Living
Doin’ it our way
As more gay and lesbian couples wed, the ceremonies come in all shapes and sizes

Lou Ann Sandstrom, left, and Kathleen Kutschenreuter at their wedding recessional at Foundry United Methodist Church on Sept. 28, 2013. (Photo by Paul Morse Photography; courtesy the couple)
Like the couples themselves, same-sex weddings come in all shapes and sizes.
We got to know three local couples that each went about it in different ways.
Kevin Anthony Rowe, 31, married Will Shreve, 28, last Sept. 19 at the Jefferson Memorial. They kept it “small and quick” so they could tie the knot before Shreve left for the Middle East on Christmas Day for his deployment with the U.S. Navy.
Greg Alexander, 43, married his partner of 13 years, Paul K. Williams, 47, on Jan. 31 at the Baltimore City Circuit Courthouse.
Kathleen Kutschenreuter, 43, and Lou Ann Sandstrom, 54, did the more traditional “big church wedding.” They had about 130 guests when they wed last Sept. 28 at Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, an event that was also the day of their then-6-month-old daughter, Ava Kae’s, baptism.
For myriad reasons, each couple’s decision, they say, made the most sense for them.

Kevin Anthony Rowe, left, with husband Will Shreve, right. They were married Sept. 19 by Rev. David Lett, center. (Photo by John Ellis)
Rowe and Shreve met on a Sunday evening at Nellie’s Sports Bar in January 2012.
“It sounds cliché, but I knew from the minute I met him, this is the guy I was going to end up with,” says Rowe, a budget analyst at National Geographic who also tends bar on weekends at Town Danceboutique. “I’d had long relationships before … but I never had been so sure about something. …. In my mind, it was only a matter of time.”
He says they might have done a destination wedding had time not been so pressing, but they’re happy with how things worked out. They chose the Jefferson Memorial because it’s Shreve’s favorite D.C. memorial.
Rowe says it was all pretty easy to arrange. After downloading a form from the National Park Service website and sending $100, the permit was e-mailed back to them within about three days.
“It was super easy,” he says. “Once you get there, there are only certain areas you can have it, but you just ask at the little guard spot and they tell you where you can and can’t go.”
The ceremony lasted about 15-20 minutes and Rev. David Lett, a friend of the couple, officiated. They were at the site about an hour.
On the Thursday of their wedding, they had dinner beforehand and an after party at Number Nine, a gay bar on P Street, with balloons and Champagne.
Rowe says the separation is hard but he’s making do with Skype, texts and the like. They video chat every couple days and are planning a few trips throughout the year to see each other. Rowe says he keeps busy working two jobs and has great friends around to help fill the void.
Because they had lived together near Columbia Heights about a year before getting married, Rowe says the wedding itself didn’t change how their relationship felt.
“It kind of just felt like another day together,” he says. “We fit so well on every level and it’s so comfortable that just because the label was there now didn’t change anything.”
Greg Alexander, a magazine editor, thought he would feel pretty much the same way. He and Williams had lived together for about 10 years by the time they wed last month.
“It’s hard to describe it,” he says. “We’d been together 13 years and I didn’t expect it to feel any different. We’d exchanged rings on our 10th anniversary, just the two of us in the garden. But something about it, after it was done, not to sound cheesy, but it feels more real. When I look at my ring, it’s not just, ‘Oh, those are the rings we gave each other because we love each other.’ Now it’s more like, ‘Yes, we are married.’”
The couple thought about getting married when same-sex marriage became legal in Maryland in January last year, but decided to wait. When key parts of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) were repealed by the Supreme Court later in the year, Alexander says, “That was kind of the final push we needed.” They waited until 2014 for tax purposes.
“We were pretty sure this is what we wanted,” says Williams, who is president of Congressional Cemetery. “I think we were more concerned we might offend some family members or friends by not doing something bigger, but we talked about it with them and decided to do some nice dinners with our two families a few months later. That’s just kind of the way it worked out best for us, especially for our families and their schedules.”
Alexander says in early discussions that, “luckily we were on the same page about this.” They’d had large parties with family, friends, banquet halls, private chefs and that type of thing for each other on their respective 40th birthdays, so when it came time to tie the knot, they agreed simpler was the way to go.

Paul K. Williams, left, with husband Greg Alexander the day they married at the Baltimore City Circuit Courthouse. (Photo courtesy the couple)
He says there was some initial concern that doing it so low key might feel anticlimactic, but he says the courthouse didn’t have the bare bones feel he thought it might.
“I thought it might be a little two-second thing like going to jury duty or something, but we were pleasantly surprised,” Alexander says. “It’s actually pretty nice. The people were amazing, which kind of caught us a little off guard. … You go into a little room that’s decorated and they have an officiant do your vows. … We couldn’t get over how excited the city employees were. We had total strangers hugging us and telling us they were so happy two gay men could get married. We didn’t expect that from the Baltimore City Courthouse.”
The license was about $85 and there was an additional $25 charge for the civil ceremony. Three couples joined them for dinner afterward.
“I think the couple needs to really ask themselves how they want to remember the occasion,” Williams says. “I know when we had the big [birthday] party, it went so fast and it was so involved and complex, I barely remember the conversations we had. I think it’s just something that’s very individual and each couple needs to look at themselves and how they like to entertain and decide how they want to do it.”
Kutschenreuter and Sandstrom were struck by Rev. Dean Snyder’s homily when they visited Foundry United Methodist Church in November 2012. As he shared a story of a same-sex couple whose wedding he had officiated the previous day and Kutschenreuter and Sandstrom discovered the church’s social justice, community and LGBT advocacy work, it hit a nerve.
“We really knew we wanted a sacred space to really honor our desire to express our commitment in front of family and friends and we didn’t want to do it on our own, we wanted witnesses,” says Kutschenreuter, who works for the Environmental Protection Agency. “We had a desire to do it in front of a higher power … . To us, we felt for our marriage to have the best chance and to be the most grounded, we wanted it to be grounded in a spiritual context.”
They say the cost of the church was a “drop in the bucket,” considering what they spent on their reception. They said it was “less than $2,000” for the church, clergy and a team of musicians who performed. Foundry offers a discount to members.
“It’s between about $500 and $2,000 depending on how lean or heavy you want to go,” Kutschenreuter says. A reception was held that evening at the Hay-Adams Hotel.
“We have absolutely no regrets about it,” says Sandstrom, who works for the FBI. “We saw it as an investment and everyone had a fantastic time.”
“We did think along the way, ‘Oh my gosh, what are we doing, this is so stressful,’” Kutschenreuter says. “But we weren’t being elaborate just to be elaborate. We were trying to honor the fact that we’re older people, we have a daughter, it was Lou Ann’s Dad’s 90th birthday and both our dads walked us down the aisle, we had people coming from all over; there was just so much more to it than there would have been for a younger couple. But we knew this group of people would never be together any other time so we wanted it to be special. It was definitely worth it.”
Dear Michael,
I’ve been dating Mark for three years, living together for two, and I’m not sure he’s for me. We get along great but I’m questioning how attracted I am to him.
I was never crazy about him physically but he was such a sweet and smart guy that I wanted to date him.
Sex was never mind-blowing and the longer we’ve been together the more this is bothering me. I wonder if I could find someone who appeals to me more, physically.
On the plus side, I like him a lot. He has good values, shares my religious faith, which is hard to find in another gay guy, is responsible and has a good work ethic. Also, I just have fun with him and he’s always interested to hear what’s on my mind. He’s an all-around decent guy.
As I’m writing this, I’m thinking that he seems great and that I’m a fool for even questioning our relationship. But all my friends are always talking about the amazing sex they are having, and then I think I’m missing out on a key part of life because my sex life is comparatively lackluster.
I don’t want to settle. But how likely am I to find another guy who is as all-around a good catch as Mark, but with more sexual chemistry?
Michael replies:
I don’t think the right approach is to wonder about your chances for of finding someone better. Anyone you find will have things you aren’t crazy about.
For example, you might find someone whom you’re wildly attracted to sexually, but they’ll bore you or annoy you, or have values you don’t respect.
I understand that you aren’t wildly sexually attracted to Mark. The truth is that it’s extremely unlikely that you would remain wildly sexually attracted to anyone for that long. People tend to get used to each other over time. Sex can remain great, but more from closeness and love than heat and sizzle.
I work with people all the time who wonder if there is someone “better” out there. And I tell them, they’re never going to get through all the possibilities before they die. Instead, how about thinking if the guy you are with is someone you’d like to go with on this journey through life?
Mark’s attributes that you mention sound wonderful to me. After more than 30 years working with folks on relationships, and being in my own 30+ year relationship, I have learned a thing or two about what creates a relationship that is satisfying and good. A decent, kind guy with admirable values is an excellent start.
The question is, can you live with your sex life not being on an orgasmically hot mind-blowing level? I hope the answer is yes, because sex with anyone you pick is not likely to stay in that sort of realm for long.
Another point to consider: I don’t think you should get too caught up in what your friends are telling you. They may be having amazing sex, but are they all having it with the same long-term partner? As I mentioned, long-term sex can be great, but the excitement tends to be replaced by caring connection over time.
I’ll generalize here for a moment: Because so many gay men have many sexual partners, the kind of sex you have with someone new, whom you’re tremendously attracted to, tends to be glorified among gay men as the gold standard of sex. But it’s not realistic for sex with a long-term partner.
This glorification is a big problem: It leaves gay men who are not having torrid sex with lots of guys feeling like there is something wrong with the sex they are having, that they are missing out on something super fantastic. Just like you are feeling.
If you want a lifetime of ongoing hot sex, I don’t think you should be looking for a relationship. If you are willing to accept sex being a not-always fantastic, but perhaps consistently loving, often good, and occasionally great part of life with a kind decent guy, then Mark might just be the right partner for you after all.
(Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, New York, and all PSYPACT states. He can be found at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].)
Real Estate
Does Pride decor resemble Trump’s design aesthetic?
Glitter, gold, and rejecting the idea that a home should be understated
Interior design is often a balancing act between taste, personality, and restraint. Sometimes, however, restraint leaves the building entirely. Such is the case when the colorful exuberance of gay Pride-inspired decorating collides with the famously excessive decorating style associated with the current occupant of the White House. The result can be a fascinating study in maximalism, spectacle, and unapologetic visual overload.
Donald Trump’s personal decorating style has long been a subject of debate among designers and critics. Admirers see luxury and grandeur. Critics see something else: a dizzying display of gold leaf, marble, mirrors, crystal, and oversized furnishings that often crosses the line from elegant into what many designers would call tacky. More is rarely enough. If one chandelier sparkles, three are better. If a room has gold accents, why not make every available surface gold? (See Oval Office and ballroom rendition for details.)
In many ways, this excess shares common ground with certain Pride celebrations. Pride has never been about blending into the background. It celebrates visibility, self-expression, individuality, and joy. Rainbow colors, dramatic costumes, glitter, flamboyant artwork, and bold statements have long been part of Pride culture. Yet there is an important difference. Pride’s extravagance is often playful, self-aware, and rooted in personal expression, while Trump’s aesthetic has frequently been criticized for equating luxury with sheer quantity and visual intensity.
Combining these influences creates an interior that could best be described as “glamorous chaos.”
Imagine entering a living room in which gold-trimmed mirrors stretch from floor to ceiling. Crystal chandeliers hang above a bright rainbow velvet sectional. Marble floors gleam beneath metallic furniture that appears determined to reflect every available light source. Pride flags become framed artwork surrounded by ornate gold moldings. A room designed this way doesn’t whisper. It shouts.
Color is central to the concept. Pride-inspired interiors often embrace the full spectrum of colors. Trump’s style, meanwhile, traditionally favors cream, gold, black, and glossy finishes. Combining them means introducing vivid jewel tones against a backdrop of faux-palatial luxury. Emerald green chairs, ruby-red draperies, sapphire-blue accent walls, and gold-trimmed furniture can coexist in a way that feels deliberately theatrical.
The key word is theatrical.
Many professional designers spend years learning how to create visual balance. A Pride-meets-Trump interior intentionally ignores many of those rules. Pattern competes with pattern. Shine competes with shine. Artwork competes with furniture. The eye rarely gets a chance to rest. For some homeowners, that sounds exhausting. For others, it sounds like the perfect party.
Lighting offers another opportunity to embrace excess. Crystal chandeliers, mirrored lamps, illuminated shelves, and color-changing LED lighting can transform a room into something resembling a cross between a luxury hotel lobby and a Pride festival. The goal is not subtlety. The goal is spectacle.
A dining room inspired by this combination might feature a massive glass table, gold dining chairs, rainbow floral arrangements, mirrored walls, and enough crystal accessories to keep a polishing cloth busy year-round. Critics would call it gaudy. Fans would call it fabulous.
Artwork becomes particularly important. Pride-themed pieces featuring LGBTQ+ history, activism, and culture can provide meaning beneath the decorative excess. Without these personal and cultural elements, the room risks becoming little more than a collection of expensive looking, but not necessarily expensive, objects. Pride design can work best when it reflects identity and community rather than simply displaying color for color’s sake.
While normally a haven for restful sleep, bedrooms can take a similar approach. Plush velvet fabrics, oversized tufted headboards, metallic and mirrored finishes, colorful accent lighting, and dramatic artwork create a space that feels more like a boutique hotel suite than a traditional bedroom. Again, the challenge is avoiding the temptation to add one more decorative element to an already crowded visual landscape.
What makes this design combination interesting is that both aesthetics reject the idea that a home should be understated. Both embrace visibility. Both invite attention. Both encourage occupants to take up space unapologetically. Yet where Pride design often celebrates authenticity and self-expression, Trump’s decorating style is frequently criticized for prioritizing conspicuous luxury over cohesion and refinement.
The result is an interior style that many people would consider delightfully outrageous and others would consider a decorating nightmare. Either way, nobody is likely to forget it.
In the end, a Pride-inspired interpretation of Donald Trump’s famously over-the-top aesthetic would be colorful, glittering, excessive, and impossible to ignore. It would break nearly every rule of minimalist design while embracing the philosophy that if something is worth doing, it is worth overdoing. Whether one sees that as fabulous or tacky may depend entirely on how much gold leaf and rainbow velvet one can tolerate in a single room.
Valerie M. Blake is a licensed associate broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.
Ragtops rock! For drivers looking to carve their own lane, the world already has enough sensible crossovers, minivans, and pickups. These three convertibles trade practicality for sunshine, wind, and the occasional wild-hair day.
BMW Z4

$58,000
MPG: 25 city/33 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.2 seconds
Trunk space: 10.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Strong engines. Uber comfy. Stylish.
CONS: Expensive. Final year of production.
Act fast, Bimmer fans, this is the last year the BMW Z4 roadster will be produced. Along with the entry-level xDrive30i and high-performing M40i, there is a Final Edition model.
Since 2002, the Z4 has expertly balanced performance, comfort, and style. The long hood and short rear deck still look fantastic. The stance is athletic. And with the top down, this car gains an extra dose of drama.
Under the hood, BMW offers turbo power that feels eager rather than overwhelming. Acceleration is brisk. The steering precise. The chassis composed.
Upgrading to the premium models lets you scoot from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.9 seconds. But—ka-ching!—the MSRP soars to $79,000.
Available in manual or automatic transmissions, this convertible can sprint through mountain roads on Saturday and soothingly devour highway miles on Sunday.
As for the interior, it blends luxury and functionality. Materials feel expensive. Controls are easy to use. And the seats are supportive.
For me, other ragtops may be more party hearty, but the Z4 is low-key, impeccably tailored and still the center of attention. Think suave James Bond versus sparkling RuPaul.
MAZDA MX-5 MIATA

$32,000
MPG: 26 city/35 highway
0 to 60 mph: 5.5 seconds
Trunk space: 5.0 cu. ft.
PROS: Nimble. Lightweight. Affordable.
CONS: So-so power. Wind noise. Limited space
For decades, the Mazda MX-5 Miata has followed a simple formula: Keep it light, keep it balanced and make every drive feel special. The result: Automotive comfort food that never gets old.
Many vehicles grow larger every year, but the Miata has remained Lilliputian in a way that feels rebellious. You sit low. The controls are user-friendly. Visibility is excellent.
No, the engine power won’t blow you away. But this beachcomber isn’t about brute force. It’s about how the Miata makes you feel wonderfully alive, whether tootling along city streets or a winding road.
Inside, the dashboard is sparse but echoes a traditional sports car. Large analog tachometer and analog speedometer. And while the 8.8-inch infotainment display is dinky, it works nicely.
Alas, storage is limited. The cabin is snug. And taller drivers may wish for a bit more room.
Yet somehow even those compromises feel almost charming. This ride knows exactly what it is and refuses to apologize. Sort of like showing up to Pride wearing what makes you happy rather than chasing trends.
MINI COOPER

$27,000
MPG: 28 city/39 highway
0 to 60 mph: 7.9 seconds
Trunk space: 5.2 cu. ft.
PROS: Playful styling. Fun handling. Extra stowage.
CONS: Ride can be firm. Not a speed demon.
Mini Coopers approach life with a wink and a grin. Rounded headlights. Compact dimensions. Cheerful styling. It all works to create a vehicle that looks like it’s having fun before you’ve even started the engine.
Driving this ragtop is equally entertaining. The steering is quick, and the chassis feels eager to please. Overall performance is lively rather than blistering.
The cabin leans heavily into Mini’s playful design language. Circular elements appear throughout. Details feel intentionally quirky. Many modern interiors seem created by committees that fear excitement. This cabin feels designed by someone who enjoys color, personality and perhaps spontaneous dance breaks.
Unlike the BMW Z4 and Mazda Miata, the Mini offers a small rear seat. “Small” is doing some heavy lifting there, but the extra space adds flexibility. It may not be enough room to comfortably squeeze in friends, but you can easily stow a few bags here.
To me, driving this convertible feels like attending the world’s friendliest block party. People notice it. People smile. Sometimes people even wave.
-
District of Columbia5 days agoNew report says LGBTQ young adults in D.C. facing affordability crisis
-
Nepal5 days agoNepalese Supreme Court issues landmark marriage equality ruling
-
a&e features5 days agoTelevision loses a legend, longtime ‘Will & Grace’ director James Burrows
-
Delaware5 days agoDel. AG Jennings seeks third term touting LGBTQ support, decline in crime
