"I feel strongly that the longstanding tradition of having one’s father or other prominent male figure walk a woman down the aisle is a tradition worth tossing."

"This tradition always felt frankly gross to me, deeply rooted in patriarchy, and the notion that a woman must belong to a man."

Said Lauren Nolan, a recent bride, quoted in "Walking Down the Aisle Alone/Meghan Markle did it. Many other brides choose to do the same, often because of the sexist origins of the tradition."

In the case of Meghan Markle, she was estranged from her father. Is there a trend of women who love their living, ambulatory father choosing to walk down the aisle alone?

Instead, Ms. Nolan said, when she met her fiancé at the altar, she was making a joint decision to combine their lives, rather than participating in a handoff between men.

If it's a matter of the man and woman in exactly the same position, fully independent human beings joining their lives together, why is he standing at the altar while she takes a long, slow walk for the assembled crowd? Isn't that also a relic of the sexist tradition?  

If you keep the bride's walk and the groom's positioning at the altar, why are you excluding your beloved dad from the old-time-y spectacle? What does it mean for the groom to stand at the altar and watch his bride slowly approach? Is that really devoid of sexism? But you want to deprive Dad of a profound moment that he may have dreamed of all your life? Why? 

If the honest answer is that you don't have a sufficiently worthy dad, fine. Do your solo walk. But don't make other women feel they need to sideline their dear dad to prove their feminist mettle. Your solo-walk wedding isn't solidly founded on feminism. It's selective feminism — cafeteria feminism. Show us a sacrifice you're making for feminism, and maybe you'll have some moral standing. Even still, people putting on the theatrical show that is their wedding should figure out their own values. They don't have to put feminism first. 

But if they're going to preen about putting feminism first, they'd better actually do it. Let the bride and groom walk separately down the side aisles and meet in the middle. Let the groom wear an outfit as gaudy and eye-riveting as the bride's. Let petals be scattered in his path. Give him a veil too. Let them lift each other's veils simultaneously. And so on.

"What would you say to people who may feel that while you're standing by your friend, it appears you gave validation or safe haven to something that he has uttered that is racist, even if you don't agree?"

Said Sheryl Underwood, quoted in "'The Talk' goes on hiatus after Sharon Osbourne defends Piers Morgan/On Wednesday's episode of 'The Talk,' Sheryl Underwood and Sharon Osbourne got into a heated exchange" (NBC). 

I hope you have a sense of how convoluted that is. The accusation of racism against Piers Morgan is already flimsy, but Sharon Osbourne is getting intimidated for saying something supportive about her friend — as if the new rule is that you have to proactively denounce people, or you yourself will become the target. Not only is the first person (Morgan) denied a fair hearing, but the second person (Osbourne) — the one who tries to slow things and ask to look carefully at the accusation — is deemed an accomplice. 

We saw that term "cancel adjacent" the other day. Osbourne is caught on camera experiencing the terror of being cancel adjacent.

Osbourne said: "I feel like I'm about to be put in the electric chair because I have a friend who many people think is racist, so that makes me a racist."

From the NBC article:

Osbourne said she didn't believe Morgan's rejection of Meghan's admission of mental health struggles was racist. Osbourne then pivoted, claiming she was being unfairly called a racist.

While trying to go to break, Underwood became tongue-tied. As she said, "Well we'll be right back," Osbourne shot back at Underwood. "Well what?" she asked. "Well what?"

Osbourne continued to press Underwood once the show returned from break. "I will ask you again Sheryl. I've been asking you during the break. I'm asking you again. And don't try and cry because if anyone should be crying, it should be me," she said. "This is the situation. You tell me where you have heard him say ... educate me, tell me when you have heard me say racist things! Educate me, tell me!"

Underwood's response contains no basis for the accusation of racism:

Underwood explained.... "To not want to address that because she is a Black woman, and to try to dismiss it or to make it seem less than what it is, that's what makes it racist"...

Ironically, Underwood's reliance on her own intuition — Morgan seemed racist to her — is the same approach to coming up with an opinion that Morgan used — Markle seemed like a liar to him.

ADDED: To put things back in proportion:

With @OzzyOsbourne at @BSTHydePark 2014 #fbf pic.twitter.com/sf8jJw9vlW

— Sharon Osbourne (@MrsSOsbourne) March 5, 2021