Like a Virgin No More - Wed and Bare It

Another sad commentary on our times.

"Like a Virgin No More - Wed and Bare It

Two decades ago, when young girls wondered how brides were supposed to look and behave, they’d most likely conclude—with some prompting from Cinderella—that on their big day they’d be a princess. They’d be blushing, virginal and wrapped from head to toe in tulle and lace.

So why is it that these days, some brides seem to be taking their cues more from Jessica Rabbit than Cinderella? More vamp than virgin, they’re having bachelorette parties that are as raunchy as their fiancés’ sendoffs. They’re selecting cleavage- or lower-back-baring bridal gowns that might get a gasp from conservative relatives. “A big-selling style is a sheer lace corset midriff,” says Millie Martini Bratten, the editor in chief of Brides magazine. “It’s clearly meant to look like you’re seeing through someone’s shirt.” And today’s wife-to-be is hiring photographers for what are called “boudoir shoots,” where they pose Maxim magazine-style in lingerie or nothing at all and give the prints to their grooms—a trend that Bratten says began about three years ago. “It’s the ultimate display of freedom and empowerment,” says Bee-Bee Kim, the founder of, a wedding-planning site that gets more than a million unique visitors a month."…

Entire article here:

Sometimes I feel like people just want to get married because they want to have a huge party (after years of cohabitating).

Interesting article. It inadvertently pointed out the problems that cohabitation before marriage causes. Why pay for milk when you already have the cow?

I totally agree with LoveJesus…it seems so many people just get married to have a party…and I can’t believe the number of people that live together before getting married…it saddens me to see loss of tradition…

It does seem that many couples view a wedding as the end all instead of realizing that the marriage IS it. Who hasn’t heard of a couple who blew thousands and thousands of dollars on their wedding day and honeymoon and then the marriage lasted only a few months? We sure are living in immoral, backward, crazy times.

There’s nothing wrong with living with the opposite sex. I did it for a couple years and I did not have sex with the women/woman I lived with. I wasn’t even dating any of them. I also know a college student, a Christian, who has her boyfriend sleep in her dorm room bed. They’ve been doing this for several months and they have not had sex either (her roommate is in the bunk below them and she told me so … they wouldn’t have sex with her there anyway)

Personally I don’t think premarital sex is a sin. The bible does not say it is a sin. The Greek word does not mean premarital sex. But even if you think it is a sin, there’s nothing wrong with living with the opposite sex. If you can’t control yourself in those situations then you probably aren’t mature enough to be dating in the first place.

Would I lived in South Carolina my roomate was a man. We never had sex. I loved him like a brother and he loved me like a sister. I felt safer living with a guy as a roomate and he had someone who would cook him meals. There was no romantic relationship between us, and we got along really great.

I saw the article and I thought I wouldn’t want to wear a dress so revealing even if I was young and 18 again. The person who wrote the article mentioned the word Princess and wanting to feel like Cinderella. Yes, there might be some truth in that in the past a girl wanted to feel like a princess who was marrying her prince. Maybe the youth can’t relate to Cinderella and so they want to be more sexy in the choice of wedding gowns. I think that each generation should decide what style of wedding dress they want to wear. Though I would hope that whatever style gown they choose it will be in good taste. One can still be sexy and not look like a slut.

I know theme weddings are very popular. If I were ever to get married I would want a Celtic wedding. I know just the dress I would have made. It would be a two piece dress and part of it would be made in my tartan and part of the bottom would have a window of white lace. If I married another Celt I would wear his tartan as a sash to represent the two clans coming together. There are woman who are choosing to bring their culture into the style of the wedding they have. So I don’t believe all brides want to focus on having a sexy gown. I think it just all depends on the woman and her desires.

As far as living together before marriage, my nephew is living with his girlfriend. Will they get married? That is up to them. I know it is a sin, but he is a man and he has to make his own choices in life.

I do know that we can’t say that we would never do something, because you never know one day you just might find yourself doing something you never thought you would do. I just think that if you decide to live with someone outside of marriage than you have to know before hand that you will be living in sin and will no longer be a Catholic in good standing. If you decide to go ahead with it, than you can’t whine about it afterward because you will have decided to do it anyway, and just have to accept that you chose to live with the person you love outside of marriage. My nephew and his girlfriend are adults and they have to make their own decisions about marriage and if they someday will get married.

This is a Catholic forum. We think fornication is a sin. As such, that is all that matters.

Perhaps fornication was removed from the sin list sometime in 1972. Or not.

I’m pretty new to the Church, but I seem to remember in RCIA that it was mentioned as still being somewhere in the realm of mortal sin! :thumbsup:

Consistancy and Tradition: 1
Modernism: 0

What you think (above) is not the Teaching of the Catholic Church. Premarital sex is a Mortal sin.

Boy oh Boy, if I relied on what I “think,” especially in the world today—I could justify all kinds of things.

The Bible says the 1st person you have sexual relations with—in the Eyes of God—is your spouse. Think of Jacob and how he wanted to marry Rachel. How he was tricked into having sex with Rachel’s sister Leah (marriage night)…then, he had to work for their father for another 7 years in order to marry Rachel:
Genesis 29:15-30
Laban said to him: “Should you serve me for nothing just because you are a relative of mine? Tell me what your wages should be.”
Now Laban had two daughters; the older was called Leah, the younger Rachel.
4 Leah had lovely eyes, but Rachel was well formed and beautiful.
5 Since Jacob had fallen in love with Rachel, he answered Laban, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.”
Laban replied, “I prefer to give her to you rather than to an outsider. Stay with me.”
So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, yet they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her.
Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife, that I may consummate my marriage with her, for my term is now completed.”
So Laban invited all the local inhabitants and gave a feast.
At nightfall he took his daughter Leah and brought her to Jacob, and Jacob consummated the marriage with her.
(Laban assigned his slave girl Zilpah to his daughter Leah as her maidservant.)
6 In the morning Jacob was amazed: it was Leah! So he cried out to Laban: “How could you do this to me! Was it not for Rachel that I served you? Why did you dupe me?”
“It is not the custom in our country,” Laban replied, “to marry off a younger daughter before an older one.
7 Finish the bridal week for this one, and then I will give you the other too, in return for another seven years of service with me.”
Jacob agreed. He finished the bridal week for Leah, and then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel in marriage.
(Laban assigned his slave girl Bilhah to his daughter Rachel as her maidservant.)
Jacob then consummated his marriage with Rachel also, and he loved her more than Leah. Thus he remained in Laban’s service another seven years.

Then there’s 1 Corinthians 6:16:
(Or) do you not know that anyone who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For “the two,” it says, “will become one flesh.”

Read: 1 Corinthians 7:1-40:

Great post, by the way.

I’ve been married for eight years (I was 30 at the time), and even back then I didn’t really see the point in having a “traditional” frat boy bachelor party. It just seems so desperate and sad when I listen to co-workers talk about their wild bachelor parties in Vegas (or what have you). And to see it bleeding over into the bridal ritual is just symptomatic of the fact that society appreciates less and less the actual dignity of marriage.

Raunchy bachelorette parties, bridezilla meltdowns, soft-porn photo shoots - this is all just a reflection of the value they assign to marriage - which is pretty much nil. 60% of women no longer marry in a church? Now that they’ve stripped (pardon the pun) all dignity from the event, what kind of foundation can their marriage be based on?

The Debauchery of a Sacrament.

Satan is a liar.

Yes, this is a Catholic Forum and yes, fornication is a sin. I think most of us who are Catholic realize that.

At the same time, do you think one can have a roomate of the opposite sex like I had in SC and have no sexual contact but have a brother/sister relationship? I was very happy living with a roommate who was a man who could protect me and who I cooked for and made sure he had decent meals to eat. We didn’t have one fight as roommates.

I do not think I can force my views on my nephew who isn’t a Catholic. He is a man and he is the one who has to make decisions about how he wants to live his own life. Even if he was a Catholic he is going to be the one to decide if he is going to follow the teachings of the Catholic church and remain a Catholic in good standing or if he is going to choose to be romantic with a woman outside of the sacrament of marriage. I feel very strongly if one does make the choice to be with that person than they shouldn’t whine about not being able to receive communion. They knew the score and chose to be with that person anyway. You know the saying they made their bed and now they have to lay in it. It is called being responsible for your actions.

When did Newsweek and Time become so blatant about their staff of writers being on Satan’s payroll…:eek:

what the heck. People think of these things in terms of adults but what is more annoying with this cultural shift is that the up and coming young girls who have the impression that this Wedding angle is going to be customary.
Maybe I’m an old fashioned young dude, but there’s a word for what they’re referring to with that kind of “change” in decorum…it’s called ‘slutty’ wedding dresses…

I don’t think Newsweek has much influence, but articles like these does cause continual slack in our societal fabric.

The very quote “ultimate display of freedom and empowerment” is SO the devil’s work…brainwashing B.S. :rotfl:

Empowerment my butt. If women really like to be treated more and more as objects so be it. :ehh:
All I know is this kind of decay can be remedied through either end, if the modern guy actually learned not to fall for secular culture traps, women wouldn’t feel the need to embarrass themselves by parading around like ‘hoochies’…
there’s a difference between accentuating one’s beauty and demeaning oneself.
This article is an attempt to make it sort of ‘mainstream’ to be a hoochie or something…I don’t know if it’s grabbing at loose straws from the aftermath of the sexual revolution but I don’t know if it’ll be that effective, the pendulum hopefully will swing back to some sobering up …

I think there needs to be some sort of renaissance with formalities, and toned down, reverence of female’s beauty…
I don’t mean the snooty, stuffy kind, or the puritan nonsense…
but some sort of happy medium…
For instance, if more families were valued and remained intact, more males would know their roles as protective brothers to their sisters, and learn patriarchal sensibilities from a good father, in turn it would decrease the male population’s disposition to objectify
women…(or at least discourage it.)

More from the article :eek:

The rise of the bride who is more bold than blushing can be explained by a host of sociological factors, most of which have nothing to do with the word “bridezilla.” For one, our entire culture is loosening up and becoming more sexualized, and taking the wedding ceremony—and young girls’ dreams of what theirs will be like—with it.

This is, after all, is a generation that is comfortable with “sexting” and posting provocative pictures of themselves on Facebook and MySpace. And it’s an age when respected actresses and role models pose seductively on the covers of the lad magazines. “In American society now, you see little girls being sexed up,” says Chrys Ingraham, a sociologist and author of White Weddings: Romancing Heterosexuality in Popular Culture, a critique of the wedding industry. “You can’t disconnect that from the way the wedding industry is going. We have 13-year-olds getting makeovers and having oral sex.”

I read this stuff, and I ask myself as a cradle Catholic…How weird it was around 13, that I felt insulated or sheltered, when it came to teenagers engaging this nonsense…and how glad I am now when my older sister would say I was like an “old man” teenager… “you youngins, that’s immoral! shakes fist —why don’t they know this?”
It’s been a decade now so I’m sure the pre-teenagers are probably even more corrupted.

these become more popular after sexually liberated working women started appearing on television programs like Moonlighting or Murphy Brown in the late '80s and '90s. Women decided they wanted a real night out, too, instead of afternoon gifting and the bride in a hat made of ribbons from the presents she got. “The women I interviewed didn’t like bridal showers,” Montemurro says. “They saw their fiancés going out and having these nights where they were drinking, and thought, ‘It’s not fair that I’m in this stilted ritual where I have to act very feminine and proper while the guys are going out and having fun’.” Strip clubs, bars and whoever makes those glow-in-the-dark penis-shaped rings capitalized on this sentiment by marketing to brides, and women everywhere adorned in condom-covered veils went out to celebrate.

At the actual ceremony, however, brides were nearly as reserved in the 1990s as they’d been in the 1950s. But then the numbers of women who got married in churches started to drop, and so did the strictures on what was appropriate to wear. (According to a survey by Condé Nast bridal media, only 46 percent of brides were married in a church or synagogue in 2006, down from 55 percent the year before.:rolleyes:) As more couples began to get married in homes, in hotel ballrooms or on beaches on Capri—anywhere but places of worship—the bridal gown lost its ceremonial meaning as a virgin’s garb. It became a fashion garment only.

This is all encouraging sin…and typical…

This is a deceptive article…wide and attractive, enticement to destructive behavior…

“I figured it couldn’t be all that special,” she says. “It’s just a woman taking photos with some skimpy clothes on. But that isn’t the case at all. When I saw the photos, I gained self-confidence and realized I’m way too hard on myself.” McLaughlin even posted the photos on, where she got about 70 comments telling her how great she looked. “It took a lot of courage for me to share the photos,” she says, “although I did crop them so my father wouldn’t have a heart attack.”

Reading this article was weird. I don’t know if it’s because I 've started listening more to the Catholic faith, in the past year…or if it’s been a drastic shift in cultural norms, or what, but it’s definitely alien.

How fast things change from even the late 1990’s…casual talk in a general news magazine about kids engaging in oral sex. 10 years ago, a whole nation was outraged and disgusted with the President’s activities. now it’s ho-hum…

I wouldn’t say Newsweek is very reflective of American culture–more of a venue for certain minority viewpoints to be passed off as a general view.

We have 13-year-olds getting makeovers and having oral sex.

And what responsible parent would find such behavior acceptable? I’m not very old at all, but I’m not aware of anyone who finds such actions as the above as acceptable.

If you are Catholic, fornication is a sin, and friends of mine that aren’t Catholic think it is a sin also…

“It’s the ultimate display of freedom and empowerment,” says Bee-Bee Kim, the founder of, a wedding-planning site that gets more than a million unique visitors a month."…

Freedom? Empowerment? I don’t see what’s so “free” and “empowering” about purposely making oneself the object of their fiance’s and his friends’ fantasies. Also, I’m sorry, but I can’t take seriously the comments of anyone who goes by “Bee-Bee”. Isn’t that a little ball that you shoot from a gun?

A professor of mine, while we were discussing marriage in archaic Greek society, noted how today’s wedding ceremonies are little more than a staged Prom where the bride gets to be the Prom queen for a day (she then remarked her disgust concerning plunging lines and high slits in many wedding dresses).

I thought the analogy very appropriate when I say the OP.

I’d like to say in response to some of these posts that yes I agree that it is possible to live with a member of the opposite sex and remain chaste but only if neither are attracted in any way whatsoever or if both have a non-existant sex drive. There are people that are totally commited to chastity but if they are wise would never put themselves in that situation because they would know instigations by the devil are inevitable and extremely violent the more holy the soul is. If you’re not holy - you don’t have to worry - not a good sign for spiritual welfare. For those pursuing sanctity it’s important to encourage, counsel and support one another in these matters esp. in these challenging times.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit