Bridal Party Dates at Head Table?

banana468

I also hate when people say, "We asked and our friends are OK with it."   That doesn't make any sense.    There are a lot of people out there that I'll lie to because it's a hell of a lot easier to do that vs. face the backlash from that person.   Some people are just very difficult to say no to and some of those people I love dearly.  

And you may have polled some people in the bridal party, but what about those SOs/Dates?   I guarantee that if you asked them not in the context of your wedding, they'd prefer to sit with their partners.  

I was that date nearly 12 years ago.   I knew DH for 5 years before we started dating.   He was asked to be a GM in a wedding.   I took off work with him the day before the wedding so we could go check into the hotel and attend the RD.   We lived 30 minutes from one another which wasn't really long distance but it did mean that we pretty much saw each other on weekends only due to work schedules.  That day together was one of the few moments that week we had to spend time together.   The morning of the wedding, I woke up at the crack of dawn with him and drove him to the FOG's home so he could be with the groom and do the last minute things.   I drove myself in the foreign town pre GPS to the church and then drove myself to the reception.   I was without him for a few hours between leaving the house and then at the church.   And then I was without him at the beginning of the reception because he was taking BP photos.   And I was without him while he sat at the head table.    But he left that table repeatedly to come to me.   So that head table was frequently empty because I was his date.   And because he was a good boyfriend (and is now a good husband) he knew that he should continue to go to his date.       No one asked me how I felt about it (not that they should have), but if I was asked where I wanted to sit, of COURSE I was going to say near my boyfriend. 

I managed just fine sitting with mutual friends.   I managed.   I'm a grown up and I spend nearly 65% of my waking hours away from my husband and live to tell the tale.   But I can say now as I said then that I think it was dumb.   And I cannot understand the mentality of splitting your nearest and dearest from THEIR nearest and dearest on a day that you pledge to be with someone until you're dead.   If that's the way you treat those closest to you I'd hate to see how you treat the people that didn't make the guest list. 

I simply cannot comprehend the mentality that your wedding events are things that they need to "manage" or "get over" when you're doing something that you won't do to yourself.     Until you decide not to sit with your husband at your wedding, don't force your wedding party to do the same. 

kimmiinthemitten

RachelLee83 said:

I also will add my own personal story of a nightmare of a head table.  Hubby was a groomsmen recently. They had name tags for everyone at the wedding including head table.... They forgot his name tag at the head table and had already done all the place settings.. so last minute (ALL guests watching) They had to slide everyone together.. SO that looked great. THEN they forgot my name tag as well as 2 other wives... We didn't really know each other but because of that sat together. I knew no one else at this wedding.. a table of 3 that was to be a table of 8 looked great. I now know the gals a bit better but it was still very odd. Then they did the wedding party dance and a few other bridal party things.. My point. We traveled to the wedding hubby was gone for about 5 hours while I walked around downtown because of photos and whatever else.. Then they went to a bar.. then the head table.. then the dance.. and guess what ?? Up until that point I had liked the bride.. she was a major B that day in regards to some other things. Which sounds like OP is on the verge of being.  If you can't treat all of your guests with respect you have a lot of other issues other then having a head table.   And as I asked in my previous post. Why do you want one? Other then that's whats done.

Ugh the wedding party dance is the worst!  Who wants to slow dance with a stranger?!?

lembaslover

Well don't you sound like a peach. You'd rather be rude to guests and follow a stupid tradition than be polite to your nearest and set a new precedence for your group of friends. You're not doing table visits because OMG you love food so much, more than your guests it seems. And god forbid anyone leave during dinner because that's what you paid for and their meals are the only important thing (probably goes back to you loving food more than them...). Then you have the nerve to say that everyone replying to your question can't adult and that we're entitled...

My SIL had a kings table with the wedding party and their dates, it was so nice to be able to sit with my BF at the time. At the time we had only been dating a couple of months so I would have been that random date you're complaining about and in just 2 years I married her brother.  

We had a sweetheart table and I'm so glad we decided on that! We sat our wedding party at tables with the rest of our guests. So family members sat with family, friends sat with other friends and they had a great time because of it. Honestly after being separated from husband for much of the day getting ready it was really nice to just have a moment with him alone to eat. After we ate dinner we were up and mingling with guests until cake and then we got another quick minute alone. 

JoanE2012

ChicagoBride2017 said:

I would be more open to suggestions if there were more. Pretty much all I've seen is "that's rude" "you're inconsiderate"

With some research, I've seen that both scenarios are acceptable. 

Well, duh!  If pretty much everyone is telling you it's a shitty idea, it probably is!  I hope the light comes on for you and you realize that making guests comfortable so they have the best possible time trumps your "vision".   Stop being a GD child.

JoanE2012

AddieCake said:

If this isn't MUD, clearly the only reason you posted this is to bitch about this topic. You aren't interested in any of the alternatives to head tables that have been suggested.

Do whatever you want. You're going to anyway, and this post has been a complete waste of everyone's time.  You deserve to have some wedding guests side eying you and talking shit about you behind your back, possibly for years to come if they are one of the SOs or members of your WP who are affected by this. I'm just sad for those people who will be made to feel uncomfortable in the process. 

Ditto.  She asked if this really was a thing and when everyone says it's rude, she just keeps yapping for it - obviously not wanting opinions.  Troll.

banana468

I would love to see what research shows that splitting your wedding party from their SOs as an acceptable idea.   My assumption is that anything saying this is OK is written by the wedding industry and not an etiquette expert. 

FutureWooly

As someone who is from the Midwest and has never been to a wedding without a Head Table that was exclusively WP, I understand how you may have never seen it. That doesn't make it acceptable.

Over the summer FI and I went to our 4th wedding together, it like the previous 3 had a WP exclusive Head Table. The previous weddings we hadn't bee bothered by it since neither of us were in the WP but this time he was GM. I knew very few people at the wedding, in fact all of the couple's college friends were seated at a single table. A table that was full leaving me who only knew those 12 people at a table with the bride's cousins and another WP date.

I was lonely and bored through the whole dinner, speeches, first dance and WP dance because the cousins had their own conversation about family stuff and the other date at our table only answered with single-word answers. I have 4 years of sorority recruitment experience so I can talk to just about anyone and understand how to keep a conversation going but I still could not engage with anyone at the table.

Prior to this experience I too didn't understand how rude not seating the WP with their dates was, especially since I have never seen it done any other way. However I can assure you that it IS rude and not something that I will be doing at my wedding this summer. FI and I haven't decided yet if we will be doing a Sweetheart Table of a King's Table but we definitely won't be splitting up our WP and their dates.

ShesSoCold

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

With this mentality, why have tables at all? I mean, they'll live standing with their dinners, right? Beyond that, who gives a shit?

I also find it comical that someone who appears to be irrationally angry at the thought that people are more comfortable with their dates uses "adult" as a verb.

pinkcow13

Just do what you want. I don't know why you even asked this question if you're not open to at least hearing any of the suggestions. The fact that every single person here told you this is rude to do to your guests, and you refuse to budge, speaks volumes about you. 

FWIW, We had a sweetheart table that we barely sat at because we were up and about partying and dancing. We let our BP sit with their dates AND friends at separate tables. We did not separate our BP from their dates. A couple of GM brought "random dates" to the wedding, and were very happy to get to sit with them. It was more important for us to have our closest friends (because that's what the bridal party is) enjoy their evening with their dates while celebrating our marriage. But whatever, do you.

[Deleted User]

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

Pelicans, pigeons, sparrows, and swans!

The thing is that I LIKE my boyfriend.  I like my boyfriend more than I like any of my friends who are getting married, and CERTAINLY more than I like any their friends and my co-bridesmaids and groomsmen.  If a bride were to hold me hostage for the morning while we got our hair and makeup done, got our pictures taken, had lovely getting-ready time with the girls, stood for the ceremony, then forced me to sit with these perfectly lovely girls who I don't give a shit about, I'd leave the head table to go sit with my boyfriend.  I'd get my plate delivered to the head table, pick it up, and carry it to my boyfriend's table.  Because I've already spent most of the day with people I like less, now I'd like to spend the day with the person I like most.

Been a bridesmaid in a Chicagoland wedding when I was single.  Sat at a table with two other bridesmaids, one of the BM's boyfriends, and a couple random buddies of the bride's baby brother.  No head table.  Been a bridesmaid in a Chicagoland wedding when I was newly dating my boyfriend.  Wedding party sat at King's Table.  I sat with my boyfriend on one side and a single bridesmaid on the other.  No head table.  Been a groomswoman at a wedding in Virginia when I was single.  Sat at a table with some cousins.  Bride and groom sat at a table with MOH and husband, BM and wife, and another of our cousins and his wife.  Table of eight.  Done and done.

pinkcow13

ShesSoCold said:

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

With this mentality, why have tables at all? I mean, they'll live standing with their dinners, right? Beyond that, who gives a shit?

I also find it comical that someone who appears to be irrationally angry at the thought that people are more comfortable with their dates uses "adult" as a verb.

Also, I'd like to add that while socializing with others might not be so bad for you, there are people that do not enjoy socializing, or that have social anxiety issues. So, while you may enjoy socializing and making new gym buddies, this may be an extremely stressful situation for someone else. Maybe not anyone in your BP, but maybe one of their dates. And. C'mon. Be real. If there is a table full of people that know each other, especially other people with SO's, chances are that the one lone person may possibly feel left out. 

Just because "this is the way it's always done", it doesn't mean it needs to be done. I don't really understand that mentality. Things would be a lot different if we went through life with that mentality.

Knottie1431006189

ChicagoBride2017 said:

I would be more open to suggestions if there were more. Pretty much all I've seen is "that's rude" "you're inconsiderate"

With some research, I've seen that both scenarios are acceptable. 

NO NO NO NO NO. I've been a bridesmaid 4 times (maid of honor in 2 of them) and if my boyfriend had to sit at some random 'extras' table, even with people he was sort of friendly with, I'd have been pissed. And he wouldn't want to attend. But that would never happen because my friends are normal people and actually wanted us to have fun at their weddings. 

I've never been to a wedding when they didn't let the wedding party sit with their dates. Aren't these supposedly your best friends? So weird. 

Things my friends have done:

Sweetheart table for Bride and Groom
Bride, Groom + Their Closest Friends (With dates!)
Bride, Groom + All Parents (Bridal party seated as if they are regular guests - wherever they will be comfortable and have the most fun!)

I don't see why the complete bridal party has to sit together at all. Who cares? Why do I have to eat my dinner next to the groom's best friend from kindergarten? You DO want your friends to enjoy your wedding..right?

madamerwin

Clearly you just wanted to bitch and moan and be validated for having shitty plans, but you're not going to get that here. You were given a number of really good suggestions, which you refuse to take. This is what I imagine you to look like:

#byefelicia

RachelR1977+RB

So off main topic... but marginally related given that it has been used here -- I know that probably this is an unpopular opinion... but I kind of dig "adult" as a verb. it's terrible I know, but i still like it. 

JediElizabeth

RachelR1977+RB said:

So off main topic... but marginally related given that it has been used here -- I know that probably this is an unpopular opinion... but I kind of dig "adult" as a verb. it's terrible I know, but i still like it. 

Same here. Adulting is what you do when you choose to do what you should instead of what you want....like paying bills instead of buying toys. Or putting others before your vision.

AddieCake

I love adult as a verb. 

MegEn1

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

All dinner seating is temporary until you go to Valhalla. 

drunkenwitch

Well clearly I've been doing rhis hostess thing wrong all these years. When I invite people to a party I want them to feel welcome, I want to think I've taken their feelings and comfort under consideration. I want them to enjoy themselves. When all this time I could have just told them to shut up and manage.

madamerwin

JediElizabeth said:

So off main topic... but marginally related given that it has been used here -- I know that probably this is an unpopular opinion... but I kind of dig "adult" as a verb. it's terrible I know, but i still like it. 

Same here. Adulting is what you do when you choose to do what you should instead of what you want....like paying bills instead of buying toys. Or putting others before your vision.

Me too... But OP is clearly not well-practiced in adulting.

MobKaz

pinkcow13 said:

ShesSoCold said:

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all  adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

With this mentality, why have tables at all? I mean, they'll live standing with their dinners, right? Beyond that, who gives a shit?

I also find it comical that someone who appears to be irrationally angry at the thought that people are more comfortable with their dates uses "adult" as a verb.

Also, I'd like to add that while socializing with others might not be so bad for you, there are people that do not enjoy socializing, or that have social anxiety issues. So, while you may enjoy socializing and making new gym buddies, this may be an extremely stressful situation for someone else. Maybe not anyone in your BP, but maybe one of their dates. And. C'mon. Be real. If there is a table full of people that know each other, especially other people with SO's, chances are that the one lone person may possibly feel left out. 

Just because "this is the way it's always done", it doesn't mean it needs to be done. I don't really understand that mentality. Things would be a lot different if we went through life with that mentality.

Be real?
 https://imgflip.com/i/w8riv

PrettyGirlLost

lyndausvi said:

PrettyGirlLost said:

ChicagoBride2017 said:

I can manage to occupy myself for a meal without my FI next to me. I can't wrap my head around why this is such a huge deal.

So when a friend hosts a party- because that's ALL a reception is, a glorified party- an you attended said party with an SO or a date and then you were separated from each other during dinner, wouldn't that seem bizarre and rude to you?  Especially if you didn't know anyone else you were forced to sit with?

I can manage to occupy myself for a meal as well, but if I'm attending that meal with a specific date, why in the hell should I be expected to manage by myself? 

The wedding ceremony is over by the time the reception begins, there is zero reason why the WP needs to sit with the B&G while they eat.  Zero.  I say this as a BM at least 10 times over; there was no reason for me to sit in the front of the room while everyone stared in our direction while I ate, especially when the B&G spent all of 10 minutes at their head tables ><

Well I know a lot of people who have assigned seat a dinner parties.   Often the couple is split up in terms of they are at the same TABLE, just not next to them.  That is not unusual.

However, what is unusual is to pick and choose who gets to sit with their partners and who doesn't.  If you have 50 couples, it's very odd to say 5 couples can't sit together but the other 45 can't.


Not one person has offered a good reason why we single out our nearest and dearest.

Well yeah, when we go out to dinner I prefer to sit across from my DH not right next to him, and I'd expect the same at a dinner party in a house. It would be very odd to me to be separated by several people from my DH.

JeeGooDowster

Sweetheart tables are the best

lyndausvi

Do people not know how to debate these days?   The rest of us have given actual reasons why it's not appropriate to keep a few guests (nearest and dearest ones mind you) from their SOs.  The only answer we get is "it's been done that way for decades".  

Well you know what?  I can name a shit ton of things that were wrong/rude/inappropriate in the name of "it's always been done that way".  Thank god people saw the light and stopped the madness.

So I ask again:   I want to know WHY the WP members have to be split up from their SO's and not all the other guests?

PrettyGirlLost

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

You're talking out of both sides of your ass now, as my mother would say.  Those statements contradict themselves.

You've asked a random sampling of women from all over the US and the world that have and have not been married, and have been in and been to an asston of weddings about this topic, and the answer is a resounding "Head Tables w/o wedding party dates and SO's are fucking rude. Period."

But obviously you are looking for validation, so another wedding site might be more suited to your needs.

I don't want to sit with my DH at dinner because he's my security blanket and I can't socialize with other people for upwards of 8 hours. . . I want to sit with him at dinner because frankly I'm fucking over you and your wedding by the time dinner has rolled around.  I've already stood around for hours while you got ready, posed for pre ceremony pictures, walked down the aisle, stood during your ceremony, stood through more pictures, waited around outside of cocktail hour so that we could all be introduced (even though everyone already knows who you are and no one gives two shits who the rest of us are).  I'm pretty much sick of being with you and the WP at this point!

I'm being a little harsh, but I'm trying to make a point.

[Deleted User]

PrettyGirlLost said:

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

You're talking out of both sides of your ass now, as my mother would say.  Those statements contradict themselves.

You've asked a random sampling of women from all over the US and the world that have and have not been married, and have been in and been to an asston of weddings about this topic, and the answer is a resounding "Head Tables w/o wedding party dates and SO's are fucking rude. Period."

But obviously you are looking for validation, so another wedding site might be more suited to your needs.

I don't want to sit with my DH at dinner because he's my security blanket and I can't socialize with other people for upwards of 8 hours. . . I want to sit with him at dinner because frankly I'm fucking over you and your wedding by the time dinner has rolled around.  I've already stood around for hours while you got ready, posed for pre ceremony pictures, walked down the aisle, stood during your ceremony, stood through more pictures, waited around outside of cocktail hour so that we could all be introduced (even though everyone already knows who you are and no one gives two shits who the rest of us are).  I'm pretty much sick of being with you and the WP at this point!

I'm being a little harsh, but I'm trying to make a point.

ExACTly this!!!  I'd like to eat dinner while mocking with my boyfriend that silly blonde bridesmaid who has been hitting on your brother for the last two days.  I want to taste a bite of my boyfriend's chicken while he takes some of my salmon.  And if I have to listen to the best man belch one more time, I'm going to fucking lose it.  I'm done being a bridesmaid.  Just let me be a friend.  Let me do what I want to do and sit with whom I like best.  I'll be much more likely to join you on the dance floor if I'm enjoying myself than if I've been relegated to Head Table Purgatory for the entire evening.

lyndausvi

PrettyGirlLost said:

ChicagoBride2017 said:

Geese, it's just dinner for crying out loud! I'm not holding the BP hostage and saying they can't see their SO at all. It's for a few hours. We are all adults and heaven forbid we have to socialize with people we don't know for a bit. Maybe you gain a new friend or find a new workout buddy. It's really not that bad. I'm attending a wedding in Jan and I will only know 3 ppl (FI, bride and groom) and I'm gonna put on my big girl pants and socialize like a GD adult. 

When end did everyone become a bunch of whining ninnies because they have to be away from this SO for a meal. 

A wedding is is a different social event than a typical dinner party, thus a TEMPORARY seating arraignment. It's kind of a given that if you or SO is part of a wedding party and the other isn't, you won't see each other for most of the day. 

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

You're talking out of both sides of your ass now, as my mother would say.  Those statements contradict themselves.

You've asked a random sampling of women from all over the US and the world that have and have not been married, and have been in and been to an asston of weddings about this topic, and the answer is a resounding "Head Tables w/o wedding party dates and SO's are fucking rude. Period."

But obviously you are looking for validation, so another wedding site might be more suited to your needs.

I don't want to sit with my DH at dinner because he's my security blanket and I can't socialize with other people for upwards of 8 hours. . . I want to sit with him at dinner because frankly I'm fucking over you and your wedding by the time dinner has rolled around.  I've already stood around for hours while you got ready, posed for pre ceremony pictures, walked down the aisle, stood during your ceremony, stood through more pictures, waited around outside of cocktail hour so that we could all be introduced (even though everyone already knows who you are and no one gives two shits who the rest of us are).  I'm pretty much sick of being with you and the WP at this point!

I'm being a little harsh, but I'm trying to make a point.

Yeah, the last wedding DH was in he left the hotel at 8am.  I didn't see him until 2pm at the back of the church for a brief moment.   I caught up with him again around 4pm after pictures.  

 Luckily the bride/groom are awesome people and invited all the SOs/dates onto the party bus to the reception.  Then DH had more pictures.    By the time cocktail party 6pm.   Dinner was at 7pm  That is some 10 hours.   Again, the couple was awesome and sat all the WP members with their SO's/dates.
   
Oh BTW, that day was also OUR anniversary.   Yeah, as I said I spend most nights not eating dinner with DH. There are MONTHS I do not even get a day off with him.  So, yeah I'm completely capable of spending time without DH. However, if he actually has a day and night off I want it to be with me.  Sorrynotsorry.  

I'm glad the couple was awesome and let me have dinner with my DH on our anniversary and didn't pull the  "well it's only one night" crap on us. For some us that "one night" only comes around once in a while.

Liatris2010

lyndausvi said:

Do people not know how to debate these days?   The rest of us have given actual reasons why it's not appropriate to keep a few guests (nearest and dearest ones mind you) from their SOs.  The only answer we get is "it's been done that way for decades".  

Well you know what?  I can name a shit ton of things that were wrong/rude/inappropriate in the name of "it's always been done that way".  Thank god people saw the light and stopped the madness.

So I ask again:   I want to know WHY the WP members have to be split up from their SO's and not all the other guests?

Because the bride really wants a last-supper style picture of her wedding party chewing? So can have the panorama printed on canvas and hang it behind her couch?

aurianna

ChicagoBride2017 said:

I asked ppl that have and have not been married weather they have seen SO sitting with the BP and it's a resounding "No"

This has to be a new thing going on where we can't adult for a majority of a day without a security blanket (SO)

ChicagoBride2017 I told you I've seen a head tables with SOs included. In Midwest weddings. Twice. In the last two years.
In fact in my Good/Bad/Ugly post on this thread: http://forums.theknot.com/discussion/1015447/wedding-season-is-starting-time-for-new-bad-invites-updated/p2
I even stated that it was one of the only things good about a terribly hosted wedding.

I didn't think they were weird. I thought they were awesome because it meant that the bride & groom cared more about their friends' comfort than they did about a uniform looking photo or some "tradition" that serves no purpose other than making the evening less fun for your bridal party and their dates.



Your bridal party and their dates will enjoy themselves more if they get to sit together. You've never denied that this is likely. Yet you still insist they should just deal with it.
What kind of person actively chooses to make their friends less comfortable?

Your nearest and dearest will be happier with their dates.

A good, considerate person would let wedding party sit with their dates, be it via sweetheart table, king's table, head table with just B&G and their parents, or head table with dates included.
A selfish person would put whatever photo-op/vision/whatever the eff the reasoning is over their friends' comfort.

It's really that simple.

MyNameIsNot

Probably beating a dead horse, but can we all quit acting like a head table is some long-standing tradition that people have been doing forever and that sweetheart tables are some new-fangled contraption that hipsters invented last week? 

Head tables are a trend from the 80's that just won't die. Sweetheart tables, king tables, and sitting with family existed back then too. 

aurianna

MyNameIsNot said:

Probably beating a dead horse, but can we all quit acting like a head table is some long-standing tradition that people have been doing forever and that sweetheart tables are some new-fangled contraption that hipsters invented last week? 

Head tables are a trend from the 80's that just won't die. Sweetheart tables, king tables, and sitting with family existed back then too. 

Heh... and let's pretend that they didn't exist back then. If OP wants to do things exactly like they've been done since the 80s, maybe her BP looks like this: