DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Manners and Brimstone
HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Weddings
*****************************************************
#Post#: 82150--------------------------------------------------
Why lie?
By: oogyda Date: October 21, 2025, 3:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here's the story: Sam is an enlisted person in the US military.
Jazz is a civilian. They met and fell in love and were married
in a very small (only her father, father's SO and two of her
sisters were in attendance.) ceremony. The weekend was
celebrated and posted to social media as an engagement. They
got married specifically to make sure she is included in the
future of his military career, mostly by being included in his
transfer orders (so the military will pay for moving her stuff
and other benefits)
They are actively lying about their marital status to some
family because they "want to have the Big White Wedding" later.
I'm not sure I see the point of lying about it. They could
still do the fake wedding and have the reception.
Right? What am I missing?
#Post#: 82151--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: Aleko Date: October 22, 2025, 1:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A lot of people don’t consider a delayed reception as equivalent
to a wedding. My guess would be that they are afraid if they
openly made known that they had got married with only four
witnesses and would have a big white reception later, these
people (a) would get in a huff that they hadn’t been invited to
the wedding, and (b) would not consider that an invitation just
to a reception calls for wedding presents.
The four people who were at their real wedding must be complicit
in the fiction they have put out on social media, otherwise the
lie would certainly come out and cause major grief. They
presumably know the family members concerned and agree that this
is a reasonable worry, or they surely wouldn’t be going along
with it?
#Post#: 82153--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: Gellchom Date: October 22, 2025, 4:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I know this kind of thing bothers many people, but not me.
There is a big range of situations where there is more than one
wedding, and they are just so different.
- Couple can't decide whether to get married in her town or his,
so they have two big "public" (not in the sense that all are
invited, just as opposed to private and unannounced) weddings,
but they hold themselves out as married after the first one.
- Couple had a "public" wedding of some kind with guests and
then decides that due to circumstances they were unable to have
as big or as nice a wedding as they'd dreamed, so just a year or
two later, they have another one (even if they call it a "vow
renewal").
These and like situations strike me as way off. At best,
another ceremony would seem silly, as if the first vows were
meaningless. And that's whether or not the first or the second
ceremony was the "official" one (i.e., recognized by the
government). But they seem very different to me from situations
like these:
- Wedding is planned for later, but one or both are about to be
deployed and in case of tragedy, they want to be sure the
survivor gets rights (this is what my aunt and uncle did during
WWII: secretly married before he was deployed and had the modest
wedding they had planned anyway after he returned).
- Wedding is planned for later, but a medical crisis suddenly
arose, and for reasons such as insurance, survivor benefits, and
establishment as status as Family for hospital visitation, etc.,
they marry privately immediately.
- Wedding is planned for later, but a parent is about to die, so
they have a private bedside ceremony and then continue with the
wedding as planned later. (We have friends who did this; it was
very touching. It was not a secret, and the dying mother did
manage to make it to the BWW a couple of months later after all,
and died shortly after. Everyone was very happy for them to
have done it this way.)
- There are still countries where same-sex (or sometimes
different-religion couples) cannot officially marry, although
their marriages performed elsewhere are recognized as valid.
This was the case in the various US states for a few years, I'm
sure you recall. So couples go to a jurisdiction where they can
marry officially, either before or after a wedding with their
family and friends back in their community, rather than dragging
everyone to the other location. Surely no one begrudges them or
their families that.
And then there are situations such as my husband has run into
several times as a clergyman. Say you want to get married in a
state where the officiant you want is not licensed. You can pay
a few hundred dollars for a one-time permit, or you can just go
to City Hall a few days before or after the wedding and do a
private civil ceremony. Or if you want to get married in some
other country where it's complicated. This happens a LOT,
believe me. We almost did it ourselves, when we learned that
Wisconsin, where our wedding was to be, required both people
showing up in person for the license three weeks in advance; we
were all set to have a City Hall marriage in Boston, where we
lived, first until we learned that for $30 Wisconsin would waive
the three week requirement (WTF? Then why require it? But I
digress). If you've been to many weddings, I bet you have been
to at least one such, and you never knew it. And why would you
care?
We have seen several people saying that what makes the
difference to them is whether the couple is open about it or
keeps it a secret; they feel like it's fraudulent not to tell
and that they don't like that they are not seeing the moment
when the couple is actually wed. I'm not sure why that seems so
important or why it's anyone else's business, but then, previous
generations felt the same way about public display of a bloody
sheet after the wedding night! And at least in the US, you
aren't seeing The Moment anyway -- the marriage becomes official
for legal purposes not when they say "I do,' but when the
officiant signs and files the license. If The Moment for you is
the "I do" before community and/or God, then you're seeing it
anyway, no matter when the couple did the legal bona fides.
And in many countries, including, I believe, the UK, you must
have a civil marriage at a government office in addition to any
other kind of wedding you have. I don't think that makes the
wedding a sham or a lie or anything else.
So for me, I roll my eyes at people who just want to have things
more than one way -- like both destination wedding and BWW at
home, or any kind of multiple "public" weddings for more
attention. But for situations like the ones above, I honestly
don't think it's anyone else's business whether the government
requirements were met at the same time as The Wedding.
#Post#: 82154--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: Hmmm Date: October 22, 2025, 10:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For me, it depends on the timeframe. Given that they had an
extremely small event, I have no issues that they are planning
their ceremony for the future. Part will depend on how long they
go on with the pretense.
For example, my niece and husband did a civil ceremony to allow
her to relocate with him to another country for work. They had
already been living together for 3 years so really no difference
in their daily lives. When they returned to the US a year later
they had the BWW. (my sister would have been heartbroken if she
hadn't been able to have one for her only daughter and his mom
was pretty much the same).
Even 40 years ago, I had a highschool friend who was in the
midst of planning her wedding for about 6 months in the future.
But he got deployment orders and he wanted her to be his
beneficiary while gone so they went ahead and got married but
still considered themselves engaged. The planned wedding was
pushed to 9 months out if I remember correctly, but I doubt only
a few of us new about the prior civil ceremony.
My only times I'd look sideways at the BWW is when a couple has
been living together for 10 years, have 4 kids together and then
suddenly decide they want a BWW.
#Post#: 82155--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: Aleko Date: October 22, 2025, 10:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]And in many countries, including, I believe, the UK, you
must have a civil marriage at a government office in addition to
any other kind of wedding you have.[/quote]
Not quite true in the UK. Here in England and Wales, clergy of
several major religions - eg Church of Engkand, Judaism,
Quakerism - who perform marriages in a registered place of
worship are also licensed to complete the civil marriage forms,
so the religious ceremony is also a civil ceremony. And for
weddings of some other faiths - e.g. Sikh, Muslim - provided the
wedding takes place in a building registered for marriages a
registrar can attend and do the civil marriage paperwork.
And even if you do need an actual civil marriage ceremony in
addition to whatever religious rite you are having (either
because your religion is not something recognised by the civil
authorities, or it isn’t taking place in an authorised
building), you can arrange for a registrar to perform it in any
place licensed for marriages.
#Post#: 82156--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: lowspark Date: October 22, 2025, 10:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm curious as to how you know about this, assuming that you are
not either Sam, Jazz, or one of the other four people in
attendance at the ceremony.
If you are not, then the secret's out anyway, right?
If you are, then I'm guessing that you are not comfortable with
keeping this secret.
If this IS the case, I'm not sure how obligated you are to
comply, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what good would come
if you didn't.
I agree with what gellchom said, because the purpose of the
first ceremony was just to legalize the marriage for the purpose
of military benefit, it's completely understandable and
practical. I don't think most people would care.
To be honest, when a couple does do multiple ceremonies or
celebrations for a wedding, as their friend or family, what I
need to evaluate is how I feel about the couple and how
supportive I wish to be. In the grand scheme of things, if they
are people I care about, I'm going to just go with the flow and
attend as best I can. If I find myself being so annoyed at the
mechanics, it's probably because I'm not super close or have a
real affinity for them.
So to answer the original question, i.e., the point of lying
about it, I don't see much point.
But I can understand that Sam and Jazz do.
#Post#: 82157--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: oogyda Date: October 22, 2025, 1:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=lowspark link=topic=2647.msg82156#msg82156
date=1761147718]
I'm curious as to how you know about this, assuming that you are
not either Sam, Jazz, or one of the other four people in
attendance at the ceremony.
If you are not, then the secret's out anyway, right?
If you are, then I'm guessing that you are not comfortable with
keeping this secret.
If this IS the case, I'm not sure how obligated you are to
comply, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what good would come
if you didn't.
[/quote]
One of the sisters that was in attendance is my
granddaughter-in-law. I don't know why she told us (her DH's
family), but we know both Sam and Jazz to varying extents as
Jazz lived with sis while my grandson was deployed and Sam
eventually moved in, too. I"ve spent time with them all,
including a week where everyone was ill and they needed help
with the kids (my great-grandchildren).
I guess the secret IS out. I don't know who all might know, but
someone in Sam's family asked a question about it, and she lied
to them.
I am completely comfortable keeping the secret because it
doesn't matter one way or another to me and I get it with the
military aspect. I know that revealing the truth would cause
upheaval and hard feelings and, as an in-law, I wouldn't want to
do that.
#Post#: 82158--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why lie?
By: Gellchom Date: October 23, 2025, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think that plenty of couples who had planned weddings for 2020
and had to postpone them for a couple of years went ahead and
got officially married and then had the BWW or whatever they
were planning anyway when they could. After all, no one knew
how long it would be, and they needed to get on with some
important things, sometimes including starting their family. It
would seem cruel and unnecessary to declare that they couldn't
then still have their wedding with their family and friends,
kind of like when same sex couples had to go somewhere for their
"legal" wedding.
Everyone is entitled to feel how they do. For me, it comes down
whether it is just a matter of separating the legal formalities
from the social/family life cycle event, which doesn't bother me
at all, secret or not (if anything I'd probably not mention it,
especially not something like the city hall visit a few days
before or after the BWW I described above) or if it's an attempt
to maximize attention or have your cake and eat it too (like
having a substantial destination wedding with guests and a BWW
at home as well -- even if they call it a reception or
something, it still feels to me like wanting it both ways) which
feels to me like too much focus on the wedding, not enough focus
on the marriage.
*****************************************************