<p>Sluggbugg–I can relate! H and I were then living together (in sin!) on about $8,000/year (and food stamps). Had the wedding in my parents’ apartment with just immediate family followed by a celebration at the apartment with about 50 friends. I made and embroidered my wedding dress and H’s wedding shirt. My wedding ring came from a slice of wedding cake that my mother had received when she was single. (Tradition was that the ring meant that you would get married; a thimble indicated that you would be a spinster; she had received both.) My mother baked the wedding cake (a three-tiered affair with columns even)and made all the food including deboning and stuffing several chickens. Got a good deal from the photographer–one roll of film, an 8x10 and several 5x7s for $50. Had a minister officiate and H had to borrow money from his Dad to give him an honorarium (there was no set charge). H’s sisters and brother-in-law read from Corinthians and nephew (then 3) gave him the box with the rings. Of course, we wrote our own vows! Honeymoon was taking the train from Boston to NYC to visit in-laws and spend one night at the Plaza Hotel (wedding gift) and have dinner at the Four Seasons Restaurant (our treat to ourselves) and then to Philadelphia to visit friends. Real treat was missing plane (enroute to grad school in Idaho) and spending the night in Denver courtesy of the airline followed by flying first class the rest of the way.</p>
<p>Little Mother - Reading your post about living “in sin!” made me realize that this phrase isn’t heard much if at all anymore. It was certainly used frequently by our parents’ generation in describing the living arrangements of many of their offspring! I wonder if our kids have heard this phrase at all.</p>
<p>Nope, I’ve never heard that used.</p>
<p>MotherofTwo, this generation also doesn’t seem to use or know the meaning of the term “cohabitation,” either. (Just a Latinate way of saying living in sin.) They may get “shacking up” but even that’s not current.</p>
<p>Changes in accepted living arrangements change vocabulary. Eg., “Ummerr.” As in, this is my daughter’s “Umm… err…”</p>
<p>Mother of Two–So true. Another archaic phrase is “out of wedlock.”</p>
<p>TheDad–My younger sister-in-law’s significant other would refer to my in-laws as his “out-laws.”</p>
<p>Was’nt it one of Woody Allens characters that when told that “sex wasn’t dirty” he said " It is if you’re doing it right"!</p>
<p>“This is my daughter’s ‘friend’” has become an ambiguous phrase these days. Boyfriend? Girlfriend? Or just friend? (Or “friend with privileges?”)</p>
<p>“This is my daughter’s ‘roommate’” (post college) may carry the same ambiguity.</p>
<p>Social relations and language are both changing.</p>
<p>Like, “hooking up”?</p>
<p>Z: You’re 18, please help me understand “hooking up”–</p>
<p>Is hooking up any casual sexual encounter? Just kissing/petting? Up to oral sex? Would it include a one-night-stand with regular sex?</p>
<p>It seems a little vague to me…</p>
<p>Hooking up can include anything really, but if there is actual sex involved, that’s usually specified. Nobody would just say “oh they hooked up” and not give the juicy detail that actual sex was involved. Usually though, it just refers to kissing and some touching. (Oral sex/sex would be specified.)</p>
<p>2 scenarios:
In one, it’s analogous to “making out” (which I think you understand).
In the other, it means a random, casual encounter. As in “they hooked up at the party” (and don’t plan on doing it again) or, “he was so drunk he hooked up with three girls and couldn’t remember the next morning” You get the drift. </p>
<p>As the case with most slang, the definition is extremely fluid, and that is my take on it. Hope it helps :)</p>
<p>Thanks, I guess the fluidity of the definition is what had me confused. </p>
<p>So nice to have an interpereter! :)</p>
<p>I’ve read articles on hooking up, and in those, the definition was not fluid. Casual sex. I think it was the NY Times that enlightened me to what they called the way today’s teenagers prefer to socialize with the opposit sex. The article went so far as to say that in some crowds, it’s just considered dorky to have a boy or girlfriend. They interviewed teens who proudly gave 2 and 3 digit number reports of how many they had hooked up with.</p>
<p>How sad that it is dorky to be in love!</p>
<p>Could this trend be the natural outgrowth of these kids having had revolving-door caregivers in daycare, starting in babyhood, rather than deep attachments? Don’t flame me-- this isn’t meant to indict anyone-- but I really wonder what social trends are behind the major shift away from intimacy, and towards pleasure being so “self-based” (i.e., service me) instead of mutual, shared?</p>
<p>SBMom, I had similar confusion over “hooking up” and my daughter’s definition was close to Zante’s, not casual sex/sleepovers as I had assumed. We called that parking when I was growing, mostly because you didn’t do that in front of anyone else - too tacky.</p>
<p>SBMom, Please don’t lay another guilt trip on those of us working mothers whose children went to day care since infancy until you have some data showing that the morals and behavior of children whose mothers worked are significantly worse than those of stay-at-home moms! Based on the comments of my daughter regarding the behavior of some of her classmates (and these comments were definitely not aimed at somehow tricking me about her own behavior), I know that she thinks that the behavior being discussed here as common to her generation is disgusting. She was in daycare since infancy and doesn’t seemed to have suffered in this regard or in any other, for that matter. Sorry if you consider this a “flame” but your comments really did need to be answered by someone.</p>
<p>I think it has a lot to do with shows like Sex in The City, music with negative messeges about love, the divorce rate and yes, the decrease in children who have a stay at home parent (including mine, so don’t flame).</p>
<p>Motheroftwo, Cheers, and Littlemother, thanks for sharing your wedding stories. Lol, Cheers! If it’s any consolation, my mom hauled me out to some old bag’s house on the morning of my wedding to pick up an arch for our ceremony. It was a lovely thing, complete with plastic vines and yellow roses, and I had to ride in the back of my mom’s pickup to hold it down so that it didn’t fly out and land on the highway on the way home. Great planning, as usual, for my family. I looked like hammered **** by the time I got back! :D</p>
<p>And one more wedding story: On the day or my wife’s sister’s wedding we thoroughly decorated the groom’s car. Just before the wedding, we realized that the bridal bouquet was still at her parents’ house. Her father and I borrowed the groom’s car and drove home to pick up the flowers. As we drove back to the church - her father driving, me (male) sitting in the front seat holding the bridal bouquet, and the “Just Married” signs on the car - we got so many honks and smiles!!</p>
<p>Somewhere along the way I figured out that “hooking up” meant a sexual encounter and the phrase should NOT be used to describe meeting someone for lunch in the city. However, I did learn a new phrase from that oft cited NY Times Magazine article, that quaint term, “friends with benefits.” What a concept! Back in my day, we used to say, “You can’t ‘eff’ your friends” but now you can have friends with benefits. </p>
<p>My S was reading a boring twisted antiquated tale for his English class and actually did not know what the term, “with child” meant!</p>