much of a pain in the ass they're going to be about it, and how much weight you want to give their potential reaction as you plan this. (My solution would be to not invite such people at all, but YMMV.) But I nth everyone who says don't lie or obfuscate that you're already legally hitched when you send invites to the public event, because it just creates the potential for more drama.
posted by rtha at 6:11 AM on May 22, 2013
To me, it seems the same. There's the paperwork part, which is important, and then there's the community aspect, which also seems important to the OP.
I've been to a second-local-ceremony-because-the-first-one-was-overseas wedding and it did not feel like an anticlimax to me at all.
See? Very subjective. Basically, you have to figure out who among your guests, if any, will feel cheated that they don't get to watch you "really" get married, how much of a pain in the ass they're going to be about it, and how much weight you want to give their potential reaction as you plan this. (My solution would be to not invite such people at all, but YMMV.) But I nth everyone who says don't lie or obfuscate that you're already legally hitched when you send invites to the public event, because it just creates the potential for more drama.
posted by rtha at 6:11 AM on May 22, 2013
I'm sorry you're already having wedding drama. I'm sorry that insurance in the US is tied to jobs, so that you even have to think about this, on top of everything else.
I understand wanting everyone there: this is your family, your community, your people, your support network, and you want them to witness this huge event in your life. Of course you do!
Your question is an etiquette, so it doesn't matter if a bunch of people say "this is perfectly fine, do whatever you want." That isn't the way etiquette works, and it sounds like that is important to you. (And as you probably know from reading Miss Manners, people will find a way to be offended even if you are being polite.) The rule is, one wedding per marriage.
So here's the thing that's hard about this: A real wedding is one after which the two parties are married to each other. Period. That's what makes it a wedding: the getting-married part. Even though it may feel like dress+aisle+attendants+party=wedding, the reason for all of those things is to accompany the exchange of vows that you are making to each other.
So your etiqutte-approved options are
1. Get married with your dream wedding in September and find a way to pay for insurance between now and then. If COBRA is an option, see if there is a 90-day opt-in period so you can buy it at the end only if it was needed (and don't if it wasn't). That leaves about 30 to 90 days of private, individual insurance to pay for.
2. Get married now, and have a big party later, just don't call it a wedding.
3. Get married with your dream wedding earlier.
posted by orange (sherbet) rabbit at 7:07 AM on May 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I understand wanting everyone there: this is your family, your community, your people, your support network, and you want them to witness this huge event in your life. Of course you do!
Your question is an etiquette, so it doesn't matter if a bunch of people say "this is perfectly fine, do whatever you want." That isn't the way etiquette works, and it sounds like that is important to you. (And as you probably know from reading Miss Manners, people will find a way to be offended even if you are being polite.) The rule is, one wedding per marriage.
So here's the thing that's hard about this: A real wedding is one after which the two parties are married to each other. Period. That's what makes it a wedding: the getting-married part. Even though it may feel like dress+aisle+attendants+party=wedding, the reason for all of those things is to accompany the exchange of vows that you are making to each other.
So your etiqutte-approved options are
1. Get married with your dream wedding in September and find a way to pay for insurance between now and then. If COBRA is an option, see if there is a 90-day opt-in period so you can buy it at the end only if it was needed (and don't if it wasn't). That leaves about 30 to 90 days of private, individual insurance to pay for.
2. Get married now, and have a big party later, just don't call it a wedding.
3. Get married with your dream wedding earlier.
posted by orange (sherbet) rabbit at 7:07 AM on May 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Best answer: It wouldn't surprise me if on some level the objection to having a courthouse wedding in this case is that the ceremonial wedding will be a secular one. Because for many people, what meaning does a secular wedding have if the legal part doesn't apply? I mean, that is actually one of the cool parts about a secular wedding-- there aren't any religious ceremonies or any spiritual tradition and you are grabbing a best friend or Justice of the Peace or the mayor to be the officiant, and then after this ceremony --BAM! -- you are husband and wife and legally bound to each other for the rest of your lives. Whereas with a religious ceremony, it is much easier for believers and friends of the couple to think, "This is the real ceremony that has meaning for our community and/or the couple that makes them husband and wife without which they wouldn't really be married, and the other part that happens immediately afterwards or went on 3 months ago is/was just paperwork and record-keeping demanded by the state."
And honestly, I'd feel it was kind of wonky if someone, outside of legal impediments created by their own backwards states, held a "wedding" without any intention of filling out the legal paperwork to formalize it, before or afterwards.
But I think that if I'm going to hold to one belief about religious ceremonies (that this is the "real" ceremony), then I shouldn't be a religious snob for those with secular ceremonies. If the ceremony itself is the one that has meaning for you, your family, and your community, and the one where you will refer to each other as husband and wife afterwards, then that is the real wedding, regardless of when, for practical reasons, you had to do state-related paperwork.
posted by deanc at 7:13 AM on May 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
And honestly, I'd feel it was kind of wonky if someone, outside of legal impediments created by their own backwards states, held a "wedding" without any intention of filling out the legal paperwork to formalize it, before or afterwards.
But I think that if I'm going to hold to one belief about religious ceremonies (that this is the "real" ceremony), then I shouldn't be a religious snob for those with secular ceremonies. If the ceremony itself is the one that has meaning for you, your family, and your community, and the one where you will refer to each other as husband and wife afterwards, then that is the real wedding, regardless of when, for practical reasons, you had to do state-related paperwork.
posted by deanc at 7:13 AM on May 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Response by poster: Wow, I had no idea this situation was so common. I thought we were alone in a very strange corner, but it turns out a lot of you and your friends have been there too!
Thank you, all of you, for helping me work through this decision in my head and giving me much to think about. To answer a couple of questions people have asked:
1) We're both atheists, so there's no religious ceremony to take into account
2) My insurance doesn't cover domestic partners, only spouses (we looked into this first thing, because it seemed such a neat way to split the difference for the time between now and the fall)
posted by badgermushroomSNAKE at 7:15 AM on May 22, 2013
Thank you, all of you, for helping me work through this decision in my head and giving me much to think about. To answer a couple of questions people have asked:
1) We're both atheists, so there's no religious ceremony to take into account
2) My insurance doesn't cover domestic partners, only spouses (we looked into this first thing, because it seemed such a neat way to split the difference for the time between now and the fall)
posted by badgermushroomSNAKE at 7:15 AM on May 22, 2013
Just another penny for the pond: I don't understand the notion of being offended by this. I'm there to see the "ceremony of commitment" itself -- the expressions of love, the public pronouncements, the broad sharing of the moment, of the new thing. Legal papers are quite something else. However, I will admit that the actual ceremony (whether religious or not) is a big part of the draw -- I guess I feel I somehow participated in The Event (by promising to support the couple? by just getting the excuse to cry and squeeze Partner's hand?), and I can't guarantee that I'd fly across the country for just the big party.... (in fact, I have passed at least once on just such an event.)
posted by acm at 8:05 AM on May 22, 2013
posted by acm at 8:05 AM on May 22, 2013
As a parent, whose daughter is far from marrying age, I would be upset if I weren't invited to BOTH the courthouse and the later big official wedding. You might want to take parental feelings into consideration, if you think your parents would be upset if they found out you were already legally married.
posted by cass at 9:12 AM on May 22, 2013
posted by cass at 9:12 AM on May 22, 2013
That's exactly what we did, just to make out taxes easier by getting married in the state's eyes in the same year we bought a house and holing the ceremony and party for our friends and family the next year.
We sort of wish we hadn't accidentally let it out to Mr Telophase's parents, as his mom had a freakout that she wasn't going to be at what she called her son's actual wedding, so we had to scramble to do something more than just have our ordained friend sign some documents in our presence, and then to broadcast it over Skype so she could watch him read a short ceremony that he'd printed out from the Internet an hour beforehand. And she then later on called my husband and explained to him that she was fine without a big ceremony so if we were holding the ceremony for her benefit, we could cancel it. We attempted to explain that the big ceremony was for our benefit and not hers, but apparently that idea was alien enough to her that she decided that it was my extended family who required the big ceremony, once she understood that we were not going to cancel it even after she told us to. So we just left it there.
Nobody else had any problems with the arrangement, although we're not sure how many of our friends and family actually realized that the formal ceremony wasn't the state-approved transaction.
posted by telophase at 10:13 AM on May 22, 2013
We sort of wish we hadn't accidentally let it out to Mr Telophase's parents, as his mom had a freakout that she wasn't going to be at what she called her son's actual wedding, so we had to scramble to do something more than just have our ordained friend sign some documents in our presence, and then to broadcast it over Skype so she could watch him read a short ceremony that he'd printed out from the Internet an hour beforehand. And she then later on called my husband and explained to him that she was fine without a big ceremony so if we were holding the ceremony for her benefit, we could cancel it. We attempted to explain that the big ceremony was for our benefit and not hers, but apparently that idea was alien enough to her that she decided that it was my extended family who required the big ceremony, once she understood that we were not going to cancel it even after she told us to. So we just left it there.
Nobody else had any problems with the arrangement, although we're not sure how many of our friends and family actually realized that the formal ceremony wasn't the state-approved transaction.
posted by telophase at 10:13 AM on May 22, 2013
I think this thread makes it clear that A) you should go ahead and get legally married now and have a public ceremony later, and B) you shouldn't tell anyone about it because people are jerks about weird things.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 12:06 PM on May 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by no regrets, coyote at 12:06 PM on May 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Man, we did this just because it was easier in some ways. Even my mother doesn't know. It is not a big deal, and I know I sure wouldn't be offended if I found out someone close to me did this. Good grief but people get bent out of shape over some nutty shit.
posted by thebrokedown at 2:02 PM on May 22, 2013
posted by thebrokedown at 2:02 PM on May 22, 2013
We got the news about the insurance rules, a dental procedure that needed doing, and decided to get married that day 30 minutes later. We were lucky to rustle up a witness. If family wants to get offended at that, that's their problem. (Which has been a theme throughout our relationship, as my family turns a lot of my stuff into About Them, so we had a little warning things might go that direction.)
posted by small_ruminant at 2:12 PM on May 22, 2013
posted by small_ruminant at 2:12 PM on May 22, 2013
The fact of your marriage will be a matter of public record, with the date it occurred available to anyone who cares to go down to the courthouse and look, or with some future web service it may show up on the front page of search results for your names.
Trying to keep it secret is nearly planning on creating future family drama.
posted by yohko at 2:48 PM on May 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Trying to keep it secret is nearly planning on creating future family drama.
posted by yohko at 2:48 PM on May 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Trying to keep it secret is nearly planning on creating future family drama.
Like when my mother did some genealogical research about a year after my great-grandmother's death, and found out that the family story that she had "eloped at 16" was actually "shotgun wedding at 17" and that my grandfather was born six months after their actual wedding date, not 1.5 years later as had been thought...
There will be drama now or there will be drama later. I suggest that if there is to be any drama, it is better to have it over with up front. Parents get really, really weird about weddings. I don't know why. In addition to being weird -- accepting, but weirdly serious -- about splitting up the legal and cultural weddings, my own very sane feminist independent not-girly mother stopped speaking to me for a half a day over wedding colors. Seriously, weddings can make parents really, really weird. The relationship with my parents is a good happy one such that I didn't want drama blowing up later, so being up front was the best solution for us. YMMV.
posted by olinerd at 4:13 AM on May 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
Like when my mother did some genealogical research about a year after my great-grandmother's death, and found out that the family story that she had "eloped at 16" was actually "shotgun wedding at 17" and that my grandfather was born six months after their actual wedding date, not 1.5 years later as had been thought...
There will be drama now or there will be drama later. I suggest that if there is to be any drama, it is better to have it over with up front. Parents get really, really weird about weddings. I don't know why. In addition to being weird -- accepting, but weirdly serious -- about splitting up the legal and cultural weddings, my own very sane feminist independent not-girly mother stopped speaking to me for a half a day over wedding colors. Seriously, weddings can make parents really, really weird. The relationship with my parents is a good happy one such that I didn't want drama blowing up later, so being up front was the best solution for us. YMMV.
posted by olinerd at 4:13 AM on May 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
We got married on a hilltop with just ourselves and the wonderful UU minister we'd chosen to marry us. Six weeks later we had a wedding party at which the same minister agreed to marry us again. We asked her to also say that we'd already had the legal ceremony and we were repeating our vows today because it was important to us to include our community of friends and family and ask for their blessings and support. I don't believe anyone got bent out of shape over it and we were able to be more present at both events than if we were trying to pull off an event simultaneously with actually wed-ing. We're older, (a few might say old ;) and it was a second marriage for both of us, if any of that makes a difference.
posted by TruncatedTiller at 1:17 PM on May 23, 2013
posted by TruncatedTiller at 1:17 PM on May 23, 2013
I implied this, but I didn't state it outright, so maybe I should make it explicit: if you are taking the attitude of "we're going to be husband and wife(!) after the wedding!" then no one will blink at the paperwork issue. If, on the other hand, when you confide about this logistical decision you made in terms of, "we've actually be married for 3 months already! tee hee! What you watched was a simulacrum!", this will totally rub people the wrong way.
posted by deanc at 2:39 PM on May 23, 2013
posted by deanc at 2:39 PM on May 23, 2013
Tardy to the party, but in my very international group of friends this is super common. No one cares. When the big wedding actually happens, actual friends are happy to celebrate the union of the couple. Anyone with a big up their butt about it is maybe not close enough to be on the guest list, anyway.
posted by OompaLoompa at 8:03 PM on June 25, 2013
posted by OompaLoompa at 8:03 PM on June 25, 2013
Response by poster: Just checking back in to let everyone know: mission accomplished! We did our paperwork marriage in June, with a very nice small ceremony led by the mayor and attended by my parents and sister, and our big shindig was at the beginning of September and went off beautifully. By the time we had the Official Wedding, most of our close family and friends were aware that we'd done the paperwork already, though we did keep it from a few people who we feared would be overly starchy about it. No one batted an eyelash at "we actually did the paperwork a while ago", and it allowed us to have a wonderful friend "marry" us exactly as we wished at the second ceremony.
I want to thank you all again for your help in getting me through the initial panic. I still can't get over how common this seems to be, and every time I attend a wedding in the future a little part of me is going to wonder whether they're also part of this club.
posted by badgermushroomSNAKE at 4:14 PM on September 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I want to thank you all again for your help in getting me through the initial panic. I still can't get over how common this seems to be, and every time I attend a wedding in the future a little part of me is going to wonder whether they're also part of this club.
posted by badgermushroomSNAKE at 4:14 PM on September 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by amaire at 3:28 PM on May 21, 2013 [11 favorites]