stevenpiziks (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
stevenpiziks) wrote2026-05-05 01:20 pm
stevenpiziks) wrote2026-05-05 01:20 pm
Micro-Weddings?
My previous post mentioned "micro-weddings." I looked them up briefly to be able to comment on them in the context of the post. Then, out of morbid curiosity, I read more about them. Turns out, micro-weddings are complete horseshit created by the wedding industry.
Are we surprised?
You would think from the name that a micro-wedding is a step above eloping. You get married at a courthouse or by a friend who got clergy papers online, with maybe one attendant per new spouse, then go to a restaurant or someone's home for some nice food and a bit of Costco cake. The idea is to have a wedding but not break the bank with a huge reception. Micro, right?
Of course not.
It seems that micro-weddings are for a mere 20 to 50 people. Also, the wedding industry is quick to say that you're supposed to have ALL the trimmings of a full-sized wedding. Dress, tux, custom bouquets, special boutonnieres, engraved rings, curated music, romantic reception at a unique or special location (like a rented winery, or perhaps a beach in Fiji) with fancy food, a decorated cake, and lively music.
Oh yes--the budget is anything under $20,000. (!)
I don't know about you, but spending $20,000 on a wedding for fifty people in a "unique" rented space doesn't sound to me at all "micro." It's blatantly obvious that someone out there created the idea of a micro-wedding as I described it in the second paragraph, and the wedding industry, terrified the idea would catch on, glommed onto it and loudly proclaimed that OF COURSE micro-weddings are the latest thing in economizing, but it's not a true micro-wedding without all the trappings of a full wedding.
That way, the only person who loses is the caterer. And the wedding couple, who spent the down payment on a house on their micro-wedding.
Are we surprised?
You would think from the name that a micro-wedding is a step above eloping. You get married at a courthouse or by a friend who got clergy papers online, with maybe one attendant per new spouse, then go to a restaurant or someone's home for some nice food and a bit of Costco cake. The idea is to have a wedding but not break the bank with a huge reception. Micro, right?
Of course not.
It seems that micro-weddings are for a mere 20 to 50 people. Also, the wedding industry is quick to say that you're supposed to have ALL the trimmings of a full-sized wedding. Dress, tux, custom bouquets, special boutonnieres, engraved rings, curated music, romantic reception at a unique or special location (like a rented winery, or perhaps a beach in Fiji) with fancy food, a decorated cake, and lively music.
Oh yes--the budget is anything under $20,000. (!)
I don't know about you, but spending $20,000 on a wedding for fifty people in a "unique" rented space doesn't sound to me at all "micro." It's blatantly obvious that someone out there created the idea of a micro-wedding as I described it in the second paragraph, and the wedding industry, terrified the idea would catch on, glommed onto it and loudly proclaimed that OF COURSE micro-weddings are the latest thing in economizing, but it's not a true micro-wedding without all the trappings of a full wedding.
That way, the only person who loses is the caterer. And the wedding couple, who spent the down payment on a house on their micro-wedding.