And even then, only Texas and Idaho have common-law marraige modernly. Despite the abundance of idiots who didn’t go to law school who like to argue with me about common law marriage.

Wiki disagrees with you:

Common-law marriage can still be contracted in the following jurisdictions: Alabama, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire (posthumously), Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah.

Common-law marriage can no longer be contracted in the following states, as of the dates given: Alaska (1917), Arizona (1913), California (1895), Florida (1968), Georgia (1997), Hawaii (1920), Idaho (1996), Illinois (1905), Indiana (1958), Kentucky (1852), Maine (1652, when it became part of Massachusetts; then a state, 1820), Massachusetts (1646), Michigan (1957), Minnesota (1941), Mississippi (1956), Missouri (1921), Nebraska (1923), Nevada (1943), New Mexico (1860), New York (1933, also 1902-1908), New Jersey (1939), North Dakota (1890), Ohio (1991), Pennsylvania (2005), South Dakota (1959), and Wisconsin (1917).

The following states never permitted common-law marriage: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Note that Louisiana is a French civil or code law jurisdiction, not an English common law jurisdiction. As such, it is a former Council of Trent jurisdiction and common-law marriage was never known there.

Nevertheless, all states — including those that have abolished common-law marriage — continue to recognise common-law marriages lawfully contracted in those U.S. jurisdictions that still permit this irregular contract of a marriage.

Off topic, but you aren;t the authority you claim to be.

My bad.

Carry on, ladies.

And in that spirit:

OMG!! My own wedding was verrrry do-it-yourself! I had a new suit that I could wear again to work and I stood up in front of a judge with my fiance and then we went to a Chinese buffet afterwards!!

Yay!! (Cheap) Marriage!! So much better than those expensive weddings the patriarchy advocates!

There has never been a state where there is “default marriage by living together”. You’re thinking of common-law marriage, which had a lot of requirements other than shacking up. e.g., holding yourselves out to the world as husband and wife.

And even then, only Texas and Idaho have common-law marraige modernly. Despite the abundance of idiots who didn’t go to law school who like to argue with me about common law marriage.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Patriarchy plays a huge role in weddings (as well as marriage). Where else do you think we get the idea that weddings have to be this way and not that way, have to include this detail but not that detail, must not deviate from this line but deviation from that line is okay?

The connection between weddings and the patriarchy is too subtle for me. Considering who typically involves herself most in the wedding preparations, I would say weddings are part of the matriarchy.

I wonder if the wedding industrial complex is also going after those whose wedding is not Christian in nature. I know that I want to have a Hindu wedding if I ever get married (I am not even dating anyone right now :p) but at the same time I think of all the work that goes into one and Vegas looks better and better. Most of the Hindu weddings I have been to are three day affairs. Also I might have to have two or three weddings. I have a very large family in two countries (America and Trinidad) and not everyone can travel because of health or, financial reasons. Also future husband may want a Christian wedding. The upside of this is that I if I am lucky I get two receptions and one thing about my family is that they know how to party. (We’re talking about a party the night before the wedding and then the official reception after the wedding)
Now that I think about it I should just skip the whole ceremony all together and just have the receptions.

There has never been a state where there is “default marriage by living together”. You’re thinking of common-law marriage, which had a lot of requirements other than shacking up. e.g., holding yourselves out to the world as husband and wife.

Just makes me once again grateful that I had a stealth wedding. Just us, our two friends, and the Justice of the Peace. One of our friends didn’t sort out we were getting married till we showed up at the office for “Marriages, Birth Certificates and Deaths”.

I’m just never going to live that down, am I? :p (My actual thought process: “I’m pretty sure I’d have noticed a baby on the 4-hour train ride up here, and neither ofthem look like zombies, so by process of elimination …”)

Maybe it’s missing the point of the original post though to say it–wait–was the point of the original post that, OMG! Look how smart we are because we can make our patriarchally-approved union/party so much cheaper than those uncritical brides who actually *believe* in this stuff and are getting ripped off as a result?

Hello.

As the author of the original post, can I say? There’s the point over there. You missed it.

Patriarchy plays a huge role in weddings (as well as marriage). Where else do you think we get the idea that weddings have to be this way and not that way, have to include this detail but not that detail, must not deviate from this line but deviation from that line is okay?

Thing is, marriage, for all its patriarchal trappings, still provides some 1000-plus legal benefits. And if you are able to partake in it, and you decide to do it, you will encounter a whole fuckload of patriarchy-dictated expectation about How Things Should Be.

And, if you noticed, where there are patriarchal expectations about How Things Should Be, there are people who will use that as leverage in order to extract more money than they usually charge for the same service.

And don’t think htat same-sex couples are exempt. The Bridal-Industrial Complex is more than happy to take their money. This is an issue entirely separate from their right to legally marry.

and i’ve got to say: if we had been men, and working on our careers for that amount of time, we both would have been rich with all that time perusing, purchasing and chatting!

If you’d been men, you would have spent that same amount of time talking about your Fantasy Baseball teams and gathering the statistics for them. That’s a lot cheaper than the average wedding, though. ;-)