Till Death Do Us Part
Often called the “Big Day,” a wedding is a ceremony where two individuals are
unified. They vow to love and care for each other till death do them part with two simple
words: “I do.” Weddings have some distinct traditions, such as exchanging vows, which
have a deep history embedded in them. However, weddings can mean much more than
just a union between two individuals. Weddings vary among groups and can have many
meanings that reflect the differences in culture, religion, and even socioeconomic class.
For a long time, weddings have been a prevalent part of society. Weddings have
been portrayed in media as the “Big Day” that every woman dreams about. The people
often promoting this idea are those involved in the wedding industry, which include
bridal gown and tuxedo stores, wedding magazines, and movies and TV shows about
weddings, such as Say Yes to the Dress. The media also plays a vital role in publicizing
weddings and depicting them in many ways. For example, the royal wedding was highly
covered by the media and talked about in 2011, essentially becoming the highlight of
2011. I remember talking about it in my 8th grade science class where my teacher, other
girls, and I gossiped over how beautiful Kate Middleton’s dress was. Similarly, most
celebrity weddings are still talked about in the media in specific, superfluous detail.
There’s also been a lot of controversy on the ideals of marriage, especially gay marriage.
The power bloc, which includes political, religious, and commercial figures, uses
weddings as a site of social control where they impose their ideals and standards of
weddings onto the people, which include marginalized people such as the those from the
lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and transgender (LGBQT) community, working-class
people, and young adults. The wedding industry’s primary goal is to generate profit
through idealizing weddings as a spectacular event. Similar to how the prom industry
promotes the idea that prom is supposed to be a special night to cap off your senior year,
the wedding industry coins weddings as the “Big Day.” They advertise weddings as
something life changing and as something amazing that any woman could dream about
and wish for. Wedding magazines advertise bridal dresses and celebrities’ weddings,
stirring commotion about weddings and making their readers wish for something
marvelous like that––or better put: like a “fairy-tale.” Other than simply making money
and constructing the idea of weddings as the “Big Day,” other agendas are involved.
Some political and religious figures emphasize their standards––or what they claim as
“society’s standards”––and try to disseminate their ideals onto the people to control them.
The power bloc generally has special access to various resources. In this case, one of the
resources is the government, so political figures have the ability to influence what laws
are set and through these laws, they impose most of their standards and rules. For
instance, in 1775, there was a law that decreed any marriage void if the bride wears
makeup during the ceremony. During the late 18th century, as Kasson accentuates in
Venturing Forth: Bodily Management in Public, women were expected to act passively
and not draw attention to themselves. Thus, this law is enacted with the justification of
maintaining society’s ideals in that sociohistorical context. Linking back to the purity
rule, efforts like this were made to control the people from going against society’s
standards. Before the Supreme Court decision in the Obergefell v. Hodges case allowed
for same-sex marriage, state and federal authorities attempted to limit the LGBQT
community. Although same-sex marriage has now been permitted, the power bloc still
tries to minimize the people’s efforts to undermine the former’s authority. For example,
federal regulations prevent religious minorities from marrying according to their
principles, such as polygamy being outlawed. As illustrated in these examples, the power
bloc attempts to use weddings as a way of to control society and maintain their ideals of a
heterosexual, monogamous wedding and especially use their authority and power in an
attempt to stop the people from challenging them. More importantly, the groups involved
form an alliance and make up the power bloc because they have some kind of mutual
interest(s). The power bloc wants to maintain their ideals, which they portray as
“society’s ideals,” so they can remain in power. They feel threatened when the people try
to challenge their authority because they’re afraid they will lose power over them. They
don’t want the people to go out of control and instead stay within their control to feel
comfortable. They want to have and maintain the ability to assert their power. In essence,
