A Newsweek article addresses a change from the virginal bride to a more "independent," sexy trend. I don't claim to know enough about bridal trends to really assess that aspect of the article. This article explores how women are choosing more skin-baring dresses with sheer panels, low fronts and backs, and sexy photo shoots as gifts for the groom, all of which are contrasted against the former traditions that revolved around purity and innocent femininity. The majority of the piece focuses on just evaluating factors that may have influenced the changes (premarital sex, cohabitation, etc.), but I found the suddenly-judgmental conclusion of the article more bothersome.
While most sociologists agree that women admitting to lust and wanting to be sexually empowered is a good thing, they see a problem with making exhibitionism the centerpiece of the wedding ceremony: it might crowd out other aspects of the marriage. "You're highlighting what should just be a piece of the relationship," says Stephanie Coontz, a social historian and the author of Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage, which looks at how recent the idea of marrying for love is. "I worry that it can take over. The message you're sending about your appearance can override other conversations you should be having about your future."
Now let it just be said that I don't really "get" the wedding hoop-la myself anyhow. Out of context, this might seem fairly benign, but within the larger piece it's referring more so to women's choice to a) wear what they want at their wedding and b) take sexy photos for their fiancees/husbands. In other words, it reverts back to the idea of any display of female sexuality, however discrete (backless dresses) or private (photos for a significant other), is a shameful exhibition, a violation of some sacred female modesty.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Virginal to Vampy: Shifts in Bridal Trends Indicates ... Immoral Sexual Exhibitionism?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14342
The counterargument, I suppose, would be to question whether dressing in a 'vampy' manner for an event like a wedding is automatically the bride's free choice. I know women who wear more revealing clothing and seem fully comfortable in it, and others who seem to feel they have to dress that way because it's expected among their peers or the only way to attract/keep a man.
Obnoxious trend, but not surprising. Just another iteration of the virgin/whore binary. If you aren't one, then you must be the other. I'm going to hope it's more media-invented, since every wedding I've ever been to has been somewhere in the middle, firmly in the bride's comfort zone. But it's definitely something to be aware of.
"The message you're sending about your appearance can override other conversations you should be having about your future."
Because of course, the wedding day is the time to sit and talk about finances, children, career, etc.
I cater a lot of weddings, and exhibitionism is very much a part of some weddings. But not necessarily of flesh - of the image of wealth and prosperity, perfect happiness, etc.
It might be the way I market my business or the fact that I live in a huge city with diverse population but in the real world there are also a LOT of women who don't do the white wedding dress at all - opting for blue dresses ("it's my favorite color and I look good in it damnit!"), red (Chinese wedding) or, the most beautiful, cream and jewel tones at a Mexican-Indian wedding. Or, oh my god, some women **don't even wear dresses**!!!
If you're interested in this I really recommend White Weddings: Romancing Heterosexuality in Popular Culture by Chrys Ingraham.
I guess it's time for nude weddings.
I'd rather be Jessica Rabbit than Cinderella any day, at least she wasn't ashamed of her sexuality. But I'm glad that the article mentions a wedding as being a PART of the relationship versus the opposite. There's so much blatant consumerism that goes into that industry.