You be the judge:
The "Honey Do Whistle."
A reader, Jessica, sends this picture of the cake from her pirate-themed wedding:
They are about 1/2 original glazed and 1/2 cream filled. In total, we bought 7 dozen donuts for less than $50 and everyone LOVED the cake. Took about 15 minutes to assemble. The ribbons were tied around wooden skewers. The little flags are hand-made from labels b/c I couldn't find any. The coins are from our shower, which my friend threw as a surprise. The duckies are from our bathroom (washed in the dishwasher before going on the top of the cake).
Thanks, Jessica. Is this part of a growing craze? Send me your donut wedding cake pics and I'll put them in future posts.
The too-horrible-to-imagine-but-too-fascinating-to-look-away train wreck that was Star Jones' excrutiatingly long engagement and extravagant wedding is finally - FINALLY - over. (Now we can look forward to the excrutiatingly long divorce procedings and extravagant settlement coming in about two years, when the terms of Star Jones' alleged pre-nuptial agreement expire and hubby Al Reynolds can lay claim to some of the Payless spokeswoman's money.)
Has there ever been a more cynical and crass exploitation of one's own wedding for monetary gain and publicity? With everything from the cake to the guests' travel up for sponsorship, I'm surprised the new Mrs. Al Reynolds didn't walk down the aisle in a NASCAR-inspired wedding dress, covered in logos for Tide, STP oil and Marlboro cigarettes. She even made the annual Today Show wedding contest seem downright tasteful. It's been reported that homosexuals across the country closed their copies of US Weekly, scratched their heads in befuddlement and wondered, "And everyone thinks we're threatening the sanctity of marriage?"
With dollar signs clouding her field of vision, Star lit into "View" co-host Joy Behar yesterday for the crime of wearing pants to the wedding. We all know that wearing white is a good way for a guest to draw the woman of honor's ire, but in the micro-managed world of celebrity weddings it doesn't take much to turn Dr. Jekyll into Mrs. Bride.
Jones was especially upset at Behar for snapping pictures in violation of a rule meant to protect the newleyweds' contract with InStyle magazine, which had bought the rights to publish exclusive wedding photos. I don't know what Behar is paid for her hosting duties on "The View," but I'm sure it's enough that she wouldn't have sold the pictures to the tabloids to pay her rent.
When Behar commented that her pants-wearing, photo-snapping rule breaking was meant in good fun, Jones replied, "Rules are meant to be broken and people are meant to not get invited to the next thing." The next thing? Is she already planning another wedding? God help us all.
In Star's defense, it's not unheard of for even the most level-headed bride to lose her cool. For example, my wife might have been upset had someone rearranged the seating cards at our reception, as "View" newbie Elisabeth Hasselback did at the Jones-Reynolds affair. But then again, L doesn't have a national TV show on which to berate those who commit such insignificant violations of etiquette.
Congratulations, Star. Instead of basking in the glow of a joyous celebration in the company of your new husband, you berated Joy Behar in front of millions.
Our friends at MatriMony Mony have a new website. There are a couple of videos which will give you a sense of the choreography they'll do for your first wedding dance. L and I had them do our first dance and loved every minute of it.
The amazing thing about this gossip item is not that Nicky Hilton,had contemplated keeping an heirloom engagement ring, but that there is, apparently, an attorney in Vegas who specializes in annulling celebrity quickie marriages.
Nicky Hilton is free to marry her actor boyfriend Kevin ("Entourage") Connelly. Paris' kid-sister had her 85-day marriage to Todd Meister annulled Monday. The couple may not have been entirely sober when they swapped vows at 2:30 a.m. on Aug. 15 at Vegas Wedding Chapel. Neither side sought any compensation, sources told the Las Vegas Review Journal, which means Hilton returned Meister's heirloom diamond ring worth a reported $1 million. Meister, 31, was represented by David Chesnoff, who also negotiated Britney Spears' annulment after her 55-hour marriage to childhood pal Jason Alexander.
L and I just sent out another batch of thank-you notes for some gifts we've received since the wedding. We still have about five left to do if we don't receive any more gifts in the coming months. Still, it's been nice to see Kenny, our UPS guy, every so often as his visits and the gifts he brings from friends and family are nice reminders to me and L of our newlywed status.
On a side note, someone emailed me to ask what to do with some of his unwanted gifts. This fellow received some artwork and a set of salad tongs that simply would not go with the new apartment he and his wife are buying. He wasn't sure what store they were from, so he couldn't return them for credit or exchange them for something more aesthetically pleasing. As they are moving soon, he wanted to know how to best get rid of them.
Before I offer my advice, I should issue this disclaimer: never get rid of a gift if there is any chance of the person who gave it to you coming to your home. They'll want to see it, want to see you using it, and will be offended if it's not around.
My intial thoughts:
Regifting - Not the best option, since if you didn't want it, why would your friends?
Garage sale - Worth doing only if the person who gave you the gift doesn't live in your neighborhood.
Ebay - The safest option as far as I'm concerned, as the anonymous nature of the Internet means there is little danger of a relative being offended when they find out you are selling their gift.
Charity - The most socially conscious of the options I could think of, although just because people are poor doesn't mean they don't have good taste.
I'd love to get more suggestions. Any thoughts?
As they process their grief in classic Kubler-Ross style in an effort to understand Tuesday's election results, there has been much talk among otherwise progressive, liberal Americans that gay marriage hurt John Kerry.
Homophobia helped George Bush. (Even though only 22% of voters identified "moral values" as their primary reason for voting for Bush, in a race as tight as this one those voters helped put him over the top.)
Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, is taking a lot of the heat for allowing gay couples to marry this year, with some saying it provided the right with just what it needed to motivate its base and with still others going so far as to call gay marriage the "Nader of 2004."
Nader siphoned votes from Democrats by claiming in 2000 that there was no difference between Bush and Gore, a claim that anyone who hasn't been living under a rock for the last four years knows to be patently false. Newsom allowed tax-paying, law-abiding, adult couples who love other to enter into a legally sanctioned, binding relationship. Nader supporters in 2000 were right to abandon him in droves in 2004. Gay rights supporters in 2004 will not abandon their beliefs in 2008.
And although though his position on civil unions was more a matter of political convenience than conviction, I now have some newfound respect for Senator Kerry. Apparently, President Clinton recommended that Kerry come out in favor of the state ballot measures banning gay marriage. Now, I waited in line for six hours to get Clinton's autograph when his book came out, but I feel ashamed that a president who did so much to lift up so many people was willing to sacrifice an oppressed minority on the altar of appeasement. Kerry, to his credit, did not flip-flop and did not take Clinton's advice.
To the Editor:
Heroically, Mayor Newsom identified a a deep social imbalance and did
everything in his power to correct it. While taking a stand on gay
marriage in San Francisco might not seem like an act of courage, I would
like to believe that Newsom considered the national implications of his
plan before moving forward. The mayor acted, and acted decisively. Isn't
that the same kind of assuredness so many Americans admire in President
Bush, even if they don't agree with his policies?
Institutionalized racism was not overcome by counting on federalism. It
took Supreme Court decisions, an executive order to desegregate the armed
forces, Congressional legislation and a president to sign it to push civil
rights to the forefront of this country's domestic agenda. Would that we
had such courageous leadership in Washington today.
I am afraid that wait-and-see paths to equality will give false hope to
those seeking justice. Counting on younger, more tolerant generations to
grow into older, more tolerant voters is a weak strategy if there ever was
one. Political identification tends to grow more conservative with age,
and the idealism of young voters today might be pushed aside by their
concern for personal economics in the future. And, let's face it, the 92%
of Mississippians who voted to ban gay marriage aren't going to stop
teaching their children and grandchildren to hate faggots anytime soon.
It is not liberal, progressive Americans who should be doing the soul
searching, it is moderate Republicans - who allowed a radical agenda to take
over their party - who now have a serious question to ask themselves. Are
their tax cuts worth the disenfranchisement of tens of millions of
Instead of decrying a mayor's decision to cure one of society's ills,
moderates and progressives of all stripes should be decrying the
president's top political advisor for exploiting it.
I'll go back to covering celebrity marriages and grooms stuff shortly. For now, I leave you with this story, forwarded to me from a friend who found it on this blog. I think it perfectly illustrates the idiocy of blaming a minority for the troubles heaped upon it.
An SS officer walks up to a Jew on the street, pushes him onto the ground, and demands, "Who is the cause of all the troubles in the world?" The Jew answered, "the Jews." "That's right," says the Nazi. "And the bicycle riders," adds the Jew. The officer asked him "Why the bicycle riders?" and he responds, "Why the Jews?"
UPDATE: Salon published my letter.
Our job of representing the faces of disappointed Kerry supporters continues in an article on CNN.com today.
If you happen to see the photo anywhere else, please let me know.
Just call me an international man of letters. Stag & Groom, the British wedding magazine, published an article of mine which was based on my first post on this site. They will be publishing more of my writing in a series of articles based on my experiences as an involved groom.
I should be getting my copy in the mail soon, but if you are in London you can find yours on newsstands now.
I'm not going to turn this site into a daily political rant, but since politics are still fresh on everyone's minds, I thought it was worthwhile to revisit a post I did in August. Shortly before our wedding, I received this card from the White House:
As I mentioned in the August post, I'm left-of center on most political and social issues, but was still excited to get mail from the White House. L and I had sent a save-the-date card to the White House greetings office in the spring. Whoever is in charge there followed through, sending a note of congratulations from the president and first lady shortly before our wedding. Receiving this card gave me an idea. Here's what I wrote back in August:
At a risk of offending my readers, however, allow me to describe something I was thinking after I read the card. Would the White House send greetings to gay and lesbian couples? If I have any readers in same-sex relationships who are engaged to be married...I'd love it if you could do a little experiment for me. Send your invitation to the White House and see if you get a response. I see no reason why wishes of congratulations and statements that a marriage celebrates "your love and commitment to each other" should be limited to heterosexual relationships.
I was hoping that this experiment would only last through January 20th and that we'd continue the American tradition of progress in all areas of equality by electing a reality-based president. Alas, the huge number of "values-based" voters who turned out for Bush have unfortunately extended the time during which my experiment can continue.
But, when life hands you lemons...
I'd like to keep this experiment going. If you are a gay or lesbian couple entering into a marriage or civil union, please send your wedding invitation to George and Laura. Here's the address:
The Honorable George W. Bush and Mrs. Bush
The White House
Attn: Greetings Office
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500-0039
Remember that the president, despite his base's overwhelming opposition to just about any form of gay marriage, flip-flopped on the same issue right before the election, taking a more nuanced view that may have made an exception for civil unions in an effort to appeal to moderate voters. Let's see if the president, as a man of steely resolve, sticks to his beliefs.
Send your invitations to the White House and, if you get a response, scan the outer envelope so that it shows both of your names and email it to me. (The cards inside don't have names on them.) If I get enough responses, I might spin off this website to post a few. We'll see what happens.
Also, if you use the White House website to make your request please note that it asks for a form of address: Mr., Ms. Dr., etc. Please do not lie and say that you are Mr. and Mrs. when you are really two men or two women. Mailing an actual invitation to the White House will be much more effective and will head off any criticism that we are duping the president and first lady. Social justice is born from truth.
Remember, either you're with rational, reality-based people or you're with the fundamentalists. Thanks for your support.
L and I were in Boston, in the front row at the Kerry-Edwards rally in Copley Square. We even got caught on film for the BBC News' website. (The source of the above photo.)
It was a long, long, long, wet, long night. Plus, it was disheartening to wake up this morning to find that 11 states - 11 states that have lost jobs, 11 states that are paying more for health care, 11 states that are having problems paying for education, 11 states that are dealing with environmental problems, 11 states that are sending young men and women to Iraq - decided to overwhelmingly ban gay marriage. Where are our priorities? When war, a bankrupt economy and a polluted sky make life near impossible for them, future generations will not look upon us kindly.
Update: the same picture was also used in todays New York Daily News with the caption "John Kerry supporters in Boston evince disappointment as they watch results trickle in." One part disappointment with two parts fatigue. It was close to two in the morning when that picture was taken.
We're back in New York now, which seemed a little quiet when we arrived this morning. Perhaps P. Diddy has begun fulfilling his promise to kill non-voters.
There's a rumor that I am mentioned in this month's "Modern Bride" in an article on groom blogs. I can't get to a newsstand right now and, even if I could I'm not sure I'd want to endure the strange looks I get when people spot a man flipping through a bridal magazine.
If you happen to have a copy and see this rumored article, please let me know. Thanks!