When my daughter got married, the Pastor asked, "Who gives this woman to be married?". I answered, "Her mother and I do." Tradition. Anticipating that question I prepared a letter to my son-in-law. It went something like this.

This afternoon, I walked my baby girl down the aisle of the church and when the pastor asked, "Who gives this woman to be married?" I answered, "Her mother and I do." But just what did I really give? I don't and never did own my daughter. She was and is not property. She a full grown, independent woman. Up until today, I had stewardship of her. It's that stewardship that I gave. From the day she was born until this afternoon, I was responsible to see that she was clothed, fed and housed. If she stubbed her toe, I was responsible to care for that stubbed toe. If her feelings were hurt, I was responsible to comfort her. If the had a problem it was also my problem. When she needed to be hugged, I was to hug her and make her feel loved.

It is this that I gave to you. Oh, I'll still love her, but it is you on the front lines now. I'm the backup. I'll be there for the two of you, just as I was there for her, but it's you responsibility to see to it she has all she needs to feel complete.

Take good care of my baby girl.

Your father-in-law,

Pat.

married her fiance in Central Park, NY. None of us were there. No one gave her away nor, I suspect, did she promise to obey.

I think the possession of another person is a metaphorical thing and is said mostly as a way of ensuring they don't date someone else during the relationship. In equal relationships both parties would probably admit some sense of ownership of the other as well as giving themselves to the other party as a form of mutualism. Remember, the main point of giving an engagement ring was to demonstrate 'ownership' of the woman by the man, marking her as his property. In a romantic sense, it was also demonstrating his wealth and his commitment to her by spending all that money.