Guest BF definitely NOT invited, but...

NYCBruin

cheapbrideincentpa said:

Honestly maybe you are right here, there is no difference in my book between an actor, whom I never met and the SO of a random family member, whom I have also never met.  But you are wrong in that it has to do with being worshiped, its more about not having strangers at your wedding- who really wants a bunch of people they never met before at their wedding.

SOs aren't strangers, even if you've never met them before.  They are the people who are most important to your nearest and dearest.  If I care about someone enough to invite them to my wedding, I care about them enough to also include the person that is nearest and dearest to them.  If you don't care enough about your guests enough to include their SOs just because you haven't met them, why are you inviting them at all?  Because it doesn't sound like it's because you care about them.

MuppetOverlord

cheapbrideincentpa said:

NYCBruin said:

cheapbrideincentpa said:

vollebell said:

JellyBean52513 said:

Think about it, every husband and every fiance started out as a boyfriend. 

I can't get out of the box this time! I get what your saying, but not every boyfriend becomes a husband. I wasn't allowed to bring my bf to a friend's wedding because she didn't have the room. We had been together a year and a half. I got it. I'm was a guest, not the bride. There were other people there in the same position and we all talked and drank and had a good time.

I am on your side. The only people you have to invite are the married spouse. Even then, I have been to work weddings where the spouses were not invited.

You must be friends with some super rude people.  How horrid to invite someone to an event that celebrates love and not include the person your guest loves.

I don't know why people seem to think that if someone finds it rude to be invited without a SO to an event that it means they are incapable of interacting with other people.  FI and I are both very social people who are able to make "single serving friends" pretty much anywhere.  We often attend social functions without each other.  That doesn't mean it isn't horribly rude to invite one of us to a social function without the other.  

It an event celebrating the love of two specific people, - not every guest.

Actually, the purpose of the reception is to thank your guests for attending. So you might want to be concerned about the comfort of said guests.

MuppetOverlord

cheapbrideincentpa said:

NYCBruin said:

cheapbrideincentpa said:

NYCBruin said:

cheapbrideincentpa said:

vollebell said:

JellyBean52513 said:

Think about it, every husband and every fiance started out as a boyfriend. 

I can't get out of the box this time! I get what your saying, but not every boyfriend becomes a husband. I wasn't allowed to bring my bf to a friend's wedding because she didn't have the room. We had been together a year and a half. I got it. I'm was a guest, not the bride. There were other people there in the same position and we all talked and drank and had a good time.

I am on your side. The only people you have to invite are the married spouse. Even then, I have been to work weddings where the spouses were not invited.

You must be friends with some super rude people.  How horrid to invite someone to an event that celebrates love and not include the person your guest loves.

I don't know why people seem to think that if someone finds it rude to be invited without a SO to an event that it means they are incapable of interacting with other people.  FI and I are both very social people who are able to make "single serving friends" pretty much anywhere.  We often attend social functions without each other.  That doesn't mean it isn't horribly rude to invite one of us to a social function without the other.  

It an event celebrating the love of two specific people, - not every guest.

If you aren't going to bother caring about the comfort or feelings of your guests, just hire actors to attend your wedding.  They'll do a much better job worshipping you than your friends and family will and you won't offend anyone.

If you don't respect MY relationship enough to include my FI there is no way in hell I'm going to spend time and money to attend an event to celebrate yours.

Honestly maybe you are right here, there is no difference in my book between an actor, whom I never met and the SO of a random family member, whom I have also never met.  But you are wrong in that it has to do with being worshiped, its more about not having strangers at your wedding- who really wants a bunch of people they never met before at their wedding.

 
People who aren't entirely self-centered.

Simply Fated

When you meet them at your wedding, they won't be strangers anymore. Or you could take the initiative to meet them before your wedding.
They're only strangers to you because you haven't met them yet. If you meet them before your wedding, what excuse will you use next?

And what do you mean boyfriends don't always become husbands? What does that have to do with anything? Some people choose to not get married. That's a fact that has become more common since 1955 or what ever decade you're still hiding in.
It should also be noted that every husband doesn't stay a husband.
So why does legal papers magically make a relationship more valid?

Also, when you send out your invitations, YOU'RE not even married, yet.

MuppetOverlord

Simply Fated said:

When you meet them at your wedding, they won't be strangers anymore. Or you could take the initiative to meet them before your wedding. They're only strangers to you because you haven't met them yet. If you meet them before your wedding, what excuse will you use next? And what do you mean boyfriends don't always become husbands? What does that have to do with anything? Some people choose to not get married. That's a fact that has become more common since 1955 or what ever decade you're still hiding in. It should also be noted that every husband doesn't stay a husband. So why does legal papers magically make a relationship more valid? Also, when you send out your invitations, YOU'RE not even married, yet.

crunchymamaof2

NYCBruin said:

cheapbrideincentpa said:

Honestly maybe you are right here, there is no difference in my book between an actor, whom I never met and the SO of a random family member, whom I have also never met.  But you are wrong in that it has to do with being worshiped, its more about not having strangers at your wedding- who really wants a bunch of people they never met before at their wedding.

SOs aren't strangers, even if you've never met them before.  They are the people who are most important to your nearest and dearest.  If I care about someone enough to invite them to my wedding, I care about them enough to also include the person that is nearest and dearest to them.  If you don't care enough about your guests enough to include their SOs just because you haven't met them, why are you inviting them at all?  Because it doesn't sound like it's because you care about them.

Love x 23487032198472039869238759024375767085670678670567085035

cowgirl8238

If you only invited your friend...and only her name was on the invitation (not plus guest) then you by means have to include him...last time I checked there is no rule saying the boyfriend has to be invited.  But don't turn around and let her bring her daughter instead...stick to a firm only her means only her!

MuppetOverlord

cowgirl8238 said:

If you only invited your friend...and only her name was on the invitation (not plus guest) then you by means have to include him...last time I checked there is no rule saying the boyfriend has to be invited.  But don't turn around and let her bring her daughter instead...stick to a firm only her means only her!

arrippa

cowgirl8238 said:

If you only invited your friend...and only her name was on the invitation (not plus guest) then you by means have to include him...last time I checked there is no rule saying the boyfriend has to be invited.  But don't turn around and let her bring her daughter instead...stick to a firm only her means only her!

There is indeed an etiquette rule that does state that all SO should be invited since they are social units. Last time I checked, a boyfriend is an SO.

Maggie0829

I would love to know what OPs wedding coordinator deems a "long-term relationship" and where the coordinator got her definition from.

MobKaz

scribe95 said:

I would love an update from the OP on who the friend RSVP'd for and how that conversation went. I hate not having closure. Plus at this point we are all just beating a dead horse repeating our opinions again and again.

New trends noted within the last month or so........

1.  Horrifically bad trolls.

1 1/2.  Horrifically bad trolls with horrid written communication and typing skills.

2.  OP's that ask a question and delete.

3.  OP's that ask a question and disappear.

MuppetOverlord

mobkaz said:

scribe95 said:

I would love an update from the OP on who the friend RSVP'd for and how that conversation went. I hate not having closure. Plus at this point we are all just beating a dead horse repeating our opinions again and again.

New trends noted within the last month or so........

1.  Horrifically bad trolls.

1 1/2.  Horrifically bad trolls with horrid written communication and typing skills.

2.  OP's that ask a question and delete.

3.  OP's that ask a question and disappear.

it's becoming wedding wire

Maggie0829

MuppetOverlord said:

it's becoming wedding wire

JellyBean52513

scribe95 said: I would love an update from the OP on who the friend RSVP'd for and how that conversation went. I hate not having closure. Plus at this point we are all just beating a dead horse repeating our opinions again and again. If I may politely correct you, the trolls are repeating their opinions about invitation etiquette... we are repeating facts.

Shia

Inviting her BF is proper etiquette but if declines to attend than do not worry about it. You will be having so much fun celebrating you marriage that you will forget that he is even there. 

phira

Maggie0829 said:

MuppetOverlord said:

it's becoming wedding wire

P MUCH.

Anyway, it's rude to invite someone and not invite their significant other. Your friend is NOT a single guest just because she's not married. If you absolutely do not want her boyfriend there, you should not have invited your friend. My partner is not inviting a friend of his because the friend is married to someone who is really rude to my partner.

In terms of how to go forward, you should 1) apologize and say that of course her boyfriend can attend, and 2) hire security so that if there's a fight between guests, those guests can be escorted out.

msdds51

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

NYCBruin

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

So couples who are opposed to living together before marriage for religious reasons are less serious/less deserving of being invited as a couple?

Just trying to figure out why you think this is acceptable.

BMoreBride6

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

Where did you get this advice?  Because it is incorrect.  You're welcome. 

Maggie0829

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

Edit:  H and I did not start living together until 6 years into our relationship.  So that means, according to your "rules", H and I would not have deserved an invitation together to any social event for those 6 years because we weren't living together. Seriously?

WinstonsGirl

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

My Uncle and his GF have been together over 20 years.  They will never get married and do not live together.  Are you telling me that they're not a couple and don't need to be invited to events together??

BMoreBride6

Maggie0829 said:

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

Edit:  H and I did not start living together until 6 years into our relationship.  So that means, according to your "rules", H and I would not have deserved an invitation together to any social event for those 6 years because we weren't living together. Seriously?

This.  FI and I decided we would not live together until we were married...we own a house together...I don't live there.  But we were dating for over 7 years before getting engaged...so our relationship was less serious than a couple who started to living together right away?  Do explain.  

phira

Oh wow. It is NOT appropriate to deem only some relationships serious, but not others. There are some people who get married after only dating for a few months, and there are some people who have been in a relationship for years and still don't live together. You cannot say that the former is automatically more serious or more "real" than the latter.

I can understand if some people choose to limit SO invites to married couples only (especially if any guests in same-sex relationships are from a state or country where they can be legally married). But once you start drawing tons of lines around which relationships are more legitimate than others, you're being inappropriate.

Maggie0829

It really drives me nuts when people think that the only relationships that are serious are if the couple is married, engaged or living together.  There are plenty of couples out there that feel their relationship is very serious without the need of a ring, a piece of paper, and co-habitating.

And it really drives me even more nuts when people feel like they can judge other people's relationship based on their own relationship.  Everyone is different, which means every relationship is different.  Period.

arrippa

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

My FI and I decided not to live together before marriage. I am very offended that you think my relationship was less serious than people who lived together. We were just as committed to each other (before we got engaged) as people who live together.

southernbelle0915

In the OP's case and from subsequent posts from her, it sounds like at the time she sent invitations they weren't together and she had a suspicion they were back together when she got the RSVP. 

I think this is pretty simple. Call and ask who the extra person is. If it's her daughter, then crisis averted! If not, you have to think about why you don't want him there. If it's just because you think he's an jerk, that's not a good enough reason to disrespect their relationship by not accommodating him. If it's because of physical or sexual abuse and/or the safety of your other guests, IMHO those reasons trump etiquette every time. It'd be better to just not invite people with SO's who have those issues, but in this case, you didn't know they were back together.

In general to the other posters who don't invite SOs unless they're married, engaged or living together... Why? I'm really curious what the reason is for this. Is it to keep your head count down? Is it to save money? Is it because your venue has a capacity limit? Is it because you don't want to rent more tables? Or you want to have space for a dance floor? I'm really curious what people prioritize if it's not the love and respect of the relationships of their nearest and dearest...

PrettyGirlLost

kss20 said:

lmorgan13 said:

If they are in a relationship, he has to be invited and should have been from the start. They are a social unit and should be invited as such.

You really only HAVE to invite him if they are married, engaged, or living together.  If they're just dating she doesn't have to invite him.

 

And also, if you only addressed the invite to her, she shouldn't be bringing ANY guest whether it's the dick or not.

Oh for fuck's sakes, if you are getting this antiquated idea from the Emily Post Institute or some such other place, please take a moment to use some common sense and courtesy!

PrettyGirlLost

southernbelle0915 said:

I'm really curious what people prioritize if it's not the love and respect of the relationships of their nearest and dearest...

NYCBruin

PrettyGirlLost said:

southernbelle0915 said:

I'm really curious what people prioritize if it's not the love and respect of the relationships of their nearest and dearest...

Because if you don't include SOs, you can invite more people which means MORE PRESENTS!!!!!

MandyMost

If a guest was single when the invite went out (~6 weeks before the wedding), and then was in a relationship at the time the RSVP was due, I would expect a reasonable guest to attend the wedding alone and not call and ask the new boyfriend to be invited. However, we all know that some people are anything but reasonable, and think that their new relationship is the end-all-be-all of life, and would want that person invited. 

So...in this situation, should the bride and groom really give in and allow the new SO of this wedding guest to attend? That's what the question seems to boil down to.l