So here is the issue my fiance and myself do not like dancing at all and so we thought we would have a wedding without dancing but now people (ex. my mom) are saying dancing is needed. I said no it is not because we are going to have the speeches and games (shoe game) between dinner and 'the cake' (which are cupcakes). My mother says if I don't have dancing people will just leave right after dinner. I think that those that would leave without dancing are the same ones that would leave if there was dancing. I mean my MC can always let people know the plan.
What does everyone else think? Dancing yes or no?
Re: Do you have to have dancing at a wedding?
If you don't want to dance, that's fine, but I recommend a shorter reception in that instance.
Moral of the story... if you decide to have no dancing, make your reception very very short.
Whats the shoe game? Are you going to have music at all? Or just silence?
We also thought about no dancing, but most of our family complained. We are including dancing, mainly because that's what our guests want. We will probably only do 2 dances: the traditional first dance & dance with parents. Other than that, the dancing is for the guests, not us.
That being said, I like the suggestions of having an afternoon reception, or something like that. I went to one that had the ceremony and right away after had tea, punch, apps and sweets set up in a room where we could eat and walk around. Guests had fun and enjoyed it, and there was no expectation of dancing. Might be an idea to go this route?