Modern weddings seem designed to conceal reality of relationships

By David McElroy · February 26, 2022

I hate weddings, so I’m not sure why I agreed to go to one Saturday afternoon. But Kristen had invited me to go with her to several events in recent months and I’d declined them all. On a whim, I accepted this invitation, even though I wouldn’t know a soul there except my date.

The small country church was overflowing with a couple hundred people. I’d never been to this small rural community. I felt like an anthropologist trying to quietly disappear into the crowd of a tribe he was studying. But were they the aliens? Or was that me?

While we were on the way to the church, Kristen told me the couple’s story. The bride has never been married but has a 5-year-old daughter. The groom is the only son in a family that owns a couple of auto parts stores. The bride claims the pair had been dating “off and on” for awhile. The groom says it was just casual sex every now and then, but she got pregnant.

Angry parents were soon involved. The groom’s family insisted on an abortion. The bride’s family demanded a wedding. There were threats made all around. And now a semi-fancy wedding had been thrown together in just weeks.

I knew all of that going in — and Kristen told me everybody knew — but what I was about to see was a theatrical performance that defied all reality.

The pastor talked about how “God had brought these two together.” The bride sang an awful song — which I’d never heard — about how the pair had always been meant to be together. They lit a “unity candle” to symbolize how the two had “come together in Christ’s love.” And the bride’s daughter was the ring-bearer.

Everything about the ceremony — or performance might be a better word — would lead you to believe that these two were soulmates who had developed a deep and lasting love for one another. The bridesmaids squealed in stereotypical ways. The groomsmen looked bored. The parents of the couple looked proud.

After the two were pronounced man and wife, the bride’s veil came off and we could see that she was wearing a tiara. A man whose identity wasn’t clear to me announced that the bride had always been a princess — and now she would be the groom’s queen.

If you took the most stereotypical elements of a royal wedding and filtered them through the understanding and budget of middle-class people — but tried to turn it into satire — you would have ended up with something like what I saw.

I almost always end up feeling horrified at weddings, because they all seem like parodies to me. They seem to be stage plays based on a child’s fantasy of what life should be. To me, most weddings feel like grown-up children playing dress-up and pretending everybody means what is being said.

When I watch such things, I’m always waiting for the little boy from “The Emperor’s New Clothes” to pipe up and tell the truth about what everybody already knows is true. But there’s always a conspiracy of silence instead. No matter what the real story is — whether the truth of a couple’s reality is good or bad — the staging plays out the same way.

It’s fantasy. It’s parody. Satire. But just underneath, it’s tragedy.

I was told that this wedding and reception cost about $30,000, which isn’t much by modern standards. The groom suggested that they simply elope and get the money as a down payment on a house, but everybody else was appalled at the suggestion. It seems that everyone seemed to believe that this elaborate farce was necessary to conceal the truth of what had really happened.

Much of what I see about modern marriages and weddings seems designed to conceal the truth. Regardless of the real story, everybody involved in such charades seems to believe he or she needs to go through the motions of pretense.

It’s as though every party involved has been fed a fantasy about what his or her role is supposed to be — in a wedding or in a marriage — and the real effort goes into falsifying reality for friends and neighbors and family. Even if everybody knows the truth, there’s a conspiracy of silence.

For reasons which will never be clear to me, people play their roles. They pretend to be what they’re not. It never seems to occur to most of them to stop pretending and live honest lives instead.

Everybody has his or her motives. Some have secrets they want to hide. Others are afraid of giving up money. More than a few are afraid of being alone or they’re afraid of what people might think.

In so many cases, though, people spend their lives continuing the sort of dishonest role-play that I watched in that little church today. I’ll never understand why they don’t drop the masks and go their own ways.

But I know from experience that most of them will continue this pretense right up until the day they die. And that’s depressing to me.

Note: I’ve changed the name of my friend and a couple of minor facts in this story to avoid pointing to the real people involved, but none of the material facts have been changed. The photo above is one I snapped with my iPhone about 10 years ago at a wedding.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts