Brides-to-be are told they are allowed to be a princess for day. Besides making a dent in the bridal pocketbook, does wanting to be a princess undermine women’s power?
Marriage in this country might be about a man and a woman, but planning a wedding is really about the bride. This is more than just tradition—it’s a capitalist driven idea that has managed to create a huge economic windfall for wedding vendors. It’s a fact that as the divorce rate has continued the increase, the annual cost of an American wedding has also increased. The estimated average cost ranges from $19,000 - $30,000.
Now the price wouldn’t bother me so much if it wasn’t laced with so much fairytale propaganda. Advertisers are no dummies, and they know how to make even the most secure woman feel cheap for not wanting to spend more than $1,000 on a dress she’ll wear only once in her lifetime.
A casual flip through a bridal magazine found me face to face with an ad in which a young bride-to-be was sitting on a throne in a shaded forest. In front of her, down one knee, was her groom, or rather “prince charming” by the way he was dressed. The ad was brilliant because it captured just what advertisers would love for women to believe – that a wedding is a temporary suspension of disbelief in fairytales and that a bride is in fact a princess. After all, princesses are unlikely to be found shopping in the bargain bin.
And what’s wrong with that you might ask? Besides unloading your hard-earned cash, is there any real problem with the idea that a bride ought to be treated like a princess? Is there really any harm for wanting to be Cinderella for a day?
I recently came across a study that attempted to provide a partial answer to these questions. Dr. Laurie Rudman at Rutgers University was interested in finding out the effects of romantic fantasies on women’s psyches. She measured women’s implicit, i.e. subconscious, endorsement of romantic fantasies. She also measured their conscious endorsement of the same romantic fantasies, i.e. how much they actually said they believed in them. Rudman’s first finding was that there was a large divergence between what women reported desiring and their subconscious feelings.
Her second finding was that only women’s subconscious endorsement of romantic fantasies predicted their interest in achieving personal power. Women who subconsciously endorsed romantic fantasies reported a lower desire for personal power.
It’s only one study, I know, but I offer it as some food for thought as to the effect of romantic fantasies on women. A desire for personal power need not be exploitive – it could also denote a desire to achieve, to lead, or to make an impact on others.
Regardless of their possible negative effects, romantic fantasies aren’t going away. Not only do they make for good movie plotlines, they are something that society – especially advertisers – would hate to lose.
Source: Rudman, L. A. & Heppen, J. (2003). Implicit romantic fantasies and women's interest in personal power: A glass slipper effect? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1357-1370.
