Invitation Relationships Nightmare

keeperlaura · July 2013

I am the MOH for my cousins wedding, and I am helping her get the invitations ready to send out. There are a few dilemmas though!

A few of her friends were in relationships when the STDs were sent out, but are now single. The STDs were sent to "Mr. Boyfriend and Ms. Friend of the Bride". So now when the invitations are sent out does she send them to "Ms. Friend of the Bride and guest" or just "Ms. Friend of the Bride"?

Also, family friends of her FI have announced they are getting divorced and he still wants them both to be invited. They definitely each get their own invitation with no plus one, correct?

I never realized relationships could make invitations so complicated!

SJM7538 · July 2013

For the people that were in relationships but are now single... If they are truly single she does not need to extend them a plus one and can just address the invite to that person. However, if she originally budgeted for their SOs to be in attendance then it would be nice of her to stick with it and give them a plus one.

As for the divorced couple, as long as they don't consider themselves in a relationship with someone else then yes... They get their own invitation and do not need to be extended a plus one.

Jen4948 · July 2013

SJM7538 said:

For the people that were in relationships but are now single... If they are truly single she does not need to extend them a plus one and can just address the invite to that person. However, if she originally budgeted for their SOs to be in attendance then it would be nice of her to stick with it and give them a plus one. As for the divorced couple, as long as they don't consider themselves in a relationship with someone else then yes... They get their own invitation and do not need to be extended a plus one.

This.

mrsB68 · July 2013

Follow the same suit all the way through. Outside of these 2 situations if you're inviting single guests with a date extend the same offer to these folks. If not, then don't. It doesn't matter if the save the date doesn't match the invitation- neither does their situation. And agree, please seat at different tables!

BarbLovesDave · July 2013

This illustrates why, in my opinion, STDs are a bad idea. They lock in a guest list way too early.

There is a reason why Proper Etiquette says that only married or engaged couples need be invited if the host knows only one half of the couple.

If the host knows only one half of a SO couple, then the host has the option of only inviting the person they know. Should the couple break up, then the host is obliged to see only the person they know, not some random stranger who used to be your friend's boyfriend.

In the OP, since the STD had Ex-BF's name on it, then Ex-BF should be invited. He was asked to "save the date", after all. Don't be surprised if he doesn't RSVP.

As for the couple getting divorced: So long as they are not yet finally divorced, extramarital SO relationships need not be invited. If you follow the married/engaged rule about mandatory invites, but SO invites at the discretion of the host, then you could reason that an engagement should not be announced while a person is still legally married and that a marriage is absolutely impossible.

Thus, with the divorcing couple, invite them both, singly, separately.

If you like drama, seat them at the same table. If you dislike drama, keep 'em separate.

As always: Same-sex couple who would be married if it were legal in their area should be invited together.

southernbelle0915 · July 2013

BarbLovesDave said:

This illustrates why, in my opinion, STDs are a bad idea. They lock in a guest list way too early.

There is a reason why Proper Etiquette says that only married or engaged couples need be invited if the host knows only one half of the couple.

If the host knows only one half of a SO couple, then the host has the option of only inviting the person they know. Should the couple break up, then the host is obliged to see only the person they know, not some random stranger who used to be your friend's boyfriend.

In the OP, since the STD had Ex-BF's name on it, then Ex-BF should be invited. He was asked to "save the date", after all. Don't be surprised if he doesn't RSVP.

As for the couple getting divorced: So long as they are not yet finally divorced, extramarital SO relationships need not be invited. If you follow the married/engaged rule about mandatory invites, but SO invites at the discretion of the host, then you could reason that an engagement should not be announced while a person is still legally married and that a marriage is absolutely impossible.

Thus, with the divorcing couple, invite them both, singly, separately.

If you like drama, seat them at the same table. If you dislike drama, keep 'em separate.

As always: Same-sex couple who would be married if it were legal in their area should be invited together.

No. This is a segway into the old SO debate. The etiquette rules stated above are outdated and don't take into consideration a lot of modern relationships. If people are in a relationship, it's not up to the host to judge how serious they may or may not be. There are plenty of long-term (and short-term) couples who decide never to be engaged/married and by that logic, they would never be granted a plus one. Couples are a social unit and should be invited as such.

Also, I don't get how one would judge whether or not a same-sex couple "would be" married if their state allowed it.... do you call them up and ask them? Definitely not.

SomethingBeautiful08 · July 2013

I think you are making this more complicated then it needs to be. In both cases you've got people that were couples when STDs went out but now are not together as a social unit. Treat the friends as if they were single all along and if they would have given a "guest" invite said guest. Treat the soon to be divorced couple as if they were already divorced, i.e. each single and treat them like every other single person on the list.

NYCBruin · July 2013

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

southernbelle0915 · July 2013

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

This. Or your friends ARE engaged and have not announced their engagement.

BarbLovesDave · July 2013

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

Do you personally know the new fiancé? Are you friends with him?

If so, then it was weird to invite one without the other, even if they weren't officially engaged. That's like inviting one sister but not the other if you are more or less equally acquainted with both. Their being engaged or not engaged does not enter in to the equation.

If you know the woman and want to invite her to the wedding, and you have never met her boyfriend, and you had no idea there was any engagement at the time you drew up your guest list, then why would she be offended? Are you expected to have ESP? A crystal ball?

The newly-engaged person who receives a "single" invite need only contact the host and say "I am sure you had not heard our happy news. Joe proposed Saturday night, so we are now engaged." The host would immediately say "Of course your new fiancé is invited. Please let me know his full name and address so I can get an invitation in the mail."

This happens when family situations change. (Birth, death, marriage.) People get in touch with you unaware that things have changed. After my mom died in October, my dad still got Christmas cards addressed to "Mr and Mrs". He just replied back "I have the sad duty to tell you..."

Don't spend your time getting offended by innocent mistakes. Occasionally I get called by Dave's last name or get "Mrs David" mail. I just politely correct the person if I expect to ever see them again, otherwise I just ignore it. I can't waste my time getting offended.

NYCBruin · July 2013

BarbLovesDave said:

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

Do you personally know the new fiancé? Are you friends with him?

If so, then it was weird to invite one without the other, even if they weren't officially engaged. That's like inviting one sister but not the other if you are more or less equally acquainted with both. Their being engaged or not engaged does not enter in to the equation.

If you know the woman and want to invite her to the wedding, and you have never met her boyfriend, and you had no idea there was any engagement at the time you drew up your guest list, then why would she be offended? Are you expected to have ESP? A crystal ball?

The newly-engaged person who receives a "single" invite need only contact the host and say "I am sure you had not heard our happy news. Joe proposed Saturday night, so we are now engaged." The host would immediately say "Of course your new fiancé is invited. Please let me know his full name and address so I can get an invitation in the mail."

This happens when family situations change. (Birth, death, marriage.) People get in touch with you unaware that things have changed. After my mom died in October, my dad still got Christmas cards addressed to "Mr and Mrs". He just replied back "I have the sad duty to tell you..."

Don't spend your time getting offended by innocent mistakes. Occasionally I get called by Dave's last name or get "Mrs David" mail. I just politely correct the person if I expect to ever see them again, otherwise I just ignore it. I can't waste my time getting offended.

I'm not actually worried about this because I would never not include a SO.

I'm pretty sure you missed my point. I was just illustrating one of the many situations where your "proper rule" makes no sense. Others have pointed out other such situations, like knowing when a same-sex couple would be married if the state permitted or what happens when a couple is engaged but hasn't announced it yet.

southernbelle0915 · July 2013

BarbLovesDave said:

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

Do you personally know the new fiancé? Are you friends with him?

If so, then it was weird to invite one without the other, even if they weren't officially engaged. That's like inviting one sister but not the other if you are more or less equally acquainted with both. Their being engaged or not engaged does not enter in to the equation.

If you know the woman and want to invite her to the wedding, and you have never met her boyfriend, and you had no idea there was any engagement at the time you drew up your guest list, then why would she be offended? Are you expected to have ESP? A crystal ball?

The newly-engaged person who receives a "single" invite need only contact the host and say "I am sure you had not heard our happy news. Joe proposed Saturday night, so we are now engaged." The host would immediately say "Of course your new fiancé is invited. Please let me know his full name and address so I can get an invitation in the mail."

This happens when family situations change. (Birth, death, marriage.) People get in touch with you unaware that things have changed. After my mom died in October, my dad still got Christmas cards addressed to "Mr and Mrs". He just replied back "I have the sad duty to tell you..."

Don't spend your time getting offended by innocent mistakes. Occasionally I get called by Dave's last name or get "Mrs David" mail. I just politely correct the person if I expect to ever see them again, otherwise I just ignore it. I can't waste my time getting offended.

No. The point is that if one follows your rule, they offend people in these situations and others whose relationships you marginalize. Even if they weren't engaged... if they're seriously dating it's weird to invite them without their significant other. In the year before FI and I got engaged, we were living together and were very serious. If he or I had been invited to a wedding and the other was not invited, we would have felt that the host was marginalizing our relationship and probably not attended for that reason.

NYCBruin · July 2013

southernbelle0915 said:

BarbLovesDave said:

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave I have a question for you

Let's assume I decide to follow your rules and decide to not invite the SO of a friend because they aren't engaged or married. I drop my invitations off at the post office on Friday afternoon, but they don't get post-market until Saturday. My friend gets engaged to her SO Friday night. She's engaged when she gets the invitation (and when the invitation is post-marked, she would have no idea that I dropped off invitations on Friday before she was engaged) that is just addressed to her. She's offended. But when I sent the invitation she wasn't engaged.

Who is in the right?

Do you personally know the new fiancé? Are you friends with him?

If so, then it was weird to invite one without the other, even if they weren't officially engaged. That's like inviting one sister but not the other if you are more or less equally acquainted with both. Their being engaged or not engaged does not enter in to the equation.

If you know the woman and want to invite her to the wedding, and you have never met her boyfriend, and you had no idea there was any engagement at the time you drew up your guest list, then why would she be offended? Are you expected to have ESP? A crystal ball?

The newly-engaged person who receives a "single" invite need only contact the host and say "I am sure you had not heard our happy news. Joe proposed Saturday night, so we are now engaged." The host would immediately say "Of course your new fiancé is invited. Please let me know his full name and address so I can get an invitation in the mail."

This happens when family situations change. (Birth, death, marriage.) People get in touch with you unaware that things have changed. After my mom died in October, my dad still got Christmas cards addressed to "Mr and Mrs". He just replied back "I have the sad duty to tell you..."

Don't spend your time getting offended by innocent mistakes. Occasionally I get called by Dave's last name or get "Mrs David" mail. I just politely correct the person if I expect to ever see them again, otherwise I just ignore it. I can't waste my time getting offended.

No. The point is that if one follows your rule, they offend people in these situations and others whose relationships you marginalize. Even if they weren't engaged... if they're seriously dating it's weird to invite them without their significant other. In the year before FI and I got engaged, we were living together and were very serious. If he or I had been invited to a wedding and the other was not invited, we would have felt that the host was marginalizing our relationship and probably not attended for that reason.

And this.

BarbLovesDave · July 2013

southernbelle0915 said:

No. The point is that if one follows your rule, they offend people in these situations and others whose relationships you marginalize. Even if they weren't engaged... if they're seriously dating it's weird to invite them without their significant other. In the year before FI and I got engaged, we were living together and were very serious. If he or I had been invited to a wedding and the other was not invited, we would have felt that the host was marginalizing our relationship and probably not attended for that reason.

Anyone who receives an invitation for any event has the option of declining for any reason.

If you don't want to attend the event without your SO, then just politely decline. If the host asks "Why?", you have the option of mentioning your non-desire to go without the SO. You also have the option of just declining without explanation.

Depending on budget, space, etc, the host may or may not then extend the invitation to an unknown-to-them SO. Or may not. Their choice.

Ideally, a host is inviting people they know well. The host would know if Jane and Joe have been going together for a while, and would be acquainted with both. Such a host would invite them both. I know I would.

Let's take another, probably more common, hypothetical. Let's say I know Jane is married. Let's say a friend is drawing up a guest list, and calls me and asks for Jane's address. I would mention to the friend that Jane is married, and that her husband's name is Joe, and their address is 123 Main St. I would fully expect the host to invite Jane and Joe, even if they do not know Joe. If I heard that Jane was invited alone, I would think poorly of the host.

Let's say the friend phones me for the address and I know Jane has an SO. I would mention the SO to the friend, but would leave the decision as to whether or not to invite the SO to the host. I might expect to see the SO invited, might not. The host might know Joe personally, might not. Not my concern. I'd be pretty much neutral on Joe's invitation or non-invitation.

BarbLovesDave · July 2013

I don't have a single problem with "marginalizing" SO relationships.

Marriage is marriage.

SO is SO.

Want to be married? Get married.

Want to be SOs? Don't get married.

Face the consequences of your choice. Don't live in an SO relationship if you want the rights and privileges of marriage. A guarantee of being invited together to mixed-sex social events is one of the rights of being married.

NYCBruin · July 2013

@BarbLovesDave

Here's the thing. To me, etiquette is about making sure your guests are comfortable and enjoy themselves when you host an event.

As posters on this thread and others have pointed out, the VAST majority of people would be offended to be invited to an event without their SO. Knowing that, why would you advocate that people follow an outdated rule that you KNOW is going to offend/hurt at least some of their guests?

Also, please stop referring to getting invited as a couple as "privilege or right" of marriage. First, posters occasionally come on here saying that they got an invitation to a wedding that didn't include their spouse, so it's not actually a "guarantee." There is no law that says you have to invite married people together, it's just the polite thing to do (just like including all SOs). Second, there are a lot of ACTUAL legal privileges and rights that come with marriage. Suggesting that party invitations are somehow on the same level as those is just silly.

ETA

PS-I would totally judge you for not inviting Joe in your Jane/Joe example when Jane and Joe are "just dating." I have friends that live all over the country. I haven't met their SOs because I don't see them very often. It doesn't matter that I don't know them. I know they are important to my friend. That's all that matters. They get an invitation.

BarbLovesDave · July 2013

NYCBruin said:

@BarbLovesDave

Here's the thing. To me, etiquette is about making sure your guests are comfortable and enjoy themselves when you host an event.

I agree. Within my constraints of budget and space, I'd love to invite everyone.
As posters on this thread and others have pointed out, the VAST majority of people would be offended to be invited to an event without their SO. Knowing that, why would you advocate that people follow an outdated rule that you KNOW is going to offend/hurt at least some of their guests?

I am saying that if you are offended because you are invited without your SO, especially when the host does not know your SO and has no knowledge that you even have an SO, then you are easily-offended. Call and tell the host about the SO, and then if they extend the invitation, great. If not, then you still have the option of declining. Decline if you prefer.

Remember, most of the time when people get engaged or married, they make it clear to their extended family or social circle. They send wedding invitations. They shout "we're engaged" from the rooftops. Mom posts 1,001 Facebook messages about the engagement and wedding planning. The cousin or aunt on the other side of the country would most likely hear about the engagement or marriage.

When people move in together, and want to be seen as a couple, they need to be similarly proactive in making their new status known to the distant cousins and far-flung friends. If they do that, then great, chances are they will be invited to events together. If not, then don't be surprised if invited as a single person.
Also, please stop referring to getting invited as a couple as "privilege or right" of marriage. First, posters occasionally come on here saying that they got an invitation to a wedding that didn't include their spouse, so it's not actually a "guarantee."

The hosts are in error if not inviting the spouse. Lots of people do dumb things.

There is no law that says you have to invite married people together, it's just the polite thing to do (just like including all SOs). Second, there are a lot of ACTUAL legal privileges and rights that come with marriage. Suggesting that party invitations are somehow on the same level as those is just silly.

It's Etiquette to consider married/engaged people as must-invites. As a host, you are certainly welcome to consider SOs together as must-invites. I usually do, too. As I said before, if you are invited without your SO, then just decline. You can be offended or not offended, your choice.
ETA
PS-I would totally judge you for not inviting Joe in your Jane/Joe example when Jane and Joe are "just dating." I have friends that live all over the country. I haven't met their SOs because I don't see them very often. It doesn't matter that I don't know them. I know they are important to my friend. That's all that matters. They get an invitation

You are absolutely welcome to invite the people you want to invite, so long as married/engaged couples are invited to mixed-sex events. You want to include SOs? Great. Go for it.

NYCBruin · July 2013

In today's digital world, it's just as easy to find out if someone is engaged as it is to find out if they are in a relationship. To use your own rule, how do you know that a same-sex couple is in a relationship? The same way you know how any guest is in a relationship- facebook, general keeping in touch, asking them when you ask for their address, etc.

If you don't care about offending/hurting your guests, that's your prerogative. I just think it's bad advice to tell people that they only have to invite engaged and married couples together when so many posters have pointed out the many reasons why it's likely to offend the guest.

Pointing an offended/sad guest to an antiquated etiquette rule about how couples don't "have" to invite "just SOs" wouldn't make them feel any better, and it could very well ruin the relationship.

HuckSC · July 2013

In your old world of etiquette @BarbLovesDave couples courted for six months, got engaged, and married three months after that. In a world where people will date many many years before even getting engaged, relegating that relationship as just another "SO" is very dismissing of another couples relationship that is longer than a good deal of marriages.

Invitation Relationships Nightmare

Re: Invitation Relationships Nightmare

Choose Another Board

Search Boards