Do Subversive Weddings Challenge Amatonormativity? Polyamorous Weddings and Romantic Love Ideals
Do Subversive Weddings Challenge Amatonormativity? Polyamorous Weddings and Romantic Love Ideals

Summary/Abstract: Subversive weddings seem to challenge widespread norms regarding romantic love.Weddings have a social significance as capstones of romantic love narratives; often, they serve as symbols of romantic love. Changing their significance would thus be a powerful tool in changing widespread expectations and beliefs regarding romantic love or committed love relationships more generally. Insofar as amatonormativity (the expectation and normative expectation that everyone seeks and flourishes in the same type of dyadic, romantic, sexual love relationship) is harmful, this is a good thing. Polyamorous weddings, for example, seem to challenge the norm that romantic love relationships must be exclusive, and the prevalence of such weddings could increase social visibility of non-exclusive love relationships. It could also lead to greater visibility for other nontraditional life paths, such as prioritizing friendships over romantic love relationships, or abstaining from romantic love relationships. But can subversive weddings really subvert the prevailing norms? One problem is that if weddings – or attempted weddings – diverge too far from the social norms, they may not succeed in changing those norms because they will not be recognized as weddings at all. A second problem is that such weddings may lead to assimilation to, rather than subversion of, dominant norms. This poses a dilemma: if subversive weddings are not in fact weddings, it seems they cannot change the social significance of weddings in the way they are intended to do; but if they are weddings, their attempts at subversion could be undermined because they bear the social significance of weddings.

• Details
• Contents