Earn cash as you plan. Get a $20 gift card for every 200 points with The Knot Rewards
Texas-Dallas and Ft. Worth
Wedding Party Shuffle
It first started when my MOH developed Gestational Diabetes and is no longer able to make the trip from Colorado so close to her due date. Then to make the wedding party look a little more even and to the relief of one of the GM, he was delighted when we let him off the wedding party hook. Here's the thing... how do I write up the program? My MOH has been a sounding board and already did an amazing job with the bridal shower and I am fortunate to have two sisters and a SIL that will be very competant bridesmaids to fill in for my MOH. But how do I format the program to show her still and do I still acknowledge the former GM?
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Wedding Party Shuffle
[QUOTE]It first started when my MOH developed Gestational Diabetes and is no longer able to make the trip from Colorado so close to her due date. <strong>Then to make the wedding party look a little more even and to the relief of one of the GM, he was delighted when we let him off the wedding party hook. </strong> Here's the thing... how do I write up the program? My MOH has been a sounding board and already did an amazing job with the bridal shower and I am fortunate to have two sisters and a SIL that will be very competant bridesmaids to fill in for my MOH. But how do I format the program to show her still and do I still acknowledge the former GM?
Posted by daricelr[/QUOTE]
<div>You won't get much support for this on many boards. It's usually considered pretty rude to "let someone go" from your WP...espically to make it even. </div><div>
</div><div>You should still include GM in your day, IMO. You could make the MOH the "honorary" MOH in your program, or just list her as MOH. </div>
[QUOTE]"Let him go" ... he was ecstatic. He would be coming from Kansas and was going to potential leave to get to the wedding early Saturday morning. Hasn't got his tuxedo fitted and was overall relieved. I'm not asking for anyone's opinion on how we approached the shuffling of the wedding party, just how to phrase it in our programs.
Posted by daricelr[/QUOTE]
<div>Not to be rude, but this is an internet forum and you can't dictate how/what people post. </div><div>
</div><div>I also gave you advice on how to word it in your program.</div>
[QUOTE]ok, so list her as MOH... should I asterisk her? What about the GM? In your opinion?
Posted by daricelr[/QUOTE]
<div>MOH or Honorary MOH. </div><div>
</div><div>I would just leave him listed. I would leave them both out of introductions because he's not there. I wouldn't make a big deal about them not being there as far as having someone explain it during the introductions.</div>
[QUOTE]ok, so list her as MOH... should I asterisk her? What about the GM? In your opinion?
Posted by daricelr[/QUOTE]
Unless you want to have to explain to every person at your wedding why you "cut him loose" (your words), I wouldn't list him. Otherwise, it'll be just like here--some people will possibly judge you for it.
[QUOTE]I wouldn't know how to approach it without having to feel like explaining to every person at the wedding what happened. So he's not coming to the wedding at all?
Posted by juliebug1997[/QUOTE]
<div>He may only make it in time for the reception and I just reasked my FH and he felt he sounded "relieved".</div><div>
</div><div>FH is of the opinion we just leave there names in, no asterisk, no comment and if people ask, we tell the story. I can see @juliebug's point of leaving them out, hence the reason I posted the issue of the program to try and get some opinions on the matter.</div>
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : Unless you want to have to explain to every person at your wedding why you "cut him loose" (your words), I wouldn't list him. Otherwise, it'll be just like here--some people will possibly judge you for it.
Posted by juliebug1997[/QUOTE]
<div>
</div><div>Was going to put the following on the post that said "cut him loose" but I didn't see it... did I use those words?</div><div>
</div><div>Edit: Pretty obvious that my choice of the words "cut him loose" was more flippant than I should have used. FH said GM was relieved to be given the option to no longer be a GM.</div>
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : Was going to put the following on the post that said "cut him loose" but I didn't see it... did I use those words? Edit: Pretty obvious that my choice of the words "cut him loose" was more flippant than I should have used. FH said GM was relieved to be given the option to no longer be a GM.
Posted by daricelr[/QUOTE]
Please stop calling him your "future husband," that's what the term fiance is for.
I'm sure no one will care if you leave them off of the programs. It's not that big of a deal.
But, in my case, nobody at our wedding would have known (except that they'd have noticed there were 5 BMs listed and only 4 standing). They wouldn't have known which name to match to the missing BM though. We didn't introduce the bridal party into the reception, either -- just us. So, that's an option.
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : Please stop calling him your "future husband," that's what the term fiance is for.
Posted by TexanTreasure08[/QUOTE]
That's a little unecessary.
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : That's a little unecessary.
Posted by Jay&Marissa[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I personally hate using fiance, and dont really see the issue with saying "future husband."
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : That's a little unecessary.
Posted by Jay&Marissa[/QUOTE]
I have to agree. I hate the term too, but it honestly shouldn't matter what someone else calls their guy.
I would say put honorary MOH and leave off the guy. If he dropped out or if you cut him, either way he's not in the WP anymore and you feel your MOH needs to be mentioned so go for it.
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : That's a little unnecessary.
Posted by Jay&Marissa[/QUOTE]
I would have to agree as well. Just like the OP can't dictate who answers and how they do so, we can't dictate what words people use to name their FI. To be fair, I called my DH my "future husband" lots of times when we were engaged.
OP, I know at this point, what's done is done... but are you sure that the GM didn't sound "relieved" so he didn't let on that his feelings were hurt? I would act relieved too, and probably be really hurt still.
To answer your original question, I agree with ProfessorScience and Crash.
Bio
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wedding Party Shuffle : I would have to agree as well. Just like the OP can't dictate who answers and how they do so, we can't dictate what words people use to name their FI. To be fair, I called my DH my "future husband" lots of times when we were engaged. OP, I know at this point, what's done is done... but are you sure that the GM didn't sound "relieved" so he didn't let on that his feelings were hurt? I would act relieved too, and probably be really hurt still. To answer your original question, I agree with ProfessorScience and Crash.
Posted by bsn1752[/QUOTE]
<div>I can only relay what my FH told me about their conversation. (I left the decision of even bringing up the subject to him as well.) I'm trying to keep in mind that this is a guy not a girl. Guys often complain that girls cannot be taken at their word. How many of us have been forwarded those "What a woman really means" emails? Based on how Brian approaches most things and his long time friendship with the GM, I feel confident that the matter is a nonissue. His brother is our best man, so it's not like he and their family will not be a vital part of the day, he just won't have to rent a tux.</div>
Is he not coming to the wedding at all now?
Bio
[QUOTE]Also, asterisks are for Barry Bonds. If you put her in the program, there shouldn't need to be a footnote. I don't even like "honorary." She either is the MOH or she isn't. HTH.
Posted by professorscience[/QUOTE]
Ditto. A footnote would promt a good deal of questioning that you (or she) may not want to answer due to the sensitivity of her situation. There may be questions either way, but the way the program is worded will be of little significance to anyone except you and your friend TBH. Since people probably won't notice anyway, there isn't any reason to bring it to their attention.
If the GM is not standing with your FI, there is no reason to include him in the program. His situation is much different than the situation with your MOH, and is another subject that you most likely don't want to have to explain to any nosy guests. In all honesty, their reactions may mirror those of concerns that were previously addressed in this thread.
**edited for clarification**
Teeheehee...and UT Big 12 Championships.
Sneaking back off into married obscurity...
As for the GM its tough to say if it hurt his feelings or not, my husband let someone go out of our wedding (after their complaining about it for months) and it blew up in our faces, however a good friend of mine was let go from a wedding and was truly relieved by it. It depends on the person and situation.
[QUOTE]I just love it how people who have no life beyond their wedding planning love to jump on posters who are supposed to magically know what the ettiquette is in every situation. Where are the responses like, "Oh, how awful that your best friend won't be able to make it to your wedding?" Well then I'll say it - I would be really sad if any of my bridesmaids weren't standing up there with me, so I feel for you! So, I say you do whatever you want. Whoever made stupid wedding rules in the 1800s is dead and anyone who gets upset about what you do is either not really a friend, or they'll forget it soon Personally, I think you should have her as the honorary maid of honor since she did all the "maid of honor" duties and isn't medically able to come to the ceremony. Don't list the groomsman, and maybe see if he can have a lesser role (usher, greeter, etc.) where he doesn't have to wear a tux. Trust me, lots of men don't know how much it's going to cost them when they accept the role of a groomsman, and I think a lot of them would be relieved to be let go.
Posted by shimmer193[/QUOTE]
1) I had a life while I was planning my wedding, and I still have one now. I also purchased a handy book called "Wedding Etiquette" by Emily Post. That way, I was well equipped to handle every situation I encountered in a formal and respectful way. Etiquette is a guide of social behavior, and serves as a benchmark for proper conduct at formal observences. A wedding is one of those occasions, and it isn't as outdated as you think. Disregarding etiquette is something not easily overlooked, no matter how good a 'friend' someone is. If I wouldn't have done certain things for my mother through the wedding process and afterward, she would have been extremely disappointed and embarrassed. That being said, yes, I do think that OP's MOH's situation is extremely unfortunate and saddening.
2) Isn't being politely released to not be a groomsman enough? Let alone be rearranged into serving a lesser role? I think being downgraded to 'guest' would be enough for me. OP, I think that if he was relieved to not be a GM any more, that I would leave it up to him if he would like to take on any kind of responsibility as it relates to your ceremony. Don't act like door #2 is the next best thing if he wasn't thrilled (or able to afford) to be a WP member in the first place.
Telling OP to 'do whatever she wants' really isn't too helpful if she is asking for specific opinions on what you would do in her situation.