Head Table - Just Don't - Rant

LakeR2014

(This is a rant from my first experience of being separated from my H by a head table - needless to say I wasn't happy and didn't enjoy the wedding as much as I would have because I didn't get to share in the couples love with the love of my life.)

Head Table's are not traditional and they are NOT ok.   Yes, it's nice to have your wedding party up with you so you're not on 'display' by yourselves.  But really, if you didn't want to be on display you shouldn't have had the big wedding to begin with.   If you wanted your closest and dearest to enjoy the wedding with you, you shouldn't have separated them from their nearest and dearest.   Yes, it's ONLY one day, but that doesn't mean I'll be any happier by being put at a table with family while my H is kept at the head table.    I actually do enjoy spending time with him (shocker I know since I married him).  

Why is it so necessary when I knew everyone at the table you put me at?  Because they were not my H, they're not the love of my life who I would like to share this moment with.  I want to be able to lean over to him and share a laugh as we watch Grandma boggy on the dance floor, or hug while the first dance is being done and remember ours.   But No, he's across the room at the head table.   Oh and by the way, even though people won't tell you - they're pissed there's a head table.  I know, I had three bridesmaids come to our table to be with THEIR husbands and explain how they don't like being separated from them either.  

On the day everyone is there to share and support your love, why must you trash theirs?

Head Table - Just Don't!

(End Rant)

thisismynickname2

I agree. I have sat at head tables twice. The second time my boyfriend at the time couldn't attend the wedding anyway.

The other reason I don't like head tables is because they're always in a line. I can only talk to the person on my left or my right, unless I'm stuck at the end.  It's an awkward set up. 

Furthermore, I've also been that guest at a table with the significant others of the bridal party. It's just.... weird. 

I dig the sweetheart table, but for my wedding, we're sitting at a regular round table with our parents, my sister and BIL, and my great aunt & uncle from overseas.  The bridal party will be placed at tables with their own friends.  I also like the idea of a king's table.

southernbelle0915

I agree with you in this situation and I've been in a situation like that also. It sucks. 

But I don't think all head tables are a bad thing. H was in a wedding a couple of years ago and they had a head table where SOs of the wedding party were included. As long as people are seated with their SOs, I have no problem with it.

sarawifenow

This is the exact reason why we are doing a sweetheart table.

theartistformerlyknownas

I've been amazed at how many people are shocked when I tell them the WP is sitting with their SOs. I think nearly every one of our WP members has sadly mentioned "well, I won't be sitting next to (name)..." Yes. Yes you will be. Don't be ridiculous.

We are having a "head table" of me and the mister, BM and his wife, MOH and her BF. Then there will be two WP tables flanking us with the rest of the WP and their SOs/children. They'll still be seated at a place of honor at the front and be served first, but they get to sit with their people.

LakeR2014

southernbelle0915 said:

I agree with you in this situation and I've been in a situation like that also. It sucks. 

But I don't think all head tables are a bad thing. H was in a wedding a couple of years ago and they had a head table where SOs of the wedding party were included. As long as people are seated with their SOs, I have no problem with it.

You're right - not all head tables are bad, just one where couples are separated.  It just does not make sense to me to do that.  

littlemushroom

I get why it would suck.  I had never even heard of a head table with the SOs of the bridal party seated there, let alone seen one in real life, before I cam to TK.  But it made sense, so I started trying to decide between a King table and a Sweetheart table.  Out of our party of 3 BMs and 2 GM, 2 are married with kids, one has a SO, and the other 2 are single and coming by themselves.

I was talking with my MOH about how we were deciding between the two, but was trying to figure out the logistics of a King table because we would have had 5 kids under the age of 10 along with 2 infants.  First, I had to explain what a King Table was because she had never heard of it before (neither had anyone else in our party).  She didn't understand why her husband and kids needed to be sat with us.  I explained I didn't want to break up the family, and she was like, "I eat with them every day.  They will be fine for an hour and a half without me. Put them at a table with our mutual friends and let me sit up with you."  

Any time we mentioned the King table to the people in the bridal party, they said it was a dumb idea and to just seat their SO (and kids) with other people they knew so that they (the one in the party) could sit at a head table with us.  Even after explaining that I wanted their SOs to comfortable as well, I was told that they (the SOs) didn't want to sit at "King" table and were fine being separated for dinner.

Same went with the Sweetheart table.  Our party was upset that they weren't going to get to sit with us at dinner.

We got so much push-back from the bridal party and their SOs that we are doing a head table because it is what they prefer.  Since it was their idea and they pushed for it when it wasn't even mentioned as an option, they must be fine with it.

lyndausvi

As a BM I HATE, HATE, HATE head tables. It's not even the fact I'm not with my SO, although that is part of the issue. HT just plain suck. The layout sucks, people looking at you eat sucks, not with your SO sucks. They are just plain stupid as far as I'm concerned.

 My WP sat with people they would normally sit with if they were not in the WP. They loved that. The WP had all been together for hours by the time the reception came. They didn't need to sit together through the reception also. Nope I feel like them sitting with those they normally would kind of "released" them from their duties so to speak. 

Weddings I've seen with HT the table ended up being a big empty space in a prominent spot in the room. As after dinner most WP run to their SOs and/or others they know leaving this big table a ghost town.

ohannabelle

Sometimes, head tables gripe me. It's not okay to separate people from an SO, and it's just personal preference, but I'm just rubbed the wrong way by the elevated on a platform or stage head tables, where the wedding party looks down on the rest of the guests, like some kind of frikking royal scene from Camelot. 

Or like the Pope, elevated above the sea of ordinary cardinals.

(Not this Pope. Papa Francesco doesn't go for that stuff. The last one did. All dressed up and bejeweled like some kind of 16th century Borgia Prince. Benedict. That was his name. I am bad, and in my house, we called him The Ermine German. Because of the furs and finery. Yep, I'm going to hell.)

Sorry. Head tables. No to separating couples, no to elevated stages above the peasants.

goldchocobo.defunct635829490514903826

Thanks for this!  I am not sold on a head table, but FI wants one.  I'm trying to campaign for a sweetheart table and will use this thread as leverage!  

annathy03

lolo883 said:

I've been amazed at how many people are shocked when I tell them the WP is sitting with their SOs. I think nearly every one of our WP members has sadly mentioned "well, I won't be sitting next to (name)..." Yes. Yes you will be. Don't be ridiculous.

We are having a "head table" of me and the mister, BM and his wife, MOH and her BF. Then there will be two WP tables flanking us with the rest of the WP and their SOs/children. They'll still be seated at a place of honor at the front and be served first, but they get to sit with their people.

This is similar to what we did.  H and I had a sweetheart table but we were flanked by two tables that our WP, reader, and our friends that really only knew people in those groups were seated at.  We felt a little less "center of attention" having our BP right next to us, and our friends appreciated being sat with their SO.

SewInLoveWithDMB

This is an interesting read to me - I have never attended a wedding where the bridal party was separate from all other guests. I have only seen the sweetheart table (bride and groom, only) and have never even heard of a King's table. Members of the bridal party have always been sat at "regular" tables - sometimes only with other bridal party members (ETA: And their dates!), and often just with other guests. I think separating a social unit is ridiculous - my thinking is that all couples obviously need to be invited together - so why then separate them? That's just as bad as only inviting one.

JCbride2015

ohannabelle said:

Sometimes, head tables gripe me. It's not okay to separate people from an SO, and it's just personal preference, but I'm just rubbed the wrong way by the elevated on a platform or stage head tables, where the wedding party looks down on the rest of the guests, like some kind of frikking royal scene from Camelot. 

Or like the Pope, elevated above the sea of ordinary cardinals.

(Not this Pope. Papa Francesco doesn't go for that stuff. The last one did. All dressed up and bejeweled like some kind of 16th century Borgia Prince. Benedict. That was his name. I am bad, and in my house, we called him The Ermine German. Because of the furs and finery. Yep, I'm going to hell.)

Sorry. Head tables. No to separating couples, no to elevated stages above the peasants.

So much this!  The bolded is pretty common in NJ.  I actually went to an engagement party once that had an elevated head table like this.  It's preposterous.

l9i

NikkiJay3333 said:

I get why it would suck.  I had never even heard of a head table with the SOs of the bridal party seated there, let alone seen one in real life, before I cam to TK.  But it made sense, so I started trying to decide between a King table and a Sweetheart table.  Out of our party of 3 BMs and 2 GM, 2 are married with kids, one has a SO, and the other 2 are single and coming by themselves.

I was talking with my MOH about how we were deciding between the two, but was trying to figure out the logistics of a King table because we would have had 5 kids under the age of 10 along with 2 infants.  First, I had to explain what a King Table was because she had never heard of it before (neither had anyone else in our party).  She didn't understand why her husband and kids needed to be sat with us.  I explained I didn't want to break up the family, and she was like, "I eat with them every day.  They will be fine for an hour and a half without me. Put them at a table with our mutual friends and let me sit up with you."  

Any time we mentioned the King table to the people in the bridal party, they said it was a dumb idea and to just seat their SO (and kids) with other people they knew so that they (the one in the party) could sit at a head table with us.  Even after explaining that I wanted their SOs to comfortable as well, I was told that they (the SOs) didn't want to sit at "King" table and were fine being separated for dinner.

Same went with the Sweetheart table.  Our party was upset that they weren't going to get to sit with us at dinner.

We got so much push-back from the bridal party and their SOs that we are doing a head table because it is what they prefer.  Since it was their idea and they pushed for it when it wasn't even mentioned as an option, they must be fine with it.

This.  I had the same issue.  I had never been to a wedding where something other than a head table was done.  Attended weddings were I was at the table and FI wasn't and vice versa.  It personally didn't bother me.  After dinner FI and I were up and dancing and talking with people anyway so it wasn't a big deal.  And same, I never heard of anything different before coming on here.  I asked my party and got the same feedback as above...

I wonder if this is a regional thing.  As it appears I've only ever seen head tables sans SOs and others have posted that they've never seen the same concept.  Just a thought.

jenijoyk

Head tables are the worst and they feel like a high school homecoming court. I attended a wedding last year where my fiance was in the wedding party. Not only did I have to go to the wedding myself (since he had left hours earlier to get ready with the guys), I had to sit alone during the ceremony, then I had wander and mingle alone during the 90 minute cocktail hour (while the wedding party did photos), then I was seated at a table where I knew no one (while he was at the head table). It's just really rude, in my opinion. By the time dinner starts, WP members have already been separated from their SOs for hours.... Sure it's fine if its a wedding where your WP's SOs know people, but if it isn't it's really painful.

theartistformerlyknownas

Ew yeah no elevated tables. Yuck.

16maybeless

We just sat ourselves at a regular long table. It was in front of the fireplace, so I guess it was sort of at a focal point, but we sat with our MOH, best man, our parents, grandparents, and siblings + any SOs. Easy enough. Just treated as another table. I really disliked the idea of my husband and I sitting by ourselves at a small table. Too much attention on me eating. 

But I can't imagine splitting up our MOH and best man from their partners. That would be weird to me. 

lizzypoo96

FI said hell no to a sweetheart table, which is fine cause they're kind of cheesy. We have a small WP, so we just decided to have all of us at a regular round with us, the WP, and their dates- so 10 total. Or table will be in the complete middle of all the tables, so it's still a focal point, but not like the obnoxious raised head table. This is what I think of when I see those big "look at me" raised tables:

We still get to eat with our best friends, and they get to have their SO with them. I was pleased how many vendors said "oh that's perfect!" when we mentioned it to them.

twitterbird

I was in a wedding over the weekend and there was a head table. I had no issue with it other than getting served way before my fiance (I felt kinda bad about that since he was hungry). After dinner and toasts were over they redid the room and the head table was gone. I sat with my fiance and friends the rest of the night.

bunnyprincess2014

Three out of the four members of my bridal party have significant others coming in from out of state. I cannot imagine forcing those guys to sit by themselves for the whole reception. Also, it would feel so disrespectful to the relationships of my closest friends who are at my side supporting me as I take the next step in my relationship with my FI to force them to sit on display with me instead of with their SOs. We are doing a sweetheart table, and the WP will be seated with their SOs at the tables where we think they will have the best time.

theartistformerlyknownas

Laurie Roche said:

I was in a wedding over the weekend and there was a head table. I had no issue with it other than getting served way before my fiance (I felt kinda bad about that since he was hungry). After dinner and toasts were over they redid the room and the head table was gone. I sat with my fiance and friends the rest of the night.

Just because you personally have no issue with something doesn't make it proper etiquette. Some people don't mind getting farted on but that doesn't make it ok for the general population.

levieenrose

goldchocobo:

We had a sweetheart table partly to avoid head table headaches, but also because we wanted to be able to socialize and dance without feeling like we were abandoning everyone else at the table where we'd been sitting.* We weren't even at the table most of the night! 

We sat ourselves in the midst of the other tables and seated some of the bridal party with friends and their significant others at tables near the "edges." We weren't on display, we were celebrating with our families. And no one should have felt like they were at the edge of the room because they weren't special enough to be closer to us. 

*Note: I was asked by a cousin why we chose to sit alone when all of our loved ones were around us. Hopefully he bought my answer--it was sincere. And if he paid any attention afterwards, he should have found it completely true. 

futuremrsog15

We are doing a sweetheart table. I would sat us with the guests, but I think my divorced parents would make a stink about who we chose to sit with. Just last week a groomsman texted my fiance asking if he would be seated with bridal party or his wife for dinner. We gladly told them they would be sitting together. Another thing I am focused on is, after the wedding, my bridal party are FREE! Free to go get some food and drink. We are taking all the pictures before the wedding. Just a few MAYBE with the family afterwards. But after the wedding bridal party are guests.

Racheldh83

I'm with a few others I've never seen a wedding without a head table sans so's. We are telling people we are doing a sweetheart table and then have to explain what it is. So it'll be new to our guests guess I've never even thought about being upset not sitting with my so for the toast and meal.

iloveotters2014

We had a sweetheart table with two tables beside us for the wedding party and their significant others. It worked out nicely to be able to talk with them while them still being with their loved ones. We were "elevated" I suppose though. We were married at a concert venue, so it was either have the wedding party on the stage or have the dance floor on the stage....and all I kept thinking was people getting hammered and falling off stage while dancing hahaha. It seemed like the best way to avoid that.

RebeccaB88

I had the dubious honor of sitting at the head table at my sister's reception. First, I was in no way allowed a date. Not that I was dating anyone, but I was MOH. They didn't think I needed one because I would know so many other people there, and I'd be busy. Fine, whatever. But the head table... I was between my new BIL and a groomsman I'd never met until the moment we were seated. (He wasn't at the rehearsal and drove in the morning of.) BIL was way more interested in talking to his new wife than me (naturally), and Random Groomsman shoveled in his lunch as fast as it was served, and hit the road for home before the cake was cut. ( He legit had another commitment that evening, I later found out.) So, yeah, I knew a ton of people there, but never got to talk to them because I was stuck at that damn table with my mom giving me the Death Glare any time I tried to move. Yeah, head tables are of the devil.

Ndelible

I never thought of the table arrangement before I started planning this wedding. I see both sides of the head table divide. What I don't understand is the whining about being separated from a SO for a few hours. Not a big deal. I think it's the bride and grooms choice. The WP are special participants of the day, not their SOs. That being said, I dislike separate tables because I think it separates the guests. I am thinking of either an X or something like a a W with seating on all sides so there is the possibility to speak to more than jus who is on your left or right. I'm thinking this can be done with a smaller amount of guests. In that way, WP will be seated at least across from their SOs.

lyndausvi

Ndelible said:

I never thought of the table arrangement before I started planning this wedding. I see both sides of the head table divide. What I don't understand is the whining about being separated from a SO for a few hours. Not a big deal. I think it's the bride and grooms choice. The WP are special participants of the day, not their SOs. That being said, I dislike separate tables because I think it separates the guests. I am thinking of either an X or something like a a W with seating on all sides so there is the possibility to speak to more than jus who is on your left or right. I'm thinking this can be done with a smaller amount of guests. In that way, WP will be seated at least across from their SOs.

In my experience the WP have to meet up with the groom or bride HOURS before the ceremony.  Then during the ceremony they are obliviously separated.  Generally an hour or more after the ceremony they are taking pictures.  By the time they get to the reception they more than likely have been away from the SO for more than a "few hours".   

For example, we are going to a wedding in Sept that DH is in.  The wedding is at 2:30pm.  DH has to be with the groomsmen around 12:30-1pm.   The reception is at 6pm.  Between the wedding and the reception the WP will be taking pictures.      If they are having a HT (unknown at this point) I will go from noon or so until after 7 or longer away from my DH.   At an OOT wedding.  Where pretty much everyone I know will be in the WP.

Now on the couple's behalf DH is the ONLY OOT WP member.  Everyone else is is local and are good friends with each other.  So I can see where they would think it's "only a few hours".  

Not only that at the time of the wedding DH would have only had 1-3 days off from May 3 until Sept 3 and works 12+ hours a day.  So far he has only had 1 day off and that was July 8, I'm hoping he will get another day off, but there is not guarantee at this point.  We average 2 meals together a week.  Most of those meals are breakfast.  I do not think it's unreasonable for me to want to have dinner with my husband once in a while when he isn't actually working.

Oh and the wedding I'm talking about is on our 6th anniversary.    I don't think it's unreasonable for me to want to spend my 6th anniversary eating dinner with my husband. Even if it's with 300 other people.

   

If the couple decides to have a HT without SO's we will respect that, but we will be pretty bummed.

badbnagdway

I've been at two head tables as an moh and both brides kindly included dates/so's at said table. Seemed very natural to me. And I understand not wanting to be separated. Weddings are all about love, it's hard to watch that and not have your so near.

Ndelible

@lyndausvi‌, I'm sorry to hear that you will not be spending your anniversary with your hubby. However, I will stand by the few hours comments. The way folks are going on and on about it, it's like you can't be without your SO - ever. There will be times when couples will be separated. If someone is special to one of the BP, their role is as an individual, not a couple. It's nice when SOs can sit together, but I have no problem if they wish for their WP to be with them at the reception. As it is, eating doesn't take too much time and then everyone goes to circulate, dance and what not. I think it's great to take everyone's preferences into account. That's all. However, the B & G's desire takes precedence, IMO.

lyndausvi

Ndelible said:

@lyndausvi‌, I'm sorry to hear that you will not be spending your anniversary with your hubby. However, I will stand by the few hours comments. The way folks are going on and on about it, it's like you can't be without your SO - ever. There will be times when couples will be separated. If someone is special to one of the BP, their role is as an individual, not a couple. It's nice when SOs can sit together, but I have no problem if they wish for their WP to be with them at the reception. As it is, eating doesn't take too much time and then everyone goes to circulate, dance and what not. I think it's great to take everyone's preferences into account. That's all. However, the B & G's desire takes precedence, IMO.

Did you not get that I spend most of my life away from my husband?    Go weeks at a time without having a single meal with him?  Do you not get that WP members normally spend HOURS without their SO already getting ready, taking pictures, standing at the ceremony, taking more pictures, etc..  It's not just for dinner we do not get to spend time with time with them.  It's the whole day.  A day that due to my DH's schedule only comes around once every few months.  

I will deal with spending my anniversary without my husband (hell to date I've only spent one anniversary with him). I will deal with not getting to have dinner with him (happens more often than not anyway).  But I do not have to be thrilled with the situation.

For some people having dinner and spending the day with their SO is normal and standard.  One night is not a bid deal.    There are many on the TK who are in a similar situation.  Some of their SOs have similar jobs as my husband  Others live long distant from their SO for various reasons including, but not limited to deployment, work, going to school, whatever.   Being able to enjoy a dinner with our SOs is a luxury to us.