Oh my God, you guys. I just read that Hillary Clinton married Bill in her living room with only 15 guests -- that is so how I envision my own wedding. I'm totally voting for her!
I suppose that might be how I'm expected to respond to the Brides Decide Web site, which is sponsored by the Knot, the Nest and the Wedding Channel. I'm part of its youthful age demographic, after all, theoretically making me engaged, married or marriage obsessed. (Wrong!)
I am so very, very confused by this attempt at getting young women to vote via summaries of presidential candidates' platforms alongside detailed descriptions and photos of their weddings. Check out the site's "About Us" section: "BridesDecide.com motivates young women to make educated decisions about their community via the political process ... The site is designed to educate using a one-click, comparison shopping model aimed to simplify the research process for this busy audience alongside fun, relatable editorial about the presidential candidates (like how nervous they were the day they tied the knot)."
So young women (read: either married or soon to be married) are turned off by the confusing political process unless they're given a side-by-side, comparison-shopping guide to all the candidates. Only then will they feel comfortable deciding -- in much the way that they might choose just the right napkin treatment for their wedding reception -- who should run this country. If they aren't particularly gripped by any of the campaign issues they can at least evaluate candidates based on their wedding day performances. I mean, if a candidate can cope with wedding day jitters, certainly he or she can handle leading this country into war!
When did brides become a voting bloc? As a co-worker suggested, this is as clear a sign you'll get that the wedding industry is out of control (and its friggin' mind). It isn't targeting married women versus single women, after all. It's reducing all young women to the sort who are too busy getting teary-eyed and blubbery flipping through a wedding magazine -- either recalling their own special day or lamenting that their day has yet to come -- to thoroughly examine the presidential candidates. And it wants to encourage these people to vote? I kid!
Don't get me wrong. Honestly informing people about campaign issues and encouraging them to vote is great. What's next, though -- Cosmopolitan breaking down the candidates' platforms alongside a "Hottest Hopefuls" list? At what point is it no longer an admirable attempt at targeting female voters but an insult to womankind?