[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 10:45:49 07/05/12 Thu
Author: Cathy F.
Subject: 
Question - weddings, tatoos and what's over the top
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Replies:
[>
inside -- cathy f., 10:46:51 07/05/12 Thu [1]
I was invited back in May to my husband's neice's wedding. She's never been married, but has live with the same guy for 5yrs and have a 5 yr. old son. In May she had a $50,000 formal wedding. She wore a white gown, the whole 9 yards. We did not attend for several reasons. But, to me this seems tacky. I know it's done all the time. But, does anyone else feel that way? It seems today no one has any "Class" as my Mom would put it. I started watching "Say Yes To The Dress" a Bridal show. And the girls come in and spend thousands of $ on beauriful gowns with these huge tattoos. I know practically everyone has one, but one girl had a dragon all the way up her back and wanted a backless gown that would show it. It looked grotesque. I just was wondering if any one else fell this way. I was a child of the 60's so I'm think I'm pretty easy going about stuff, but some things are just so over the top?
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Proof read Cathy! Felt this way. So I think -- Cathy F., 10:50:15 07/05/12 Thu [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
I HATE tatoos. What is the matter with people? I've seen so many otherwise sexy men, with gross tatoos all over their bodies. I'm sure they'll look just wonderful when they are old....To me, tatoos say "Cheap, tacky, gross, unsexy, unromantic,unclassy, stupid, sleazy, dirty looking, a complete turn off, and very, very BAD art." And I agree, they really destroy the look of a pretty wedding dress. I'm always disappointed when someone I like has one. Hey, you did ask...lol. -- Cece, 14:46:47 07/05/12 Thu [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Let me clarify. I am NOT saying that people with tats have these qualities. It's just that all the bike gang thugs are covered in tats, and that's what they look like to me. Two men who I find very sexy, handsome, and otherwise classy, (Shemar Moore from Criminal Minds, and David Beckham of soccer fame), have tats, which is really too bad. Don't get me started on the women. -- Cece (now I've probably offended all my tattered friends.), 17:22:04 07/05/12 Thu [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
ITA Cece. -- JJ Ronda, 03:52:34 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
I agree too!!! -- doc, 03:57:44 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Me, too! I couldn't have said it better myself. -- Lee, 06:44:47 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Thanks a lot Cece! ;-) the only difference between those of us who have tattoos and those that don't is that we don't care that you don't have any. LOL! I like small well done tattoos. Great big ones are just too crowded to look right. -- Theresa, 11:42:22 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Hey Theresa! I don't care iif you have a tatoo or not. I don't care how people decorate themselves, or if they use permanent ink to do it. I can still think they look gross when they cover someone's body. I live in a great place, sadly with many tough gangs (Hell's Angels and the like), and they are all covered in tats. It goes with the territory. But I don't like seeing an otherwise gorgeous guy or pretty woman covered in the same way. Maybe I was traumatised by having inky fingers at school....LOL. -- Cece, 18:09:11 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
LOL!! I hate the gross ones too! -- Theresa, 18:40:02 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
"Cheap, tacky, gross, unsexy, unromantic,unclassy, stupid, sleazy, dirty looking, a complete turn off, and very, very BAD art." LOLOL What do you really think Cece? Love that you called them "tattered". There's a joke in there somewhere--I'm just too tired to find it. -- JJ Ronda--still tattoo free, 19:53:45 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Whenever I see women with those huge, ugly tattoos in very exposed parts of their body, I think of two things. Well, actually, I think of a lot of things (see Cece's post below), but the two foremost are 1) How will that affect their professional career? and 2) How will that look when paired with fancy, elegent wedding dress? -- JJ Ronda--The beauty of the dress is negated by the ugly exposed tattoo, IMO., 19:58:45 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
You should see them when they get stretched out in pregnancy! And you don't even want to know what they look like after C-section scar. I've watched many an OB "try" to put them back together again, LOL!!! -- doc, 07:19:01 07/07/12 Sat [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
There seems to be a tendency nowadays to confuse 'acceptance for all peoples' , 'tolerance', and 'inclusiveness' with 'anything goes'. IMO, when 'anything goes', then, 'nothing seems to matter'.(inside if you want to moan a bit more with me, haha!) -- mj, 00:44:41 07/06/12 Fri [1]
I am very respectful and embrace all people, but am finding that many people, nowadays, abuse some very basic principles of cleanliness, propriety, and common courtesy and consideration for themselves and society. People that do all these outlandish things to their bodies think they are expressing their uniqueness and how exciting they are. I find it all selfish and boring. If people would put their energy and money into eating and drinking better, exercising more, and being kinder to one another -- THAT would be truly beautiful, exciting, and revolutionary!
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
I accept most public behaviours that are not hurting or negatively influencing others. I agree that there's a general lack of respect or caring for the comfort of others (good manners.) I'm not certain how weddings and tatoos fit into the bad manners catagory though. (inside) -- Cece, 18:34:46 07/06/12 Fri [1]
However, gaudy, expensive weddings are often a pretty vulgar display of overspending, born of a desire to outdo everyone else. Tats are another thing. They express the way people want to appear to others, a personal choice. If tats are hidden, they are private. If they are on display, then expect opinions to be expressed. I believe that if people REALLY don't care what people think, they'd walk around unadorned in plain clothes. Most people do care, which is why we choose our clothes etc, to create an impression, whatever we want that to be.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
I agree. Why do anything unless it is to make a statement of some kind? Tats aren't bad manners, even the ones that offend others. They're a personal choice, but you make your choices and you ask for reactions you're going to get them on both sides. What bothers me is that people expand the display of a tattoo to mean all sorts of things that don't pertain. Like bad parenting, heartlessness, uncleanliness, or violence. Some tattoos mean all of those things if that's what the tat is actually displaying but just the presence of them on someone's body doesn't necessarily mean those things. -- Theresa, 12:58:51 07/15/12 Sun [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
Cece that's exactly how I feel. What about the $50,000 wedding when you have a 5 yr. old son. Does anyone find that tacky. I do. I think if you want to get married after 5 years and have a child you should have a quiet ceremony with family and friends. I really am old fashioned. LOL!! I use to be so cool!! -- Cathy F. and don't get me going on the piercing buisness!!, 07:28:53 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
I'm in full agreement with you Cath! I always have felt that after living with each other and child(ren) in the picture, it should be family and close friends, not a big expensive shindig. That kind of flaunting is tasteless. With regards to the tattoos, my former SIL had a rose above one boob and was absolutely disgusted with herself when she married the second time. She kept yanking the dress up to cover up what she referred to as a "stupid, immature mistake." -- jenks-whose son has a large sun tat on his back which he thought he could hide from his mother for the duration of her life...never try to fool MOM, 08:24:44 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Cathy, I agree with you on the over the top weddings. If you want to see lovely wedding pics of our very own mother of two girls, Theresa to Colie, check out the pics on FB. I may not like the tat, but a small, intimate wedding in a beautiful setting....now that's lovely.. -- Cece, 18:14:57 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Thank you Cece! My lady wanted something low maintenance, so that's what she got. I had everything I wanted standing next to me, and beautiful nature around her. Why do we need anything more? -- Theresa, 16:31:39 07/15/12 Sun [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
I agree. Inside I know I'll go over. -- JJ Ronda, 19:46:47 07/06/12 Fri [1]
I know a lady who was unhappily married for 25 or 30 or more years (not sure how long), and got a divorce when her daughters were grown. A few years later, she met and got engaged to a wonderful man. She had a HUGE church wedding: several hundred guests, fully catered meal, wore a white wedding dress, even registered at several places! Not just registering for picture frames and such-they registered for dishes and everything that you would get for young newlyweds who don't have anything yet. The woman is a grandmother! What on earth did she need all new stuff for? I understand wanting to have a new start with her new and improved life, but I just thought the whole thing was extremely tacky!
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Meant to say "wore a really fancy white wedding dress" -- JJ Ronda, 19:48:50 07/06/12 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[>
well - as a mother of a 21 year old daughter who plans to have the wedding of the century when the day comes- I hope to heck she sees the light or I win the lottery!! - lol- I agree 50k on a wedding is insane - I also come from NY and the land of the big blowout weddings. When I got married NY style here in Texas is what a shock for most folks. I'd like to believe we can find a way to have the big every relative and friend you ever met weding without spedning the price of a small house. We'll have to see. -- chris k, 07:09:25 07/07/12 Sat [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Now tattoos, my first reaction is Ick. I was raised when tattoos equaled low life dangerous bikers not 'nice' people. Some things drummed into you as a child are hard to overcome. I still don't like to see men go shirtless (except maybe in a certain Navy TV show!). Today it seems folks consider tattoos an accessory. Except practically the idea of an accessory- a pair of shoes, nail polish, jewelry is to complete the outfit not make it the focus of attention. In summer I wear pale polish, in winter darks. I don't wear red shoes w/ a green dress- not even at christmas! LOL Inside I'm way over.. -- chris k, 07:43:26 07/07/12 Sat [1]
Accessories should be able to change to enhance the presentation. You can't change a tattoo to match your occasion- a rose chain around your wrist may look lovely on a summer day out to lunch with friends, but not so much at a 7pm formal wedding or a 2pm business meeting with the Senior VP of your company. Then when you get to the massive body art, the tattoo becomes the focus not the accent. The folks covered in tattoos might as well walk the streets naked because w/ a dragon down your back no one will notice anything else. Especially not if you have beautiful eyes or a friendly smile.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
and lastly- living together five years and have a 5 year old son. I hope it lasts. Statistics say folks who live together before marrying have a 50% higher divorce rate than folks who don't. I think I'd be more inclined to enjoy the moment if they hadn't had a 5 yr old son. Inside I know I'll go long again -- chris k, 08:06:04 07/07/12 Sat [1]
Folks often live together first today - that's just the way it is - then they decide - hey this is working okay - let's get married.
I tried to brainwash my kids- if you love someone enough to live with them you should marry them and if you don't love them enough to marry them you shouldn't live with them.
We'll see how that goes- though at the moment my daughter says that too- my son you never know!! LOL.
My theory on why so many marriages don't work out who live together first is because of the psychological shift.
I once explaiend to my friend's son in terms his young mind could follow - You come to live with me for the summer. You share a room with my son. You follow my rules of the house. eat when we eat, eat what I cook, follow the curfews I set, and any other house rule. You're John doe and happy with all that. Then for whatever reason your folks are out of the picture and we have to adopt you. You're now John Jones. You still share the same room and follow the same rules, but now there's a subtle difference. You're not living with us, you're legally connected to us. Even your name changes.
to some folks that's nothing - to others - that's enough of a shift to change the dynamics of a previously working relationship.
now- onto the 5yr old.
Just waiting five years to make it official - I'm okay with that. When it happens with friends of mine I hope these are the 50% who stay married.
Live together and ooops- baby comes along. Marry after the birth. I'm okay with that - though i have my doubts about how long it will last.
live together, have a baby and still wait five years ??? I'm thinking - seriously? what did you do - toss the dice and decide this is the year?
Now - i would still attend because family is family - and if the parents are friends or family I know they're probably thrilled to finally make it legal or blessed.
but still - pull out all the stops? really?
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
We take greater care to legally protect our property, companies, real estate, etc. than we do our children. One of my lovely nieces and her great husband, waited until they had three children before they got married. The oldest was around 10 when they finally had a quiet family wedding and a weekend away. My sister and BIL (her parents) were very relieved. My niece put it down to procrastination on her part. She is usually fare more organised than that. Oh well...all is good. (inside) -- Cece, 14:39:21 07/07/12 Sat [1]
First and foremost, marriage is a legal (not religious) institution, which is why I believe all adults should have the right to protect themselves and their children legally through marriage. The religious part is all up to the individual and the rules of their faith. The legal part is the constant for everyone. The big wedding is unnecessary, but sometimes a very nice way to join two families with a celebration. It shouldn't break the bank.
My DH and I lived together for 6 yrs in the early 70s. But when we got serious about having children, we got married in a registry office with only 2 friends in attendance. The children never arrived (not our choice), but we've been married for 35.5 yrs. Not too shabby. It's the marriage, not the big wedding, that's important to me.
[ Edit | View ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]
Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
