Wedding dress code and other demands!

balletshoes

skintchick wrote: »

If this were just a party someone was throwing, would all of you object to a dress code then? Just wondering.

I've never been to a party with a dress code - even if it was fancy dress, it was never "compulsory fancy dress".

skintchick

balletshoes wrote: »

I've never been to a party with a dress code - even if it was fancy dress, it was never "compulsory fancy dress".

Perhaps this wedding isn't compulsory either?

I don;t have a huge opinion either way on this, I'm just wondering things out loud.

EDIT: Although if I threw a fancy dress party I would expect everyone to come dressed up even though I would not have put 'compulsory' on the invitations. I would think it was a given that if I stated a dress code, it was compulsory. Same for a posh do, if I put black tie I'd expect everyone to come in black tie.

Kirri

Barbiedoll & Dark Star, if you combined your suggestions it would be even better, hideous and identical outfits, oh would love to see that in the photos

Would be worth going then..

securityguy

Person_one wrote: »

Dictating colours and being really specific is never really very hospitable. Even if its a fancy dress or themed party then it should only be a suggestion, not an order or a condition of attending.

Someone with class would make their guests feel welcome and at ease. A spoilt silly girl would regard them as extras to be ordered around. Weddings of the first type are a joy to be part of. Weddings of the second type are to be avoided, although mockery is also OK.

The whole thing reeks of new money and no style. You don't order people to buy new clothes because people with class have wardrobes, and therefore will not be wearing clothes so new the labels are still showing. The sign of a gentleman is not buying a dinner suit; it's having several to choose from, including an elegant one left by your father.

There's a hilarious claim from upthread that weddings are about "aligning houses" --- that's true, if you're a member of the minor aristocracy, and members of the minor aristocracy have weddings that look like the opening reel of Four Weddings, not like My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding. Matching clothes for guests? All the class of Coleen Rooney, without the intellect.

Person_one

skintchick wrote: »

Perhaps this wedding isn't compulsory either?

I don;t have a huge opinion either way on this, I'm just wondering things out loud.

EDIT: Although if I threw a fancy dress party I would expect everyone to come dressed up even though I would not have put 'compulsory' on the invitations. I would think it was a given that if I stated a dress code, it was compulsory. Same for a posh do, if I put black tie I'd expect everyone to come in black tie.

What would you do if someone turned up not in fancy dress or black tie?

Person_one

securityguy wrote: »

Someone with class would make their guests feel welcome and at ease. A spoilt silly girl would regard them as extras to be ordered around. Weddings of the first type are a joy to be part of. Weddings of the second type are to be avoided, although mockery is also OK.

The whole thing reeks of new money and no style. You don't order people to buy new clothes because people with class have wardrobes, and therefore will not be wearing clothes so new the labels are still showing. The sign of a gentleman is not buying a dinner suit; it's having several to choose from, including an elegant one left by your father.

There's a hilarious claim from upthread that weddings are about "aligning houses" --- that's true, if you're a member of the minor aristocracy, and members of the minor aristocracy have weddings that look like the opening reel of Four Weddings, not like My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding. Matching clothes for guests? All the class of Coleen Rooney, without the intellect.

Hey, don't be shy, tell us how you really feel! :rotfl:

(You seem to be slightly confusing class with money in the bolded though.)

lostinrates

securityguy wrote: »

Someone with class would make their guests feel welcome and at ease. A spoilt silly girl would regard them as extras to be ordered around. Weddings of the first type are a joy to be part of. Weddings of the second type are to be avoided, although mockery is also OK.

The whole thing reeks of new money and no style. You don't order people to buy new clothes because people with class have wardrobes, and therefore will not be wearing clothes so new the labels are still showing. The sign of a gentleman is not buying a dinner suit; it's having several to choose from, including an elegant one left by your father.

There's a hilarious claim from upthread that weddings are about "aligning houses" --- that's true, if you're a member of the minor aristocracy, and members of the minor aristocracy have weddings that look like the opening reel of Four Weddings, not like My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding. Matching clothes for guests? All the class of Coleen Rooney, without the intellect.

As the writer of the hilarious claim I think you failed to grasp the concept of the reply. .

lostinrates

Person_one wrote: »

Hey, don't be shy, tell us how you really feel! :rotfl:

(You seem to be slightly confusing class with money in the bolded though.)

Dh's dad is almost half a foot shorter (and considerably lighter in girth)than one son, and three quarters of a foot shorter than the opther. There were plenty of dinner suits to be handed down but neither dh nor his brother can wear them. Dh fits in a couple of his fathers and grandfather's old jackets, but the trousers....not unless they are to be worn as clam diggers!:rotfl:

skintchick

Person_one wrote: »

What would you do if someone turned up not in fancy dress or black tie?

I'd say hello and get them a drink.








Then seethe quietly! :rotfl:

Irony

Treat yourselves! Accessorise. You can reuse shoes,bags,belts(blingy) & jewellery(costume of course) If they have colour coded these then tell them you can't go as it clashes with a funeral & luckily dress code is the same:A