Some Eye-Opening Experiences Christmas Shopping

Today, I decided to use my lunch hour to get some Christmas shopping done for my husband (honey, if you're reading this, you might want to stop now, unless you want your surprise to be ruined. Ok, thanks.) Anyway, as this is our first Christmas together as a married couple, I wanted to get him an ornament commemorating that milestone.

I was disappointed, however, because all I found were ornaments that said, "Our first Christmas together." No, this isn't our first Christmas together; it's our first as husband and wife, yes, but it's our eighth Christmas together.

I think the reason this bothers me is because it somehow paints the unmarried relationship as less important, less tangible. Now, let me be the first to say that I think marriage is a wonderful, beautiful thing, and it SHOULD be celebrated. But why is it that just because we signed the piece of paper, we now are officially a couple? What about the previous 7 1/2 years, in which we were committed, monogamous, and completely in love? Do those years and milestones not count for anything? Why is everything measured solely from the date of marriage? It seems as though that would invalidate the many tangible and real experiences leading up to one's wedding.

And what about those who choose, of their own volition, to abstain from the legal aspect of marriage (such as Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn, or Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon) while still living out the ideal of marriage in every other way? It also seems to be a slap in the face for the many homosexual couples across the nation, who, as much as they would desire it, can't get married. We're saying, "Sorry, guys (and girls), it's only the LEGAL marriages that count. Your relationship? Well, sorry, but that's not real."

Even when we were looking for wedding invitations and the like, it bothered me. There was this one GORGEOUS invitation, but I was irked by the wording of (something along these lines), "From this day forward, I promise to love you, honor you, and forsake all others." Now, I don't have a problem with the loving, honoring, and forsaking all others part (indeed, that's what we put in our vows), but I do have an issue with the first part of the sentence. So it's only from the wedding day forward that you need to love, honor, and be faithful to your partner? The many months or years before the wedding somehow don't count, because, what, you don't have the piece of paper? You can go ahead and treat the relationship as somehow "less real" because you haven't had the big wedding and reception yet? (This is also my main issue with bachelor parties, or "the groom's last night as a single guy," as some men like to claim. No, his last night as a single guy was the night before he met his future wife. It's most definitely NOT the night or two before his wedding, and it's most certainly not an excuse to have naked women dancing lasciviously all over him. But I digress). Dan and I were as in love and as committed to one another from the time we met in 2000 as we were on our wedding day earlier this year (and, indeed, still are). All a wedding does is make the relationship legal; it shouldn't make it any more valid or committed. If it does, then you probably shouldn't be getting married.

Some may say I'm reading too much into this (and that could be a definite possibility), but it just sort of rubbed me the wrong way. Not too much, of course, and yes, I still ended up getting Dan a cute ornament. It's a snowflake that says, in silver writing, "Our first Christmas together 2007." We'll hang it every year on the tree, and when our kids ask about it, we'll say that was the first year we were legally married, but we'd been married in our hearts from the moment we met.