Where do you draw the line?

I'm wondering her addressing them on your invite was a way of making the whole no guests less noticeable? That only flys when the kids are still little. Your children are grown adults that deserved individual invitations.
 
The adult children who live elsewhere being on your invite = tacky
The adult kids not getting a date = fine…

Maybe the bride thought you son would like someone to hang around.
Maybe your daughter mentioned her Boyfriend hates weddings
Maybe three of her other cousin has a live in as well and that would be more people then the room could hold
There are a million reasons why

These days a bride can win
Some people complain when their cousin’s kids boyfriend was invited (gift grab) but this one its an insult.

As for the question where did I draw the line, with people I hadn’t talked to in five years. This cut out some aunts, uncles, cousins, old friends and defiantly people I hadn’t met before. Did people get mad, of course….Did I get some phone calls from angry guest (oh you wouldn’t believe)… Did I care…not one bit…if I haven’t heard from you in years and you have the gall to ring me an complain, you better believe you wont be hearing from me ever again.
 
So it looks pretty even then. About half think it's tacky not to invite a guest, and the other half think it's fine, and almost everyone thinks adult children living elsewhere should get their own invitation. I'll agree that it is tacky to add the kids onto the parents' invite, and I'll concede that it's not tacky to not allow a guest, nor according to those who've researched, is it out of the bounds of etiquacy. I still wouldn't do it.;)
 
Well, maybe he should put a ring on her finger if he wants an invite. :confused3

Maybe he can't afford to put a ring on her finger right now? Maybe she's asked him not to spend that kind of money so he can put himself through school or something? Who knows what reasons they have?

I really can't believe how many people think that a 6 year deeply committed relationship is the same as a casual date.
 

OP I am with you. The whole thing sounds tacky and rude to me. For us all adults get invited "and guest". We have family members who have never married (their choice) who have been together for over 20 years. Should they leave their SO home? Absolutely not. Your kids should have gotten their own invite and they should have been invited with a guest. Some may disagree but that's how everyone I know has always done it too.
 
That poor bride.

I think it is great that she is putting family first, even if she is inviting those she hasn't seen for a while. What a wonderful opportunity to gather everyone together and strengthen family ties.

No matter how long your daughter and her boyfriend have lived together, the fact is he does not make the cut off because they are not engaged or married. That is their choice, they don't want to be married then don't expect to be treated like a married couple> :confused3

Then, you say that you would have perfectly understood if your children weren't invited at all. Yet somehow, I doubt that.
 
Let me clarify myself, I did say I'm feeling resentful, and then I said I'm not. The underlying feeling is hurt. I feel slighted. I know my child is going to feel hurt, so that hurts me. I'll get over it. I'm sorry I can't be as BIG as some folks on this board, and not let it bother me at all, but it does. I'll get over it. In the grand scheme of things it's no biggie. I'm just grateful for the understanding shoulders of some on this board who allow people to vent. Thank you, you guys are great!!!:thumbsup2


Teresa, there is nothing wrong with the way you are feeling. Better to get it out here then at your cousin. If your daughter decided to never marry her SO and lived with him for another 20 years, should he never get an invite? I think it is ludicrous that a live in SO would not get an invite.

When I got married 17 years ago I had three cousins who were not married. Two of them were living with their girlfriends, they both got invitations adressed to them and their girlfriends. The other one did not have a boyfriend, she was invited with a guest. She brought a guy she had been dating for about a month. Now 17 years later one cousin is still living with his girlfriend, they are now living together for 19 years. The other one that was living with his girlfriend married her about 11 years ago. The one who brought the guy she had been dating for a month wound up marrying him two years later, he also happens to be one of my husbands best friends today.
 
I think what got me initially annoyed is that she said she was going to put my son and daughter on our invitation. That is just totally tacky, and I felt like she was doing it because she didn't want them to bring a guest and felt stupid sending them their own invitation to their own address. I don't know.
THAT, I'll agree with! Adult children not living at home should get their own invites. I think that may even be in Emily Post!

:earsboy:
 
That poor bride.

I think it is great that she is putting family first, even if she is inviting those she hasn't seen for a while. What a wonderful opportunity to gather everyone together and strengthen family ties.

No matter how long your daughter and her boyfriend have lived together, the fact is he does not make the cut off because they are not engaged or married. That is their choice, they don't want to be married then don't expect to be treated like a married couple> :confused3

Then, you say that you would have perfectly understood if your children weren't invited at all. Yet somehow, I doubt that.

That was quite a rude statement. Why not just call me a liar?
 
my aunt and uncle were very upset :confused3 that my sister and I, both married, did not show up for my cousins wedding in San Francisco. We did not get an invitation. We both live on the east coast. My parents live in the midwest. She sent an invitation to my parents. Neither of our names were on the envelope, we were supposed to "know" we were invited. :rotfl2: :rotfl2:
 
This is why I don't like weddings. Everyone from the bride to the guests complain. People should elope and buy their own stuff to start a home. And yes I had a church wedding and yes it was a nightmare of who is and who isn't coming and yes I wish I had just gone to some island somewhere and done it.
 
For the record, according to Emily Post's guide to wedding etiquette, spouses must be invited (so most people invite engaged people as part of this rule). It is considered polite, but not required, to invite co-habitating partners as well (whether gay or straight). It is also considered polite to let single members of the bridal party invite guests. Beyond that, it is up to the bride totally without any breach of etiquette whatsoever. It is not a requirement to issue blanket "and guest" invitations to all adults you invite.

See this is what I don't understand about etiquette. How can it possible be okay according to etiquette to treat long-term gay couples who legally can't marry (or long term straight ones who just choose not to for reasons that are no ones business but their own) like their relationships don't matter as much as much as the 20 year old couple who eloped in Vegas and will be divorced by next year? Isn't that, in fact, quite rude and cruel? Since these etiquette rules tend to come out of a racist, sexist, homophobic past I put absolutely no stock in it.

That is exactly why people sometimes only invite spouses and fiances. It's an easy deliniation.

Hmm, wouldn't be very easy for me :confused3. I guess it's only easy if you are allowed to be legally married in your state, don't have any gay friends/family (or straight friends/family who aren't married for reasons that are no ones business), or don't mind horribly hurting the latter to the point that it would damage the relationship beyond being able to be rebuilt.



Of course, I agree with what some posters have stated--that only the couple getting married gets to determine the guest list. But surely, that doesn't mean that their choices are beyond criticism. But what if I started a thread announcing I was going to invite people based on, say, how much sex they had with their partner in the last year or how many fights they have or how much I think they actually love one another. Or alternatively, if I decided that because I can't be legally married, when I have my commitment ceremony I will not include any legal spouses, only people who have not made their commitment legal NO ONE would be defending me in any shape or form. The fact that the throwers of the party get to decide who to invite does not preclude legitimately calling their choices rude, offensive, and in some cases cruel.
 
OK, let me first state that I made EVERY effort to invite every family's child *by name*, and to invite spouses, engaged couples, and significant others *by name*, with only the occasional "and guest" for those singles who wanted to have a date there, or for those who just started dating people but hadn't told us.

After doing so, inviting a total of about 120 or 130, we got "yes" answers for 90, and that's what we paid, 2 weeks before the wedding, for. About 70 showed up. Sigh.

There were 4 children there, and 2 of them were in the wedding party. After doing all the work to get every child's name (except for a co-worker of hubby's, who REFUSED to give his kids' names b/c he thought it was silly to invite them), only 4.

We also had people show up alone when they had been invited as a duo, and some of them didn't show up when they had said yes.

In OUR case, WE were the ones hurt by the guest list!


BUT I was engaged for 2 years, and the first wedding book I bought was Peggy Post's etiquette book (she's the daughter or grand daughter in law of Emily Post and is the one updating the Post books nowadays), and I wanted to do everything "beyond" the book, but not everyone does that.


You mentioned that no one doesn't do "and guest" in your area? Beg to differ. The only reason my now DH was invited to my friend's wedding in Cherry Hill (she was from Hadden Heights) was b/c we had just gotten re-engaged. We had been engaged, had some problems and called a halt to everything, but we were still together...our wedding was supposed to be right before my friend's, and we had been together with our SOs the same amount of time. But she called RIGHT before sending out the invites to see if we were engaged again, to see if she should include him on the invite. She had no unengaged or married "guests" at her wedding. So there ARE people who do that out in your area (according to your Location).





It didn't seem that way, but maybe I misunderstood. I know she is inviting step cousins through marriage that she has not even met, but they are a "cousin" in her words. I can't imagine leaving out the sig other of a cousin you are close to, who is taking semi-pro pics of your wedding for free, in order to invite family members you don't see at any other time.

I lived with my now husband for two years before we got married. We never were officially engaged.

Well, what does "officially" engaged mean? At some point you two decided that you would get married, right? As soon as that decision was made, you were engaged, to most people. There are some incredibly odd people who see engagement as equalling a ring (and a sub-set that ONLY see a diamond ring as being an "engagement ring"), but most of the time, engaged is a mindset of "we're going to get married", yes?


Some people really love family, and really want FAMILY to be there. I invited EVERY aunt and uncle, EVERY child of theirs that I could, even though I hadn't seen them in ages. I really REALLY wanted them there, and we ended up leaving some friends off our list b/c of that. Now, they were friends who didn't meet the "5 years" list, where hubby just wanted to invite people b/c they used to be his friends forever ago...they were dropped b/c we wanted family to be there.

Honestly, if your daughter is/was planning on doing the photography, I don't know why she'd want her S.O. to go. She'd be too busy working to spend any time with him and he'd end up at a table with semi-strangers. I enver understood why anyone in the wedding party would want to bring a date if they weren't married.

Or even if they are! :goodvibes

Who wants to go to a wedding with no date?

Me!

I used to think I didn't like to go alone, but once I had someone to go with, I realized that his only reason for being there was to keep bringing me drinks or grab me the "good" stuff from the food tables while I socialized or was having pictures taken if I was a b'maid. Nowadays I'd rather bring a nicer gift and NOT pay for hubby to travel to the wedding. :) Now if only some of my single-again friends would get hitched, so I could put that plan into practice!!!


Making the wedding list is one of the most stressful parts of the planning. (just wait until she tries the seating chart).

Be patient with the bride. The stress she's under is probably unlike anything she's ever experienced. Every bride and groom need to cut their list somewhere and all risk offending someone to do it. Cutting it at fiancees/spouses is fairly common.

Oh the guest list was hard. My family REFUSED to help, and so did hubby's family. And the only reason I didn't get the stress of the seating chart was that my best friend wound up in the hospital, almost dying, and I spent the weeks before the wedding sitting at her side with her sisters, making sure the doctors understood what she was saying in her morphine haze (averted one BAD medical decision by doing so, when they weren't reading charts but relying on morphine-girl to give them accurate information). I brought my seating chart info, but somehow it just didn't seem important, sitting there with her.

How does one know how long people have been in a relationship, or how serious it is? That would really drive me crazy to try to figure that out.

Why is my brother invited who hasn't spoken to my aunt/uncle/cousin in the last 12 years?

And that's likely why they decided on the line of engagement. Because they didn't want to have to figure all that out.

Maybe your brother is invited b/c she loves him and wants him to be there.

Not much different from being married other than there is no "official" paper.

Right or wrong, but SOME people, having made the decision to get the piece of paper (and almost 5 years married, I really do just see it as a piece of paper, LOL), see that piece of paper as being Very Important. And some people, having made that decision, find it to be very important to make that distinction. THEY are making the decision to get the piece of paper; that paper is important to them. And some people in that state of mind simply do not understand why others would not.

Remembering that we DID invite everyone along with their sig others, I remember wondering why my BIL and his long-time partner hadn't gone to MA to get married. They both wore rings, but hadn't had a ceremony even though they could have traveled to do so. When CA briefly allowed gay marriages, before it was overturned a few years ago, we didn't understand why they didn't do that. In THEIR circumstance, ultimately, it may have been b/c their relationship was broken, and his partner moved out very dramatically, stealing about 75K from the family. In THEIR case I came to an understanding from events that happened later, but it WAS on my mind back then, why they hadn't gone a'traveling to get a "piece of paper" in the state where it was and is allowed.

Right or wrong, maybe knowing the state of mind will help you.




Again, this is just my belief. I would never invite an adult to any kind of formal event without including a guest. That's where I draw the line.

When your DD gets married, try to remember that line. :goodvibes

Times have changed. People are no longer happy to "just" share in your day and be served good food and drink, dance, and have a good time. That is no longer enough for today's guests. Nope. They have to have ONLY the food they want, served at the time they want, with the drink they want (and heaven forbid if there's alcohol when they don't believe in it), have babysitters provided, and get to choose who is on the guest list. Having been in the bridal industry, I have said recently that the real bridezillas are not the brides, but the guests who these days bring not a gift but a sense of entitlement to the proceedings.

Here is what I know from being in the business: Brides cannot win. If they don't provide superduper food and entertainment, they are cheap and horrible. If they don't invite everyone who has any reason whatsoever to want a ticket, they are horrible. If they have great food and drink, they must be mortgaging their future to waste their money on one day. If they have a large enough wedding to accomodate all of the demands for invitations, then they clearly invited all 'those' people for a blatant gift grab. If they can't afford to be everything to everybody, then they should have just eloped and spared us the 'disappointment' of attending an event that's not up to 'our' standards. And on and on and on.


You are my hero. :goodvibes

Also, let me add that my son got married this past November and the only people there were siblings and their sig others and the parents. No aunts, no uncles, no cousins, no grandparents, no friends. My son was suppose to get married this coming October, but due to financial and other concerns, they decided to get married right away, and informed us two weeks prior to the date.

They got married in a park by a judge, and we had a post wedding dinner at a nearbye restaurant. My brother and sister were very, very upset. They just couldn't understand why they weren't invited since they were very close to my son. I totally understood how they felt, but if they were invited then my son's dad's siblings and their families would have had to be invited, and then the dinner bill would have been outrageous. This is how my son chose to do it. To this day neither my brother or my sister has even sent them a congratulatory card.

My point is that if you can't invite everyone, then don't invite anyone. You can't pick and choose whose relationship is longer, more stable, more "engaged", or whatever. That's all. If I wasn't invited to my cousin's wedding due to cost, THAT'S FINE, just don't invite me without my husband,:)


In your circumstance, having *just* had that experience with your son, I would think you would be one of the MOST understanding people! You were inside the circle in the case of your son. You understood his decisions. Then again, you still expect a congratulations when you haven't announced his marriage formally (announcements can be SEEN as grabby, but MANY people send them out to announce something, not to ask for something, and celebrations of marriages when there was none before are lovely...I think you should have one for your son), so maybe the bigger picture of all of this is still fuzzy.

Each couple and the families closest to the couple has to make the decisions that can be made by them. Your son made a decision and it seems you went along with it, even though it hurt the people most genetically related to you (assuming you're not adopted, whoops).

Your cousin, her fiance, and the close parents have made a decision you wouldn't have made. Maybe they wouldn't have gone along with the decision your son made. Maybe it's horrid to them, what your son did. Maybe each of you has different criteria for inviting people...if your cousin hasn't said anything to you about your son's wedding, maybe you should take that to heart. :hug:

Weddings are really a pain. Someone is always hurt. Which is why the second time around we eloped!

Seems you DO understand the big picture of all of this. I bet that your eloping hurt some people too. If they came to be OK with it, maybe that can be thought of in this circumstance.



I think sending out announcements sometimes looks like you are looking for a gift. I'm just saying that with weddings, no matter what, someone is always hurt. I've been thinking of having a big end of summer barbeque/wedding celebration, but again, is that tacky? I think it might be.

It doesn't have to be tacky. Not at all. Have the celebration! Allow your family, the ones not invited to their nephew's wedding, to come and formally celebrate his marriage.


Maybe the bride thought you son would like someone to hang around.
Maybe your daughter mentioned her Boyfriend hates weddings
Maybe three of her other cousin has a live in as well and that would be more people then the room could hold
There are a million reasons why

These days a bride can win
Some people complain when their cousin’s kids boyfriend was invited (gift grab) but this one its an insult.

Ooh true. Maybe the cousin, being friends with your DD, knows something you don't know. Maybe that's why she didn't invite the boyfriend.

And isn't THAT true, about cousin's kid's boyfriend! It's amazing how far away in relation that can sound in one context, but how close in relation it is in another context!



"She told me her parents made up the list. Yea right, she's 30 years old herself for God's sake. "

She's told this to you. There's really no reason to disbelieve it. When making up OUR wedding list, my friends couldn't believe that we had NO familial input. Especially since my dad paid for it. I had to nearly beg and plead for addresses from people I really wanted there, and in some cases it was refused, b/c the families didn't see the point of inviting them. I wanted a big party with people that we cared about, with family friends and friends and family all getting together and having a grand time, but it was an uphill climb to get most of those addresses.

My friends on the other hand had family ALL in their guest lists (meaning that we were an anomaly) no matter their age, and no matter who was paying for the wedding.

She gave you a very plausible explanation. Maybe it's not how YOU are going to do things when your DD gets married (it being traditional that you'll have more "say" for a DD's than a DS's wedding), but it might very well be what is going on in your cousin's life.



:hug: :hug: :hug:
 
I would never invite a single person and not invite them to bring an escort.

But, it is up to the bride and groom to have the wedding however they want. If that includes rudeness, that is their perogative.

It is up to the invitee to accept or decline a rude invitation.
 
If they have been dating that long and the bride knows her boyfriend, I say he should be invited.
However, I don't think it's anyone's RIGHT to have a guest at a wedding. I"m not sure who came up with those rules or why people keep insisting they must be followed. But my thoughts and what I did at my wedding is that if someone was married/engaged/long term relationship, the SO was invited. However, I don't feel that a couple has to let every adult bring a guest...I wouldn't want a bunch of random people I don't know and most likely will never see again at my wedding. Weddings are meant to be shared with those you love and care for and know...not random strangers just so that everyone at the wedding isn't alone.. that's just how I feel.

Exactly! I was just in a wedding, and the people getting married were 23 and 24 - a little on the younger side nowadays. Out of their friends, only people in a LTR, engaged, or married were allowed to bring guests. It totally avoided the whole "come to this wedding with me - free dinner and an open bar!" mentality, and a ton of strangers at their wedding. and no one complained! They paid for it all themselves, were on a budget since they're both in grad school, and only invited close friends and family.

I know your daughter would not have brought a random date - it's very obvious it's a committed and long term relationship, but I bet allowing her to bring her boyfriend would have opened a pandora's box of people bringing bfs and gfs, which can quickly grow out of proportion. Sometimes lines get drawn and it doesn't seem fair, but that's why everyone has an option not to attend.

Also, it's wicked tacky to add adults to their parents invitation - that I agree with completely!
 
DBF and I have decided we do not want to get married. It is our choice and we have our reasons. So to think he would not get invited to a wedding that I am invited to would be rude. I can't imagine not letting a single person bring an escort with them to the reception. Who are they supposed to dance with? talk to? be with?

Its nice the bride is trying to invite all the famliy. But why? If you aren't close to them or even talk to them why would you do that? I read somewhere that you shouldn't invite people to your wedding that you wouldn't have over to your house for dinner.

And OP's DD is taking the pictures for the wedding for free if I read the post correctly...even most paid photographers bring a guest or helper. I think its rude to not invite the SO of the DD. But thats just me.
 
DBF and I have decided we do not want to get married. It is our choice and we have our reasons. So to think he would not get invited to a wedding that I am invited to would be rude. I can't imagine not letting a single person bring an escort with them to the reception. Who are they supposed to dance with? talk to? be with?

If the wedding is for a family member then they will have parents, siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc etc to talk to and hang out with. I really REALLY do not understand the NEED for an escort at a wedding. :confused3 The way I see it -- if you are close enough to the bride and groom to BE at their wedding, you will more than likely know other people there, be it mutual family, friends, or even coworkers.

I was the MOH in a close friend's wedding that happened to be 6 weeks after we moved from MN to CA. DH had just started a new job and could not fly back. I went 'alone'. I didn't know most of the people there. But I knew my friend and her husband and their immediate families and our college friends. That was plenty for me not to feel bored or alone. I had a great time, even without DH there. So I didn't get to slow dance with someone. That was not important to me.

IMO it is perfectly reasonable to draw the line at married/engaged. If you choose not to get married, that's fine. But this is one of the downsides of that choice. I do not think people are rude for not including your SO (like others, I make a distinction for couples who cannot legally marry)

That said, I think we did provide the "and guest" option to the singles at our wedding. We had the space and could afford it.
 
DBF and I have decided we do not want to get married. It is our choice and we have our reasons.

My bf & I are not getting married either for assorted reasons. But I absolutely will not attend weddings & other functions like that w/out him. Anyone I am close enough to to have them invite me, would be aware of how close we are and if he is not welcome, I don't want to go.

I only attend weddings of people I am very close to as it is and if the bride and groom don't respect my long term relationship enough to consider my bf welcome at their party, I'd consider them not close enough friends of mine for me to attend.
 
IMO it is perfectly reasonable to draw the line at married/engaged. If you choose not to get married, that's fine. But this is one of the downsides of that choice. I do not think people are rude for not including your SO (like others, I make a distinction for couples who cannot legally marry)

Is it also perfectly reasonable for me to decide to draw the line at couples who who have children (I'll make an exception for those with fertility problems) versus those who don't (with the understanding that if you chose not to have kids this is one of the downsides) or those who don't have sex more than once a week. Or is it acceptable for me to not invite legal spouses, but only non-married ones because I personally think the state shouldn't be involved in marriage? (WTH does it matter what I personally believe when it comes to inviting people to a special event like a wedding? I'm a pretty die hard liberal--should I throw out all the republicans in the family too?)

If I made any of those choices, people would think I was absolutely crazy, but why would those be any less arbitrary or rude than only inviting the SO who happen to have a certain legal document? :confused3 Not everyone values having sex once a week, not everyone thinks it is important or right for them to have kids in a relationship, not everyone wants or needs a piece of paper from the state or a $30,000 party in a big wedding dress--why then is one of those then an acceptable way to distinguish which couples matter and which ones don't?

And you must already be making distinctions that aren't based on marriage when it comes to gay couples, no? Surely if you have a 16 year old lesbian who's been dating a girl at school for two weeks you distinguish that from the gay couple who's been living together for 10 years. But what's the difference if there's no legal contract in either case? Well somehow you can tell the difference--so why not just apply that to straight people as well? And what do you do if it's a gay couple who's been together for 20 years but is openly vocal about their beliefs that marriage is not something they want to take part in because they politically oppose the idea of the state being involved in regulating people's familial lives. Well that couple wouldn't get married if they were legally allowed, so how are they different than the straight couple who can get married but chooses not to?

I'm also curious how people have so much knowledge of other people's legal status. I know most people have big parties when they get married, but surely some people do it quietly at the justice of the peace. GF and I have the highest degree of a legal contract that we are allowed to have--a legal domestic partnership in our city of residence. We did not tell anyone when we got that legal contract. Now years later, we may have mentioned it to our parents in passing, but I'd be surprised if they remembered. Certainly no one else in our family has any idea about it. I fully expect that if we are lucky enough to move to a state where civil unions or same-sex marriages are allowed we will get that legal contract, but I don't really see why my extended family would ever be informed about it. I guess maybe news would travel the grapevine, but since same-sex marriage is a touchy subject I'm not sure the family will eagerly spread the gossip as quickly as usual.

And on the other hand, a wedding in a big white dress does not equal a legal marriage either. Gay couples do that all the time, but they still aren't legally married except in CA or MA. As far as I understand it, in cases of destination weddings (like Disney cruises) the couple legally gets married when they get their marriage license, so they are in fact already married before they do their ceremony and vows and such. GF's parents had the ceremony over 30 years ago, but afterwards they were never sure if their marriage license was valid because the person who married them may not have been legally vested with the authority to do so. So how does anyone actually know the legal status of other couples around them anyway? Perhaps there are people out there who don't care to have the whole world know their legal business precisely because they think it is ridiculous that who gets invited to a wedding would be determined based on people's personal legal contracts. The use of marriage in contexts like this as the be all-end all of relationships is what makes me really *not* want to get married--I don't want to be any part of treating people without a legal piece of paper like they are less important than me. And if people are going to treat me bad because of a legal contract I lack, I'd rather know that up front so I can stop bothering to know them.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom