Weddings - evening invite

trinity_enigma

I haven't time to read all the replies- just the first couple of pages but I am absolutely flabberghasted by the response!!! Forgive me if I'm wrong but the ceremony is the most important part of the wedding day- whether the couple have the money or have the space to have all their friends at the wedding breakfast is not important - or so you'd think!

I'd be absolutely horrified if any of you people calling this person rude were my friends and would essentially rather get a free meal and drinks rather than see their friends exchange their vows.

How often do you hear people moaning that the bride and groom care more about the day than the marriage? Evidently that would be all you people moaning as you view the party as more important than the ceremony. Shame on you!

Person_one

trinity_enigma wrote: »

I haven't time to read all the replies- just the first couple of pages but I am absolutely flabberghasted by the response!!! Forgive me if I'm wrong but the ceremony is the most important part of the wedding day- whether the couple have the money or have the space to have all their friends at the wedding breakfast is not important - or so you'd think!

I'd be absolutely horrified if any of you people calling this person rude were my friends and would essentially rather get a free meal and drinks rather than see their friends exchange their vows.

How often do you hear people moaning that the bride and groom care more about the day than the marriage? Evidently that would be all you people moaning as you view the party as more important than the ceremony. Shame on you!

Do you understand the purpose and the history of the reception? The clue is in the name. Its supposed to be where the couple receive their guests and provide them with hospitality as a thank you for taking the time and effort to come and watch their wedding ceremony. Let's face it, its the most boring part for the guests.

Expecting people to make the effort to come to the ceremony, and then just go away afterwards for a bit until the cheaper party later on, is rude, sorry!

Letting your evening guests know, with no pressure or expectation, where the public ceremony will be held just in case they do have the time and want to show up, is fine, formally inviting them to it, is not.

duchy

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

I would totally have to disagree with you there. I have two friends who have been with their partners for 20+ years, but I certainly don't think their relationship is any less relevant than mine just because I'm married and they're not. If we were all invited to a wedding, and my husband was invited, but their partners not, well personally, I'd be offended for them.

Some people agree with marriage, some don't, I certainly wouldn't treat anyone who wasn't married any different, because to me, the above two couples that I mentioned are two of the most dedicated couples I know.

If someone had only been with their boyfriend for a short while, then I can understand, but for long term relationships, I think it's totally different.

If you've known them twenty years presumably you've met them though so you wouldn't be paying for a meal for someone you've never met.

I'm not sure why anyone who considers marriage irrelevant would WANT an invitation to celebrate something they personally don't agree with though (unless they just want a free night out)

Frankly if you want society to recognise your relationship -then get married. If you chose not to marry then don't get huffy when some people think it isn't as important. That's the message many people get when a couple just live together-and I think it is especially true when so many people now have serial live in relationships (even if you've lived together for twenty years people are going to lump you in with the couple shacked up for a few months and then moving on as you are both" just" living together and have chosen not to make any outward public commitment). It may not be what your relationship is about but that is how people will regard it consciously or unconsciously.

trinity_enigma

Person_one wrote: »

Do you understand the purpose and the history of the reception? The clue is in the name. Its supposed to be where the couple receive their guests and provide them with hospitality as a thank you for taking the time and effort to come and watch their wedding ceremony. Let's face it, its the most boring part for the guests.

Expecting people to make the effort to come to the ceremony, and then just go away afterwards for a bit until the cheaper party later on, is rude, sorry!

Letting your evening guests know, with no pressure or expectation, where the public ceremony will be held just in case they do have the time and want to show up, is fine, formally inviting them to it, is not.

I disagree- I don't think it is rude. I think it is rude to expect anyone to invite and therefore pay for you to anything. I also don't think the ceremony is the most boring part- again you are the one being rude.

And what exactly is the difference between your last two paragraphs? In one it isn't ok and in the other it is- is it the pressure? How do let someone know it is ok to attend the ceremony without inviting them?

Edited to add: Also you obviously view the evening celebration as the cheaper part of the wedding, but don't for one minute think it is cheap. You could easily spend thousand of pounds providing food for everybody you would like to invite which is still obviously cheaper the the day reception. Of course you couldn't cut it out- apparently all your friends already think you're a cheapscate for being unable to afford them to attend all day, you couldn't possibly make it cheaper for yourselves any further for fear of becoming a social pariah!

Person_one

duchy wrote: »

If you've known them twenty years presumably you've met them though so you wouldn't be paying for a meal for someone you've never met.

I'm not sure why anyone who considers marriage irrelevant would WANT an invitation to celebrate something they personally don't agree with though (unless they just want a free night out)

Frankly if you want society to recognise your relationship -then get married. If you chose not to marry then don't get huffy when some people think it isn't as important. That's the message many people get when a couple just live together-and I think it is especially true when so many people now have serial live in relationships (even if you've lived together for twenty years people are going to lump you in with the couple shacked up for a few months and then moving on as you are both" just" living together and have chosen not to make any outward public commitment). It may not be what your relationship is about but that is how people will regard it consciously or unconsciously.

A hint of the 'smug marrieds' coming through already duchy?

Try to be a bit less judgemental of other people's relationships, after all I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate people deciding yours wasn't as meaningful as theirs because you don't live together...

Person_one

trinity_enigma wrote: »

I disagree- I don't think it is rude. I think it is rude to expect anyone to invite and therefore pay for you to anything. I also don't think the ceremony is the most boring part- again you are the one being rude.

And what exactly is the difference between your last two paragraphs? In one it isn't ok and in the other it is- is it the pressure? How do let someone know it is ok to attend the ceremony without inviting them?

You don't need to tell them its ok, its not up to you, if you're getting married in a church.

I've seen invitations that say 'Evening Invitation' on the front, making it nice and clear, and then the inside says "Bob and Sarah are getting married at X church on X date, we'd love you to come and celebrate our evening reception with us at X venue at X time.'

That's alright, isn't it?

duchy

Probably not - I don't regard our relationship as having the same status as a couple who are already married (If I did what would be the point of getting married?). I'm not getting married because I want a party -I'm getting married because I'm making a commitment to our relationship.

I've been married before - my view hasn't changed married or single. If there is no good reason not to get married -someone isn't willing to make that commitment so I do see that relationship as less than a couple who've stood up in public and said "This is for life". You don't need a big party to do that - just the person marrying you -the couple and two witnesses.

duchy

Person_one wrote: »

You don't need to tell them its ok, its not up to you, if you're getting married in a church.

I've seen invitations that say 'Evening Invitation' on the front, making it nice and clear, and then the inside says "Bob and Sarah are getting married at X church on X date, we'd love you to come and celebrate our evening reception with us at X venue at X time.'

That's alright, isn't it?

If the time of the ceremony was on it I'd take it to assume I'd be welcome for it- with no time I'd think I might not be.

newcook

trinity_enigma wrote: »

And what exactly is the difference between your last two paragraphs? In one it isn't ok and in the other it is- is it the pressure? How do let someone know it is ok to attend the ceremony without inviting them?

the ones I have received have been and evening invitation which has written at the bottom 'ceremony is taking place at X if you wanted to see the exchange of vows'

Person_one

duchy wrote: »

If the time of the ceremony was on it I'd take it to assume I'd be welcome for it- with no time I'd think I might not be.

If its a church wedding, there's no such thing as 'not welcome'.