What Etiquette Breaches Did TK Save You From?

lovegood90

rcher920 said:

thisismynickname said:

My very first post on here, if I remember correctly, was whether or not I could ask my friend, who is a professional musician, to play for my ceremony. That got shut down right quick!

I got good guidance on properly wording and addressing invitations, and what information to put on my website. 

There were things that I had experienced that I didn't plan to do anyway, like have a gap (my area is gap-tastic) or even have a head table, but it was interesting to read up on why things were wrong rather than just feeling like things I'd experienced were annoying.  

Wait, sorry I'm late - why is this not ok? Just curious!

As long as you offer to pay them their going rate and not expect them to perform for free, I think it's okay. But someone correct me if I'm wrong!

rcher912

ah, that makes sense. Thanks!

Jessie42613

YOU GUYS.

Before TK, I was totally, 1000000% down with setting up a bank account where guests could give us money for the down payment on a house.  Like, in my mind this was the best. idea. ever.  And that shit was going in the invitations, on the website, all of it.

Thank God for y'all.  Really.

buttercup1958

I said don't ask because V had an awful time. His friends asked him to play guitar and he felt like he couldn't say no. It was on a beach and V is ginger so he was very burnt. He never got a thank you note or anything. I just think its a lot to ask someone if they could play and act like its no big deal. If your friend regularly plays in front of a lot of people they don't know, sure! But if they are like V who really only play with friends, I would avoid asking. That's just my personal opinion.

floridabride44

buttercup1958 said:

I said don't ask because V had an awful time. His friends asked him to play guitar and he felt like he couldn't say no. It was on a beach and V is ginger so he was very burnt. He never got a thank you note or anything. I just think its a lot to ask someone if they could play and act like its no big deal. If your friend regularly plays in front of a lot of people they don't know, sure! But if they are like V who really only play with friends, I would avoid asking. That's just my personal opinion.

Someone should buy V some sunscreen! Just sayin'.

flantastic

lovegood90 said:

thisismynickname said:

My very first post on here, if I remember correctly, was whether or not I could ask my friend, who is a professional musician, to play for my ceremony. That got shut down right quick!

I got good guidance on properly wording and addressing invitations, and what information to put on my website. 

There were things that I had experienced that I didn't plan to do anyway, like have a gap (my area is gap-tastic) or even have a head table, but it was interesting to read up on why things were wrong rather than just feeling like things I'd experienced were annoying.  

Wait, sorry I'm late - why is this not ok? Just curious!

As long as you offer to pay them their going rate and not expect them to perform for free, I think it's okay. But someone correct me if I'm wrong!

Yeah, it's okay to ask them if you're intending to pay them as a vendor, but issues of prudence - 

1) If they're close enough that they'd have been invited anyway, it means they'll be working instead of getting to fully enjoy themselves as a guest and friend.

2) If you ask and it turns out you don't like what they're doing, it can often be harder to bring up or go a different direction without causing problems in the friendship.

justsie

Let's see....

TK helped me get more eloquent wording on how to keep my mom from demanding a dollar dance(and made me get the balls to turn her down)

Helped me realize that even though everyone I know does matching bridesmaid gifts thats a big NO-NO

And the "adults only" not on invitation ediquette. 

banana468

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

This. If I found out that I was split from DH while wranging the kids without him you'd be getting the sink eye from me. Sorry but that reasoning is horseshit.

dolewhipper

OMG SO MUCH. My mother was an etiquette queen (for the most part) but with her recent decline in health she wasn't available so the advise given to me was horrible. Things I didn't do because of TK:

-Have a tiered ceremony/reception (was going to have the ceremony in a church and have the reception on a cruise ship while it sailed away from port; so only those who could afford the cruise would actually go to the reception)

-Send out invites 10-12 weeks out

-Put the ceremony start time 30 minutes before

-Exclude SOs from the rehearsal dinner

-Make the invitation a showcase of who was paying for the wedding, not hosting it

-Put attire on it (BTO, no doubt)

- Put the RSVP for the wedding 2 weeks before even though final numbers aren't due until 3 days before.

-Allow Fi to "replace" one of his GM because they dropped out

-Ask for cash/gift cards on the registry

-Tell BM what they had to do (ie. buy certain things other than a dress, get hair and makeup done, get nails done, ect without buying it for them)

whovianstark

Too many to count:
No Honeyfund (I actually went to a wedding once where the honeyfund information was IN the invitation and I went to pay it and it said they are only accepting checks. what?! So you are registering for cash and you are dictating to me how to give it to you?)
Not matching bridesmaid gifts: this is what I'm used to and I did buy them necklaces but that will just be in addition to their special gifts.


Things I wish I had known:

Bridesmaid budget: before I was even thinking about dresses a BM and I were at the mall so we went in to see if we could even find the color I was envisioning. That BM sent a pic to another bridesmaid which created a bunch of drama.

Asking family to help: a few years ago when I was a poor college student my brother starting doing videography for weddings. So I told him that would be an amazing present. And he did film our Dad's wedding. So, now I am trying to figure out what to do. He had committed before but that was when I was rude and asked him. I told him I would let him think about it, but I'd rather have no video at all or hire someone and let him enjoy it. Or if it's something he really wants to do, only film the ceremony. But if I hire someone I don't want him to think it's because I don't trust him to do a great job.

Please ignore any spelling or grammar errors.

marie2785

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

whovianstark

Oh and it saved me from B listing people! My wedding is a destination wedding so I don't think I would have done that anyway, but I know many people who have B listed before.

huskypuppy14

marie2785 said:

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers.

peachy13

Putting attire information on my reception insert of the invitation and my website (TK website really tricks you!!) I'm getting married this Halloween and everyone keeps asking if we're doing costumes, which we're not.

Also charity donations as favors.

peachy13

Jessie42613 said:

YOU GUYS.

Before TK, I was totally, 1000000% down with setting up a bank account where guests could give us money for the down payment on a house.  Like, in my mind this was the best. idea. ever.  And that shit was going in the invitations, on the website, all of it.

Thank God for y'all.  Really.

A guy I graduated HS with (who I always had a teeny tiny crush on) just got engaged and I saw the announcement in the local paper -- "an August wedding is planned." So me being a weirdo, I went on TK to see if they had a website or registry and sure enough they do! Some BS called "hatch my house" -- a registry so that your guests can contribute to your "house fund!" WTF!

lyndausvi

I don't even have kids, but I know what it's like to try and get 2-4 kids to sit still at dinner, in a strange place, when another parent is in the same room.   It's not exactly the easiest thing to accomplish. 

 My nephew was a big time daddy's boy.   No way he would sit still knowing daddy was in the room.  He HAD to be with his daddy.   A little 3 year old doesn't get the concept of why he can't be with daddy when it is right there.     It's even worse if the mom is the one separated. For a lot of kids,  If mom is in the room the kid needs to be with them.

As far as being not "alone".   Well technically that is correct, but are those other people really going to be WILLING and ABLE to assist the moms?

In the end do what you want, but like huskypuppy this is more for the many lurkers out there.

lovegood90

huskypuppy14 said:

marie2785 said:

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers.

Yep, agreed. The explanation provided doesn't change my stance on this. Your bridal party has already been to your rehearsal, potentially getting ready with you all morning, standing at your ceremony and for pictures. They most likely haven't seen their families all day. It seems pretty rude to separate them from their families for dinner too, just because they claim to be okay with it.

marie2785

huskypuppy14 said:

marie2785 said:

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers.

Um, I am pretty sure at no point did I say "this isn't rude", in fact, I openly called it out as an etiquette mistake I am making, which means I KNOW it can be perceived as rude, and likely will be by some guests. But, I did as much due diligence as possible to minimize the etiquette mistake, which I think is important to note when other posters gave me recommendations which I had already explored. Is this generally rude? Yes. Will some of my guests potentially see this as something rude I did to the wedding party? Yes. When my venue gave me my options, did I check with the SOs of the wedding party who assured me they preferred the "rude" method vs being split up into sweetheart tables? Yes. 

So TLDR, it's rude and I know it, but I did my best to minimize the effects. And in an imperfect world, sometimes that's the best you can do.  

floridabride44

marie2785 said:

huskypuppy14 said:

marie2785 said:

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers.

Um, I am pretty sure at no point did I say "this isn't rude", in fact, I openly called it out as an etiquette mistake I am making, which means I KNOW it can be perceived as rude, and likely will be by some guests. But, I did as much due diligence as possible to minimize the etiquette mistake, which I think is important to note when other posters gave me recommendations which I had already explored. Is this generally rude? Yes. Will some of my guests potentially see this as something rude I did to the wedding party? Yes. When my venue gave me my options, did I check with the SOs of the wedding party who assured me they preferred the "rude" method vs being split up into sweetheart tables? Yes. 

So TLDR, it's rude and I know it, but I did my best to minimize the effects. And in an imperfect world, sometimes that's the best you can do.  

The best you could do in this situation would be to sit at a sweetheart table or one of the regular guest tables and let your wedding party sit at regular tables with their SO's and family. Is someone forcing you to do a head table?

marie2785

hsgator said:

marie2785 said:

huskypuppy14 said:

marie2785 said:

lyndausvi said:

marie2785 said:

It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 

I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.  

So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.

Just my 2 cents

When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)

Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 

It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers.

Um, I am pretty sure at no point did I say "this isn't rude", in fact, I openly called it out as an etiquette mistake I am making, which means I KNOW it can be perceived as rude, and likely will be by some guests. But, I did as much due diligence as possible to minimize the etiquette mistake, which I think is important to note when other posters gave me recommendations which I had already explored. Is this generally rude? Yes. Will some of my guests potentially see this as something rude I did to the wedding party? Yes. When my venue gave me my options, did I check with the SOs of the wedding party who assured me they preferred the "rude" method vs being split up into sweetheart tables? Yes. 

So TLDR, it's rude and I know it, but I did my best to minimize the effects. And in an imperfect world, sometimes that's the best you can do.  

The best you could do in this situation would be to sit at a sweetheart table or one of the regular guest tables and let your wedding party sit at regular tables with their SO's and family. Is someone forcing you to do a head table?

The best option according to etiquette rules is in fact what you say above. But the best option for the groomsmen and their wives was to keep the head table according to them. So given the option between etiquette and the feelings of those affected, I went for the feelings of those affected. 

When I asked the wives (as I said above) I got mildly offended answers from all of them. If I now do a sweetheart table, I will get hell for disregarding their feelings and not trusting that they're being honest. And honestly--pissing these women off is way scarier than making an etiquette mistake. 

lyndausvi

There is also a difference in "not minding" and what they prefer.  

  When asked by a bride I would mostly likely say "No, I don't mind" just to be polite.  I am an adult an somewhat social so I can hold my own at a table without DH.  However,  my preference ,hands down, would be sitting together. 

 Mostly because I do not understand why EVERY OTHER guest at the wedding, including the bride and groom, gets to sit with their SO.  Yet somehow the nearest and dearest, the ones who just spent a bunch of money on attire they probably never wear again.  Who, in most circumstances just spent HOURS and HOURS away from family getting ready, taking pictures, taking more pictures, etc get separated.   

It's a crazy concept to me.   You have 100+ people at your wedding, yet only these 6-12 people have to be separated from their SOs.   

I don't know who came up with these "norm", but it's time it goes away.

banana468

Yeah.   I have to say that it depends on how you ask me a question.  If my husband is in your wedding and I'm not then he's probably closer to you then I am.   As such, if you ask me questions I'll probably answer in a way to not rock the boat or seem needy.  If you're my best friend and I'm in your wedding I'll be more likely to say, "There's no way DH will want to sleep with  me for a year if I make him handle the baby and the 4 yo for 4 hours plus dinner without me."  However if you're our friend's FI, I'll say, "Don't worry about it.  We can have plenty of fun at a table ourselves."   And my answer won't really be a lie but I'll wonder if you could have just planned to seat us together in the first place.

fwtx5815

marie2785 said:

Um, I am pretty sure at no point did I say "this isn't rude", in fact, I openly called it out as an etiquette mistake I am making, which means I KNOW it can be perceived as rude, and likely will be by some guests. But, I did as much due diligence as possible to minimize the etiquette mistake, which I think is important to note when other posters gave me recommendations which I had already explored. Is this generally rude? Yes. Will some of my guests potentially see this as something rude I did to the wedding party? Yes. When my venue gave me my options, did I check with the SOs of the wedding party who assured me they preferred the "rude" method vs being split up into sweetheart tables? Yes. 

So TLDR, it's rude and I know it, but I did my best to minimize the effects. And in an imperfect world, sometimes that's the best you can do.  

The best option according to etiquette rules is in fact what you say above. But the best option for the groomsmen and their wives was to keep the head table according to them. So given the option between etiquette and the feelings of those affected, I went for the feelings of those affected. 

When I asked the wives (as I said above) I got mildly offended answers from all of them. If I now do a sweetheart table, I will get hell for disregarding their feelings and not trusting that they're being honest. And honestly--pissing these women off is way scarier than making an etiquette mistake. 

Do you honestly believe that the WP and their spouses PREFER to be split up?? And even if you truly think that, your WP doesn't get to call the shots on the seating layout. 

The odds of people being offended by your following etiquette are almost non-existent. That's why etiquette standards exist...

dolewhipper

marie2785 said: hsgator said: marie2785 said: huskypuppy14 said: marie2785 said: lyndausvi said: marie2785 said: It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 
I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.   So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.
Just my 2 cents When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)
Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever.  It doesn't matter what you think, or even what your bridal party thinks. Just because people do it that way, doesn't mean it's not rude. Bridal party members should sit with their SO at dinner. We don't care what you do, but it's important to tell people the correct etiquette for lurkers. Um, I am pretty sure at no point did I say "this isn't rude", in fact, I openly called it out as an etiquette mistake I am making, which means I KNOW it can be perceived as rude, and likely will be by some guests. But, I did as much due diligence as possible to minimize the etiquette mistake, which I think is important to note when other posters gave me recommendations which I had already explored. Is this generally rude? Yes. Will some of my guests potentially see this as something rude I did to the wedding party? Yes. When my venue gave me my options, did I check with the SOs of the wedding party who assured me they preferred the "rude" method vs being split up into sweetheart tables? Yes. 
So TLDR, it's rude and I know it, but I did my best to minimize the effects. And in an imperfect world, sometimes that's the best you can do.   The best you could do in this situation would be to sit at a sweetheart table or one of the regular guest tables and let your wedding party sit at regular tables with their SO's and family. Is someone forcing you to do a head table? The best option according to etiquette rules is in fact what you say above. But the best option for the groomsmen and their wives was to keep the head table according to them. So given the option between etiquette and the feelings of those affected, I went for the feelings of those affected. 
When I asked the wives (as I said above) I got mildly offended answers from all of them. If I now do a sweetheart table, I will get hell for disregarding their feelings and not trusting that they're being honest. And honestly--pissing these women off is way scarier than making an etiquette mistake. 
---------------------I SWEAR THERE WERE BOXES---------------------- There's a Progresso soup commercial where a BM who is the sister of the bride, when asked, "Do you like your dress?" She replies with "I love my sister". These people will not tell you how they truly feel because of the whole, it's my day, mentality.

lyndausvi

Oh and fuck my spouse if he/she actually said he/she would "prefer" to sit at the HT and leave me with 2-4 kids to deal with by myself.   Fuck that shit.  It's called being a parent.  It's called being in a relationship.

Sure I get why they would "prefer" to dodge their parenting responsibilities by sitting at the HT.  But it's pretty shitty to  basically say "Ha, have fun dealing with the kids as I get to sit at the HT. I'll be sure to wave"  By preferring to NOT sit with your SO and family is bascailly saying that.

Again, it's a messed up "norm".  People only do it because "everyone else does".   They never stop to ask why?

banana468

lyndausvi said:

Oh and fuck my spouse if he/she actually said he/she would "prefer" to sit at the HT and leave me with 2-4 kids to deal with by myself.   Fuck that shit.  It's called being a parent.  It's called being in a relationship.

Sure I get why they would "prefer" to dodge their parenting responsibilities by sitting at the HT.  But it's pretty shitty to  basically say "Ha, have fun dealing with the kids as I get to sit at the HT. I'll be sure to wave"  By preferring to NOT sit with your SO and family is bascailly saying that.

Again, it's a messed up "norm".  People only do it because "everyone else does".   They never stop to ask why?

That's essentially why I don't think anyone would actually answer that they honestly thought it was better to be split from the spouses and kids unless they're assholes. 

Shit, I hate it when DH goes out on Wednesdays but that's his night to do his man stuff and I deal with it because he deserves some time away and the kids are asleep most of the time.

DH loves it when he hears other dudes say that they need to be home to babysit.   More than once he's said, "But they're your kids!   Isn't that just called parenting?!" 

ohannabelle

marie2785 said: lyndausvi said: marie2785 said: It's saved me from the cash bar my FI wanted and from having a 3 hr gap between ceremony and reception, but also made me accept a few etiquette breaches that I know I am going to have at my wedding. For example, FI and my parents are INSISTENT on having beer and wine for the whole wedding, but also serving 2 signature cocktails only during cocktail hour. I lost that battle since it was 3 against 1, but I fought hard (parents are paying for the reception, so it's not something I can change on my own). 
I am excluding SOs from the head table. Reasoning--if I include them, I also need to add 10+ kids to the head table since we're inviting children, and 4 of the groomsmen have 2-4 kids each, many of which are at an age which they cannot be left unattended. The venue does not have a good way to do a 30+ person head table or captains table.   So why have a HT at all?   I'm sure your GM's wives would be happy not to have to sit with the kids all by themselves.   I know I would be giving stink eye to my husband up at a HT while I have to deal with the kids alone.  Which BTW since he was in the WP, I'm sure at that point it would have been HOURS I was left alone with them, not just dinner.
Just my 2 cents When I asked, all of the SOs said to do the table and told me I was over thinking it. The groomsmen and their wives are adults (in their 40s) who have a bunch of friends at the wedding--NONE of them will be alone. So yea, they thought it was rude I even asked (one wife jokingly asked me if I really thought she wasn't capable of making friends or getting along with a few people there she knows...)
Plus we're also offering free childcare at the hotel, and on site at the reception. We have a full separate room with a TV, dvd player, WIFI, separate TV with whatever video game system my brother brings, and board games for all of the kids, along with a infant and child CPR-certified babysitter at the reception site. I think adults will be hanging out there too. The venue even offered to serve the kids food there if the kids wanted to hang in the play room all night. So the wives wont be stuck with the kids forever. 
SIB


To the bolded- what????????

No apologies here. I believe that not at all. Not even a little. Because there is absolutely no logic at all. How does that go?

You: "SO, at dinner, I was thinking that husbands and wives would be more comfortable sitting together than split up with one at the head table. Since I'm consulting all the significant others invited" (I'll just pretend this actually happened) "what do you think?"

SO: "How rude of you to even ask!" 

So, not only am I to believe that one person was offended by a question that couldn't possibly be considered offensive, but that multiple people were offended and thought you were "rude to ask."

I deem this hogwash. 

Unless you know several people contending for the title of World's Most Illogical Person. 

lovegood90

lyndausvi said:

Oh and fuck my spouse if he/she actually said he/she would "prefer" to sit at the HT and leave me with 2-4 kids to deal with by myself.   Fuck that shit.  It's called being a parent.  It's called being in a relationship.

Sure I get why they would "prefer" to dodge their parenting responsibilities by sitting at the HT.  But it's pretty shitty to  basically say "Ha, have fun dealing with the kids as I get to sit at the HT. I'll be sure to wave"  By preferring to NOT sit with your SO and family is bascailly saying that.

Again, it's a messed up "norm".  People only do it because "everyone else does".   They never stop to ask why?

YUP. 100% agree. If I'm gonna be stuck wrangling my (fake) children all night by myself, I could have saved myself the money and trouble of dressing up and going to the wedding and just stay home with the kids in the first place. 

melbenso

blabla89 said:

-Asking the WP to help with stuff (I've been asked to for every wedding I've been in and just assumed it was the norm)

Thank goodness for this board.

Towards the end of my wedding reception, I decided to change out of my wedding dress and into a sundress I had brought with me because I had been ungodly hot and sticky all day (outside photos in 90 degree weather and HVAC that was on the fritz for a bit at the reception).  I asked one of my best friends and bridesmaids to stop back at my room with me and unzip my dress for me.  I thanked her profusely for helping me with this small task.  Her response was, "Of course.  I'm in the bridal party.  I am supposed to do things for you. I've had to do tons more in every other wedding I've been in." (She had also offered to come into town early to help me get things ready.  I thanked her and said it wasn't necessary - which it wasn't.)  Thanks to TK, I was truly upset by this.  I told her that she had no obligation to do anything other than stand by me when I got married and I was incredibly grateful that she had traveled almost 1,000 miles just to do that.

We also considered a head table without wedding party dates at first (again, never occurred to me not to do this), but by the time we got to planning the set up for the reception, we were firmly set on a King's Table for us, our wedding party, their SOs and kids. 

ETA:
H was also dead set on a honeymoon fund registry for quite a while.  Thanks to these boards, I was able to talk him out of it.  And just in case any lurkers are wondering, we received enough in cash gifts to pay for our entire honeymoon, get all the additional registry gifts we decided we needed, and save some money towards a house without having to be rude to our guests at all.

KatieinBkln

TK has saved me from:

-A possible Honeyfund/other non-material gift "fund" (we were kind of uncomfortable with it and seeing everyone's reasoning here definitely confirmed my gut feeling)

-Serving a signature cocktail for only the cocktail hour before switching to wine/beer

-Dictating the BP's (non-dress) attire. I hadn't gotten far enough to actually consider which shoes/hair/mani-pedi I wanted my potential BMs to have, but I can shamefully confess that I was the WORST MOH-zilla about this for my sister's wedding. Oops.

There are a ton of little things that a person could theoretically mess up if one is not actively considering things from an etiquette perspective. The best thing about these boards is the way they consistently reinforce the lovely notion that a reception is meant to thank your guests, and that means their comfort is crucial. Therefore, any time you come across something that asks you to prioritize yourself or your own comfort/convenience over the comfort of your guests, it is le bullshit. Easy peasy.