Head Table - Just Don't - Rant

lyndausvi

beachyone15 said:

artbyallie said:

Ndelible said:

And it is amusing to be accused of being a horrible hostess and I dunno, a terrible person and kindness is the golden rule when many of you fail to see how shrewish you come off in your posts. Start with being kind to strangers... On the internet no less.

Well, it's not kind to make people sit apart from their spouses/SOs/dates at an event about a romantic relationship.

Ndelible said:

And it is amusing to be accused of being a horrible hostess and I dunno, a terrible person and kindness is the golden rule when many of you fail to see how shrewish you come off in your posts. Start with being kind to strangers... On the internet no less.

Agreed. I mean, this is the whole point right??! You are at a social event (at any other social event you seat SOs next to each other) and you are celebrating a marriage. An event which involves the cementing of a couple. Why would you separate the other couples you invite?

*** STUCK IN THE BOX ****

abbyj700

I quite honestly have *never* seen a sweet heart table or a head table with SO's. That being said - I can completely see why people would want to sit with their SO's. As a person who's been a BM at several weddings sitting at head tables alone I was not at all stunned or upset, but can see in many of the situations described in this thread why some might be. 

We have planned to have a head table as it was all we know. No children will be present at the wedding so that will not be an issue. The only two people being separated from their spouses are my sister, brother and a dear friend - all of whom had head tables with no SO's that I sat at in the last year. I've decided to talk to them, see if they'd like their wives/husband at the table, and go from there. 

JCbride2015

abbyj700 said:

I quite honestly have *never* seen a sweet heart table or a head table with SO's. That being said - I can completely see why people would want to sit with their SO's. As a person who's been a BM at several weddings sitting at head tables alone I was not at all stunned or upset, but can see in many of the situations described in this thread why some might be. 

We have planned to have a head table as it was all we know. No children will be present at the wedding so that will not be an issue. The only two people being separated from their spouses are my sister, brother and a dear friend - all of whom had head tables with no SO's that I sat at in the last year. I've decided to talk to them, see if they'd like their wives/husband at the table, and go from there. 

Good for you!

abbyj700

Though I honestly feel rude asking. I have to tell all the brides involved that what they did was rude, even though I didn't find it to be. :-/

VulgarGirl

So a wedding, when it boils down to, is all about love. These people here (the happy couple up front) are in love with each other and are going to promise to keep loving each other until the end of all time even if they get turned in the zombie apocalypse, and they're going to hold this huge to do to make those promises in front of other people the love, and those people they love want to come see this because they love them right back. And some of these people you love so much you ask them to stand by your side and ward off evil spirits while you make your love promises and they love you so much back they say they will stand up there and ward off the evil spirits. So basically it's just this giant love fest.

So at this love fest, you're going to tell those people who you love so much that they warded off evil spirits for you, they can't be with the one they love? Because of your "wedding vision"? Fuck you, you're an asshole. It's a love fest, let them have their SOs with them.

Yeah, I spend a lot of time without FI. I'm without her right now. But ya know what, when I go to a giant love fest, I'm taking the girl I love with me and we're sitting at the same damn table. 

theartistformerlyknownas

abbyj700 said:

Though I honestly feel rude asking. I have to tell all the brides involved that what they did was rude, even though I didn't find it to be. :-/

You don't have to phrase it that way. Just say "I'm planning my head table, and would love for you and BIL to be able to sit together! Does he have any objections to sitting at the head table?"

lyndausvi

lolo883 said:

abbyj700 said:

Though I honestly feel rude asking. I have to tell all the brides involved that what they did was rude, even though I didn't find it to be. :-/

You don't have to phrase it that way. Just say "I'm planning my head table, and would love for you and BIL to be able to sit together! Does he have any objections to sitting at the head table?"

Yep.

To be honest all my siblings had head tables.  I didn't even ask for their opinion on the issue.

Basically they were just like any other guest and found out where they were sitting when they got to the wedding. Well the family all knew because each parent knew who was sitting at their table.   But there was no discussion between us and the WP on their opinion on the matter.     We put my sister, brother and BF at my parent's table along with their spouses and my brother and SIL who were not in the wedding.    His brother and 2 sisters and their dates at his mom's table.   The other 2 friends sat together with their SOs with other friends.

All of my siblings kids (who were in the wedding) sat with us.   Ha.   Now that is thinking outside the box.  All great and well behaved kids (parents were sitting 1 table over).  Now they were so excited to sit with us for all of 15 minutes.   (as the picture in another reply shows.)

LakeR2014

lyndausvi said:

lolo883 said:

abbyj700 said:

Though I honestly feel rude asking. I have to tell all the brides involved that what they did was rude, even though I didn't find it to be. :-/

You don't have to phrase it that way. Just say "I'm planning my head table, and would love for you and BIL to be able to sit together! Does he have any objections to sitting at the head table?"

Yep.

To be honest all my siblings had head tables.  I didn't even ask for their opinion on the issue.

Basically they were just like any other guest and found out where they were sitting when they got to the wedding. Well the family all knew because each parent knew who was sitting at their table.   But there was no discussion between us and the WP on their opinion on the matter.     We put my sister, brother and BF at my parent's table along with their spouses and my brother and SIL who were not in the wedding.    His brother and 2 sisters and their dates at his mom's table.   The other 2 friends sat together with their SOs with other friends.

All of my siblings kids (who were in the wedding) sat with us.   Ha.   Now that is thinking outside the box.  All great and well behaved kids (parents were sitting 1 table over).  Now they were so excited to sit with us for all of 15 minutes.   (as the picture in another reply shows.)

You are brave.   So, so brave!  I bow to thee.

abbyj700

Issue solved. Bridesmaid said her husband has a conference that weekend and won't be able to join us, and my siblings both responded that my sister in laws were hoping/thinking they'd be at the table with my parents as the most important family table. So that's where they'll go. :-) 

Ndelible

Yes, nasty, shrewish and just over the top. Your opinion on something does not make it proper hosting. I love telling people about some of the stuff written on this board. Sometimes I even read it, because no one believes me. I am all for love. I just think the whining is unnecessary.

Ndelible

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings? Anyone? Or crickets?

PrettyGirlLost

Ndelible said:

Yes, nasty, shrewish and just over the top. Your opinion on something does not make it proper hosting. I love telling people about some of the stuff written on this board. Sometimes I even read it, because no one believes me. I am all for love. I just think the whining is unnecessary.

Most people here base their opinions on proper hosting on well established sources of Etiquette, like original Emily Post, not the foundation that took over when she died, and also common sense and common courtesy.

I'm not sure anyone said that having a head table sans SO's was against etiquette per se. Lame, outdated, and annoying as hell, yes. I'm not sure why you are taking those opinions so personally.

PrettyGirlLost

Ndelible said:

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings?

Anyone? Or crickets?

Are you already married? I know nothing of your posting history outside of this thread. . .I've never seen you on TK before.

lyndausvi

Ndelible said:

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings? Anyone? Or crickets?

I am brave enough to own up to my mistakes. However, I never accused you have having 2 weddings so I have nothing to apologize for.

Ndelible

Hate the tablet, cause I can't quote properly. No, I am not currently married. Second marriage for both of us in January. And we are looking forward to it. And no, @lyndausvi‌, i do not believe you hurled the (intended) slur. @PrettyGirlLost‌, I have posted sparingly on many boards; it may be why others think I am having two weddings.

PrettyGirlLost

Ndelible said:

Hate the tablet, cause I can't quote properly. No, I am not currently married. Second marriage for both of us in January. And we are looking forward to it. And no, @lyndausvi‌, i do not believe you hurled the (intended) slur. @PrettyGirlLost‌, I have posted sparingly on many boards; it may be why others think I am having two weddings.

I hate mobile TK forum format as well!

Gotcha. PPL think you are having a PPD rather than a second marriage after a divorce. Yeah, sometimes ppl get posts and posters confused.

Ndelible

@PrettyGirlLost‌, I don't take it personally for sure. Just expressing my opinion, as is everyone on the board. Usually, my position, everything is an opinion and can be taken with grains of salt. Personally, we are not having a head or sweetheart table. Opting for something that will, hopefully, be more inclusive.

artbyallie

Can I just request please, that you stop using the word 'shrewish?' It's such an anti-woman thing to say, quite as bad as suggesting one is on their period. People never describe a man that way. If you're going to insult people, you could at least be more feminist about it.

AddieCake

Ndelible said:

Yes, nasty, shrewish and just over the top. Your opinion on something does not make it proper hosting. I love telling people about some of the stuff written on this board. Sometimes I even read it, because no one believes me. I am all for love. I just think the whining is unnecessary.

So you're boasting about making fun of the regular posters here to your IRL friends? Gee, I really want to get to know you now. Why are you here if that's how you feel about us?

hyechica81

we did the sweethearts table just me and fi and that was totaly fine we had our wp sit with there famlies we had so many people in the wp 7 girls 5 guys that we did not want the huge table 

theartistformerlyknownas

Ndelible said:

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings? Anyone? Or crickets?

You've adamantly defended PPDs in quite a few other threads, and I was certain you had said you were getting married legally before your own "real" ceremony. However since you've said more than one time that you don't consider a legal marriage a "wedding," I'm not sure I believe you now when you use the verbiage that you're not having "two weddings." If I was mistaken, I apologize. 

Ndelible

artbyallie said:

Can I just request please, that you stop using the word 'shrewish?' It's such an anti-woman thing to say, quite as bad as suggesting one is on their period. People never describe a man that way. If you're going to insult people, you could at least be more feminist about it.

 

I understand what you are saying on this.  However, in this case, shrewish is exactly the word I wanted to use.  Shakespeare's Katherina was exactly who came to mind when I wrote it.  Normally, I would agree with you on using words to only describe women but not men.  But only when it is a situation where any sex can be described.  IMO, this is not the case here, as 95% of the posters are indeed female and discussing items that tend to be womens' domain. 

 

I could have said other words, but really shrew works.  And, for the record, I have thought of men as shrewish before too.

Ndelible

lolo883 said:

Ndelible said:

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings? Anyone? Or crickets?

You've adamantly defended PPDs in quite a few other threads, and I was certain you had said you were getting married legally before your own "real" ceremony. However since you've said more than one time that you don't consider a legal marriage a "wedding," I'm not sure I believe you now when you use the verbiage that you're not having "two weddings." If I was mistaken, I apologize. 

Thank you @lolo883.  I do appreciate the correction.  Yes, I have defended people choosing their own manner of celebrating their marriage/wedding/union, whatever...  I tend to think of weddings as the celebration of -- not the act of -- if that makes sense.   As for the usage of "two weddings", I had to think up another way to say what is so derisively referred to on these boards as a "PPD".  I think it's ugly and insulting, so I say two weddings. 

I'm not having two weddings, but you can bet your bottom dollar that I would if some situation arose that made it the smart thing to do.  And no one say it's never smart, because that's from where you sit.  I simply think that different strokes for different folks is quite apt in these kinds of situations.

Back to table arrangements -- and I think just about anyone can have an opinion on those - regardless of their stance on the great "two wedding" debates.  Has anyone done something completely out of the box, like the X or square W (as opposed to a U) set up?  I think it can work, (actually hoping), but wondering if anyone else tried such a thing?

Ndelible

Oh, and on a PC.  Yes, paragraphs and quote capability!  Yes! 

Ndelible

AddieCake said:

Ndelible said:

Yes, nasty, shrewish and just over the top. Your opinion on something does not make it proper hosting. I love telling people about some of the stuff written on this board. Sometimes I even read it, because no one believes me. I am all for love. I just think the whining is unnecessary.

So you're boasting about making fun of the regular posters here to your IRL friends? Gee, I really want to get to know you now. Why are you here if that's how you feel about us?

Call it boasting, I call it maybe a reality check.  If I stopped random people on the street and read what some replies say, well, it's harsh.  I've seen it many times called out by newer members of the board and they are immediately dismissed.  Look, this is a public forum, no one person or group of persons owns it or calls the shots, except the owners.  Perhaps if it's stated more than a few times, posters might take into account that their tone is not friendly, helpful or supportive.  When someone comes to a wedding forum, they probably expect friendly, helpful advice.  That's not to say that the advice has to change but perhaps the way it is delivered.  Many time, the excuse is that Posters are tired of having to explain the same thing over and over again.  Not sufficient - there must be thousands of new members a month....  The boards are confusing and it is difficult to navigate when you first sign up.  If someone is tired of answering the same questions, perhaps they've been on too long?  Just a thought.  It's an opinion.

abbyj700

Ndelible said:

artbyallie said:

Can I just request please, that you stop using the word 'shrewish?' It's such an anti-woman thing to say, quite as bad as suggesting one is on their period. People never describe a man that way. If you're going to insult people, you could at least be more feminist about it.

 

I understand what you are saying on this.  However, in this case, shrewish is exactly the word I wanted to use.  Shakespeare's Katherina was exactly who came to mind when I wrote it.  Normally, I would agree with you on using words to only describe women but not men.  But only when it is a situation where any sex can be described.  IMO, this is not the case here, as 95% of the posters are indeed female and discussing items that tend to be womens' domain. 

 

I could have said other words, but really shrew works.  And, for the record, I have thought of men as shrewish before too.

Women's domain huh?

It's the new millennium. Gender roles are blurred. Please don't lump gender stereotypes and think that everyone will agree with you from the kitchen baking their pies and planning their weddings with their mammas. 

My other half has been very active in the planning of our wedding and I think he'd be rather embarssed of some woman pointed out to him that the knot, or wedding bee, or any of the sites HE FOUND - are some how my domain and not his. 

lyndausvi

lolo883 said:

Ndelible said:

Anyone brave enough to apologize for the incorrect assumption that I am having two weddings? Anyone? Or crickets?

You've adamantly defended PPDs in quite a few other threads, and I was certain you had said you were getting married legally before your own "real" ceremony. However since you've said more than one time that you don't consider a legal marriage a "wedding," I'm not sure I believe you now when you use the verbiage that you're not having "two weddings." If I was mistaken, I apologize. 

Thank you @lolo883.  I do appreciate the correction.  Yes, I have defended people choosing their own manner of celebrating their marriage/wedding/union, whatever...  I tend to think of weddings as the celebration of -- not the act of -- if that makes sense.   As for the usage of "two weddings", I had to think up another way to say what is so derisively referred to on these boards as a "PPD".  I think it's ugly and insulting, so I say two weddings. 

I'm not having two weddings, but you can bet your bottom dollar that I would if some situation arose that made it the smart thing to do.  And no one say it's never smart, because that's from where you sit.  I simply think that different strokes for different folks is quite apt in these kinds of situations.

Back to table arrangements -- and I think just about anyone can have an opinion on those - regardless of their stance on the great "two wedding" debates.  Has anyone done something completely out of the box, like the X or square W (as opposed to a U) set up?  I think it can work, (actually hoping), but wondering if anyone else tried such a thing?

I was pretty out of the box.   We had a mix of round and square tables.    Our table was plopped in the middle of the room.  It was a square table.  DH and I sat on one side.   4 of my nieces sat on one side.  1 niece and 2 nephews sat on the other side.  All of them were in the wedding party.  The fourth side was left empty.  It allowed up to look out to the dance floor which was down 2 small steps.   

My parent's table was the right of our table.  That had parents, sister (moh), BIL, 2 brothers (one was a gm), 2 SIL, BM who was friend and her husband.

MIL's table was the left of our table.  That had both SILs (both BM's), their dates, best man (DH's brother) and his date.

The other 2 GMs and their SOs sat with their friends at a table which was down those 2 small steps next to the dance floor.

This was a clear case of know your crowd. My nieces/nephews are well behaved kids (my siblings are pretty strict when it comes to how to act in public).  They were not 4 years old and needed food to be cut either.   The 7 of them always eat at their own table at family gatherings, so it wasn't their first time.

 If the WP was told they would have to sit at a HT they would have without complaint.     The fact they got to sit with their SOs was a welcomed bonus.  Small detail that the didn't know they liked so much as it's just "standard" to be separated.   Their SOs were appreciative also.

drina0218

Amen! This is why we are doing a sweetheart table & letting our BP sit with their families, ya know so they can actually enjoy the wedding and not feel like props.

AddieCake

Ndelible said:

AddieCake said:

Ndelible said:

Yes, nasty, shrewish and just over the top. Your opinion on something does not make it proper hosting. I love telling people about some of the stuff written on this board. Sometimes I even read it, because no one believes me. I am all for love. I just think the whining is unnecessary.

So you're boasting about making fun of the regular posters here to your IRL friends? Gee, I really want to get to know you now. Why are you here if that's how you feel about us?

Call it boasting, I call it maybe a reality check.  If I stopped random people on the street and read what some replies say, well, it's harsh.  I've seen it many times called out by newer members of the board and they are immediately dismissed.  Look, this is a public forum, no one person or group of persons owns it or calls the shots, except the owners.  Perhaps if it's stated more than a few times, posters might take into account that their tone is not friendly, helpful or supportive.  When someone comes to a wedding forum, they probably expect friendly, helpful advice.  That's not to say that the advice has to change but perhaps the way it is delivered.  Many time, the excuse is that Posters are tired of having to explain the same thing over and over again.  Not sufficient - there must be thousands of new members a month....  The boards are confusing and it is difficult to navigate when you first sign up.  If someone is tired of answering the same questions, perhaps they've been on too long?  Just a thought.  It's an opinion.

People have tried for years to tell posters here how to post. So no, it being said "a few times" is not going to change anything. It's been said a few hundred times and the results are always the same. There are other forums where the women are not "shrewish." My suggestion is go there if you prefer that style as opposed to trying to change the dynamic of this forum.

theartistformerlyknownas

This is a shrew. I look nothing like that.