Wedding Reception Forum

What NOT to do!

13

Re: What NOT to do!

  • I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.
    20130121-125529.jpg 
      Wedding Countdown Ticker
    Toue
  • mysticl said:
    wabanzi said:
    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.
    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  


    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  


    20130121-125529.jpg 
      Wedding Countdown Ticker
    Toue
  • So a gap is not great but its not the freakin end of the world either.  Deal with it. 
    Some friends of ours planned a 5 hour gap. We dealt with it by skipping the ceremony and only attending the reception. Why? Because it was a 1.5 hr round trip drive that we would have made twice in one day so that they could take pictures all over the city. Yea, no thanks.

    Apparently a lot of other people did too because the bride was all upset that hardly anyone attended the ceremony and went around at the reception asking everyone if they were there. At least she has her precious photos..... Pffff.
    *********************************************************************************

    image
    aurorajanettePrettyGirlLost[Deleted User]
  • strow34 said:

    ^Same thing happened to us.

    One of my best friends had a destination wedding earlier this year, I was a bridesmaid and I love this friend dearly so there's no way I'd miss it. We spent over 800 dollars just to get there (we actually saved money by staying with a friend who lived about an hour away). We went to the rehearsal dinner the night before at a nice little Italian restaurant and learned that the our bill was on us. My FH was currently out of work so we ended up splitting an appetizer and a dessert. It made us very uncomfortable that we couldn't order like we normally would want (and how MOST everyone else ordered their own dish) and just made it harder to have an enjoyable meal.  But we just shrugged it off.

    Also, at the reception for the same wedding, we had one free drink and then had to pay for the rest. Another uncomfortable situation, esp since the groom went around telling everyone.  Having waiters having to figure out who drank what and how many was just madness. 

    Ugh that's soooo awful and tacky that they didn't pay for you all. =( That makes me so sad just to read.
  • Worse wedding was June down in Southern Cali. In a church, no A/C. About 100+ guests. It was 94 degrees outside. 
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • wabanzi said:


    mysticl said:


    wabanzi said:

    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.

    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  



    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  




    That shouldn't be a "surprise bill" considering it's by no means customary for the bride to pay for the lodging/travel of her guests, wedding party included.

    You seem to be a little confused by what is customary in US culture and what is not. The bride paying for the things you've mentioned is not standard here, save for the day-of shoes. Parking, on the other hand, should be covered unless there is an equally convenient free alternative. Depending on how far "a few blocks away" is, it could prove to be quite uncomfortable for guests in heels or other formalwear.
    PrettyGirlLost
  • wabanziwabanzi member
    500 Comments 250 Love Its Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited November 2013
    mysticl said:
    wabanzi said:
    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.
    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  


    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  


    That shouldn't be a "surprise bill" considering it's by no means customary for the bride to pay for the lodging/travel of her guests, wedding party included. You seem to be a little confused by what is customary in US culture and what is not. The bride paying for the things you've mentioned is not standard here, save for the day-of shoes. Parking, on the other hand, should be covered unless there is an equally convenient free alternative. Depending on how far "a few blocks away" is, it could prove to be quite uncomfortable for guests in heels or other formalwear.
    Nope, no confusion. I didn't state travel expenses, I stated lodging.  And yes as I stated it may be expected by the WP this is covered by the hosts since it is outlined in etiquette guides such as Emily Post  (http://www.emilypost.com/attendants).  My advice was not to assume your WP is ignorant of this, even though some hosts are.  

    My lodging has always been included as a traveling BM (save the above example), so I  expect it, as would my family, and nearly everyone I know.  But neither you nor I can speak for the entire U.S. culture by example, which is why I referenced an "official" guide.  

    Ignore the guideline if you (or others wish).  My point is not to belittle/trash others for not following etiquette while doing the same. 

    ETA: Italics to "may."
    20130121-125529.jpg 
      Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • It was the "norm" for me too until I expanded my social circle and went to non-catholic weddings. Epiphany! Non-full-day wedding commitments do exist! When FI and I started planning the number one thing I said was, "I don't want guests to waste an entire day on us." We found a former Catholic priest to marry us outside the Church. We won't have the sacrament performed but it will be legal and spiritual so it was the right fit for us.
    Totally agree!
    thisismynickname have you spoken to your parish priest and made sure he will validate the marriage after the fact? Some are pickier and will not. You should make sure you know before hand to be safe :) GL!
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • mysticlmysticl member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    edited November 2013
    wabanzi said:
    mysticl said:
    wabanzi said:
    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.
    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  


    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  


    That shouldn't be a "surprise bill" considering it's by no means customary for the bride to pay for the lodging/travel of her guests, wedding party included. You seem to be a little confused by what is customary in US culture and what is not. The bride paying for the things you've mentioned is not standard here, save for the day-of shoes. Parking, on the other hand, should be covered unless there is an equally convenient free alternative. Depending on how far "a few blocks away" is, it could prove to be quite uncomfortable for guests in heels or other formalwear.
    Nope, no confusion. I didn't state travel expenses, I stated lodging.  And yes as I stated it may be expected by the WP this is covered by the hosts since it is outlined in etiquette guides such as Emily Post  (http://www.emilypost.com/attendants).  My advice was not to assume your WP is ignorant of this, even though some hosts are.  

    My lodging has always been included as a traveling BM (save the above example), so I  expect it, as would my family, and nearly everyone I know.  But neither you nor I can speak for the entire U.S. culture by example, which is why I referenced an "official" guide.  

    Ignore the guideline if you (or others wish).  My point is not to belittle/trash others for not following etiquette while doing the same. 

    ETA: Italics to "may."
    No one I know would expect this.  Heck, I wouldn't want the bride to pay for my accommodations because that means she gets to dictate where I stay and what type of room I get.  

    ETA:  That Emily Post link that you are using as an official guide says bridesmaid should pay for their own attire and accessories.  So according to your own etiquette guide you were in the wrong to expect a bride to pay for your dress.  
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    MadHops21
  • wabanziwabanzi member
    500 Comments 250 Love Its Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited November 2013

    mysticl said:
    wabanzi said:
    mysticl said:
    wabanzi said:
    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.
    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  


    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  


    That shouldn't be a "surprise bill" considering it's by no means customary for the bride to pay for the lodging/travel of her guests, wedding party included. You seem to be a little confused by what is customary in US culture and what is not. The bride paying for the things you've mentioned is not standard here, save for the day-of shoes. Parking, on the other hand, should be covered unless there is an equally convenient free alternative. Depending on how far "a few blocks away" is, it could prove to be quite uncomfortable for guests in heels or other formalwear.
    Nope, no confusion. I didn't state travel expenses, I stated lodging.  And yes as I stated it may be expected by the WP this is covered by the hosts since it is outlined in etiquette guides such as Emily Post  (http://www.emilypost.com/attendants).  My advice was not to assume your WP is ignorant of this, even though some hosts are.  

    My lodging has always been included as a traveling BM (save the above example), so I  expect it, as would my family, and nearly everyone I know.  But neither you nor I can speak for the entire U.S. culture by example, which is why I referenced an "official" guide.  

    Ignore the guideline if you (or others wish).  My point is not to belittle/trash others for not following etiquette while doing the same. 

    ETA: Italics to "may."
    No one I know would expect this.  Heck, I wouldn't want the bride to pay for my accommodations because that means she gets to dictate where I stay and what type of room I get.  

    ETA:  That Emily Post link that you are using as an official guide says bridesmaid should pay for their own attire and accessories.  So according to your own etiquette guide you were in the wrong to expect a bride to pay for your dress.  
    Please reread my posts.  I never stated I expected this bride to pay for the dress. It was about zero discussion of it --dictating it (which ironically you seem to be against since you used the same term), and her own breaches of etiquette -including making fun of another, which made for a unpleasant experience in the wedding. To quote myself: "It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way."

    I made it very clear that paying for your honored guests' (the WP) attire is something I feel is right (I even used the phrase "my opinion"). 

    What you or what you think your family/friends expect in regards to offering accommodations to your WP does not change the etiquette in this situation (and if you do know and are not just assuming, you have talked with them about it which was my advice). One can always decline the offer and pay for their own room too. But, the offer should be made.  I am actually surprised on the reaction to this guideline in that the TK boards seem to take pride in following proper etiquette.  The same type of statements are used to justify cash bars (for example), but has low tolerance here based on the posts I've read.


    Edited for typo.


    20130121-125529.jpg 
      Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • I am shocked & appalled by the rude replies about the gap. I feel like its standard. 
    For the record I'm not catholic, by my fiance is. We are having a 230 ceremony and a 6pm reception. I didn't want a 3pm reception at a brewery... just didn't seem to fit. I don't think that I should have to sacrifice the party I want just because I want to get married in a church... 
    I do understand that some of our friends will pick either the ceremony or reception, and I'm 110% ok with that. To say that I am rude because I am hosting a full dinner reception is just....rude.

    pot... meet kettle... 
    CamiSeleneMadHops21
  • Thank you to those that understand the gap!! Who the hell wants to start cocktail hour at 2:30 and then dinner at 3:30/4ish... But since I'm catholic I should have to have a lunch reception?? Screw! People will understand... And if they don't then I don't really want them to come to my wedding anyway!
    CamiSelene
  • kellh615 said:
    Thank you to those that understand the gap!! Who the hell wants to start cocktail hour at 2:30 and then dinner at 3:30/4ish... But since I'm catholic I should have to have a lunch reception?? Screw! People will understand... And if they don't then I don't really want them to come to my wedding anyway!

    I'm sorry that the Catholic Church doesn't make it easy to schedule a wedding.  But people will not understand rude treatment of them-and regardless of the Church's rules, it is rude to keep them waiting just because you want an evening wedding.  You are the one who needs to do some understanding of your guests'  needs, not expect them to "understand" because you are selfishly holding on to some "dream" that isn't practical.
    jenniferurssouthernbelle0915tcnoble
  • Let's take this back to what the board was supposed to be about... Everyone has CLEARLY stated their opinions on the gap AND proper WP etiquette... Moving on.............

    I was recently at a wedding (somewhat casual) where the Dj kept passing the microphone to some of the guests (mainly drunk WP members) and it turned into karaoke on the dance floor... Not cool!
    wabanziMadHops21
  • There was a guest (GM actually) that kept staring at me (even when I was sitting next to FI) and ask my cousin if I was single. Then he proceeded to take off his shirt near the end of the night and run around the dance floor and dance with the bride. I felt so embarrassed for her since she's such a sweetheart and probably didn't care much for that.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
    Funny Awkward animated GIF
  • I'm really worried about a gap time as well, I really don't want to see my fiance until I'm walking down the aisle the day of, but our quest list is so small I just worry about them being bored during our hour-ish of taking out together photos. Our ceremony and reception take place at the same venue, which makes it way easier. We are having an open bar and I was planning on having cookies/finger sandwiches to help hold people over, but I'm just so worried people won't mingle!! I couldn't imagine making people wait hours in between
  • kitty8403kitty8403 member
    1000 Comments 250 Love Its First Answer Name Dropper
    edited December 2013
    wabanzi said:



    mysticl said:


    wabanzi said:



    wabanzi said:


    mysticl said:


    wabanzi said:

    I am aware of U.S. common/typical practices in most circles/social classes (which are not necessarily the same good manners, unfortunately), and I probably did not go into enough detail with my statement above.  I actually have no issue paying for a BM dress, as I paid for roughly 15 to this point (about 7 of them the bride insisted on covering the cost of being in her wedding).  Other than this situation I offered to pay, and had a discussion with the bride (bride initiated) regarding budget, style, expectations. This one was dictated.

    To my original point: this bride actively belittled/made fun of another recently married BM who had a minor (optional) parking charge at her venue of $3 (guests could have parked for free a few blocks away too).  Given her own behavior and breach of manners, it irked me. I should also mention that the "gift" she gave us was necklace to be worn at the wedding (so a non-gift) and she did not cover the accommodation charges incurred by the out of town bridesmaids (which is expected by U.S. standards).  She apologized after her wedding and returned to her sweet, considerate self. Ironically, the belittled BM had paid for the wedding party attire/accommodation expenses.  It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way. To do that, is of course, another breach of manners (along with her other breaches), and thus hypocritical. I don't think I made that point as clear as I should have in my previous statement.  

    Now to the extended point (and this statement will probably start a whole new heated discussion  so I am zipping up my flame suit): if you require certain guests (and the wedding party are guests) to wear particular new clothing because that is how you want your wedding to look, then it is a type of cover charge for your event.  I feel it is wrong to claim no guest had to dip into their pocket when the cost of what you want is shifted to some of your guests. Now individuals in the WP are free to decline, as is any guest, to attend.  And yes it may be common to shift this expense, but in my opinion it doesn't make it good form. 

    *Italics intentional because I realize that on TK boards this opinion isn't widely shared.

    No it's not.  I have never heard of a bride paying for her bridesmaids' hotel rooms.  Since bridesmaids are the bride's closest friends and family it is assumed that they would be attending the wedding even if they were not in the wedding.  Therefore they would still be incurring those expenses.  



    The hosts should keep in mind that regardless of whether or not they are aware of this, individuals in the WP may expect it and view it as a breach of etiquette (e.g. Emily Post) if not offered.  Additionally, BMs & GMs may not budget for it and get upset by or unable to pay a surprise bill.  


    That shouldn't be a "surprise bill" considering it's by no means customary for the bride to pay for the lodging/travel of her guests, wedding party included.

    You seem to be a little confused by what is customary in US culture and what is not. The bride paying for the things you've mentioned is not standard here, save for the day-of shoes. Parking, on the other hand, should be covered unless there is an equally convenient free alternative. Depending on how far "a few blocks away" is, it could prove to be quite uncomfortable for guests in heels or other formalwear.

    Nope, no confusion. I didn't state travel expenses, I stated lodging.  And yes as I stated it may be expected by the WP this is covered by the hosts since it is outlined in etiquette guides such as Emily Post  (http://www.emilypost.com/attendants).  My advice was not to assume your WP is ignorant of this, even though some hosts are.  

    My lodging has always been included as a traveling BM (save the above example), so I  expect it, as would my family, and nearly everyone I know.  But neither you nor I can speak for the entire U.S. culture by example, which is why I referenced an "official" guide.  

    Ignore the guideline if you (or others wish).  My point is not to belittle/trash others for not following etiquette while doing the same. 

    ETA: Italics to "may."



    No one I know would expect this.  Heck, I wouldn't want the bride to pay for my accommodations because that means she gets to dictate where I stay and what type of room I get.  

    ETA:  That Emily Post link that you are using as an official guide says bridesmaid should pay for their own attire and accessories.  So according to your own etiquette guide you were in the wrong to expect a bride to pay for your dress.  



    Please reread my posts.  I never stated I expected this bride to pay for the dress. It was about zero discussion of it --dictating it (which ironically you seem to be against since you used the same term), and her own breaches of etiquette -including making fun of another, which made for a unpleasant experience in the wedding. To quote myself: 
    "It was the purposeful attempt at humiliating/making fun of another that rubbed me the wrong way."

    I made it very clear that paying for your honored guests' (the WP) attire is something I feel is right (I even used the phrase "my opinion"). 

    What you or what you think your family/friends expect in regards to offering accommodations to your WP
    does not change the etiquette in this situation (and if you do know and are not just assuming, you have talked with them about it which was my advice). One can always decline the offer and pay for their own room too. But, the offer should be made.  I am actually surprised on the reaction to this guideline in that the TK boards seem to take pride in following proper etiquette.  The same type of statements are used to justify cash bars (for example), but has low tolerance here based on the posts I've read.


    Edited for typo.







    Feeling that something is right does not make it an accepted etiquette rule by which to judge other couples. In US custom/rules, the bride has every right to choose which dress(es) the bridesmaids should wear. This is completely her call. So long as it is in the agreed budget, she does not need to ask your permission or consult lots of outside opinions. It is not standard etiquette to expect her to pay for it or to make a pretense of "offering" to pay. It is, however, her job to make sure the dress she chooses is affordable. She can do that by asking your budgets and working with that limitation, by buying the dresses, or by subsidizing
    part of the cost.

    The Emily Post link you cite specifically mentions transportation as an attendant's own responsibility. ETA: on a reread, I see that she does indicate "accommodations" as a requirement. This, however, is still not typical or standard in US practice, and considering the other long lists of attendant responsibilities included here -- which are more generally accepted in my own circle but tend to be frowned on by many Knotties -- I think you'll be hard pressed to get many on the boards to accept this link as a serious etiquette source. I agree that it has potential to cause confusion, though.

    If we accept that lodging is a couple's obligation, then we must be prepared to accept that if a bride wants her attendants to stay with her, or to crash at her grandmother's house, or go camping the night before, she can do so because she is technically providing lodging. In addition, lodging is often a matter of choice, or even unnecessary. In general, you are talking about grown adults who can make informed decisions. I have two attendants who could choose to stay with their mothers, or could choose to get motel rooms.
    They could get inexpensive rooms, or choose a high-end resort. A groomsman could decide to stay sober and drive the half-hour home, or get trashed and call a hotel. By your logic, it would be the couple's job to babysit all their attendants, second-guess their decisions on where to stay, and ask for receipts and expense reports. See the problem?

    Now, I happen to agree with you in thinking that if a couple *can reasonably afford to pay* for all attendants' attire, travel, or lodging, then they should consider budgeting for those expenses and make that part of their demonstration of thanks to attendants--if everything else is already covered, and only if they can afford to do it for all attendants. BUT, reimbursing attendants for everything is well above and beyond their standard obligations, and they are not
    required to do so.
  • I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
  • 4 hour gap. Took a nap in the hotel in between the ceremony and reception.

    My ceremony will be from 5-6, cocktails from 6-7 and reception from 7-11 ---- ABSOLUTELY NO GAPS!
  • 4 hour gap. Took a nap in the hotel in between the ceremony and reception.

    My ceremony will be from 5-6, cocktails from 6-7 and reception from 7-11 ---- ABSOLUTELY NO GAPS!
    Ugh. This. I'm going to a wedding in a few weeks with a 3-hour gap. I don't know what I'm going to do with myself.
  • jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?

  • kerbohl said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?
    For some people it's a pain in the neck to have to go out and spend money, time, or other resources on a costume-on top of a gift and whatever it takes to actually go to the wedding, especially if you have to make an overnight trip.  And some people just don't like costumes-they feel it impairs their dignity, or they're just not comfortable.

    And frankly, it's a little annoying to have adults decide for other adults, outside of work-related and wedding-party related situations, what they should wear.  I'm a grownup-I can figure it out for myself.
  • jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?
    Under other circumstances I think it would have been fun but they got married in February...
    PrettyGirlLostsouthernbelle0915
  • jdluvr06 said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?
    Under other circumstances I think it would have been fun but they got married in February...
    Umm wait...what...huh? o.O

    To have a Halloween reception....wouldn't you need to have it on/around Halloween 10/31? Any other day would just be a costume party/reception....right???

    image
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • CLI242009 said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?
    Under other circumstances I think it would have been fun but they got married in February...
    Umm wait...what...huh? o.O

    To have a Halloween reception....wouldn't you need to have it on/around Halloween 10/31? Any other day would just be a costume party/reception....right???

    image

    It was way Halloween themed. They had jack o'lanterns, fake leaves everywhere, Halloween decorations on the tables, and played Halloween music during the reception. The bride carried a black and orange bouquet. It was over the top.

  • jdluvr06 said:
    CLI242009 said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    jdluvr06 said:
    I went to a Halloween themed wedding where it was requested that everyone show up in costume.
    Is that bad?  Sounds like fun to me.  Different strokes for different folks?
    Under other circumstances I think it would have been fun but they got married in February...
    Umm wait...what...huh? o.O

    To have a Halloween reception....wouldn't you need to have it on/around Halloween 10/31? Any other day would just be a costume party/reception....right???

    image

    It was way Halloween themed. They had jack o'lanterns, fake leaves everywhere, Halloween decorations on the tables, and played Halloween music during the reception. The bride carried a black and orange bouquet. It was over the top.
    Wow...well if it worked and they pulled it off then *shrugs* yay for them. Hahaha. I just know if I had received an invite to a halloween wedding...I would be one of those who just instantly assumed "Okay 10/31.."

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • I've never been to a wedding that DIDN'T have a gap. Usually 2 hours (or three if it's long). It's pretty well expected and most people either go home, to someone's house, to a coffee shop or wherever. Most weddings I've been to don't have "cocktail hours" but you show up at the reception place and get seated, the couple comes in and dinner starts. None of these have been Catholic weddings either. I think as long as you are clear about the times things start, it shouldn't be an issue. I've never even realised that a gap was rude as it is always done at weddings where I'm from.
    mimiphin
  • erinbethp said:
    I've never been to a wedding that DIDN'T have a gap. Usually 2 hours (or three if it's long). It's pretty well expected and most people either go home, to someone's house, to a coffee shop or wherever. Most weddings I've been to don't have "cocktail hours" but you show up at the reception place and get seated, the couple comes in and dinner starts. None of these have been Catholic weddings either. I think as long as you are clear about the times things start, it shouldn't be an issue. I've never even realised that a gap was rude as it is always done at weddings where I'm from.
    There is a built-in issue:  What are the guests supposed to do for 2 or 3 hours waiting for the reception?  Nobody wants to go home, to someone's house, or especially to a coffee shop or wherever while still dressed up-and if they had to travel for an hour or so to get to the ceremony, they don't have time to go home and change clothes.  And if they're from out of town, it's even more awkward for them.

    That's why it's not considerate of your guests to have a gap-even if locally it is the "done thing."  It is an assumption that doesn't take into account your guests' needs not to have to wear wedding attire when one is not at a wedding or reception and to get immediate refreshment.
    miaawallace
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards