HELP!! How do I word it when we are hosting it but both parents wants their names on the invites?

jenijoyk · October 2014

CMGragain said:

I am sorry that you think that invitation tradition and etiquette no longer serve a purpose. Very few people will agree with you.
There is no way that I am ever going to advise anyone to do something that is not etiquette approved. If you really think etiquette and tradition are outmoded, this probably isn't a good board for you. There are plenty of other wedding websites that will tell you "It's your wedding! Do whatever you want!" which is the worst advice to give to a bride who is trying her best to do things properly.

I have attended over 100 weddings as a church organist and sometimes as a guest. I never will forget the wedding where nobody knew who was in charge. The different people in the family all pointed to each other when I actually had to ask for my fee. It was embarrassing.. The MOB was furious when I approached her. (She had requested my services.) She complained to the minister, who backed me up. The minister met with the family later in the week and got my check. I wonder how the venue did with those people? The next time they asked for permission to use the church for a wedding, they were told, "No." (They weren't church members.)
Yes, it is important to know who is hosting, and who is responsible.

I'm sorry, but I never said that all etiquette rules are outmoded.

Also, at the wedding described above why didn't you just check whose names were listed on the invitation????

jenijoyk · October 2014

You just reiterate the same thing, over and over! You don't actually respond to what other people are saying. You haven't actually explained why this particular rule is so important. In the example you give above, the wording of the invitation would not have helped you. At all. This is my entire point.

jenijoyk · October 2014

But while I have your attention, I am at this very moment printing out my escort cards. They are informal. "Jane and John Doe." Or should it be "John and Jane Doe"? Or do we list the name of the person we know best first?

This is a serious question. I am assuming there is a rule and you know it by heart.

CMGragain · October 2014

jenijoyk said:

You just reiterate the same thing, over and over! You don't actually respond to what other people are saying. You haven't actually explained why this particular rule is so important. In the example you give above, the wording of the invitation would not have helped you. At all. This is my entire point.

Look in the mirror.

CMGragain · October 2014

jenijoyk said:

CMGragain said:

I am sorry that you think that invitation tradition and etiquette no longer serve a purpose. Very few people will agree with you.
There is no way that I am ever going to advise anyone to do something that is not etiquette approved. If you really think etiquette and tradition are outmoded, this probably isn't a good board for you. There are plenty of other wedding websites that will tell you "It's your wedding! Do whatever you want!" which is the worst advice to give to a bride who is trying her best to do things properly.

I have attended over 100 weddings as a church organist and sometimes as a guest. I never will forget the wedding where nobody knew who was in charge. The different people in the family all pointed to each other when I actually had to ask for my fee. It was embarrassing.. The MOB was furious when I approached her. (She had requested my services.) She complained to the minister, who backed me up. The minister met with the family later in the week and got my check. I wonder how the venue did with those people? The next time they asked for permission to use the church for a wedding, they were told, "No." (They weren't church members.)
Yes, it is important to know who is hosting, and who is responsible.

I'm sorry, but I never said that all etiquette rules are outmoded.

Also, at the wedding described above why didn't you just check whose names were listed on the invitation????

Because I never received one. I was asked to play by the MOB, but she was not at the rehearsal. I was not a guest. Nobody seemed to know who was the host.

I'm done with you. Get your etiquette advice from someone else. OP, I'm sorry about this.

jenijoyk · October 2014

Thanks!

dolewhipper · October 2014

My step mother and mother are hosting my wedding. Their names are on the invitation. My mother, stepmother, myself and hopefully my FMIL would all agree that if a guest came to my FMIL and thanked them for a great wedding she would suggest thanking my mother and stepmother, as that pleasure belongs to them. If someone tried saying my (future) wedding was amazing due to my FMIL, although she is helping us financially, she is not hosting (aka taking care of our guests), I would correct them and tell them that it was all my mother and step mother's hosting.

If putting your IL's names on the invite a hill you're willing to die on, go right ahead and die on that hill. Some people aren't willing. Etiquette is defined as the customary code of polite behavior in society. All we are doing is stating what that code is and why. This rule is important because it's proper etiquette, and proper etiquette is deemed important on this board.

princessofgenovia · October 2014

I'm a terrible person clearly because I don't pay that much attention to invitations that come in. I look at the names "Oh John and Todd are getting married, awesome", then I look at the date, time, and place. It's a quick skim. So they could list their John's mom and Todd's dad at the hosts and I would probably not know that. I probably don't even know their parents at all, so before I leave the wedding I'll say goodbye to John and Todd.

However, listing a bunch of names seems really clunky. OP, you haven't weighed back in, but would "together with their families" be acceptable? Fitting in everyone's names seems like a lot of work. But I can also see this not being a hill you want to die on.

Jen4948 · October 2014

jenijoyk said:

Also, sorry, I'm not trying to be snarky. I just think it is really obvious that this etiquette rule no longer serves its purpose. And when rules no longer serve their purpose, there is just absolutely no reason to harp on them anymore. IMO.

Sorry, but I disagree that they don't serve any purpose. They serve all the purposes I outlined above, even if you choose not to see it that way.

So I am not going to stop advocating for following this etiquette rule. You can do whatever you like with your invitations; there's no police force that's going to stop you. But you do run the risk of people getting confused by who to approach and duplicative effort if they're supposed to come to you but they go to your parents because you "honored" them with the titles of hosts even if they are not functioning as hosts, all of which could have been avoided by not trying to use your invitation as a playbill, which is NOT its function.

PS-with 3 posts from you in response to mine, it seems to me that you are doing a fair share of "harping" yourself. Also, this forum does not advocate against rules of etiquette because one person thinks they're outdated and don't apply to her. They don't expire because one person finds them inconvenient.

biggrouch · October 2014

Also, this forum does not advocate against rules of etiquette because one person thinks they're outdated and don't apply to her.

Serious question -- does the forum officially advocate anything? Like is there a place where stuff is listed that the forum definitely agrees with (I always assumed even the stickies were kind of an informal thing, since the forum majority clearly disagrees strongly with the rest of the site)? Or is it just that the majority of long-time posters tend to agree with each other?

Jen4948 · October 2014

I don't know that the forum itself officially advocates anything, but if you want to know what we do and don't generally advocate, just lurk. That's why we lots of times mention something like, "Lurkers, now you know why X isn't a good idea" or something that takes the poster's issue to a more general level.

A majority of long-time posters do agree with each other. Plus, we often reference etiquette sources such as Miss Manners, though there are occasional differences there. But again, etiquette doesn't go away just because one person wants it to. Deviating from it when it isn't necessary does make people side-eye you and think less of you. We're trying to help the people who ask about it avoid that with our answers, so to have them thrown back at us with "you're stuffy, old-fashioned, nobody cares, my friends and family don't care, I did it anyway and it worked out great" are responses we really don't appreciate because they're not true, and whether or not it "worked out great," the fact is that it's still a breach of etiquette and someone may well be side-eying you over it even if they're too polite to say so directly.

Knottie10972591 · October 2014

Ok then, I feel better about my "Together with our families"!

Is it weird to put Groom's parents' names as hosts on the Rehearsal Dinner invite when no parents' names have been mentioned on the regular invite?

southernbelle0915 · October 2014

Knottie10972591 said:

Ok then, I feel better about my "Together with our families"!

Is it weird to put Groom's parents' names as hosts on the Rehearsal Dinner invite when no parents' names have been mentioned on the regular invite?

No, it's not weird. These are two separate events. If the groom's parents want to be listed on the RD invite, it's fine.

biggrouch · October 2014

Thanks @Jen4948 for the explanation. I have in the past vocally disagreed with certain etiquette things (sexist ones usually) and was concerned that I had violated some actual rule somewhere.

Side note, I have always found it a little bit disturbing that people on this forum so frequently use "you will be judged/thought less of by your guests" as a motivator. If the harm caused to other people by a certain etiquette "violation" is too small or non-existent on its own to be a convincing argument and you have to resort to this whole notion of the side-eye, then why does the rule need to exist in the first place? I suspect it's because the Knot's particular etiquette orthodoxy is not, in fact, JUST about avoiding harm to guests but also about following a certain social code that some people are extremely invested in maintaining. As for your not appreciating disagreement, well, that's just human I guess!

Jen4948 · October 2014

biggrouch said:

Thanks @Jen4948 for the explanation. I have in the past vocally disagreed with certain etiquette things (sexist ones usually) and was concerned that I had violated some actual rule somewhere.

Side note, I have always found it a little bit disturbing that people on this forum so frequently use "you will be judged/thought less of by your guests" as a motivator. If the harm caused to other people by a certain etiquette "violation" is too small or non-existent on its own to be a convincing argument and you have to resort to this whole notion of the side-eye, then why does the rule need to exist in the first place? I suspect it's because the Knot's particular etiquette orthodoxy is not, in fact, JUST about avoiding harm to guests but also about following a certain social code that some people are extremely invested in maintaining. As for your not appreciating disagreement, well, that's just human I guess!

The rule exists because etiquette involves thinking about the needs of other people and making sure they are properly attended to. If there's any harm or even the potential for it caused by something someone wants to do, then the rule is that you don't do it, in order to protect those persons and property involved from the harm. It's not about being invested in maintaining a social code so much as it is about respecting the feelings and well-being of others, and that involves protecting them from harm by not engaging in anything that would cause harm-even if the harm is likely to be small.

biggrouch · October 2014

Yes, agreed that etiquette should be about the needs of others. Which is why the "you might be side-eyed" argument is illogical, as you should be able to rely on "your guests will be harmed" reasoning for any given rule.

Jen4948 · October 2014

biggrouch said:
Yes, agreed that etiquette should be about the needs of others. Which is why the "you might be side-eyed" argument is illogical, as you should be able to rely on "your guests will be harmed" reasoning for any given rule.

Well, it seems to me that if anyone side-eyes you for breaching etiquette it is because you have harmed or even potentially harmed someone or something. It's sort of like a person who drives drunk being side-eyed for endangering others on the road whether or not it's against the law to drive while drunk and whether or not the driver actually harmed anyone.

People do think less of people who willingly and knowingly break rules that are supposed to protect others from harm, regardless of whether the harm actually happens and what kind of harm it is. That person violated rules for their own benefit without regard for the needs of others. Yeah, that's going to result in side-eying and unwillingness to have anything to do with that person in the future, which can be a serious consequence-and which I think is logical.

biggrouch · October 2014

I think the idea that putting your parents on an invitation when they are not the hosts is going to actually harm anyone has been effectively demolished by someone else, so I won't repeat it. But I do think it's a bit icky/melodramatic to compare "improperly" (allegedly) worded wedding invites to drunk drivers. Drunk drivers shouldn't be side-eyed. They should be freaking thrown in jail!

Anyway, I personally wouldn't give a shit if someone side-eyed me for breaking a rule that I didn't believe would hurt anyone. In fact I'd kind of judge them for judging me. But I'd feel horrible if I hurt someone's feelings accidentally. And frankly I think my priorities are in excellent order on that front.

And yeah I know, I'm starting to "harp," so I'll retreat to my cave now.

Jen4948 · October 2014

Well, you asked why there are etiquette rules and why they should be followed and given an answer. The rules exist for the reasons given and you agreed that they are about not causing harm. But the idea that putting non-hosting people's names on the invitation to "honor" them doesn't cause harm isn't the case; nor does that mean other etiquette rules don't apply. I mentioned above that it wastes time, a non-renewable resource for people to bring something up to the parents, who are not hosting, only to be told that they are not the people to speak to and to speak to the couple about it. You might not see that as "harm" but the time spent having to talk to two sets of people because misleading information was provided about who to contact was provided is still harm. And it certainly doesn't justify other breaches of etiquette that take place because you think they are "harmless." On the contrary, there may be harm done that you just aren't told about. That's not the same as "harmless" or justification for breaching etiquette in the first place. The rules, while not existing for your personal inconvenience, also don't exist for your personal convenience. Whether or not you think you are doing no harm by breaching etiquette isn't relevant. Breaking rules for your personal benefit isn't polite at best and can be extraordinarily harmful at worst. That's why they apply to everyone-including you.

CMGragain · October 2014

Mr. and Mrs. XXXX
requests the honour of your presence
at the marriage of their daughter
XXXX
to
XXXX
son of Mr. and Mrs. XXXX
Saturday, the twenty-sixth of November
two thousand five
at three o'clock
Christ Church
Rochester, New York

I'm sorry, but there are so many mistakes on your example, I just have to post again. Never use abbreviations on a wedding invitation. Never use zip codes on a wedding invitation. This format names the bride's parents as hosts, but they are NOT hosting. No "and" in the year. There is also a grammar error - request, not requests.

For heaven's sake, the company you are recommending for American/Canadian etiquette is located in India! Try taking advice from a reputable source that has been giving wedding etiquette advice for more than 200 years - like Crane's.

biggrouch · October 2014

@Jen4948, I realize I said I was leaving the thread, but just to clarify, this post was not about me. These aren't my invitations under discussion. You have absolutely no way of knowing what my invitations will say nor what etiquette "rules" (scare quotes HEAVILY intended) I plan on breaking, so there's no need for all the lecturing. If you're curious: I plan to address every woman by her first and last name unless requested otherwise, GASP. Also there might be five to ten minutes between my ceremony ending and the reception starting. But I don't expect my invitations will list anyone who couldn't be considered as a host, so yeah. There's no need to get personal.

And I definitely did NOT ask why there are etiquette rules and why they should be followed. I said there was only ONE reason to follow any purported "rule" -- to avoid foreseeable harm; and I pointed out the illogic inherent in using the "you will be side-eyed" argument. If you don't see the contradiction there, fine, but jeez, at least try to read the posts before lecturing the poster.

biggrouch · October 2014

Oh, and shouldn't it be:

Mr. and Mrs. (or Ms.

) XX

*request* the honor of your presence

?

Just saying.

--Oh JK, CMGragain already pointed that out, sorry

Jen4948 · October 2014

biggrouch said:

@Jen4948, I realize I said I was leaving the thread, but just to clarify, this post was not about me. These aren't my invitations under discussion. You have absolutely no way of knowing what my invitations will say nor what etiquette "rules" (scare quotes HEAVILY intended) I plan on breaking, so there's no need for all the lecturing. If you're curious: I plan to address every woman by her first and last name unless requested otherwise, GASP. Also there might be five to ten minutes between my ceremony ending and the reception starting. But I don't expect my invitations will list anyone who couldn't be considered as a host, so yeah. There's no need to get personal.

And I definitely did NOT ask why there are etiquette rules and why they should be followed. I said there was only ONE reason to follow any purported "rule" -- to avoid foreseeable harm; and I pointed out the illogic inherent in using the "you will be side-eyed" argument. If you don't see the contradiction there, fine, but jeez, at least try to read the posts before lecturing the poster.

Take your own advice before you offer it. And when it comes to etiquette, sorry. I'm not going to stop advocating for the following of correct etiquette.

Grow up and get over the fact that others may not agree with you. FYI, I read every fucking word of each of your posts before I replied to them. It is childish of you to assume that someone hasn't just because they don't agree with you.

biggrouch · October 2014

Uh, yeah. I just reread my posts and found that I did write a rhetorical question like "Why would a rule need to exist if the only consequence for breaking it is being judged?" My mistake: I should have clarified that I was not asking a serious question there, but making a rhetorical point, instead of implying you hadn't read my posts. I honestly didn't realize it could be read that way until rereading the thread today and so I thought you were putting words in my mouth.

Oh and believe me, if I weren't perfectly fine being disagreed with, I'd go post on other websites.

spglsp · November 2014

I'm learning so much in this thread! Both sets of parents in my wedding are hosts and appropriately acknowledged as such on the invitations and when I think about it, yes, they are also the point people for family who need extra guidance. I would probably be bothered if someone who hadn't contributed in any way wanted to be listed as a host, parent or not

cbus13 · November 2014

This thread is cracking me up! Honestly, it's a wedding where everyone is hoping you and your fiance have the best and happiest day of your life! On my invitation, I included both my parents and his, even though my parents are paying for everything. Oh and I pre-addressed the RSVP envelope to be sent to my house, so I could keep track of all the responses. Maybe I am throwing etiquette to the wind, but I don't think my guests will be peering over my card criticizing and looking for etiquette mistakes. I just hope they find my invitation beautiful and get the time/date/location of the event!

Jen4948 · November 2014

HReis13 said:

This thread is cracking me up! Honestly, it's a wedding where everyone is hoping you and your fiance have the best and happiest day of your life! On my invitation, I included both my parents and his, even though my parents are paying for everything. Oh and I pre-addressed the RSVP envelope to be sent to my house, so I could keep track of all the responses. Maybe I am throwing etiquette to the wind, but I don't think my guests will be peering over my card criticizing and looking for etiquette mistakes. I just hope they find my invitation beautiful and get the time/date/location of the event!

So what that your parents are paying for anything? Why is that any of the guests' business?

Answer: it isn't.

What is is who is greeting them and making sure their needs are taken care of. If that isn't your parents, you didn't do your guests (or for that matter, your parents) any favors by misdirecting your guests just because you were so into "honoring" your parents using the wrong method.

Edited to add: If you're worried that your guests won't get the time/date/location of the event, then you clearly misunderstand the purpose of wedding invitations and focused on stuff that didn't belong there. The basic time/date/information is what guests need the most-not to know who your parents are (presumably they already know), who's paying how much for what (which they don't need to know), or how much "in love" and how much "joy you take in your marriage" which is built into sending a wedding invitation to begin with.

southernbelle0915 · November 2014

HReis13 said:
This thread is cracking me up! Honestly, it's a wedding where everyone is hoping you and your fiance have the best and happiest day of your life! On my invitation, I included both my parents and his, even though my parents are paying for everything. Oh and I pre-addressed the RSVP envelope to be sent to my house, so I could keep track of all the responses. Maybe I am throwing etiquette to the wind, but I don't think my guests will be peering over my card criticizing and looking for etiquette mistakes. I just hope they find my invitation beautiful and get the time/date/location of the event!

The purpose of a wedding invitation is not a family tree or to denote who is whose kid or whatever. You do know that, right?

It's meant to tell guests who is getting married, when and where, and who is hosting the wedding. Hosting =\= paying so if your FI's parents are also hosting, then you did the right thing. If neither sets of parents are actually hosting (I.e. your parents are just bank rolling it), then your invitations are incorrect. It's not mean, it's just a fact.

redoryx · November 2014

spglsp said:

I'm learning so much in this thread! Both sets of parents in my wedding are hosts and appropriately acknowledged as such on the invitations and when I think about it, yes, they are also the point people for family who need extra guidance. I would probably be bothered if someone who hadn't contributed in any way wanted to be listed as a host, parent or not

Host =/= Financial contributor. So it really is entirely possibly to have someone listed as a host who didn't give money. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Often, yes, they overlap but they are still two different responsibilities.

Edited to add: you had it right the sentence before, the "point people" for the event. THOSE are the hosts, regardless of what financial support they offered.

Jen4948 · December 2014

Knottie04752293 said:
In the spirit of Christian joy
Bride’s Parents
and
Groom’s Parents
invite you to share in the joy
of the marriage uniting their children
Bride’s name
and
Mr. Groom’s name
on WEEKDAY, the DAY of MONTH
YEAR
at TIME TIME PERIOD
address

Nope.

Both sets of parents ate listed only if they are hosts-not to "honor" them. The only persons "honored" by a wedding invitation are the guests. The invitation is not a playbill or a family tree.

Also, nothing about "joy," or "sharing in joy," Christian or otherwise. Traditionally, if the parents or couple has to announce how "joyous" the occasion is supposed to be, it's a signal that something is wrong, like an unplanned pregnancy. And nowadays, it just comes off as too braggy and AWish.

HELP!! How do I word it when we are hosting it but both parents wants their names on the invites?

Re: HELP!! How do I word it when we are hosting it but both parents wants their names on the invites?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards