Is this snark-able?!

birdybride2014

Hello. I have a wedding that is driving me insane, and I want to know if it is just me or not....

A bride is having a small, parents and wedding party-only ceremony, on a MONDAY. This is followed by a "cocktail hour". While I appreciate them hosting during the gap between the ceremony and reception, it really makes no sense to me because NO ONE is invited to the ceremony anyways, so why would I waste my money going earlier to pay for a cash bar beverage? Their website says that the cocktail hour is for when they will be taking photos, so it begins at 5:30, but dinner won't be served until 7. Why would I go at 5:30? They won't be there, and there will be nothing to do but mingle with people that my fiance and I do not know. If no one is invited to the ceremony why don't they just have their start time be for when they will be arriving?? The wedding website says under the Ceremony information that no one is invited and the reception is the fun part anyways, so they want to "party the night away" with us...on a Monday night. Ugh.

Also, they are having ANOTHER reception, in a different state, in 2 months. Even their wedding website bothers me....

abbyj700

A few things...

I get that the Monday sucks for you - but that's not really an etiquette breach. 

So you're invited to the reception but not the ceremony? That makes zero sense. 

They are having a cash bar? NO ONE should have a cash bar. That is a huge no-no.

And a PPD 2 months later? 

Please run...this couple is doing everything wrong...

JCbride2015

birdybride2014 said:

Hello. I have a wedding that is driving me insane, and I want to know if it is just me or not....

A bride is having a small, parents and wedding party-only ceremony, on a MONDAY. This is followed by a "cocktail hour". While I appreciate them hosting during the gap between the ceremony and reception, it really makes no sense to me because NO ONE is invited to the ceremony anyways, so why would I waste my money going earlier to pay for a cash bar beverage? Their website says that the cocktail hour is for when they will be taking photos, so it begins at 5:30, but dinner won't be served until 7. Why would I go at 5:30? They won't be there, and there will be nothing to do but mingle with people that my fiance and I do not know. If no one is invited to the ceremony why don't they just have their start time be for when they will be arriving?? The wedding website says under the Ceremony information that no one is invited and the reception is the fun part anyways, so they want to "party the night away" with us...on a Monday night. Ugh.

Also, they are having ANOTHER reception, in a different state, in 2 months. Even their wedding website bothers me....

Technically, it is etiquette-approved to have a tiny, intimate ceremony and a larger reception.  I wouldn't like that as a guest either, but that part is etiquette acceptable.

I agree though that there is no point in inviting people to cocktail hour before B&G arrive.  Cocktail hour is to host guests between the ceremony while B&G briefly take pictures and arrive at the party.  There's no point if the guests were not already at the ceremony.

Cash bar?  Barf!

Second "reception" two months later? Barf!

I will never understand why people have these tiny ceremonies because they say they don't want to be the center of attention, and then go on a reception parade and tour around with these huge parties.  If you want a small wedding, just have a small wedding.

adverb1129

JCbride2015 said:

Technically, it is etiquette-approved to have a tiny, intimate ceremony and a larger reception.  I wouldn't like that as a guest either, but that part is etiquette acceptable.

Really?  I thought that would count as a "tiered" invitation.  Or does that only exist when you have different stages of reception (ex: some people invited to dinner and dancing while others are only invited for dancing)

natswild

@adverb1129, what @JCBride2015 is referring to is when the ceremony is literally just immediate family, so only a few people are at the ceremony. That is not considered a tiered reception. However, having a "family only" ceremony with say 30-50 people, then big reception, would absolutely be a tiered reception

JCbride2015

adverb1129 said: JCbride2015 said:
Technically, it is etiquette-approved to have a tiny, intimate ceremony and a larger reception.  I wouldn't like that as a guest either, but that part is etiquette acceptable.


Really?  I thought that would count as a "tiered" invitation.  Or does that only exist when you have different stages of reception (ex: some people invited to dinner and dancing while others are only invited for dancing)
natswild said: @adverb1129, what @JCBride2015 is referring to is when the ceremony is literally just immediate family, so only a few people are at the ceremony. That is not considered a tiered reception. However, having a "family only" ceremony with say 30-50 people, then big reception, would absolutely be a tiered reception

----GD boxes, first I'm stuck in them, then they disappear-------


@adverb1129, Yes, @natswild has it exactly right.  It's E-OK to have only immediate family (and maybe a couple of friends in the WP) at the ceremony, followed by a larger reception, if everyone is invited to the entire reception.  The bolded is a tiered ceremony and is not OK.

FWIW, I dislike the tiny-ceremony, big-party combo personally.  But I can't really call it bad etiquette.

theartistformerlyknownas

birdybride2014 said:

Hello. I have a wedding that is driving me insane, and I want to know if it is just me or not....

A bride is having a small, parents and wedding party-only ceremony, on a MONDAY. This is followed by a "cocktail hour". While I appreciate them hosting during the gap between the ceremony and reception, it really makes no sense to me because NO ONE is invited to the ceremony anyways, so why would I waste my money going earlier to pay for a cash bar beverage? Their website says that the cocktail hour is for when they will be taking photos, so it begins at 5:30, but dinner won't be served until 7. Why would I go at 5:30? They won't be there, and there will be nothing to do but mingle with people that my fiance and I do not know. If no one is invited to the ceremony why don't they just have their start time be for when they will be arriving?? The wedding website says under the Ceremony information that no one is invited and the reception is the fun part anyways, so they want to "party the night away" with us...on a Monday night. Ugh.

Also, they are having ANOTHER reception, in a different state, in 2 months. Even their wedding website bothers me....

If they're having a cash bar, they're not hosting the gap. Hosting = covering what your guests might need during that time - shelter AND refreshments. They get no bonus points. If you want to go, show up at 7. If you're that annoyed, just decline.

birdybride2014

Thanks ya'll. I knew that they weren't breaking many etiquette rules, but I'm glad I'm not crazy for being annoyed.

@lolo883 I think my fiance and I will plan on arriving more around 7, I was thinking that myself, but it was nice to have another person suggest it

adverb1129

@natswild & @JCbride2015:

Thanks guys  I had never heard of that but it makes sense to me.

beethery

We are doing something like this. FI and I are doing a private ceremony (parents, grandparents, small WP, and their SOs– because not including SOs is rude)  followed immediately by a big reception with the extended family and friends.

We will be forgoing a lot of traditional things at the ceremony– including cake cutting, because FI has really bad anxiety about being the focus of a crowd, etc. and I don't want him to have to try to power through an anxiety attack at an event that he should be enjoying. I would be perfectly fine with all of our guests being present for the ceremony, but what is comfortable for me is not always comfortable for FI. I can not think of a more important time that I want him to be comfortable.

I truly, to my core, hope none of our guests feel slighted, and I am very aware that if any do feel that way, they probably won't say anything. If someone does, I still don't know how I will respond. Now, if it really bothers someone that they were not invited to the ceremony, I will not be offended if they decide not to attend. I will not blame them a bit because, while etiquette-appropriate, a private secular ceremony is not the norm.

OnceUponAVine

I wouldn't bother attending the "cocktail reception" because it doesn't sound like a reception at all... But if they're close friends I would probably attend the actual reception to celebrate with them.

birdybride2014

@beethery I am not bothered by not being invited to the ceremony, as we are not super close to the couple. My fiance was college friends with the groom and they still text during basketball games, etc but we aren't close with them by any means. I also understand that it is not necessarily breaking etiquette. I'm mostly irritated that they are having a "cocktail hour" which is a cash bar, and they expect people to arrive early for a reception, following a ceremony they weren't invited to. I don't understand why they aren't just having their ceremony earlier so that the WP can arrive at the same time as their guests or have the reception later. It just seems pointless to me. And after having discussed the wedding details with the bride at previous social gatherings, she is pretending to not want a PPD and not be into wedding planning and too cool for school, but obvious does want one considering they are having two receptions.... maybe I just don't like her and she rubs me the wrong way

I can understand your decisions to go a more nontraditional route, and I hope that your fiance is able to enjoy himself even while being the center of attention

beethery

birdybride2014 said:

@beethery I am not bothered by not being invited to the ceremony, as we are not super close to the couple. My fiance was college friends with the groom and they still text during basketball games, etc but we aren't close with them by any means. I also understand that it is not necessarily breaking etiquette. I'm mostly irritated that they are having a "cocktail hour" which is a cash bar, and they expect people to arrive early for a reception, following a ceremony they weren't invited to. I don't understand why they aren't just having their ceremony earlier so that the WP can arrive at the same time as their guests or have the reception later. It just seems pointless to me. And after having discussed the wedding details with the bride at previous social gatherings, she is pretending to not want a PPD and not be into wedding planning and too cool for school, but obvious does want one considering they are having two receptions.... maybe I just don't like her and she rubs me the wrong way

I can understand your decisions to go a more nontraditional route, and I hope that your fiance is able to enjoy himself even while being the center of attention

Toooooootally understand! Those things are ridiculous and nothing says, "I am definitely not too cool to need all this attention' like having two receptions. Like, girl paint your dress highlighter yellow and put some flashing lights on it. We can all tell how thirsty you are for attention lol

FI should be alright at the reception because he won't have to talk into a mic or literally have the entire room staring at him while he is standing there talking. Should be good