The wedding industry has blossomed in recent years, with more and more brides-to-be pursuing their fairy-tale wedding (Heise, 2012; Ingraham, 1999). Weddings are important rituals in that they signify the transition of women and men from singlehood to coupledom. Weddings also mark an elevation in status, especially for women (Blakemore et al., 2005). Despite the striking increase in the pursuit of the fairy-tale wedding, even in other, non-Eurocentric cultures, the white wedding is characterised by a number of patriarchal practices (Ma, 2006; Tombaugh, 2009). Many of the patriarchal practices in white weddings that are noted in the literature review are identified as
sexist practices, in the first section of the analysis, that the participants performed. The couples that were interviewed subscribed to and performed the gender specific manner of, for example, the proposal, the wedding planning, the choosing wedding outfits, the giving away of the bride, the giving of speeches and the changing of surnames.
Consequently the white wedding inconspicuously preserves gender unequal social arrangements through these practices. This research has considered the patriarchal nature of these white wedding practices and asked why women would eagerly participate in these rituals whereby gender norms and the performance of stereotypical gender roles are not favourable to them individually and as a group.
SJT provides a framework from which to understand why these traditional and patriarchal wedding practices continue to be resistant to change. The seemingly sacred nature of the white wedding renders it taboo to critique. This is reflected in the lack of research on the interface of gender inequality and white weddings (Kalmijn, 2004), as well as the participant’s defensive justifications when asked about certain traditional practices that they performed or did not perform during their wedding. For example, the practice of the father of the bride giving her away to the groom is performed in most white weddings and is a traditional wedding ritual that is taken-for-granted and seldom, if ever, questioned (Ingraham, 1999). The patriarchal nature of this tradition is expressed with men exercising their authority and ownership over women by treating them like an object to be passed from father to groom (Lewis, 1997). However, eight out of ten brides interviewed willingly engaged in and performed this ritual. This is suggestive of the importance that maintaining this ritual may hold for women and thus by performing this ritual women comply with what is expected of them. As such, by walking down the aisle the bride is keeping with traditions that are taken-for-granted and she thus avoids possible backlash that could result from noncompliance, deviance and overt rebellion (Rudman & Glick, 2001). Furthermore, this traditional practice affirms the bride. By engaging in this particular ritual the bride places herself at centre stage and consequently receives a great deal of admiration and positive attention.
Therefore the negative and positive aspects of conforming to gender unequal practices are noticeable. In addition to this, it is evident that the traditions that make up the system-justifying ideology of the white wedding are resistant to change.
Interestingly, the brides that performed the ritual of being walked down the aisle by their father to the groom also provided justifications and rationalisations as to why they were walked down the aisle when they were asked about this. For example, brides mentioned “it’s a dad’s privilege” (interview 7, lines 618-619), “well somehow I would have to get in there” (interview 4, line 336), “I thought everybody had to” (interview 2, line 493), “I guess it’s a tradition, I didn’t even give it any thought why I wouldn’t do it”
(interview 9, lines 313-314), “um, that is also a bit tradition and to involve [my dad] as well” (interview 3, line 760), “your dad gives you away to your husband um he gives you away to your husband and for everybody to see” (interview 10, lines 373-374) and “I wanted to” (interview 1, line 1041). Although a few brides expressed ambitions of gender equality (see for example extract 15 & 22) the pursuit of this was not noticeable amongst all of the brides. It is evident through the answers provided by the brides that almost any reason serves to justify and account for why they performed a certain practice. Consequently not much reasoning is needed for a response to have a system justifying function.
Another interesting paradox is noted with women enabling their own subordination by engaging in most of the planning for a wedding with rituals and practices that are patriarchal and, thus, not in their favour. The discourses of the fairy-tale wedding and the bride’s day are positively framed towards the bride suggesting that the wedding is for and about the bride. Through the bride’s participation and the groom’s lack of involvement in the wedding planning the bride is able to construct her fairy-tale wedding. Because these discourses appear to be positive, flattering and in favour of the bride, the gender unequal distribution of wedding labour and the patriarchal nature of the white wedding itself is seemingly overlooked and simultaneously supported and
perpetuated. Consequently these commonly used discourses are representative of everyday language that promotes gender inequality.
Related to the fairy-tale discourse, the benevolent stereotypes of women as princesses in the white wedding encourage a warm and flattering view of women (Glick & Fiske, 1997). In assuming the role of princess the bride affords herself power and status (Sniezek, 2005). By supporting the view of the bride as the princess women also encourage their own life satisfaction, because they justify the gender unequal status quo and thereby reduce ideological dissonance (Hammond & Sibley, 2011).
Consequently, constructing a fairy-tale wedding whereby the bride is the princess serves an affirming and flattering function for women. However, in justifying the status quo by supporting the fairy-tale discourse women also promote gender inequality through the encouragement of benevolent sexism (Jost & Kay, 2005). The more these benevolent stereotypes of women are mentioned and encouraged, the more women are encouraged to assume a greater proportion of the wedding planning work. This is in line with what Jost and Kay (2005) have found, namely, that the mere activation of complementary stereotypes is “sufficient to trigger increased support for the system”
(p. 507). According to the brides and grooms in this research, the rationalisation of this is that the wedding is for the bride’s sake and thus she should do the majority of the work. This indicates that these benevolent stereotypes of women as princesses serve a system-justifying function and are influential in endorsing the status quo and, thus, gender inequality by maintaining women’s subordination (Jost & Kay, 2005; Rudman &
Glick, 2001). In this research three possible explanations as to why women encourage and conform to the discourses of the bride’s day and the fairy-tale wedding and thus bolster support for benevolent stereotypes and the existing social arrangements are plausible. These explanations are discussed below and include women’s depressed sense of entitlement, out-group contact and the reduction of ideological dissonance.