Would you be angry?

KiKi

Person_one wrote: »

I'm afraid this just isn't how it works at all!

You absolutely get to decide how important your relationship is to you, but as a society we have certain ways of declaring publicly how important it is and that's how we make decisions about invitations and so on.

Genuine question: why do you insist that this view is the only one?

I understand that you value etiquette highly, as it your right, but you keep telling people that this it only works this way, that as society this IS the decision, and this IS how it works.

It's not. It's one way for those who choose to. There are other ways, too. You seem like such a sensible person in your posts, that I'm really, really surprised that you can't acknowledge that 'etiquette' around weddings isn't followed by everyone, and that there is more than one way of doing things.

KiKi

Torry_Quine

melancholly wrote: »

i've never been given that little notice. 3 to 6 months ahead is normal and with only a few weeks notice, i'd be really irritated at having to find travel and accommodation that close, as it would be more difficult and more expensive. and while the couple/their family may be paying for a wedding, it gets expensive for guests and i'd like time to budget for buying the gift and paying for anything else over a few months, not all just beforehand. i've always had to rsvp at least 2 months before the day. any closer to the day and i'd honestly assume i was in the second tier of invites after others had said no!

To be honest surely anyone close enough to be invited wil be well aware you're getting married as it won't be a great secret. The difference is that I have never stayed overnight and always go home the same night. If they are that close they would be getting a present whether or not I actually go to the wedding.

I don't get this second tier of invites. I invited those I wanted to be there. A couple of people weren't able to come but it didn't cross my mind to ask anyone I hadn't asked in the first place. Work colleagues and other acquaintances were invited to the evening and that included spouses, surprised some think otherwise.

Plans_all_plans

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Work colleagues and other acquaintances were invited to the evening and that included spouses, surprised some think otherwise.

I think it depends entirely on the 'make up' of the guests: our rule was that a plus one was given when the 'partner' in question was also considered a friend of ours too.

The only exceptions to this was where the initial guest would not know anyone else at the wedding. So ex work colleagues got a plus one, as did the odd schoolfriend...because it would be rude in those circumstances to have a guest 'floundering' with no-one else they knew there.

All this thread proves is that there's no hard and fast rule on the etiquette of weddings!

Person_one

KiKi wrote: »

Genuine question: why do you insist that this view is the only one?

I understand that you value etiquette highly, as it your right, but you keep telling people that this it only works this way, that as society this IS the decision, and this IS how it works.

It's not. It's one way for those who choose to. There are other ways, too. You seem like such a sensible person in your posts, that I'm really, really surprised that you can't acknowledge that 'etiquette' around weddings isn't followed by everyone, and that there is more than one way of doing things.

KiKi

Oh I acknowledge that it isn't followed by everyone, but I think that's a real shame rather than a good thing!

Its just like I said before really, etiquette is a framework to keep things simple and help everybody get along. If we say that everybody gets to decide whether their relationship is serious enough for a wedding invite, it'd be a nightmare! Think about the practical implications.

Sticking to etiquette keeps it simple, and I'm afraid that its not just my opinion about formality and officialness of relationships, that's just how it is, ever applied for benefits or a student loan? Your partner is only your partner if you live with them or are married.

Torry_Quine

Plans_all_plans wrote: »

I think it depends entirely on the 'make up' of the guests: our rule was that a plus one was given when the 'partner' in question was also considered a friend of ours too.

The only exceptions to this was where the initial guest would not know anyone else at the wedding. So ex work colleagues got a plus one, as did the odd schoolfriend...because it would be rude in those circumstances to have a guest 'floundering' with no-one else they knew there.

All this thread proves is that there's no hard and fast rule on the etiquette of weddings!

Exactly, although some seem to think there is.;)

sassyblue

elvis86 wrote: »

Granted, it seems a weird way to go about things, issuing an invitation that specifically excludes your child, and yet then acknowledging that if you accepted the invitation you would probably need to bring the child anyway and that they would accept this.

However, I have to say that you sound just like the OP's mother. Your child might be the most important person in your life, but *newsflash* she might not be all that important to your cousin in the grand scheme of things.

Erm, what are you meant to do with a 5 year old child if we attended the wedding the rest of the family were attending, leave him alone with a packed lunch or with a total stranger?


By the sounds of it, I bet you don't make friends easily, so it's no wonder you [STRIKE]were forced to make up the numbers[/STRIKE] were able to afford to accomodate every distant relative. Rent-a-guest, much..?:D

Did you actually type that?! And you can make those assumptions based on a couple of sentences from the internet and assume you're correct? :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:


I bet they were so relieved! Maybe they knew what a narky c*w you were and hoped for this reaction all along!

Never had a problem with them before, despite them arguing with every tom, !!!!!! and harry in the family - it was just my turn that week.

Never a truer word...

If I felt compelled to do something so petty to someone on their wedding day, I don't think I'd bother going. Pathetic.
Don't worry, based on your character seen here, l'm sure they wouldn't miss you.

Not quite sure why you felt compelled to pull apart my post and make so many ridiculous assumptions.... but then since you've come to this thread all you've done is be aggressive to others, what's your problem? You're the narky c*w - or maybe you're my cousin? :rotfl:

POPPYOSCAR

Sassyblue

"newsflash" it really isn't worth it!!:)

sassyblue

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Sassyblue

"newsflash" it really isn't worth it!!:)

"newsflash" :rotfl:

You're right. Someone gunning for an argument methinks.

tescobabe69

mishkanorman wrote: »

Back in the dark ages eh ?

I was actually including those who may be widowed, its called being open-minded not odd or strange :mad:

I'm sure you're right.

bethl79

No I wouldn't be angry, I think it's fairly normal for a bride and groom to be to only invite the people that they want at their wedding. Personally the only people we wanted at ours were our immediate family - parents, brother and sisters and their respective spouses and children so that's who were there. It was lovely!