Lily Foussé

The importance of researching wedding evolution comes from its strong presence in cultures globally, as well as my own life. They are such a long lasting tradition. However, what is particularly interesting is their evolution from the colonial times to current day, which is the timeline I will be focusing on. Throughout this paper, I will discuss and argue, in chronological order, how weddings, over time, in Western culture from the 18th century onward, have shifted from being a survival strategy with extreme gendered roles, to how they have become more recently, centered around love and egalitarianism. Weddings are also very fascinating as a concept because, as I will describe throughout this paper, they adapt and accommodate themselves to the state of society - as womanhood and manhood have shifted over time, so have the manners of a wedding. I will begin this paper by discussing the history of the wedding from the colonial time to modern times for background information and knowledge. Then I will argue my case and point of the disappearance of genderedness in weddings in relation to these historical moments. Finally, I will close with a brief counterargument before concluding. 

Another example of the genderedness of marriage that pertains to the 20th century is the role of the wedding invitation. An example of an invitation between a supposed John Smith and the bride-to-be would read as follows; “Mr. and Mrs. John Smith invite you to their wedding…” This signifies, once again, the importance of coverture in this time, where the woman is situated under the control of the male counterpart due to the fact that her identity is placed entirely under the man’s name. Not to mention, if the woman’s name were to be included on the invitation in the same space as the male’s name, it would weaken the image of the man due to the fact that the power would be split among the couple, rather than dominated by the man. 

At the wedding itself, the bride walks down the aisle and the clergyman will say something along the lines of, “who giveth this woman to be married to this man?”, and the father of the bride will take her right hand in the hand of the clergy who, then, gives it to the hand of the groom (10). This kind of wording by the clergyman and the action of passing the bride’s hand from father to husband is very degrading for the woman as she is being passed from being the father’s property, to then being the husband’s property. 

Heading into the late 20th century, there is a vast contrast between the once regimented ritual that a wedding was, to being more complicated than ever before. 

“Today’s weddings are often more complicated: couples are marrying later in life, and for almost 30 percent it’s the second or third trip down the aisle. Their parents, who don’t necessarily foot the bills, may have divorced and remarried. As a result, problems arise that never did before–and old-style etiquette can’t help” (13).

What’s more, men in the late 20th century pick up more active roles in the wedding planning process. They help decide the wedding site, attend engagement parties thrown in their honor, and have their families more involved as well, which in turn means that they share some wedding expenses too (14). In doing this, it shows that weddings were once a purely practical event for men, but they are now allowed to give the event more thought and share their own visions and details for the wedding. This was once predominantly a woman’s role, as they are the ones that are more “detail-oriented” individuals than men. So as seeing that men over time have employed these “detail-oriented” duties more and more, it erases the feminine connotation that is associated with it. 

All of this being said, the slow disintegration of gender roles in marriage and wedding rituals is not a linear progression. American society has taken impressive steps to progress past the strict rules of the wedding as they once were in the 18th and 19th century. However, society still perpetuates themes of gender inequality in wedding rituals. A prominent and modern example of gender inequality in action is the expectation of the male marriage proposal. This moment for men in their lifetime is “scripted as a masculine moment…men are expected to play the active role, and women to be passive and reactive” (15). This is a very high pressure to experience as a man, especially as only a small percentage of women propose to their male counterparts (16). It is possible for women to play a more active role in this by having a mutual agreement prior to the proposal that they both want to be married, but it seems that from the woman’s perspective, they want men “to let them know that they have been chosen and are worthy of their partner’s love and commitment” (17). There is not necessarily anything wrong with sticking to the patriarchal tradition of the proposal, in fact, many gendered expectations are still appreciated for their romantic efforts. However it is interesting to note how many of the wedding traditions have changed overtime, but some still remain intact. 

Similarly, another patriarchal tradition that has persisted through time is the woman’s changing of her last name upon marriage. The idea of this tradition is that the changing of the name indicates that women and their children belong to men in a hierarchical order in the way that they belonged to men in previous centuries (18). There are cases in which this tradition does not have to do with a hierarchical order, but something as simple as wanting to display nuclear family values, wanting to maintain “wife identity”, or maybe even because a spouse prefers the other spouse’s last name. In either case, a woman has the decision to choose whether she may keep or drop her last name, and should not be judged for her final verdict. But, because this societal standard still remains a common practice among married people, if a woman chooses to keep her own last name, she may encounter negative reactions from friends or family, extending to the point where her marital commitment may be questioned in unwanted settings (19). 

With the wide variety of culture and religion integrated in today’s Western society, it is very hard to generalize wedding standards and rituals as everyone has a slightly varied idea of what their special day should look like. Being able to say that, however, really does emphasize that the wedding really is no longer what it used to be. If I am able to choose not only who I get to marry, but have autonomy over all the specificities of my marriage without the say of my parents or extended family, I know that the times have changed. There definitely will remain cultural and religious implications of marriage that keep some hierarchical and patriarchal traditions. Regardless, the wedding rituals of today’s Western cultures are ultimately defined by the individual, and no longer the institution.