Comments

  1. Mary says

    No problem here. It’s HER bouquet and she can give it to anyone she wants. A lot of her guests probably didn’t appreciate a political statement at a wedding reception. I would have done a thing like this only if I was sure that none of my guests would have a problem with it. But then it isn’t my wedding, so I don’t get to decide what’s done! And it IS a nice way to show support for gay equality.

  2. melvin says

    Oh Mary. Have you ever been to a wedding? If you waited for consensus among the guests on any issue whatsoever, there would be no wedding.

    A lovely and supportive gesture. You can’t ask her to put her life on hold until there is peace in the valley.

  3. RHR IN TN says

    Mary, honestly, I’m kinda getting tired of your “don’t rock the boat” mentality. If you’re honestly concerned about not offending your audience, then please stop telling us to “play nice”, “think of how the straight people will feel”, and, basically, “know your place.” I appreciate your support, but please don’t tell us HOW we should fight for our equality.

  4. Francis #1 says

    Who cares what the guests want? It’s not their wedding.

    Natasha is a beautiful person and a great sister for doing this. And the majority of people clapped so I’m guessing this is an accepting family and hence more of a reaffirmation of what people in that reception believed already.

  5. Mary says

    Melvin, I never said she should put her life on hold or even hide her support for SSSM from friends or relatives who might be against it. I only meant that a wedding is supposed to be a happy occasion and a time for people to come together. Many people would feel that making a political statement at a wedding reception injects controversy into the affair. As I said , though, it’s her choice since its HER wedding.

    An example: two gay men are celebrating their wedding at a reception hall. Theirs is one of the first gay weddings in their state, which just made SSM legal. The grooms toast Brian Brown, saying that they feel sorry for him and hope that one day he gets over his homophobia. Wouldn’t any Towleroaders in attendence be saying to themselves “Did they have to ruin a perfectly good gay wedding by mentioning Brian Brown? Now I’ll be seeing that ugly bigot’s face in my mind all evening. UGH!?

  6. RHR IN TN says

    Mary, maybe she just saw her sister’s life as her LIFE and not as a political statement. By your logic, any hetero wedding in its entirety could be perceived as a political statement…an in-your-face example of “traditional marriage”. I’m just curious…do you comment on anti-gay sites as well, and instruct the commenters on how they should get their point across and not hurt OUR feelings?

  7. Bear Aspirin says

    Mary said: “I would have done a thing like this only if I was sure that none of my guests would have a problem with it.” Would she have felt the same way as when my sister brought her white fiancee to a family wedding? Or when my friend’s uncle brought his wife who is 16 years older than him? And if we all wait for a ceremony where everything is by consensus, that just leads to a string of boring get togethers.

  8. Mary says

    Jesus, I even get in trouble when I SUPPORT gay people! OK, RHR, here’s the deal. I’m not concerned with the “feelings” of anti-gay people. I’m concerned with what such people could do to gays of the future once the current mania for gay rights/gay marriage subsides. LGBT people will still be a small minority in the future and a change in the political climate could make them ideal scapegoats for people who don’t remember life before 2009-2012 and will view gays as part of the establishment. Instead of a best of both worlds scenario (what gays are very quickly coming to have) they may end up with a worst of both worlds scenario. It happened to feminists in the 1970’s and beyond. It doesn’t mean all progress will unravel, but things will get more difficult.

    Angering people is sometimes necessary, of course. They key is to distinguish between angering statements/actions that are truly needed to keep progress going and those that aren’t.

    And I did say TWICE that the bride had every right to do what she wanted as her own wedding.

  9. JONES says

    Natasha is at her wedding. Her Lesbian sister is there and she can not have a wedding. Making vows of commitment to the one she loves is prohibited by a bigoted society. Natasha knows this and uses a small but profound gesture at the end of the ceremony to express her love and support for her sister and to appeal for support from those in attendance.

    It’s THE PERFECT moment to do this. Any person in that gathering that was offended by her statement needed to have this moment of reality to show them that very clearly that their anti equality views cause hurt.

    Stop acquiescing to bigoted minds.

  10. princely54 says

    Good for Natasha. She loves her sister and her family and felt the need to support them in that moment. What other people felt at that moment is so far down on the list as to be inconsequential; they could not clap or they could leave — who cares? Good for her and her sister!

  11. says

    Oh, Mary, you’re so completely wrong in your little lonely allegedly gay-friendly boat on the placid lake. The perfect time to make this loving and, yes, political gesture is precisely at an occasion where some may feel uncomfortable and where you have both power and a captive audience. It’s called putting generosity towards those you are closest to ahead of the delicate bigotry of Uncle Bob and Aunt, um, Mar…garet. That’s when you actually make people question themselves and maybe think about their own prejudices for five seconds.

    And if you’d seen the RI Senators speaking yesterday, you know the ones who changed their votes to make it a landslide for equality, this is exactly the type of gesture that convinces people that equality isn’t really as threatening as they may have thought. You don’t change hearts and minds by keeping silent, ever.

    And Minnesota legislators should pay attention to this woman. She is the present and the future.

  12. Thomas says

    This is really sweet. It does, however, remind me of going to a wedding about four years ago, where my cousin threw her bouquet to her best friend, a gay man, there with his boyfriend. The dj made her take the bouquet back and do it, “for real, this time.” I was mortified. I look forward to someday catching and someday throwing- or letting my husband do it.

  13. Mary says

    Ernie, I like you a lot and it truly hurts me that you still think my little boat is “allegedly” gay-friendly (and yes, I’m being self-pitying here). Anyone could see why I advocate caution: it’s what social conservatives do on ANY issue. They look for “unintended consequences” and warn people about how to avoid potential dangers. The world needs such people, just as it also needs people who can move things forward by “shaking things up” and making people feel uncomfortable enough to question their beliefs.

    In my own life I suffered a great deal as a result of too many people around me being self-centered and hedonistic and also chasing after unrealistic goals only to come crashing down later on because they didn’t plan prudently for the future. I developed a sort of hyper-conservative, ultra-square outlook on life as a result of this. I’m just applying this mentality to the SSM cause now.

    You may be right about how to change minds. I hope so.

  14. JONES says

    “The dj made her take the bouquet back and do it, “for real, this time.”

    See, these are the people we should supposedly worry about offending. At the slightest attempt to show acceptance someone will be offended or might think it’s ‘yucky’ and try to make acceptance seem wrong.

    No response to bigotry is often taken as agreement. This is why I applaud Natasha loudly … she took a stand and stood up for her sister.

  15. says

    Well, Mary, if you ever make it to VT, look me up and we can don life preservers, go for a boat ride and see what happens. I’m sure it would be fine.

    Many of us who are confident that moments like this can change people are confident because we’ve witnessed and have been part of such moments for years now. We were at the 1993 March on Washington, at state fairs in the late 90s and Statehouse hearings over a decade ago, on up to today, and we have some knowledge about what brings about cultural change. Sure, mistakes are made once in a while, but the biggest mistake is always waiting for change to happen on its own, cause that’s proven not to work.

    Plus, this bride rocks (in a good way), she just does. Anyone who was offended should just have another drink and get over it.

  16. MaddM@ says

    What an awesome gesture, and an excellent way to show support and way to turn what was probably a source of guilt into something positive. Mary, please only worry about if you are offended or not and why, not if anyone is going to be offended. If you want to sterilize everything for mass consumption it’s going to make for a bland life.

    I think it’s unreasonable to say people who can marry shouldn’t until some kind of full marriage equality is achieved because making something like the death of a spouse that much worse by denying survivor benefits is unnecessarily cruel

  17. says

    A lovely gesture. When my sister got married a few years ago she and her husband gave out Equality bracelets as table favors, and gave a lil speech encouring everyone to wear them with pride and support, because everyone should be free to marry whom they love. And let me say – terr are few things more awesome than seeing folks in Wales wearing those bracelets with love and solidarity.
    The sister in this story is a gem. Well met, lass.

  18. TM says

    I agree with Marcus. I think it would have been more respectful to have waited until her sister could marry the person she loves before having her wedding.

Leave A Reply