There are two main questions I'm going to address in this blog entry. The first is, can ministers ordained online solemnize legal marriages in Pennsylvania, and the second is, can you get legally get married with a self-uniting license in Pennsylvania if you are not of the Quaker or Baha'i faith?
Can ministers ordained online solemnize legal marriages?
They can and they have in the state of Pennsylvania, although there is disagreement among the county courts concerning the legality of such marriages; no cases have gone before the state supreme court, and the state itself has not taken a clear stand on the issue. A woman in York County wanted to have her marriage annulled on the grounds that she and her husband were married by a Universal Life Church Monastery minister; the judge presiding over the case agreed that her marriage was invalid because Pennsylvania state law requires ministers to be "of any regularly established church or congregation," and he did not think a minister who did not conduct or attend services at a physical church and did not have a congregation met this requirement.
However, a couple in Bucks County, realizing this could set dangerous precedent for thousands of couples across the state, requested that the Bucks County court legally recognize the validity of their marriage, which had also been solemnized by a Universal Life Church Monastery member. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued their case before the court, and the Bucks County judge declared the marriage valid.
The crux of the ACLU's argument was that the court does not have the right to determine what legitimizes a minister; only the church with which a minister is affiliated can do that. Furthermore, the Universal Life Church Monastery is indeed a real church; it has a belief system and has tax-exempt status. The ACLU also made the point that limiting the definition of "church" to mean only a religious structure would bar all itinerant ministers from performing wedding ceremonies; Jesuit priests teaching at universities, retired ministers, and other itinerant pastors who now commonly solemnize marriages would not be allowed to do so.
The ACLU also sought to have a marriage that had been solemnized by an itinerant Universal Life Church Monastery minister in Montgomery County and a marriage that had been solemnized by an itinerant Jesuit order of the Roman Catholic Church minister in Philadelphia County validated. It was successful in both cases.
Unfortunately, since there is no definitive declaration on the matter by the state legislature or, as yet, the state supreme court, each county is allowed to decide the matter.
Can you get married with a self-uniting license if you are not a member of the Religious Society of Friends (a Quaker) or of the Baha'i faith (or other faith without traditional established clergy)?
Yes, you absolutely can. However, some counties will not issue this license and others will ask for proof of membership in one of the above faith-based organizations before issuing this license. In 2007, a federal judge issued a restraining order preventing the Allegheny County register of wills from denying such a license to a couple unconnected with such a faith-based organization, and many counties have always granted the license with no questions asked. Although there has been no official ruling on the matter, precedent would seem to be in your favor should you choose to legally challenge counties engaging in discriminatory practices, but it is probably easier to pick your license up in a county that does not care about your religious affiliation. If you want to get this kind of license, be sure to ask for it at the very beginning of the application process; I don't know why, but that seems to be a common requirement.
Links:
The ACLU complaint filings -
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/ONeillfinalcomplaint.pdf
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:NbE4X8ekGvwJ:www.aclupa.org/downloads/Hancockfinalcomplaint.doc+In+re+Marriage+of+Ryan+and+Melanie+Hancock&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/GoldbergerDurbincomplaint.pdf
An ACLU newsletter article (page 12) confirming the legal victories -
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/2008LegalDocket.pdf
An article about the Bucks County case -
http://blogs.phillyburbs.com/news/bcct/bucks-judge-upholds-marriage-by-online-minister-2/
An article about the self-uniting license questioning challenge -
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07271/821194-85.stm
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
The Lie of Wedding "Averages"
Quite often we'll hear quotes for the average wedding cost. The figures usually seem to fall somewhere between twenty and thirty thousand dollars, and they get thrown into the public forum by all manner of newspaper and magazine journalists and television fluff-news reporters. Why is it that I've never seen any of these commentators challenge the truth of these figures?
Occasionally, as in this article on CNN Money, the source of the average will be given. However, this is rare.
Those crazy "averages" aren't averages at all. They're based on wedding-industry figures - which means the data used is based on traditional wedding purchases and vendor sales figures. In the article linked above, the figure was provided by the Conde Nast Bridal Infobank; Conde Nast publishes Bride, Modern Bride, and Elegant Bride, and owns Brides.com.
Industry wedding averages won't reflect brides and grooms who do a lot of the work themselves, use nontraditional items or use items in nontraditional ways, and use vendors who aren't members of industry associations.
They also average in the costs of a whole lot of junk with which most couples don't even bother. This ridiculous website averages in [edit 07/18/10: The website changed its content, so I altered this paragraph and added the paragraph following it to bring my content up to date and to address what I believe is a fallacy of logic on the part of Cost of Wedding] "facial hair service," "massage," and "travel for guests." Now, some people do opt for professional grooming services before their weddings, but enough to justify including the costs in a wedding average? And it's the rare couple who can afford to spring for their guests' transportation. [Edit 09/17/11: Wow. The site has changed its language once again. Now it no longer refers to "facial hair service," "massage," and "travel for guests." It does however (and I've no idea if this was factored in originally) average in pedicure costs and the costs of a DJ and a band. That's right, a DJ and a band, not a DJ or a band.]
Although Cost of Wedding does make a point of saying it uses the figures of "other brides and grooms" and "not wedding vendor prices," this implication of research integrity is misleading. So this company isn't creating imaginary couples, so what? Unless someone alleged that it was, this is a classic straw man argument. Unless it is averaging in nontraditional purchases and purchases made at non-industry-related outlets, it isn't using figures that can truly reflect average wedding spending.
The bottom of the "About Wedding Cost" page of the preceding website says, "Cost of wedding is owned and operated by The Wedding Report, Inc. a provider of wedding statistics and wedding market research for the wedding industry. For more information about The Wedding Report, Inc. visit www.theweddingreport.com." Big shocker there, huh?
[Edit 07/18/10: The following three paragraphs are also new material.] Read about the Cost of Wedding/Wedding Report methodology, and you'll find that Cost of Wedding, at least, does not use a mean (discussed in the below update of 05/11/10). However, it collects data on "over 100 products and services" and uses a "proprietary formula to calculate estimates and growth rates for each item, for each market." It then uses a "weighted demand average" in determining average cost. The concept of weighted demand is a good one, but we have no idea how this company assigns weight. The Wedding Report goes on to say that its methodology "takes into account all items that a market may purchase."
How is this an improvement on a standard mean? In fact, "all items a market may purchase" doesn't even conceptually resemble "all items a market is likely to purchase." Furthermore, as alluded to above, there is much room for debate concerning what products and services should be defined as wedding expenses. Should an indulgence like a massage, popular though it may be, be considered a wedding expense? If a stressed-out employee splurges on such a service, he or she is unlikely to be able to call it a business expense.
When a business makes its methodology public, the immediate impression we're left with is certainly that of the company's transparency. But it isn't possible to use an undisclosed "proprietary formula" and have true transparency. That's like giving someone a recipe with "secret sauce" listed as an ingredient. Without knowing what goes into the secret sauce, the cook doesn't really know what goes into the dish.
Update 05/11/10: I have recently come across another criticism, pointed out by more than one writer before me, of the mythical wedding average. That is, that a wedding average is often a mean - the total after the costs of multiple weddings are added together and then divided by the number of weddings. The figure you're left with isn't representative of what most people spend on their weddings at all (that would be the median), because even one really expensive wedding will skew the total upward. And if you're thinking that an inexpensive wedding could skew the figure downward as well, thus nullifying the effect of an expensive wedding, remember how unlikely it is that the items used in a low-budget wedding conform to the neat industry categories reflected or are purchased at standard industry outlets. In other words, really low-budget weddings are unlikely to be reflected in such averages, while really high-budget weddings are. Therefore, the figure skewing will naturally trend upward.
Update 07/20/10: A more streamlined version of this entry was chosen as a Shine "Editor's Pick" for the Love & Sex page.
Occasionally, as in this article on CNN Money, the source of the average will be given. However, this is rare.
Those crazy "averages" aren't averages at all. They're based on wedding-industry figures - which means the data used is based on traditional wedding purchases and vendor sales figures. In the article linked above, the figure was provided by the Conde Nast Bridal Infobank; Conde Nast publishes Bride, Modern Bride, and Elegant Bride, and owns Brides.com.
Industry wedding averages won't reflect brides and grooms who do a lot of the work themselves, use nontraditional items or use items in nontraditional ways, and use vendors who aren't members of industry associations.
They also average in the costs of a whole lot of junk with which most couples don't even bother. This ridiculous website averages in [edit 07/18/10: The website changed its content, so I altered this paragraph and added the paragraph following it to bring my content up to date and to address what I believe is a fallacy of logic on the part of Cost of Wedding] "facial hair service," "massage," and "travel for guests." Now, some people do opt for professional grooming services before their weddings, but enough to justify including the costs in a wedding average? And it's the rare couple who can afford to spring for their guests' transportation. [Edit 09/17/11: Wow. The site has changed its language once again. Now it no longer refers to "facial hair service," "massage," and "travel for guests." It does however (and I've no idea if this was factored in originally) average in pedicure costs and the costs of a DJ and a band. That's right, a DJ and a band, not a DJ or a band.]
Although Cost of Wedding does make a point of saying it uses the figures of "other brides and grooms" and "not wedding vendor prices," this implication of research integrity is misleading. So this company isn't creating imaginary couples, so what? Unless someone alleged that it was, this is a classic straw man argument. Unless it is averaging in nontraditional purchases and purchases made at non-industry-related outlets, it isn't using figures that can truly reflect average wedding spending.
The bottom of the "About Wedding Cost" page of the preceding website says, "Cost of wedding is owned and operated by The Wedding Report, Inc. a provider of wedding statistics and wedding market research for the wedding industry. For more information about The Wedding Report, Inc. visit www.theweddingreport.com." Big shocker there, huh?
[Edit 07/18/10: The following three paragraphs are also new material.] Read about the Cost of Wedding/Wedding Report methodology, and you'll find that Cost of Wedding, at least, does not use a mean (discussed in the below update of 05/11/10). However, it collects data on "over 100 products and services" and uses a "proprietary formula to calculate estimates and growth rates for each item, for each market." It then uses a "weighted demand average" in determining average cost. The concept of weighted demand is a good one, but we have no idea how this company assigns weight. The Wedding Report goes on to say that its methodology "takes into account all items that a market may purchase."
How is this an improvement on a standard mean? In fact, "all items a market may purchase" doesn't even conceptually resemble "all items a market is likely to purchase." Furthermore, as alluded to above, there is much room for debate concerning what products and services should be defined as wedding expenses. Should an indulgence like a massage, popular though it may be, be considered a wedding expense? If a stressed-out employee splurges on such a service, he or she is unlikely to be able to call it a business expense.
When a business makes its methodology public, the immediate impression we're left with is certainly that of the company's transparency. But it isn't possible to use an undisclosed "proprietary formula" and have true transparency. That's like giving someone a recipe with "secret sauce" listed as an ingredient. Without knowing what goes into the secret sauce, the cook doesn't really know what goes into the dish.
Update 05/11/10: I have recently come across another criticism, pointed out by more than one writer before me, of the mythical wedding average. That is, that a wedding average is often a mean - the total after the costs of multiple weddings are added together and then divided by the number of weddings. The figure you're left with isn't representative of what most people spend on their weddings at all (that would be the median), because even one really expensive wedding will skew the total upward. And if you're thinking that an inexpensive wedding could skew the figure downward as well, thus nullifying the effect of an expensive wedding, remember how unlikely it is that the items used in a low-budget wedding conform to the neat industry categories reflected or are purchased at standard industry outlets. In other words, really low-budget weddings are unlikely to be reflected in such averages, while really high-budget weddings are. Therefore, the figure skewing will naturally trend upward.
Update 07/20/10: A more streamlined version of this entry was chosen as a Shine "Editor's Pick" for the Love & Sex page.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Submission Guidelines and New Features
If you've pulled off a fantastic day with a small budget, please consider submitting your wedding to be profiled. Since small is a relative term, there is no specific budget cutoff. It's expected that even the most economical reception for 500 will cost more than one for 10 or 20.
If you'd like to submit your wedding, simply email me (the link is on my profile page) with the details of your wedding and some photos (attachments are fine, as are links to sites like Flickr) you'll allow me to reproduce on the site. I'd love to hear what you loved about your wedding, as well as any money-saving measures you used. Feel free to include your budget, but don't feel pressured to do so.
I obviously can't pay for submissions (I know of no wedding bloggers who do), but you will be doing a public service by showing off your big day. You'll be inspiring and encouraging couples who might be hard pressed to find your kind of inspiration and encouragement elsewhere.
Now, on to other business. I've decided to add a couple of new features to the blog. In addition to posting wedding profiles, I'll be happy to spend some time on the blog responding to reader email, and I'll also be taking a little time each week to discuss in depth the pros and cons of different money saving ideas. [Edit 02/26/10: Clearly, I have not managed to do this. I will update the blog on occasion, but since I'm not aware of a readership, I'm not pushing myself to do so on any regular timetable.] What should you be aware of if you're thinking of cutting out professional photography? What are your options when serving alcohol?
These articles will largely be judgment free. I'll simply take an issue and try to explore it thoroughly. I won't presume that something is better because it is more inexpensive, and I won't presume that something is unacceptable because it might be considered tacky by others.
I believe that the only things genuinely tacky in the world of weddings are things that are rude. Making your guests write their own thank-you notes at your shower? Tacky. Unconventional choice of colors or materials? Not tacky. Sometimes these articles might deal with what could be considered tacky, but only when I'm using tacky as a synonym for rude.
I hope you enjoy the blog, and please, remember to submit and/or encourage others to do so! Thanks!
If you'd like to submit your wedding, simply email me (the link is on my profile page) with the details of your wedding and some photos (attachments are fine, as are links to sites like Flickr) you'll allow me to reproduce on the site. I'd love to hear what you loved about your wedding, as well as any money-saving measures you used. Feel free to include your budget, but don't feel pressured to do so.
I obviously can't pay for submissions (I know of no wedding bloggers who do), but you will be doing a public service by showing off your big day. You'll be inspiring and encouraging couples who might be hard pressed to find your kind of inspiration and encouragement elsewhere.
Now, on to other business. I've decided to add a couple of new features to the blog. In addition to posting wedding profiles, I'll be happy to spend some time on the blog responding to reader email, and I'll also be taking a little time each week to discuss in depth the pros and cons of different money saving ideas. [Edit 02/26/10: Clearly, I have not managed to do this. I will update the blog on occasion, but since I'm not aware of a readership, I'm not pushing myself to do so on any regular timetable.] What should you be aware of if you're thinking of cutting out professional photography? What are your options when serving alcohol?
These articles will largely be judgment free. I'll simply take an issue and try to explore it thoroughly. I won't presume that something is better because it is more inexpensive, and I won't presume that something is unacceptable because it might be considered tacky by others.
I believe that the only things genuinely tacky in the world of weddings are things that are rude. Making your guests write their own thank-you notes at your shower? Tacky. Unconventional choice of colors or materials? Not tacky. Sometimes these articles might deal with what could be considered tacky, but only when I'm using tacky as a synonym for rude.
I hope you enjoy the blog, and please, remember to submit and/or encourage others to do so! Thanks!
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
As Promised
I promised to put up some photos of our wedding, so here they are. But I also have an announcement! I'll be posting photos and information about someone who isn't me very, very soon! [Edit 10/07/09: The post is up, but since I worked on the draft before I posted this, it's showing up as having been posted first. Just scroll down.] And I'd love to post wedding blogs about lots and lots of people who aren't me, so please submit and/or spread the word to friends who might like to submit. I'll be ever so grateful.
A little background:
Different parts of our wedding took place on three separate occasions; we had our sand ceremony one evening, we said our vows and exchanged our rings a couple of weeks after that, and we made everything legal a bit later still.
My stepdaughter lives across the country and we really wanted her to be with us the day we said our vows, but coordinating that just wasn't possible. Her visit with us was about two weeks before, so we did our sand ceremony with the kids early and displayed our vase and pictures on the day we exchanged rings.
We also ran into a bit of a problem getting our paperwork together and ended up unable to get our marriage license on time. Thank goodness we'd already decided to get a self-uniting license; not having an officiant allowed us to simply quietly tell our families what had happened and go on with plans as if nothing had. We did tidy up the legal part a little later. And we still got the self-uniting license; actually doing so seemed to add some continuity to the whole process.
We said our vows at the beautiful Peace Valley Park in New Britain Township, Pennsylvania.
For our reception, we grilled steaks and cooked baked potatoes in the coals of the grills. We had a lot of wind and rain that day, but that didn't keep us from doing anything!
We also served shrimp, rolls, and salad. We weren't allowed to have alcohol at the park, so after the cake cutting, we had everyone back to the apartment for drinks. No one thought to take pictures of that, which is a shame. We had so much fun just hanging out with our loved ones.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we made the invitations ourselves, but not from a kit. Here's how they turned out:
I also made the wedding cake:
I hope you liked the photos, and I can't wait to see yours!
A little background:
Different parts of our wedding took place on three separate occasions; we had our sand ceremony one evening, we said our vows and exchanged our rings a couple of weeks after that, and we made everything legal a bit later still.
My stepdaughter lives across the country and we really wanted her to be with us the day we said our vows, but coordinating that just wasn't possible. Her visit with us was about two weeks before, so we did our sand ceremony with the kids early and displayed our vase and pictures on the day we exchanged rings.
We also ran into a bit of a problem getting our paperwork together and ended up unable to get our marriage license on time. Thank goodness we'd already decided to get a self-uniting license; not having an officiant allowed us to simply quietly tell our families what had happened and go on with plans as if nothing had. We did tidy up the legal part a little later. And we still got the self-uniting license; actually doing so seemed to add some continuity to the whole process.
We said our vows at the beautiful Peace Valley Park in New Britain Township, Pennsylvania.
For our reception, we grilled steaks and cooked baked potatoes in the coals of the grills. We had a lot of wind and rain that day, but that didn't keep us from doing anything!
We also served shrimp, rolls, and salad. We weren't allowed to have alcohol at the park, so after the cake cutting, we had everyone back to the apartment for drinks. No one thought to take pictures of that, which is a shame. We had so much fun just hanging out with our loved ones.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we made the invitations ourselves, but not from a kit. Here's how they turned out:
I also made the wedding cake:
I hope you liked the photos, and I can't wait to see yours!
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Sage and Jon's Beautiful Winter Solstice Wedding
While browsing Flickr, I came across this gorgeous 2002 Winter Solstice wedding. I contacted the lovely Sage, and she generously agreed to let me profile it here on True to You [Edit 12/30/09: now Really Sweet].
Sage tells me that at first she tried to be "one of those blushing brides with the huge weddings and the fancy dinners," but that planning that kind of wedding just didn't feel right. She and Jon, her husband, gave themselves a month to plan the wedding and it was the right decision for them.
I love the bride's holly wreath:
Sage and her husband are avid readers, and they got married in their library. They chose a passage from The Prophet as their reading. So beautiful.
I love the bridal ensemble, the way it's both traditional and nontraditional at the very same time. And the groom's suit is really sharp:
And this is just amazingly sweet:
Sage says that she's really frugal, and continues, ". . . my wedding was no different. My husband's wedding suit is now used for all weddings and funerals - the flowers were plastic instead of real, so our house is beautifully decorated every winter."
Perhaps the coolest thing about this wedding was how Sage and Jon handled their reception. They had a small guest list for the actual ceremony, but hosted an all-day open house. I cannot express how dazzled I am by that idea.
A big thanks to Sage for letting me profile the wedding! Any of you readers who have gotten married at home (your own or the home of someone else) might want to check out the Flickr group Sage moderates. It has lots of gorgeous photos.
Sage tells me that at first she tried to be "one of those blushing brides with the huge weddings and the fancy dinners," but that planning that kind of wedding just didn't feel right. She and Jon, her husband, gave themselves a month to plan the wedding and it was the right decision for them.
I love the bride's holly wreath:
Sage and her husband are avid readers, and they got married in their library. They chose a passage from The Prophet as their reading. So beautiful.
I love the bridal ensemble, the way it's both traditional and nontraditional at the very same time. And the groom's suit is really sharp:
And this is just amazingly sweet:
Sage says that she's really frugal, and continues, ". . . my wedding was no different. My husband's wedding suit is now used for all weddings and funerals - the flowers were plastic instead of real, so our house is beautifully decorated every winter."
Perhaps the coolest thing about this wedding was how Sage and Jon handled their reception. They had a small guest list for the actual ceremony, but hosted an all-day open house. I cannot express how dazzled I am by that idea.
A big thanks to Sage for letting me profile the wedding! Any of you readers who have gotten married at home (your own or the home of someone else) might want to check out the Flickr group Sage moderates. It has lots of gorgeous photos.
A Breakdown of Our Own Wedding Budget
These prices are approximate, because I didn't keep track of all my receipts. However, we probably spent less, not more, because I have a tendency to overestimate costs.
Food, $358.00.
This included our steaks, baking potatoes, the salads we ordered, everything for our side dishes, and the condiments, as well as the items like coolers, ice, and charcoal. (We bought vacuum-sealed frozen steaks and thawed them just before the big day; they were much cheaper than freshly cut steaks and were still really delicious.)
Beer, $42.00.
Liquor, $45.00.
License, $90.00.
The self-uniting license was a little more expensive, but getting it allowed us to skip the expense of hiring an officiant. [Edit 10/07/09: I realize this isn't entirely clear, so I'll explain a bit more. In addition to the traditional marriage license, Pennsylvania offers what is known as a "self-uniting marriage license." It allows a couple to get married without an officiant. A few other states have similar licenses, but most do not.]
Rings, $55.00.
We went with matching titanium bands from eBay.
Gifts for the kids, $18.00.
Venue, $90.00.
This price gave us a large park pavilion for the whole day!
Invitations, $15.00.
We made these with blank-inside note cards, colored paper, and tracing paper.
Sand for our sand ceremony, $13.00.
Clothing, $295.00.
Sales, sales, sales! And discount stores.
Wedding arch, $25.00.
Silks, $60.00.
Yes, we used silk flowers. And it turns out that sometimes they really don't photograph as well as the real things - but they looked great, and I still have them! [Edit 05/18/10: I like working with silks because I can arrange them far ahead of time, but it's certainly possible make economical and beautiful fresh flower bouquets, boutonnieres, corsages, and arrangements yourself. I live in an expensive part of the Northeast, and even the priciest grocery stores generally have gorgeous fresh-flower bouquets for $10.00 and under.]
Vases, $16.00.
Tulle, ribbon, and other decorating incidentals, $21.00.
Disposable napkins and cups, $15.00.
We had to use plastic cups. The park rules didn't allow us to use real glasses.
Punch bowl, china, flatware, and serving bowls, trays, and utensils, $71.00.
The punch bowl and china came from our local thrift store, Impact. It is fantastic.
Favors, $20.00.
We displayed an assortment of Hershey's Kisses and favor boxes so that people could have exactly the flavors they wanted. I don't think anyone took any, though - we were eating chocolate for a month! (I'm not suggesting that's bad.)
Tablecloths, $10.00.
We got flat bedsheets on sale, made sure the edges faced each other where the tables met, and covered them with tulle. They looked great.
Batteries for portable CD player, $17.00.
Umbrella in case it rained, $4.00.
It did rain, so I'm glad we got this.
Grand total, $1,280.00.
I'll be adding photos sometime soon, so you can see how it all worked out.
Food, $358.00.
This included our steaks, baking potatoes, the salads we ordered, everything for our side dishes, and the condiments, as well as the items like coolers, ice, and charcoal. (We bought vacuum-sealed frozen steaks and thawed them just before the big day; they were much cheaper than freshly cut steaks and were still really delicious.)
Beer, $42.00.
Liquor, $45.00.
License, $90.00.
The self-uniting license was a little more expensive, but getting it allowed us to skip the expense of hiring an officiant. [Edit 10/07/09: I realize this isn't entirely clear, so I'll explain a bit more. In addition to the traditional marriage license, Pennsylvania offers what is known as a "self-uniting marriage license." It allows a couple to get married without an officiant. A few other states have similar licenses, but most do not.]
Rings, $55.00.
We went with matching titanium bands from eBay.
Gifts for the kids, $18.00.
Venue, $90.00.
This price gave us a large park pavilion for the whole day!
Invitations, $15.00.
We made these with blank-inside note cards, colored paper, and tracing paper.
Sand for our sand ceremony, $13.00.
Clothing, $295.00.
Sales, sales, sales! And discount stores.
Wedding arch, $25.00.
Silks, $60.00.
Yes, we used silk flowers. And it turns out that sometimes they really don't photograph as well as the real things - but they looked great, and I still have them! [Edit 05/18/10: I like working with silks because I can arrange them far ahead of time, but it's certainly possible make economical and beautiful fresh flower bouquets, boutonnieres, corsages, and arrangements yourself. I live in an expensive part of the Northeast, and even the priciest grocery stores generally have gorgeous fresh-flower bouquets for $10.00 and under.]
Vases, $16.00.
Tulle, ribbon, and other decorating incidentals, $21.00.
Disposable napkins and cups, $15.00.
We had to use plastic cups. The park rules didn't allow us to use real glasses.
Punch bowl, china, flatware, and serving bowls, trays, and utensils, $71.00.
The punch bowl and china came from our local thrift store, Impact. It is fantastic.
Favors, $20.00.
We displayed an assortment of Hershey's Kisses and favor boxes so that people could have exactly the flavors they wanted. I don't think anyone took any, though - we were eating chocolate for a month! (I'm not suggesting that's bad.)
Tablecloths, $10.00.
We got flat bedsheets on sale, made sure the edges faced each other where the tables met, and covered them with tulle. They looked great.
Batteries for portable CD player, $17.00.
Umbrella in case it rained, $4.00.
It did rain, so I'm glad we got this.
Grand total, $1,280.00.
I'll be adding photos sometime soon, so you can see how it all worked out.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Introduction
Hi! Thanks for checking out Really Sweet Weddings [edit 12/30/09: formerly True to You Weddings].
There are tons of wedding blogs on the internet, so I guess I'll tell you what I hope to do here and why I think that is going to make this blog special.
Like most wedding bloggers, I love weddings - love, love, love them. And like a few wedding bloggers, I love hearing the wedding stories of couples who really make the day their own and don't feel, excuse the awful pun, married to tradition.
Don't get me wrong, tradition is fantastic if it truly means something to you. I have nothing against it. But no one should feel obligated to give up the wedding of her (or his) dreams because of societal pressure to carry a ribbon-wrapped bouquet of calla lilies when she'd prefer a fistfull of clover, or to wear a tux when he'd like to rock black jeans and cowboy boots.
I know that there are already a couple of fantastic sites out there that focus on nontraditional couples. My husband and I were actually featured on one of them, and we thought it was really, really cool.
I'd like to think that this site is a little different from even those great sites, though. See, although those sites feature lots of weddings from couples who had tight budgets, that isn't the primary focus. And weddings under $2,000.00 still seem to be in the minority. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that; it isn't my intention to judge how other people spend their money.
But brides and grooms on microbudgets have to deal with a whole set of unique problems. Aside from the very practical concerns of feeding guests and finding affordable venues, they often have to deal with the prejudices of others. It's alarming how many people feel comfortable making assumptions about a bride or groom's values, income level, and education level based on what they know of the couple's wedding budget. For that matter, it's alarming how many people think that anything but a person's values has any relevance at all. It takes an extremely strong bride or groom to plan a wedding with small budget and self-esteem still intact when the big day arrives.
My husband and I could have gone the traditional route and saved and saved for an expensive engagement ring and an expensive wedding. The simple fact, though, is that we didn't want to. We wanted to start our lives together; we didn't want to put off offering each other the legal protections of marriage so that we could have an expensive party.
Some couples work hard at thankless jobs and never make enough to justify spending it on a party. Does that mean they shouldn't get married, shouldn't pool their resources, aren't entitled to a wonderful day of sincere promises in front of loved ones? Absolutely not.
I hope this site inspires and encourages those planning weddings on the tiniest of budgets. It is possible to have a fabulous wedding for under $2,000.00.
If you've had an extremely inexpensive wedding, I'd love to hear your story and possibly profile it on Really Sweet Weddings [edit 12/30/09: formerly True to You Weddings]. You can go to my profile page and use the email link to send me your story and some of your wedding photos (please make sure you have your photographer's permission). Include your budget, if you feel comfortable, along with any information about how you trimmed costs. Also include the things that made your day feel so special you, and any helpful vendor links or information.
Thanks, and I hope to hear from you!
There are tons of wedding blogs on the internet, so I guess I'll tell you what I hope to do here and why I think that is going to make this blog special.
Like most wedding bloggers, I love weddings - love, love, love them. And like a few wedding bloggers, I love hearing the wedding stories of couples who really make the day their own and don't feel, excuse the awful pun, married to tradition.
Don't get me wrong, tradition is fantastic if it truly means something to you. I have nothing against it. But no one should feel obligated to give up the wedding of her (or his) dreams because of societal pressure to carry a ribbon-wrapped bouquet of calla lilies when she'd prefer a fistfull of clover, or to wear a tux when he'd like to rock black jeans and cowboy boots.
I know that there are already a couple of fantastic sites out there that focus on nontraditional couples. My husband and I were actually featured on one of them, and we thought it was really, really cool.
I'd like to think that this site is a little different from even those great sites, though. See, although those sites feature lots of weddings from couples who had tight budgets, that isn't the primary focus. And weddings under $2,000.00 still seem to be in the minority. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that; it isn't my intention to judge how other people spend their money.
But brides and grooms on microbudgets have to deal with a whole set of unique problems. Aside from the very practical concerns of feeding guests and finding affordable venues, they often have to deal with the prejudices of others. It's alarming how many people feel comfortable making assumptions about a bride or groom's values, income level, and education level based on what they know of the couple's wedding budget. For that matter, it's alarming how many people think that anything but a person's values has any relevance at all. It takes an extremely strong bride or groom to plan a wedding with small budget and self-esteem still intact when the big day arrives.
My husband and I could have gone the traditional route and saved and saved for an expensive engagement ring and an expensive wedding. The simple fact, though, is that we didn't want to. We wanted to start our lives together; we didn't want to put off offering each other the legal protections of marriage so that we could have an expensive party.
Some couples work hard at thankless jobs and never make enough to justify spending it on a party. Does that mean they shouldn't get married, shouldn't pool their resources, aren't entitled to a wonderful day of sincere promises in front of loved ones? Absolutely not.
I hope this site inspires and encourages those planning weddings on the tiniest of budgets. It is possible to have a fabulous wedding for under $2,000.00.
If you've had an extremely inexpensive wedding, I'd love to hear your story and possibly profile it on Really Sweet Weddings [edit 12/30/09: formerly True to You Weddings]. You can go to my profile page and use the email link to send me your story and some of your wedding photos (please make sure you have your photographer's permission). Include your budget, if you feel comfortable, along with any information about how you trimmed costs. Also include the things that made your day feel so special you, and any helpful vendor links or information.
Thanks, and I hope to hear from you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
