Blushing Brides (this is what bugs me)

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Blushing Brides (this is what bugs me)

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Sethbag wrote:Jersey Girl, I'm trying to understand your OP. You don't like that the two women were referred to as brides? So, if two gay dudes got married and they were referred to as grooms, that would get you too?

I'm curious, what exactly about them both being referred to as brides gets to you? I'm a little surprised by this. Once a person can wrap their head around gay marriage at all, it would seem that the two parties both being referred to as brides, or as grooms, would be pretty trivial.

Just wait till Ellen is interviewed and mentions her wife in the interview. Or some gay dude refers to his husband. Ouch!


I dunno, Sethbag, it just seems weird to me. I think that as the language evolves, it won't seem strange at all. Just as when the term "Ms." was introduced.

It has to do with tradition and protocol. Up until current times, the prominent positions in the wedding party were the bride and groom.

When I hear/read "brides" or "grooms", it just seems strange. I think it would be preferrable to refer to whomever is being married as "life partners" or something to that effect.

The intention of the OP was to see if others could invent new terminology.

The OP was about innovation, not a debate regarding SSM.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Post Reply