• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Etiquette

Inviting a friend's SO who tried to start a fight with me?

2

Re: Inviting a friend's SO who tried to start a fight with me?

  • AlexisA01 said:
    AddieCake said:
    If they are all openly poly and openly in a relationship with each other, all 3 should be invited as a social unit. That thing awhile back with the wife and mistress was not at all the same as this.

    While I agree the openly poly vs. wife/mistress are different issues, I am surprised to find myself in the minority to disagree that openly poly relationships need to invite all or none.

    Generally speaking...whether it is a wedding or not...guests can bring one other person.  Their SO...or another guest if truly single and given a plus 1.  I just don't feel I need to invite extra people to a party because one of my guests has chosen to be in a polyamorous relationship.  Of course, I would probably choose to do that, but I don't think it is required etiquette-wise.  I think an "and guest" is a perfect solution for that situation.

    For example, if I happened to be friends with one of those women on "Sister Wives" or "My Five Wives"...I'd invite her and her husband....not her, her husband, and the other wives even if they all consider themselves to be a social unit.  Same with if I was friends with the husband.  He would get an invitation for himself and his legal wife.

    Not comparing polygamy to bigamy...I realize they are different...though I don't think they are that different in this type of situation. 

    Now why would you be the one to judge their relationship? Also they wouldn't be "extra guest" they would their significant other.

    I wanted to clarify to a few comments on my post.  If I was friends with one of the Sister Wives who was NOT the legal wife, I would invite who she considers her husband because that is her SO (and invite him by name)...but I would not invite all the other wives (unless they were my friends also).  To me, this is different than a wife/mistress situation because they are all openly living as a family.  No one is a secret.  But just because they choose to be a family of six consenting adults, does not mean I have to invite everyone.

    And I apply that same thought to a poly relationship.  I absolutely do not judge that type of life style.  I'm not judging the relationship, I'm judging the numbers...and only strictly from an invitation/etiquette standpoint.  At any event almost across the board, the usual assumption is people are invited as couples...not even necessarily romantic couples.  It is just the social norm and, yes, that will sometimes mean people who choose to have relationships larger than two people may not be able to always go to events with everyone in the relationship.

    I'll use an extreme example someone gave, but I think it makes my point.  One of the posters mentioned if someone was part of a swinger's club you wouldn't have to invite all the people in the club.  Fair enough, but at what number IS that line drawn?  At 3?  At 5?  At 10?  For me, I draw the line, etiquette-wise, at 2.  Because that is by far the social norm.

    With that said, if I was friends with someone in a poly relationship...if it was just three people...I would most certainly invite everyone.  But again, I would feel required by etiquette to invite two, and would include all 3 as a courtesy.  Not necessarily giving that advice to the OP, obviously there are other issues going on there.

    One more example.  Let's not even talk weddings for a sec.  My workplace had a Holiday party.  My invitation allowed me one guest.  Didn't have to be my SO, I could have brought anyone.  But only one guest.  Hypothetically, would it have been appropriate for a person in a poly relationship to go to HR and say, "I realize the other 200 people in the company can only bring one guest, but I am in a poly relationship with 3 other people so I am RSVPing for 4."?  

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    MegEn1huskypuppy14[Deleted User]
  • While I do agree that social norms are certainly not always ethical or morally right, the fact is our society functions on social norms and it is a key element that makes our society work.  Sometimes great social norms go by the way side.  Sometimes bad social norms, such as the stigmas of interracial and gay couples also go by the way side.  Societies are constantly evolving.  I think inviting as "twos" etiquette-wise is currently a valid social norm...obviously others disagree.  I do understand where that point of view comes from and respect it, it is just not how I feel on the subject.

    Totally right about the swinger's club, that wasn't quite how I meant it and I should have been more specific.  I was referring to people who consider themselves a social unit and at what number is that too much, as far as invitations are concerned.

    Your example about the Duggars is a good one.  You may have swayed me with that one ;).  Though for me the sad answer would be if my BFF was one of 5 wives and she was the only one I knew, I probably wouldn't invite her to my event if etiquette dictated I had to invite all six people.  Now I'm curious how invitations usually come (or don't) for those in larger social units.

    Though I disagree that a wedding and a work party or any other party are apples and oranges.  There are some etiquette differences, but the majority stays the same.  And I would side-eye if my work invitation had said a blanket, "Adults only."  I side-eyed it just a little because it had that ubiquitous, "Cocktail attire requested."  For all the same reasons it isn't okay to put those phrases on a wedding invitation.  

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • While I do agree that social norms are certainly not always ethical or morally right, the fact is our society functions on social norms and it is a key element that makes our society work.  Sometimes great social norms go by the way side.  Sometimes bad social norms, such as the stigmas of interracial and gay couples also go by the way side.  Societies are constantly evolving.  I think inviting as "twos" etiquette-wise is currently a valid social norm...obviously others disagree.  I do understand where that point of view comes from and respect it, it is just not how I feel on the subject.

    Totally right about the swinger's club, that wasn't quite how I meant it and I should have been more specific.  I was referring to people who consider themselves a social unit and at what number is that too much, as far as invitations are concerned.

    Your example about the Duggars is a good one.  You may have swayed me with that one ;).  Though for me the sad answer would be if my BFF was one of 5 wives and she was the only one I knew, I probably wouldn't invite her to my event if etiquette dictated I had to invite all six people.  Now I'm curious how invitations usually come (or don't) for those in larger social units.

    Though I disagree that a wedding and a work party or any other party are apples and oranges.  There are some etiquette differences, but the majority stays the same.  And I would side-eye if my work invitation had said a blanket, "Adults only."  I side-eyed it just a little because it had that ubiquitous, "Cocktail attire requested."  For all the same reasons it isn't okay to put those phrases on a wedding invitation.  

    I think this instance is also apples and oranges, although emotionally I still kind of fall with you on the "twos" thing, I think intellectually I'd have a hard time doing it.

    The thing with the sister wives though is that I don't see them as in an equal relationship with the other wives. In this case, OP's friend is in a three way relationship, which means friend is in a relationship with boyfriend A and boyfriend B, just as boyfriend A is in a relationship with boyfriend B, etc. With the sister wives, each has their own relationship to the husband. From what I gather they don't consider themselves in a relationship with the other wives as well. So I think if you were to invite the husband as your guest, you'd have to invite all the social partners there. But if your friend is a sister wife, the only person she claims to be in a relationship with is the husband.

    While the sisters may be FAMILY to each other, I wouldn't call them in a relationship.

    Achievement Unlocked: Survived Your Wedding! 
    slothiegalluckysnorkelfwtx5815[Deleted User]
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be mod
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its

    While I do agree that social norms are certainly not always ethical or morally right, the fact is our society functions on social norms and it is a key element that makes our society work.  Sometimes great social norms go by the way side.  Sometimes bad social norms, such as the stigmas of interracial and gay couples also go by the way side.  Societies are constantly evolving.  I think inviting as "twos" etiquette-wise is currently a valid social norm...obviously others disagree.  I do understand where that point of view comes from and respect it, it is just not how I feel on the subject.

    Totally right about the swinger's club, that wasn't quite how I meant it and I should have been more specific.  I was referring to people who consider themselves a social unit and at what number is that too much, as far as invitations are concerned.

    Your example about the Duggars is a good one.  You may have swayed me with that one ;).  Though for me the sad answer would be if my BFF was one of 5 wives and she was the only one I knew, I probably wouldn't invite her to my event if etiquette dictated I had to invite all six people.  Now I'm curious how invitations usually come (or don't) for those in larger social units.

    Though I disagree that a wedding and a work party or any other party are apples and oranges.  There are some etiquette differences, but the majority stays the same.  And I would side-eye if my work invitation had said a blanket, "Adults only."  I side-eyed it just a little because it had that ubiquitous, "Cocktail attire requested."  For all the same reasons it isn't okay to put those phrases on a wedding invitation.  

    I disagree, it's not even close.
    I think it is perfectly acceptable for a work function to have a dress code. It is not event to thank you for attending a wedding. It is part of your job. If it is acceptable to your employer to dictate the formality of dress in your office, I don't see how that is any different at a work party - especially if outsiders are being received at the party. The attire of the employees will reflect on the company. The attire of guests at your wedding does not reflect on you and will have no impact on contracts or earning potential. If a company hosts events that are sometimes child friendly, there is no breach of etiquette is stating that an event is for adults only.
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

    esstee33Maggie0829
  • esstee33esstee33 Pittsburgh member
    Ninth Anniversary 1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    edited December 2014
    Just cosign me to everything @photokitty has said. Every single thing has been perfect. 

    Just because it may be a social norm for a relationship to consist of only two people, that doesn't mean you get to pick and choose which partner to invite in a poly relationship. Following etiquette would dictate that you invite your guests partner(s) because they are a social unit. In a lot of cases, the social unit is just two people. But not always, and in this case, the social unit is three. If the question is whether to invite all parts of a poly relationship, you must invite all of them. You can't invite your friend with only one of his partners and expect him to just be cool with it that you basically just said "Listen, your relationship is abnormal and doesn't fit into my numbers." If John has three other partners, and they all live together and consider themselves all in a relationship with each other, and identify as a social unit, you better invite all three of them. You don't get to choose which of John's partners is his "primary" partner (ETA: and you shouldn't make him choose, either!), because that's not how a lot of poly relationships work. Just like we tell people that you have to invite your guests' partner, even if you don't like them, and even if they haven't been together that long because they consider themselves to be a couple, the same applies here. You don't get to dictate the terms of your friends' relationships. 

    In the case of the original OP and question, I would not invite any of them. Your friend clearly has no intention of standing up to you when Boyfriend A has been aggressive, and to invite only your friend and Boyfriend B would be a major dick move. 
    image
    photokittyashley8918Viczaesarfwtx5815
  • MegEn1 said:

    While I do agree that social norms are certainly not always ethical or morally right, the fact is our society functions on social norms and it is a key element that makes our society work.  Sometimes great social norms go by the way side.  Sometimes bad social norms, such as the stigmas of interracial and gay couples also go by the way side.  Societies are constantly evolving.  I think inviting as "twos" etiquette-wise is currently a valid social norm...obviously others disagree.  I do understand where that point of view comes from and respect it, it is just not how I feel on the subject.

    Totally right about the swinger's club, that wasn't quite how I meant it and I should have been more specific.  I was referring to people who consider themselves a social unit and at what number is that too much, as far as invitations are concerned.

    Your example about the Duggars is a good one.  You may have swayed me with that one ;).  Though for me the sad answer would be if my BFF was one of 5 wives and she was the only one I knew, I probably wouldn't invite her to my event if etiquette dictated I had to invite all six people.  Now I'm curious how invitations usually come (or don't) for those in larger social units.

    Though I disagree that a wedding and a work party or any other party are apples and oranges.  There are some etiquette differences, but the majority stays the same.  And I would side-eye if my work invitation had said a blanket, "Adults only."  I side-eyed it just a little because it had that ubiquitous, "Cocktail attire requested."  For all the same reasons it isn't okay to put those phrases on a wedding invitation.  

    I think this instance is also apples and oranges, although emotionally I still kind of fall with you on the "twos" thing, I think intellectually I'd have a hard time doing it.

    The thing with the sister wives though is that I don't see them as in an equal relationship with the other wives. In this case, OP's friend is in a three way relationship, which means friend is in a relationship with boyfriend A and boyfriend B, just as boyfriend A is in a relationship with boyfriend B, etc. With the sister wives, each has their own relationship to the husband. From what I gather they don't consider themselves in a relationship with the other wives as well. So I think if you were to invite the husband as your guest, you'd have to invite all the social partners there. But if your friend is a sister wife, the only person she claims to be in a relationship with is the husband.

    While the sisters may be FAMILY to each other, I wouldn't call them in a relationship.

    That is an interesting distinction and major difference I hadn't even thought about.  Sister Wives are family, but not in a romantic relationship all with each other.  Poly relationships are in a romantic relationship all with each other.

    And now I am going to be super judgy and a bit off topic.  Those "many wives and one husband" relationships absolutely make my skin crawl.  Not because I have a problem with multi-person relationships, but because I have problem with relationships that are not equal and so patriarchal.  I've even watched a few episodes to try and understand.  It wasn't as male domineering as I thought it would be and they all seemed like lovely people but, at the end of the day, it is multiple women serving the emotional/physical needs of one man.  And a lot of children in the family growing up thinking that is what it is supposed to be.

    As an aside, I just love these topics that gives one a lot of food for thought! 

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • Some of these people consider themselves to be in a "social unit", doesn't mean I need to make room for Fido, even if I'm hosting an event at a farm or the like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human–animal_marriage

    And face it, we're already being judgmental, because we only consider sexual/erotic/romantic relationships to constitute a "social unit," which of course is exclusionary. If two bachelor siblings live together, are they a "social unit"? What about two old lady friends just sharing a home but not in a sexual relationship but who hang out and go places together? I'm sure a single parent with a minor child considers the two of them to be a "social unit." The point is, "social unit" is not actually a helpful term and yes, the social norm in the western world is for pairings of two, so I disagree that you are under any obligation to accommodate beyond that. If people here want to constantly point out that we're focused on etiquette rules in the US/Western world, then this is a reasonable standard as well.
  • huskypuppy14huskypuppy14 Boston Suburbs member
    2500 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    edited January 2015
    Welcome OP! You have a very interesting question, and it's complicated by a few factors. One being that his parents threw you an engagement party. 

    On the surface, this is your friend and yes you should invite both of his boyfriends. If there were no issues with Boyfriend A and everything was fine with all of them, you would have no problem inviting all three correct? I don't think you should try to find a loophole based on "social conventions" to not invite him. 

    I do think you should talk to your friend, and discuss your concerns. Say you were hurt by his comments in agreeing with boyfriend A and see what he says. If you're concerned about potential violent outbursts at your wedding, I'd hire security so they can escort him out if there are any problems. How was he at the engagement party?

    Now on to the general question of "where to draw the line on relationships". I think people should make every effort to invite all SO regardless if that is the conventional 2 people or more people. However, some practical issues come in to play. 

    We always tell brides to add an additional person to every single guest. Should they add extra people to every guest in case one or more gets into a polyamorous relationship. This is not snarky, it's a real question. How do people account for that? Okay, so maybe you can budget for a couple relationships being threesomes as opposed to twosomes, but what if someone is in a relationship with 10 people. You do have to draw the line somewhere. 

    It's a really interesting discussion. I do think in this particular situation, you should invite both boyfriends.


    image
    image

    image


  • SP29SP29 member
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    edited January 2015
    Well this has gotten interesting!

    Generally, I agree with everything photokitty has said- you invite the social unit, however many that is. But MegEn1 did make a good point- Sister Wives are not in a romantic relationship with each other, they consider themselves to be like sisters (hence the name). However, Butterfly makes a good point about what IS a social unit- bringing up the two older ladies living together is a good example I think.

    This is how I would answer this question, regardless of the social "set up"- invite guests to your wedding like you would invite them over to your home for a dinner party. 

    A) If OP were to invite Friend over to her house for dinner, would she invite BF A and B? Baring the violent outburst- yes, because the 3 present themselves together as a social unit.

    B ) If you invite your friend Sally, you invite her husband.

    C) Sister Wives is tricky- some events they all go together, other things they do separate (like dates). However, if I were friends with a sister wife and I invited her and her sister wives + husband for dinner, then I would expect to invite all of them to my wedding, not pick and choose which events I invited one or all to. However, if I had ONLY met the one wife (my friend), I think you could argue the point that the other wives are not HER social unit. 

    D) If I invited Betty and Gladys over for dinner together all the time, then I would invite them together to my wedding. However, if I often went out on social "dates" with Betty only (say for coffee, out to dinner), then I don't think it would be a requirement to invite Gladys (though it'd be nice). 

    E) You could argue that an adult (either single parent, or even married couple) is a social unit with their children, but I think there are MANY instances where you would invite your friend (the adult) but not his/her children to events you may host- thus clearing that they are not the social unit (they are a family unit). 
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    Welcome OP! You have a very interesting question, and it's complicated by a few factors. One being that his parents threw you an engagement party. 

    On the surface, this is your friend and yes you should invite both of his boyfriends. If there were no issues with Boyfriend A and everything was fine with all of them, you would have no problem inviting all three correct? I don't think you should try to find a loophole based on "social conventions" to not invite him. 

    I do think you should talk to your friend, and discuss your concerns. Say you were hurt by his comments in agreeing with boyfriend A and see what he says. If you're concerned about potential violent outbursts at your wedding, I'd hire security so they can escort him out if there are any problems. How was he at the engagement party?

    Now on to the general question of "where to draw the line on relationships". I think people should make every effort to invite all SO regardless if that is the conventional 2 people or more people. However, some practical issues come in to play. 

    We always tell brides to add an additional person to every single guest. Should they add extra people to every guest in case one or more gets into a polyamorous relationship. This is not snarky, it's a real question. How do people account for that? Okay, so maybe you can budget for a couple relationships being threesomes as opposed to twosomes, but what if someone is in a relationship with 10 people. You do have to draw the line somewhere. 

    It's a really interesting discussion. I do think in this particular situation, you should invite both boyfriends.


    I would invite none of them.  The "friend" and BF A forfeited any right to an invitation through their rudeness.  BF B should not be invited if the others are not.
    PrettyGirlLost
  • I agree with Jenn4948- you either invite all 3, because they are a social unit, or none because of BF B's (and Friends) behaviour. Even though Friend is your friend, he has made a choice to involve himself with BF B and if B is a jerk, that is going to reflect on Friend and he has to live with those consequences too. 
    PrettyGirlLost
  • bethsmilesbethsmiles Denver, CO member
    10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    It seems incredibly insulting to only invite 2 members of a group of people who all consider themselves a part of a romantic relationship. Who are you to determine whose relationship within that group is most significant?

    It is outside of the social norm to be in a relationship with multiple partners but etiquette is about making your guests comfortable and feel welcome, not about adhering to social norms. Otherwise, all the SS brides who come here saying any number of etiquette faux pas are okay because it's a regional thing or normal in their circle would be okay being rude to their guests. Just like you, as host, don't get to judge whether or not someone is an SO based on how long they've been dating or if they have a ring - you don't get to judge their relationship because it is outside the social norm.

    OP - Invite them all or invite none of them.


  • MegEn1MegEn1 member
    500 Love Its 500 Comments Second Anniversary First Answer
    edited January 2015

    Some of these people consider themselves to be in a "social unit", doesn't mean I need to make room for Fido, even if I'm hosting an event at a farm or the like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human–animal_marriage

    And face it, we're already being judgmental, because we only consider sexual/erotic/romantic relationships to constitute a "social unit," which of course is exclusionary. If two bachelor siblings live together, are they a "social unit"? What about two old lady friends just sharing a home but not in a sexual relationship but who hang out and go places together? I'm sure a single parent with a minor child considers the two of them to be a "social unit." The point is, "social unit" is not actually a helpful term and yes, the social norm in the western world is for pairings of two, so I disagree that you are under any obligation to accommodate beyond that. If people here want to constantly point out that we're focused on etiquette rules in the US/Western world, then this is a reasonable standard as well.
    It's true - eventually there are lines. But we're going down the road of hypotheticals that I think are  very rarely going to come up. MAYBE the sister-wives thing, but otherwise for things like Aunt Mary and her BFF Suzy, it generally just needs to be considered based on the situation. If Aunt Mary and Suzy are both technically single, but do everything together, it doesn't really hurt to invite them both together. As far as your guest count is concerned it will be the same as if Aunt Mary had a boyfriend, instead of a BFF. That doesn't mean that EVERYONE gets to bring their BFF, it just means it works in that particular situation.

    ETA: Removed a thought of my own that on a moment's reflection I didn't actually agree with. Going to Starbucks now. :/

    Achievement Unlocked: Survived Your Wedding! 
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers

    It seems incredibly insulting to only invite 2 members of a group of people who all consider themselves a part of a romantic relationship. Who are you to determine whose relationship within that group is most significant?


    It is outside of the social norm to be in a relationship with multiple partners but etiquette is about making your guests comfortable and feel welcome, not about adhering to social norms. Otherwise, all the SS brides who come here saying any number of etiquette faux pas are okay because it's a regional thing or normal in their circle would be okay being rude to their guests. Just like you, as host, don't get to judge whether or not someone is an SO based on how long they've been dating or if they have a ring - you don't get to judge their relationship because it is outside the social norm.

    OP - Invite them all or invite none of them.
    Because if someone considers himself to be in a social unit with 19 other people, sorry, as far as I'm concerned they can bring ONE of those 19 with them. Regardless of how many people someone considers themselves to be in a social unit with, in the real world people do not have unlimited space and money budgets to invite "social units" of more than 2, maybe 3 people.

    It's not about "judging" other people's personal lives. It is about hosts having finite resources to entertain limited numbers of people. There does come a point where inviting too many people because of "not judging" is more than one's budget and building code allow. And sorry, but that has to be the host's decision, not that of the guests'.
    huskypuppy14
  • AddieCakeAddieCake Beyond the Wall member
    10000 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary 25 Answers
    edited January 2015
    Deleted b/c I posted in the wrong thread!
    What did you think would happen if you walked up to a group of internet strangers and told them to get shoehorned by their lady doc?~StageManager14
    image
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    edited January 2015
    I think that in that case, the only answer for people on tight budgets is not to invite anyone at all, so as not to "judge."

    Sorry, but I don't think anyone will go for that either. But I do think that no, you can't claim that you are in a "social unit" with everyone else in town and expect invitations for all. What will happen is you won't get one for yourself, let alone anyone else you consider yourself to be a "social unit" with.
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers


    Jen4948 said:

    I think that in that case, the only answer for people on tight budgets is not to invite anyone at all, so as not to "judge."

    Sorry, but I don't think anyone will go for that either. But I do think that no, you can't claim that you are in a "social unit" with everyone else in town and expect invitations for all. What will happen is you won't get one for yourself, let alone anyone else you consider yourself to be a "social unit" with.

    If I was in a committed and exclusive relationship and living in the same house with two people I would rather not be invited than be told to choose one of my two SOs. It would be a friendship ending move and I would think that my friend was a narrow-minded asshat and was never truly my friend. 

    Then again, I'd like think I would never be friends with that type of person in the first place tho...


    If only three people are involved that's one thing. More than that, though, and I think the whole bunch can expect not to be invited when it comes time to see if the guest list fits a cap.
  • redoryxredoryx member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    edited January 2015
    Jen4948 said:
    I think that in that case, the only answer for people on tight budgets is not to invite anyone at all, so as not to "judge." Sorry, but I don't think anyone will go for that either. But I do think that no, you can't claim that you are in a "social unit" with everyone else in town and expect invitations for all. What will happen is you won't get one for yourself, let alone anyone else you consider yourself to be a "social unit" with.
    How on earth did we go from polyamory relationships = dating an entire city? That's so incredibly ignorant and judgmental to assume that because a person isn't monogamous and only dating one person that means they're out fooling around with everyone.
    image
    esstee33slothiegalbethsmilesashley8918
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.
  • esstee33esstee33 Pittsburgh member
    Ninth Anniversary 1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    Jen4948 said:

    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.


    Yeah, and it's an extremely ignorant and offensive exaggeration.
    image
    redoryxslothiegalbethsmilesashley8918
  • Jen4948 said:
    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.
    Oh. Oh I see. So it's okay to be all offensive and ignorant because you were just "exaggerating." 
    image
    esstee33plainjane0415ashley8918
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    redoryx said:


    Jen4948 said:

    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.

    Oh. Oh I see. So it's okay to be all offensive and ignorant because you were just "exaggerating." 

    Oh, BS. I was not being " ignorant." And I don't GAF if you were "offended" because I said that I think that if someone wants to claim that they're in a social unit with a large number of other people that the likelihood is that none of them are going to be invited because the average hosts of a wedding don't have the money or room to invite them all.

    You're the one who's being "ignorant" because you seem to have no idea of what that word means, and throwing it around as a negative label is ignorant and offensive in itself. Use a dictionary before you go throwing words around as negative labels.
  • ViczaesarViczaesar Central Coast, CA member
    Ninth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    Jen4948 said:
    I think that in that case, the only answer for people on tight budgets is not to invite anyone at all, so as not to "judge." Sorry, but I don't think anyone will go for that either. But I do think that no, you can't claim that you are in a "social unit" with everyone else in town and expect invitations for all. What will happen is you won't get one for yourself, let alone anyone else you consider yourself to be a "social unit" with.
    Which is perfectly acceptable, etiquette-wise, as I said.  All or none.



    esstee33redoryxMaggie0829ashley8918
  • redoryxredoryx member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    edited January 2015
    Jen4948 said:
    Jen4948 said:
    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.
    Oh. Oh I see. So it's okay to be all offensive and ignorant because you were just "exaggerating." 
    Oh, BS. I was not being " ignorant." And I don't GAF if you were "offended" because I said that I think that if someone wants to claim that they're in a social unit with a large number of other people that the likelihood is that none of them are going to be invited because the average hosts of a wedding don't have the money or room to invite them all. You're the one who's being "ignorant" because you seem to have no idea of what that word means, and throwing it around as a negative label is ignorant and offensive in itself. Use a dictionary before you go throwing words around as negative labels.
    The likelihood of it being all or nothing being invited is fine and etiquette approved. That's how it works for all social units.

    The problem is that the OP presented a three person poly relationship and somehow that turned into you not feeling it necessary to invite an entire social unit because someone was "claiming" to be poly and dating an entire city. Do you not see the problem with that exaggeration of yours? If you are unable to invite the entire social unit for budget reasons that's fine, but when you saysomeone is "claiming" to be in a relationship with 19 people it borders on being very judgy of non-monogamous relationships and thinking 1) they aren't valid or 2) only two (and not all) of the people in the unit are serious enough to warrant being called a social unit. That's why I said it was an ignorant attitude in that those sorts of comments suggested unfamiliarity with poly relationships.
    image
    esstee33ashley8918
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    redoryx said:


    Jen4948 said:

    redoryx said:


    Jen4948 said:

    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.

    Oh. Oh I see. So it's okay to be all offensive and ignorant because you were just "exaggerating." 
    Oh, BS. I was not being " ignorant." And I don't GAF if you were "offended" because I said that I think that if someone wants to claim that they're in a social unit with a large number of other people that the likelihood is that none of them are going to be invited because the average hosts of a wedding don't have the money or room to invite them all.

    You're the one who's being "ignorant" because you seem to have no idea of what that word means, and throwing it around as a negative label is ignorant and offensive in itself. Use a dictionary before you go throwing words around as negative labels.

    The likelihood of it being all or nothing being invited is fine and etiquette approved. That's how it works for all social units.

    The problem is that the OP presented a three person poly relationship and somehow that turned into you not feeling it necessary to invite an entire social unit because someone was "claiming" to be poly and dating an entire city. Do you not see the problem with that exaggeration of yours? If you are unable to invite the entire social unit for budget reasons that's fine, but when you saysomeone is "claiming" to be in a relationship with 19 people it borders on being very judgy of non-monogamous relationships and thinking 1) they aren't valid or 2) only two (and not all) of the people in the unit are serious enough to warrant being called a social unit. That's why I said it was an ignorant attitude in that those sorts of comments suggested unfamiliarity with poly relationships.


    What I said (for the umpteenth fucking time) was if a "social unit" has more people in it than the hosts can afford to host or have room for in their venue, the probability is that none will be invited, no matter how many people are in it.

    You're coming across as "judgy" yourself here by throwing around the word "ignorant."
  • Jen4948 said:
    Jen4948 said:
    Jen4948 said:
    It was an exaggeration. Seriously, though, people really can't realistically be expected to budget for big groups of guests who claim to be in poly relationships. The space and money available to entertain so many people along with the one person in the group who is acquainted with the couple doesn't usually exist. So if that one person wants everyone else in the group invited along with him or her, I think they're going to get a reply of: Sorry, but if you're going to put us in an all-20-or-none situation, we're inviting none of you. I don't think anyone will agree to invite 17 or 18 strangers as opposed to just 1 or 2 so as not to "judge"-especially if that means that their budget and space won't allow for others to whom they are close to be invited.
    Oh. Oh I see. So it's okay to be all offensive and ignorant because you were just "exaggerating." 
    Oh, BS. I was not being " ignorant." And I don't GAF if you were "offended" because I said that I think that if someone wants to claim that they're in a social unit with a large number of other people that the likelihood is that none of them are going to be invited because the average hosts of a wedding don't have the money or room to invite them all. You're the one who's being "ignorant" because you seem to have no idea of what that word means, and throwing it around as a negative label is ignorant and offensive in itself. Use a dictionary before you go throwing words around as negative labels.
    The likelihood of it being all or nothing being invited is fine and etiquette approved. That's how it works for all social units.

    The problem is that the OP presented a three person poly relationship and somehow that turned into you not feeling it necessary to invite an entire social unit because someone was "claiming" to be poly and dating an entire city. Do you not see the problem with that exaggeration of yours? If you are unable to invite the entire social unit for budget reasons that's fine, but when you saysomeone is "claiming" to be in a relationship with 19 people it borders on being very judgy of non-monogamous relationships and thinking 1) they aren't valid or 2) only two (and not all) of the people in the unit are serious enough to warrant being called a social unit. That's why I said it was an ignorant attitude in that those sorts of comments suggested unfamiliarity with poly relationships.
    What I said (for the umpteenth fucking time) was if a "social unit" has more people in it than the hosts can afford to host or have room for in their venue, the probability is that none will be invited, no matter how many people are in it. You're coming across as "judgy" yourself here by throwing around the word "ignorant."
    and I just said THAT IS ETIQUETTE APPROVED.
    image
    Viczaesaresstee33ashley8918
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards