Not allowing "and guests"

mlg78

How much resistance have you felt if you did not allow guests to be brought to the wedding?  Of course we're allowing those already in a long term relationship and those who are married to bring their significant others and we'll obviously re-evaluate and not turn anyone down if they should be in a relationship when our wedding rolls around in September.  I just counted on our list and this impacts only about ten people at a 200 person wedding.  Thanks!

JoanE2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:02e32ce5-c71f-42d1-854c-e6740363af04">Not allowing "and guests"</a>:
[QUOTE]How much resistance have you felt if you did not allow guests to be brought to the wedding?  <strong>Of course we're allowing those already in a long term relationship</strong> and those who are married to bring their significant others and we'll obviously re-evaluate and not turn anyone down if they should be in a relationship when our wedding rolls around in September.  I just counted on our list and this impacts only about ten people at a 200 person wedding.  Thanks! :)
Posted by mlg78[/QUOTE]

Anyone in a relationship should be allowed a +1.  It's also kind to extend a +1 to those in your wedding party.  Anyone beyond that is up to you.  If it only impacts about 10 people and you have the money and space, I'd let them bring a guest.  When I was single it was always nice to have the option to bring someone, especially if I didn't know many people at the wedding.

mlg78

Well, those 10 guests would end up being about $500 and while we do have the space we have other places to apply that money.  Of those 10, one is my MOH, another is a bridesmaid.  Another is my fiance's grandmother in her 70's and a great aunt, neither of which I could see bringing someone.  The remaining people are all friends who know a number of others attending the wedding so they wouldn't feel "alone" by any means.  I've been that alone person at a wedding when I didn't know another soul and it sucked.  Thanks for the reply!

libby2483

PP is spot on.  Inviting truly single guests without a +1 is perfectly acceptable from an etiquette standpoint.  Anyone in a relationship needs to be invited with his or her SO.  It is courteous to extend a plus one to WP members, as well as those who will not know many other people at the wedding.  For our wedding, we gave +1s to our single WP members, as well as to single guests that would not know many other people at the wedding.  None of these people chose to bring a +1.  We did not give +1s to our single friends who knew several other people at the wedding.  However, we did have one friend ask if he could bring a girl he had gone on a few dates with, even though he didn't consider himself to be in a relationship with her.  Since we had the space and budget, we said "yes".   

Some people on this board are adamant that every single person be given a +1, and tell woeful tales about times they had to attend weddings alone.  This is their personal opinion, and is not dictated by etiquette.  Extending a +1 to every guest is certainly a lovely gesture if space and budget allow, but is completely optional from an etiquette standpoint.

monkeysip

There is nothing in etiquette that says you are REQUIRED to extend a +1 to those who are (truly) single.

However, it is a nice thing to do.  You can have different cut-offs, like wedding party only, or out of town people only. 

You could also B-list (so to speak) the plus ones.  If you have a lot of RSVP no's, then call back your single friends and ask if they'd like to bring a friend.

ofthewheel

there is no requirement to give someone a plus 1. Actually I don't really like it. If you are inviting them to the wedding and it is a serious/will be by the time the wedding comes then you should know them well enough to know their names. If you don't know someones name then why would you want them there.

If there is a few people who wont know anyone else at all (which hardly ever happens people tend to know at least one or two others put them on a table together)

If a guest is completely single then why give them someone to bring?

 After all a wedding is a great place to met someone. 

Summer2011Bride

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:1490391b-4982-4883-a321-b9f2ae7898e6">Re: Not allowing "and guests"</a>:
[QUOTE]there is no requirement to give someone a plus 1. Actually I don't really like it.<strong> If you are inviting them to the wedding and it is a serious/will be by the time the wedding comes then you should know them well enough to know their names. If you don't know someones name then why would you want them there.</strong> If there is a few people who wont know anyone else at all (which hardly ever happens people tend to know at least one or two others put them on a table together) If a guest is completely single then why give them someone to bring?  After all a wedding is a great place to met someone. 
Posted by ofthewheel[/QUOTE]

The bolded is not good advice. I dated my H for almost a year before his cousin's wedding. He doesn't talk to his cousin hardly ever and they are not super close, but he was still invited because he is family. I was not and it hurt. We were already in a very serious relationship at that time. Just because his cousin doesn't know my name because she doesn't talk to H all the time doesn't mean I shouldn't have been invited. That's a terrible rule of thumb to use. If someone considers themself ina  relationship, the SO must be invited. It doesn't have to meet some arbitrary requirement you decided to set up.

HSAmber

I've noticed a lot of posts (here and otherwise) mentioning giving the WP plus ones. All of ours are in relationships, so not an issue for me, but I'm curious as to the logic? I think I'm less likely to bring a guest when I'm a bridesmaid - I'm busy during the day of the wedding, so the only time we'd get to hang out is the reception. What makes it preferable for the WP to have plus ones?

AddieCake

To answer your question, Amber, I would think people tend to follow that plan b/c it is just a nice thing to do. These people are shelling out money to be in your wedding, possibly giving up time for other wedding-related events as well as the wedding. It's not too much to ask to give them a +1. It's just something a lot of people choose to do as a courtesy. 

I personally am in the camp of giving singe people a +1 if you can afford it. If not, that is understandable. 

I am also 100% in the camp of giving people in relationships a +1, no matter how long or short of time they have been together and no matter what their "label" is (boyfriend, girlfriend, engaged, living together, etc) If they consider themselves a couple, I firmly believe they should be invited as a couple and that any host who doesn't, is, in my opinion, an ass. 

Jen4948

I don't oppose giving +1's if you want to and can afford it, but many people don't and can't.  They're not being rude or "asses" if they don't.

If two people decide on the spur of the moment, the day of or before my wedding, that they are a couple, sorry, but I think that's not enough to make them a social unit that has to be invited together. And I don't spend my time keeping track of who is currently dating who and who, aside from people who are engaged, married, or living together, consider themselves couples.  It's none of my business or anyone else's.

That's why etiquette says that couples who have made that social declaration, as in getting married, getting engaged, or living together, need to be invited together but others do not.  Third parties can't tell and sometimes, especially when there will be many singles who are not living with someone will be present, it's just too expensive to invite every single with a date.  And no, you (generic) do not have the right to expect the couple to cut everything they care about out of their weddings just so you (again generic) can bring a date who probably wouldn't enjoy him/herself at a totally stripped-down wedding with no entertainment, the barest of food and drink provisions, or anything else. 

lyndausvi

Personally I would count on all of them having a pluse by then. If they don't, not big deal, you have wiggle room in your counts.  If they do, then you are covered cost and room wise.

As far as the older guests.  Make sure they do not need assistance.  My deceased grandfather's girlfriend of 40 years was 101 and not seeing anyone.  However, she needed assistance.  I absolutely gave her a plus one so she could attend.  It also made sure other like my parents didn't have to take care of her.

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:865545da-1f15-46d2-b302-3482c10f819f">Re: Not allowing "and guests"</a>:
[QUOTE]Jen, I disagree. Before meeting H, I would date guys for months that I didn't consider to be serious. My friends would have met them and known their name. My now H? We were serious from the beginning. I knew within weeks that I'd marry him. Did all my friends know him & his name by then? Nope. That's why I think it's ridiculous to put arbitrary qualifications on the 'seriousness' of a relationship.
Posted by jcbsjr[/QUOTE]

But that only goes for fixed relationships, like engaged, married, or living together.  Otherwise, no.  You're not entitled to just bring someone at random and claim you're in a "relationship" just to have a date.  And if you're dating, again, some people consider themselves not a firm couple, others do.  Why should any bridal couple be expected to know that about every single person they invite-especially if the "relationships" keep changing?  Not only that, but they may well not want to invite total strangers.  With married, engaged, and living together couples, they have no choice,  but if they have to set limits on their guest list, I think plus ones for unattached singles are going to be the first ones cut.  The unattached singles who make fusses about not having dates are the ones being "selfish" in that instance.  Weddings aren't nightclubs that are open to the general public and everyone can feel free to bring a date-they're hosted events on usually limited budgets with limited space.

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:f4dc795f-4021-4d28-a268-90ebcb417168">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]Jen, that is exactly the point, that the couple cannot and should not be expected to know how serious a relationship is. By denying some who are in a relationship an invite, that is EXACTLY what the couple is doing. Far better for everyone involved to extend the invite and let the guests in question work it out. H was invited to a close friend's wedding right before we started really "dating". They had met me several times, I'd attended group outings, parties, etc, but we weren't officially and publicly a couple. When they sent his invite, they let him know that if he wanted to bring me, I was welcome. He chose to take another girl in his group of friends who was already invited separately as his "date". He caught ribbing over it for years to come, lol, but both he and I sincerely appreciated the gesture from them and have never forgotten it. On the flip side, after we'd been dating for nearly a year, his cousin got married. He lives out of state and we only see him at Christmas. He used the same logic you mentioned above about how if someone is truly important to a guest, you should automatically know their name. He couldn't remember mine, hasn't officially met me yet, and so assumed it was fine to invite H solo. That was 6 years ago and this Christmas was the FIRST time he and his wife haven't heard about how rude that was at the annual family gathering. Even his parents were pissed at them when they found out. Hence why when someone is in what THEY define as a relationship, it is better for the bride and groom to err on the side of caution and invite them.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]

If they have limited funds and space and lots of people to invite, they CAN'T err on the side of inviting plus ones.  I counted up my guest list, and there are some 35 people who are single without a known SO, spouse, or fiancee.  I'm not made of money.  I probably can't afford a space that can hold that many extra people or the food and other amenities they would require.  Many other people are in the same situation-they can't swing the costs.  People getting upset and whine about how the bride and groom aren't being good friends and taking their "relationships" into consideration when the couple don't have the money to invite them are the ones being selfish and inconsiderate.

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:d734994a-3df0-40b5-983d-7467a2a3b387">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]No one is talking about people who are TRULY single. We're talking about your specific definition of "in a relationship" which you said was engaged, married, or living together. There is a world of difference between someone who is single and someone who is in a committed relationship that YOU don't deem "serious enough" because they aren't legally bound by some type of paperwork.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]

It has nothing to do with legalities or paperwork.  It has to do with making sure one can afford to pay for everyone one wants to invite.  If you ask someone to choose between inviting dates that they don't know for people who don't live with them and going broke, guess what?  They're not going to invite the dates.  Doesn't matter how "serious" the person they are inviting and the person they might want to bring consider their "relationship."  And if they whine, that's going to make the couple dig their heels in.  The couple isn't being selfish or even "erring" by not inviting the date.

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:89fe77d3-1408-4441-8b2c-c4c56fde7dfb">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]Your friends are pretty crappy friends, IMHO. I have no problem not being invited to a wedding of a friend or distant family member because they have a tight budget. Inviting me without my husband, however, is a friendship ending move. Period. It says "I want you to come and bring me a gift and make a big deal over my new marriage, but I don't give a crap about your relationship." That's not someone I want in my life.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]

I don't disagree about that.  I've never believed that anyone should be invited without their spouse, SO, or fiancee, because yes, it is very rude.  But if the partner in question doesn't belong to one of those categories, then if it's necessary to reduce costs by removing such persons from the guest list, then that's what's necessary.  It's probably also painful to the couple as well as the guest who can't bring their date and the person they wanted to bring as their date. 

And I don't disagree that inviting dates for unattached singles is a nice thing to do when one can afford it.  But many people can't afford it, and putting such people in the position of having to choose between friendship and going broke isn't a nice thing to do. A guest's complaining about how it's a "friendship destroyer" is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy-and they, not the couple, are the ones destroying the friendship. 

AddieCake

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:9d791828-b67a-4352-806c-af85f4a7036d">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot; : I don't disagree about that.  I've never believed that anyone should be invited without their spouse, <strong>SO</strong>, or fiancee, because yes, it is very rude.  <strong>But if the partner in question doesn't belong to one of those categories,</strong> then if it's necessary to reduce costs by removing such persons from the guest list, then that's what's necessary. 
Posted by Jen4948[/QUOTE]

<div>Therein lies the problem. If a couple deems themselves a couple, they are each other's SIGNIFICANT OTHER. </div><div>
</div><div>Oy. I spent the last 2 days arguing this on the Maids board. I can't do it again, so this is all I'm saying on it and biting my fingers instead!</div>

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:35f8de9e-d761-4cf4-af1f-488bd3de48f1">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot; : Therein lies the problem. If a couple deems themselves a couple, they are each other's SIGNIFICANT OTHER.  Oy. I spent the last 2 days arguing this on the Maids board. I can't do it again, so this is all I'm saying on it and biting my fingers instead!
Posted by AddieL73[/QUOTE]

Nope, I don't agree that all they have to do is declare themselves a couple.  Especially when it is done solely for the purpose of one of them having a date for a wedding.  There needs to be more than that.  Otherwise the couple might have to declare bankruptcy to entertain all those one-night "social units."  I have some 35 people on my guest list who are single right now with no partner I know of-and that's just on my side; it doesn't include my FI's single friends and acquaintances.  I can't afford to invite all those people with dates, and they are not engaged, married, or living with anyone.  I have no choice but to invite them by themselves if I want to include them.  And since these are relatives, leaving them out would cause huge problems in my family.

monkeysip

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:763e2d95-75ef-4163-9bd0-b9ba16191003">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot; : Nope, I don't agree that all they have to do is declare themselves a couple.  Especially when it is done solely for the purpose of one of them having a date for a wedding.  There needs to be more than that.  Otherwise the couple might have to declare bankruptcy to entertain all those one-night "social units."  I have some 35 people on my guest list who are single right now with no partner I know of-and that's just on my side; it doesn't include my FI's single friends and acquaintances.  I can't afford to invite all those people with dates, and they are <strong>not engaged, married, or living with anyone</strong>.  I have no choice but to invite them by themselves if I want to include them.  And since these are relatives, leaving them out would cause huge problems in my family.
Posted by Jen4948[/QUOTE]

This is so ridiculous.  I dated my FI for over 8 years before we became engaged.  And we don't believe in living together.  So, by your standards, he wouldn't be invited, even though we were 100% committed to each other for those 8 years of dating.

I think he definitely qualified as a SO at that time.  That's the problem with putting arbitrary distinctions on who is  a SO... not everyone falls into your categories.  Some people are entirely committed, but not engaged/living together, after a month.  And years later, they may be married, and still remember how YOU chose not to invite them to your wedding.

And I think your budget/big family excuse is lame.  Everyone has those issues.  If your family is so big and so ridiculous that they would actually get angry if you didn't invite every single distant relative, then you need to either elope, have a cheap cake and punch reception, or get ready to hurt some feelings and let them get over it like big boys and girls.

Jager1219

Lots of posts here!  Our guest list has gotten a bit out of control and to add plus 1's to our single friends would have been too much.  We invited the SO of anyone in a relationship.  I also went out of my way to find out the name of the SO for everyone we were inviting (even if I hadn't personally met them).  If we have more people decline than expected, then I plan to circle back to our single friends to see if they would like to invite anyone.  I have one single friend who assumed that she would get a plus 1 (it came up in general conversation).  I simply told her than our guest list would have been too many if we did that.  Also - all of our single friends know at least 1 other person, so it's not like someone was going to be attending that only knew us (the bride & groom).

Shia

I have a +1 issue too. My fiance and I not giving "single" guest +1's becuase all our friends know each other. There are only a few in relationships and the SO are invited to the wedding. 

Our families and friends understand that +1's is an option not a requirement. It is also a personal desicions that should not be dictated by anyone else but between you and your bride/groom.

Jen4948

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_not-allowing-and-guests?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:55f2fe34-ee64-410b-ac2c-f85d8de9baf8Post:910cc8a4-6c9a-4a56-8e94-c1249aa0bf7a">Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot;</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re:Not allowing quot;and guestsquot; : This is so ridiculous.  I dated my FI for over 8 years before we became engaged.  And we don't believe in living together.  So, by your standards, he wouldn't be invited, even though we were 100% committed to each other for those 8 years of dating. I think he definitely qualified as a SO at that time.  That's the problem with putting arbitrary distinctions on who is  a SO... not everyone falls into your categories.  Some people are entirely committed, but not engaged/living together, after a month.  And years later, they may be married, and still remember how YOU chose not to invite them to your wedding. And I think your budget/big family excuse is lame.  Everyone has those issues.  If your family is so big and so ridiculous that they would actually get angry if you didn't invite every single distant relative, then you need to either elope, have a cheap cake and punch reception, or get ready to hurt some feelings and let them get over it like big boys and girls.
Posted by monkeysip[/QUOTE]

Think what you want, but that's BS as far as I'm concerned. Nobody is required to elope or have a cheap reception just so people can bring dates.  The idea that they should is what's ridiculous here.  The occasion does not belong to the dates.