It’s simply a fact that some people don’t like having their picture taken. Whether it’s because they think they come out looking ridiculous or that they want to be able to control every shot they appear in, there are men and women who just cannot stand appearing in candid photographs. At weddings, as you might imagine, this becomes a touch problematic.

At almost every wedding there comes a time — usually during the reception — when the photographer is making the rounds, snapping shots of wedding guests eating, drinking, dancing, and otherwise enjoying themselves. If the bride and groom happen to know a lot of photophobic individuals, what they end up with is a lot of pictures of hands covering faces or well-dressed people ducking out of the frame. It doesn’t exactly make for a great wedding album.

An acquaintance of mine who is planning to wed her girlfriend in the near future anticipated this problem and created a series of photographic rules for wedding guests. The main rule is as follows:

If you are at the wedding or reception, you are NOT ALLOWED to cover, duck, or otherwise hide your face when you think someone is trying to take a picture of you because you think you take such horrible pictures. I am freaking serious I will KICK YOU OUT. You will be playing on the swingset all alone with a piece of cake.

That seems entirely reasonable and understandable to me… well, except for the kicking out bit, which I take to be facetious. Really, who wants a bunch of shots of panicky-looking wedding guests waving their hands at the camera lens? But in case that seems less than reasonable to photophobes, my acquaintance drew up a number of sub-rules that clarify the main rule. Here are some of them:

1. Covering your face or, in some dramatic cases, hurling yourself under the table, is what makes a hideous photograph. Holy Batman almighty, there is nothing worse.

6. You won’t even be SEEING the pictures.

8. In fact, if you pull this Photos-of-me-are-so-hideous crap, we might blow your photo up to poster size and show it to everyone you know.

10. I mean, these are PROFESSIONAL photographers. Who only take good pictures. This is not your Uncle Joe with a disposable camera and the sun behind him so you have to squint and he shoots everyone from the top down so they look weirdly foreshortened and then you think that’s just how you looked because everyone says that the camera never lies.

What do you think? Is this an entirely reasonable thing for a bride and bride (or groom and groom or bride and groom or whatever you’re into) to ask of their wedding guests? While I wouldn’t suggest that soon-to-be newlyweds give their wedding guests specific instructions, I do think it’s a courtesy that guests should extend to their hosts automatically. After all, the snapshots the wedding photographer is taking will be some of the most precious keepsakes a couple will have, so it seems rather impolite to compromise them.

Don’t like having your photo taken? I have an easy solution for wedding guests! Simply avoid the photographer. Hint: That’s the person with the largish professional-looking camera equipment. Problem solved.

Photo credit: Make Pictures

Friday was a big day for supporters of marriage equality. That was the day the Iowa Supreme Court handed down its ruling in a four-year court battle, upholding a lower court decision declaring that a state law banning same sex marriage violates constitutional rights to equal protection.

Iowa lawmakers have “excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification,” the justices wrote.

To issue any other decision, the seven justices said, “would be an abdication of our constitutional duty.”

The county attorney who handled the defense case has said he does not intend to seek a rehearing. That means the only way to change this decision would be a Constitutional amendment. There are no known plans to do that during the current legislative session or the next, and the earliest such an amendment could reach public ballots is 2012.

In the meantime, Iowa same sex couples can expect to be issued marriage licenses as early as April 24.

At a news conference announcing the decision, plaintiff Kate Varnum, 34, introduced her partner, Trish Varnum, as “my fiance.”

“I never thought I’d be able to say that,” she said, fighting back tears.

Congratulations to Kate and Trish. Save a slice of cake for me.

Wow.

Just wow.

Last week I presented you all with this image for your snarking pleasure:

and you guys hit me back with some ten rib-tickling responses.

I admit that I wavered. I second-guessed. I even waffled, which was quite delicious. I always forget just how tasty and comforting waffles can be…but I digress, yet again.

In the end, there can be but one winner. That is, except when there are two so evenly matched that I am forced to declare a tie. Congratulations, Fabrisse and KTB. You are this week’s joint winners. You may pick the joint of your choice. In the event that you choose the same joint, you’ll just have to share.

What were the winning entries? Taken in alphabetical order of author, here they are:

Miss Havisham: The Early Years coming soon on HBO

and

Every good bride knows just how important it is to match your shoes and crinolines to the cake.

Congratulations, Fabrisse and KTB, and thanks to everyone who played.

“Who?,” you may ask. That’s all right. I hadn’t heard of designer Chrissy Wai Ching — a designer who specializes in contemporary wedding gowns with exotic touches, among other things — until recently, when Sarah G. sent me a link to Wai-Ching Clothing. Here are four examples of Wai Ching’s unique wedding gowns:

The Zolotova uses satin rope to add interest to pleated silk chiffon in old fashioned cream and modern greenish blue.

The L’Arbre flowing pairs silk charmeuse in varying complementary shades with satin rope detailing for a quilted look

The L’Arbre Bleu does the same thing, but replaces the original’s muted palette with stark white and two shades of blue.

And the Athena features pleated silk chiffon layered over charmeuse. The vividly-hued back ties serve double duty as a sash.

Like what you see? Though Chrissy Wai Ching is located in Seattle, WA, she is happy to work with customers remotely to design a one-of-a-kind wedding gown using hand dyed silks. The best part is that prices start around a very reasonable $500, which is not far off from what I paid for my mass market wedding gown. Why, oh, why do I find out about these designers two years later?

The creatrix behind Refinerii uses salvaged metals and found industrial objects as the raw materials with which she crafts unique works of art like this wire bridal bouquet.

She can even create a custom bouquet made with your choice of colors using salvaged aluminum wire, Swarovski crystals, freshwater or crystal pearls, glass beads, and other bits of sparkle. Intriguing, no? While we’ve delved deeply into alternative bridal bouquets and wedding flowers here at the blog in the past, this is the first time I’ve come across a bridal bouquet that is so… industrial. I think I like it. In fact, I’d go so far as to say I love it!

What say you?

Reader mkb is one of the few males who comments here at Manolo for the Brides, so it’s no surprise that it was he who informed me that Cyberoptix Tie Lab offers a 10-20% bulk discount on wedding ties for guys. Or gals, gal-ish guys, guy-ish gals, or anything in between, for that matter… like if you’re dressing a groomsmaid or best woman in dude’s duds or planning a wedding that falls somewhere on the LGBT spectrum. They even stock a selection of slender ties meant to look good on thinner, smaller frames.

Grooms can choose from any of the styles of tie on the Cyberoptix Tie Lab web site, but I’d recommend browsing their color selection first, as the company has a flickr page featuring its usual tie palettes. Don’t see any that float your boat? No prob. With enough lead time — think just two to three weeks, wow — they can usually find ties that will match your wedding color scheme.

And before I sign off, I wanted to let you know about the WEtv.com Ugliest Bridesmaid Dress photo contest ending on April 13.

Ever been forced down the aisle in a bubblegum pink bridesmaid dress with over-the-top tulle and big, poofy sleeves? Are you a former bride who made your bridesmaids wear a wild dress, but now regret your decision? Now’s the chance to show us your ugly dress! One day of embarrassment could earn you $5,000! Upload your picture today!

All you need to do is register at the site linked above and post a picture of you wearing that uncool bridesmaid frock. The winner will be determined by votes cast by a panel of contest sponsor employees, so don’t be put off by the Hot-or-Not style interface asking viewers to rate bridesmaid dresses on a scale of “pretty ugly” to “totally ugly.”