I normally dont have an issue with segregated wedding, but dislike it when it is extreme for no reason. Usually the segregation was there so bride andbgals can dress up without hijab...dance....let loose etc. I went to a wedding wherw it was extremely segregated, totally seperate rooms for men/women....and servers of that gender in each side. The bridal party did nothing....bride didnt take off her hijab....no music....so I just didnt get the point of being that strict.
It was a pain for myself and others with kids, bevause you just couldnt easily transfer kids to spouse when need be....etc.
I have been to other parties where it made sense. The bride n her cousinsnhad their hair down and even music/dancing planned....so it was nice to be just gals and have a blast.
The bride kept her jilbaab on which made me think what was the point of girls only.. but then again maybe she thought guys would still come in and out..
I've heard of people having two parties in completely different places.. can't get much more segregated.. suppose it works much better..
PCG:
I know that desi woman feel uncomfortable to dance or sing in front of unknown men.
This happens especially to women who have been brought up in a male dominating society, where even looking / talking to a man is frowned upon.
You may not understand this, as your upbringing may have been more liberal.
The bride kept her jilbaab on which made me think what was the point of girls only.. but then again maybe she thought guys would still come in and out..
I've heard of people having two parties in completely different places.. can't get much more segregated.. suppose it works much better..
I went to a wedding like that too.
But in that case, I felt bad for the bride and a lot of other people as men kept coming in and out kisi na kisi kaam se. At some point, I think the ladies just gave up.
One of my sisters didn't have a segregated mehndi per se - but it was a female only invitation. Up until then our parties were always mixed but that one (requested from the groom's side) was only women. I loved it. I thought it was awesome. We danced until our feet were sore and everyone had such a good time!
I respect anyone who wishes to have their weddings segregated. It's the hosts choice and every right to hold a wedding in any way they chose. I do however don't prefer them. I prefer to sit with my husband in a community where I don't know many people and usually end up sitting alone. Regardless of that I find them a little boring. One segregated wedding I went to was so packed that there weren't many seats. Any table I went to everyone had saved for family or someone else and so I literally had no where to sit. I had to wait outside in the hotel lobby till I could get a hold of my husband and we shortly left after that. I didn't really mind but in that case it was annoying. I went up to the brides mother to thank her for the invite and came out without making it an issue but I literally got ready for nothing. Since then I usually attend events when someone I know will be there otherwise my husband goes on our behalf or not at all. It's just easier for us. Unless its at a masjid people roll in clicks so its hard to mingle when you don't know very many people at a Pakistani wedding. That's my experience so I sometimes prefer not to attend.
Parties need to be segregated, just not along gender lines. All the conspiracy theorists who will talk political all eve, go in one area, all those doctors who will just talk medicine..(stop it FFS) go sit over there, all chichoray and mailay desi, go over there...yup right where TLK is sitting, and everyone who did not use a deodorant, go out for some fresh air.
uncles and aunties who do not want to be segregated, find a way to get around a table anyway even in segregated parties ..... so really nothing to worry about.
can someone tell me what is the point of a segregated wedding if the waiters and photographers and videographers etc are MALE?!??!!
In West, its fairly easy to find both male and female photographers/videographers for their respective audiences and for segregated weddings, people go with this option (not always though).
Even with a male photographer, I can imagine that women would be more comfortable since its just one or two people, who are mainly just focused on stage area so more parda-conscious women can stay in the back.
Seriously though I have no issue with segregated parties unless that becomes the norm. It's the hosts choice. People invited can decline or handle it in whichever way they want to. Went to a mehndi event recently where it was a combined event until singing and dancing started. Then the men were asked to move to an adjoining room.
What was funny was that some guys were called in to sing and dance since they were friends and family. I declined saying that I also am not going to get down and do the Harlem shake in front of random ladies ;-)
The events where I have been annoyed at the segregated sessions were when there was no proper facility for men, we get booted out and are wandering the hallways, only so long you can hang out in hallways and outside. Luckily, we bailed from there soon but the guys who had ladies in the family that were really into the while thing may had to wait outside for a few hours. Suckers.
Parties need to be segregated, just not along gender lines. All the conspiracy theorists who will talk political all eve, go in one area, all those doctors who will just talk medicine..(stop it FFS) go sit over there, all chichoray and mailay desi, go over there...yup right where TLK is sitting, and everyone who did not use a deodorant, go out for some fresh air.
Segregated parties would rock.
J
That is a cool way to segregate and one can even gender segregate within that combination if there are enough people.
I usually don’t mind segregated events except in the case of my brother in laws wedding. No one from the brides side does pardah or hijab and the only person in a Niqaab remained in her Niqaab the whole time. It was so pointless and boring.
U know that is the point of a segregated wedding?.... None of the women have to do hijab. The one with the niqab might have kept it on maybe because of male waiters or dj or the guys from the wedding family (brother, father) etc walking in and out as they please
U know that is the point of a segregated wedding?.... None of the women have to do hijab. The one with the niqab might have kept it on maybe because of male waiters or dj or the guys from the wedding family (brother, father) etc walking in and out as they please
I would think a family wants segregation because someone from the girl's side does hijab, but it wasn't the case. They are my relatives so i know that no one wears a hijab from the girl's side. I think I worded it wrong in my first post.
Even if they don't do hijab sometimes they opt for segregation because they want to dance but not in front of the guys. And why would it be boring on the girls side? The party still goes on on the girls side... It's the guys side that's boring right?
And it's not only the girls side that ask for segregation. The guys side does have females right. And sometimes it's also the case that only the groom is religious in the whole wedding party and he had always wanted his wedding to be a segregated event because he (or some other deciding member of the family) believes that's how it's supposed to be. This is besides the fact that none of the females do hijab. But as u know that's when all the women don their best clothes hair and makeup and then u have singing and dancing, so it's just a way of making it happen without religious ppl minding what's going on.
There was no music or dancing. I am just taking about this instance and no they are not very religious either. Neither side was.
Again I am saying I don't mind segregated if a lot of girls do hijab and wish to dehijab for the event and dance etc. I just didn't get the point of this segregation specifically. This was in Pakistan btw.
It was so pointless and boring.