What is your opinion on the ban of father's giving away their daughters in marriage?

Question

Swedish pastors believe the practice to be sexist. A father giving possession of his daughter to the new owner, her husband was the traditional reason.

Answer 1

Quoting my response to a more critical posting of the same story:

"When I first saw this, I was disturbed by what struck me as another attempt by an over-reaching government to impose transformation of civil institutions, but this is an individual priest refusing to perform a ritual in a particular way. When institutions change, that's how it should be: people within those institutions pushing for change, not having changes imposed from outside. I have no problem with this, whether or not I think the tradition is sexist in intent or in its present meaning (which are two different matters)."

I want to elaborate on the last point. Very often a ritual has very different significance for the people currently practicing the ritual than it may have had in it's origins. To say a ritual is inherently sexist ignores the dependence of meaning on context, on the function the ritual serves in the lives of its practitioners. Looking solely at the origins leads to preposterous conclusions in many cases, as if someone were to accuse one of superstition for saying "bless you" when they sneeze. Today, such an expression is one of courtesy, not a belief that demons might come to inhabit you during your sneeze.

Answer 2

Surely what the Swedish Pastors believe is hardly relevant to the rest of the world population's concept of morality and ethics? I would have thought that the family would have sat down and sorted the marriage service procedures out well in advance of the actual day. What next? The Best Man/ Maid of Honor is to be replaced with a gender neutral Representative of the community? Is the Groom really necessary ? Where does it all end?
As You know Male Nurses often stand in for Male members of a patients immediate Family at an impromptu wedding service. I have been a Brides Maid and a Matron of Honor. As far as I am aware there have been no wide ranging ramifications for this obvious breach of etiquette. (No I didn't have to wear a dress).

Answer 3

Personally I don't think it should be banned. People should be independent and need to choose for themselves what they are to do with their own wedding. Such is freedom of choice. However, I don't think that it should be required for the father to give away the bride as I believe anyone should be allowed to give away the bride. Heck, even having the bride walk down the aisle alone should be allowed. However, I don't think that because a father gives away a bride that it is automatically sexist in nature. We don't know why the bride chose to do this, if she chose at all, or how this came to be in any particular wedding. It is also best not to speculate. People might still perform the ceremony in the traditional fashion but not for the same 'sexist' reasons their forebearers did.

Answer 4

In the Jewish religion BOTH parents walk their daughters and their sons down the aisle. Makes sense to me! The parents raise the children and present them to be married, the man to the woman and the woman to the man. No partiality there!!!! It is just a tradition, which is kinda nice to have in this day and age when so many traditions have gone out of style.
Having said that, I agree that, in theory, this practice of fathers giving away their daughters is sexist, but if you look at it as part of a sweet and tender ceremony, rather than as a literal giving away of another human, it is easier to accept.

Answer 5

The practice is sexist. Everything about marriage is sexist, so why is this being targetted? I knew a long time ago that I would want both my parents walking me down the aisle...but I eloped instead. With my daughter, if she gets married, I would walk her down the aisle--either way, it's a symbolic transfer of ownership. People need to do what's good for them...mother/father/good friend, whatever--the option should be there, but that aspect of the ceremony is probably the least sexist aspect of the whole thing--and that goes for men and women. It's a very old tradition, so naturally it's going to have some archaic elements. But yes, as someone said, if this is all people have to worry about, things couldn't be too bad.

Answer 6

I grew up in Sweden and when my cousin got married, her mother and father walked her down the aisle, the same should be the case for the groom. Both are entering new families, so it's only fair for both to get the symbolic support from both parents. I don't think there should be a ban on personal lives and individual choices, but clearly, the tradition should be re-examined and IMO both parents should walk her and him down the aisle.

Answer 7

Let me get this straight, you are asking who is willing to make it *illegal* for people to have the right to do what they want because some few self-righteous individuals disagree?

If you don't like it, don't do it. It is not mandatory to follow conventional methods. If others like it, is it in any way YOUR business?

Would the same idea apply to wedding rings (for both men and women) because it signifies "slavery"?

I find it impossible to understand how anyone comes to the point that they feel the need to control every tiny aspect of other's lives as if they had all knowledge of "right" and "wrong".

Answer 8

Haven't really considered it, but you do have a valid point. Why can't both parents walk the bride down the aisle? And why isn't the groom 'given away' as well?

For my husband and my wedding, we both walked to the marraige celebrant and joined hands, no giving away by any parent.
(I don't have any contact with my parents and don't know their whereabouts)

Answer 9

Legislating morality or cultural beliefs into place or out of existence is an attack on freedom. It is a form of social engineering. Although society may be headed in a certain direction, it is dangerous to attempt to bring about abrupt social change, even healthy change, without regard for humanity's psychological needs related to the time required to adjust to change in healthy ways or without regard for the dignity of the fulfillment of individuals' visions and dreams and learning for themselves what is right or wrong for them in their own way and in their own time. That dignity is an inalienable right.

Answer 10

u can swing the other way for a while
then that will become the norm
till a large group deems that that is bad
and then it will swing back the other way

and fathers giving away their daughters will seem like a great advance for women and daughters and fathers

whoppdidoo just swinging back and forth back and forth

people seldom recognize the epistem they are inside of
and think they are part of some unique movement

whats the diff

i hope you get what you want Deirdre o
till you don;t want it anymore
and then want something else
and i hope you then get that to
why not!