I listened to someone once tell me the story of her own honeymoon. While driving to their destination, she had to go to the bathroom and asked her new husband (who was at the wheel) to find a place to stop. Her husband hemmed and hawed about interrupting their travel progress, and then when they did finally pull into a rest stop he pulled back out because it was crowded and there were no parking spaces. My client, who did not advocate for herself and her needs in order to keep the peace on this "happy day," was hurt and angry that he could not step outside his narcissism long enough to understand that her needs had to matter too. It was a rocky beginning for a marriage that has never really found its groove because of the limitations of both partners.
I have higher hopes for Rob and Celia, but they remind me of this couple at this moment. The person in the above story had some idea that she was marrying a self-absorbed man, but to have it underscored on her honeymoon over such a radically basic issue hit home in a way it never had before. Similarly, Celia knew this was an issue of Rob's, but facing it married takes it to a whole new level, especially since Celia thought there had been some resolution to the issue and that she had been heard in her concerns. There is no walking away from it now.
Yes, Rob is a tightwad, and as the keeper of a Pennsylvania Dutch heritage, I can appreciate that. I agree with Harold's summary of what this couple needs -- to be curious about one another at these times and to voice concerns regardless of the outcome. This is where the permanence of marriage comes into play. Will its permanence cause a couple to sweep things under the rug to keep the peace for the coming decades, since there is no way out, or will that permanence allow genuine struggle since the marriage will stand regardless of the turmoil within?