Etiquette Hell

General Etiquette => Life...in general => Topic started by: Mammavan3 on April 07, 2013, 02:09:32 PM

Title: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 07, 2013, 02:09:32 PM
There were a few comments on the subject thread that echoed my feelings on choosing a date/location for a wedding, namely that the B & G are free to choose a time and place that is important to them but the guests can infer from those choices just how important their attendance is to the HC.

My situation. A first cousin once removed announced his engagement last spring. He told us at that time that they were going to try to schedule the wedding in August of this year. This is a person of whom we are very fond and who has visited us often.

The areas of concern:

The wedding will be on the opposite coast from a large percentage of his relatives, including us, and will entail at least a full day's travel. They scheduled the wedding for a Thursday this September. This makes attending difficult for several groups of people.  His aunt and SIL both teach in universities and my SIL teaches middle school, and the date is the second week of school, midway between the two Jewish holidays, which makes it difficult to find people to cover your classes. Additionally, at least two of his first cousins are in grad school, in research programs which frown on absences. His nieces and nephews are also in school.

The wedding will be at a state park on an island. There are cabins available, but I've been told that all seven of the cabins with bathrooms were booked before the save-the-date cards were sent out; the rest have "nearby" facilities. I've learned that there are some B&Bs on the island, but no one has given any information about which ones are close by or desirable.

The STD cards!  Ours was addressed to Moma and Pappa (wrong spelling of my name, no last name), at the wrong street number. These people are not kids; he's almost 40. If I hadn't bee outside when the mailman came so he could check with me, we probably wouldn't have gotten it.

When DD was married, we booked a block of rooms at a nearby hotel and provided a bus to and from the reception. We hired a baby-sitter (a friend of DD who worked in child care) for anyone who wanted one, provided lunch before the wedding as well as a brunch the morning after and a hospitality suite with refreshments as a place to gather and socialize if anyone wanted to do so. We did all this and more because we were so happy that these people had made the effort to attend the wedding and sharing this day with them was important to us.

The message I'm getting is that having their wedding at a special place was more important to the B&G than having us attend. It will cost us quite a good bit of money to fly across the country, rent a car, etc., and I wonder if the message they're sending is that they really don't care if we're there or not.

Am I misreading this?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Amara on April 07, 2013, 02:15:25 PM
I don't think you are misreading it, but neither do I think that because you did all that for your wedding guests--and it was very generous of you--that anything less is impolite on their parts.

Personally, I wouldn't worry about any "message" they may or may not be sending and just think only about whether I could afford, and would want to, spend the time and money to attend.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 07, 2013, 02:31:41 PM
I don't think there is a message.  The couple has decided for their own reasons this is how they want their wedding day.  The only thing I can see that would be rude or off putting is if they complained and whined when people RSVP 'no' due to it being on a weekday during the school year.  I think a couple should possibly take into consideration their parents/siblings schedules, but all and all, it is the HC's wedding and their choice to do it how they want, as it is your choice as to whether you can go or not. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Poppea on April 07, 2013, 02:39:22 PM
No you have read it correctly.  Having family attend the wedding is secondary to the location and date they desire.  If having family attend was a priority, they would have done more to accommodate relatives traveling across the country.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 07, 2013, 02:42:14 PM
I don't think there's necessarily a message.  Maybe they didn't even expect people to want to fly across the country for their wedding in the first place -- particularly the relatives in grad school, even if it were in the summer they may not have had attending a wedding in their budget.

You chose to do your wedding differently, and it's great that you were able to accommodate people because that was important to you.  But that doesn't mean that your relatives are wrong or rude to want and plan for a smaller wedding than you did. 

If you want to attend and can afford the time and money, great -- go ahead.  If not, send them your congratulations. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 07, 2013, 02:54:29 PM
I certainly don't expect others to provide the same level of hospitality that we extended, but neither do I think that giving some thought to accommodating your guests is too much to expect. Those who stay in the cabins, both those with and without bath facilities, will need to provide their own sheets, blankets, pillows, towels, dishes, etc., which is obviously impossible if you are flying.

And they do have every reason to expect everyone will attend their wedding. A few years ago everyone flew to another continent for his brother's wedding, and we've all gone to his other brother and sister's weddings, which involved interstate travel, if not quite this distance. 

We can afford this trip and do have the time for it, but wonder making it difficult for your guests to attend is a way to keep peace in the family by inviting everyone when you don't want them there or care if they attend.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 07, 2013, 03:04:41 PM
It seems to me as though they simply want a different type of wedding than you're used to.  That doesn't make them wrong or rude. 

If you won't enjoy going, then don't go.  Or if you want to go and don't want to sleep in a cabin, ask about the B&Bs you mentioned in your first post.   

They're not doing anything rude here unless the bride and groom get upset that family members turn down the invitation.  I'd be surprised if they did -- maybe they want a low-key, small wedding, but wanted to make sure that family members were included if they were the type to enjoy a wedding in a state park and accommodation in cabins or B&Bs.   (I know I'd enjoy this couple's plan more than staying in a hotel, personally.)
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 07, 2013, 03:23:36 PM
It seems to me as though they simply want a different type of wedding than you're used to.  That doesn't make them wrong or rude. 

If you won't enjoy going, then don't go.  Or if you want to go and don't want to sleep in a cabin, ask about the B&Bs you mentioned in your first post.   

They're not doing anything rude here unless the bride and groom get upset that family members turn down the invitation.  I'd be surprised if they did -- maybe they want a low-key, small wedding, but wanted to make sure that family members were included if they were the type to enjoy a wedding in a state park and accommodation in cabins or B&Bs.   (I know I'd enjoy this couple's plan more than staying in a hotel, personally.)

It's not really a question of "enjoying" this type of wedding, but more a question of logistics. If we were able to secure a cabin with bath facilities (those of us of a certain age make frequent visits to the facilities at night and wending one's way to a "nearby" facility, possibly in the rain, isn't really an option), we'd still be faced with the problem of using our limited luggage allotment for bedding, towels, dishes, etc., or purchasing these things there and then discarding them. (A possible wedding gift? ;))

I never said I think their plans are rude, nor do I think they are, but, as you have said, that they want a small, low-key wedding and would prefer that few guests attend. That was the message I got and wondered if others saw it that way too.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: rigs32 on April 07, 2013, 03:33:05 PM
I also think it's not fair to say that there's a certain norm for the family and expect all members of that family to subscribe to that norm. 

As an example, my SO's family gets together very often.  They are often confused why we cannot attend every event, but we have lots of friends that we make plans with.  Much of the family only socializes with family.  We aren't going to change to their norm and they shouldn't expect us to.  The same with this wedding.  You may be disappointed it is inconvenient, but you get to decide whether to attend or not, on the terms of the invitation extended.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Allyson on April 07, 2013, 03:36:07 PM
I think reading a message into it is..well, understandable, but maybe overall not helpful. to me, 'message' implies they deliberately thought 'We don't care about guests, we care about venue' and that probably wasn't the case. In my experience, people just don't think that way. It was more likely to be 'Oh, this sounds like a wonderful venue, we would love this type of wedding!'

If it's logistically bad for you to go, then the couple certainly can't offended when you don't. Maybe they do want a small, low-key wedding, or maybe they didn't put too much thought into it. It comes up frequently on this forum that different people see weddings very differently.

But, I personally just don't think looking for the message is likely to be useful for anyone, as the message directly sent to you was 'come to our wedding if you can' by inviting you. What would be the purpose of looking for anything else? Do you feel maybe perhaps they don't really want you there?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: delabela on April 07, 2013, 03:42:09 PM
Full disclosure - my wedding was where I and my SO lived at the time, a plane ride away for almost all family members on both sides.  This was not typical in my family, but for various reasons was what we chose.

I don't think there is any message being sent.  They've planned an event they will enjoy, and presumably think their guests will enjoy.  If you won't enjoy it, don't go.  From your first post, it sounds like you are making some assumptions about accommodations without checking out or inquiring about all of what's available - the B&Bs you mentioned.

It strikes me as looking for offense to take away that they don't value your company. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Shoo on April 07, 2013, 03:43:40 PM
I doubt they intended any kind of "message" but I do think their intent is clear.  They want what they want, and that's their priority.  As someone who got married later than most people tend to, I found myself not really caring how our plans affected anyone else.  If they were able to come, great!  If not, great!  Not really concerned one way or the other.  The important thing to us was that we were getting married, and doing it our way.  Maybe that's how your cousin feels? 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: TootsNYC on April 07, 2013, 03:57:51 PM
I really don't think they're sending a pointed message to you. I think that's actually a teeny bit conceited, to think that your NON-attendance matters so much that they'd deliberately make choices to make it hard for you.

I do think it's true that if they had to choose between
  1)  guaranteeing that you'll all be there by making it really easy for everyone to attend; and
  2) having their wedding at a place they really will enjoy;
that #2 is their pick.

That doesn't translate into a deliberate snub, or an insult, or a rejection of you.

Maybe having everyone at their wedding is just not that big a deal to them. And it's not a reflection of your importance in their lives; they can really value you and still think that it's not important to have you there on THAT day; they'll see you the next time it works out, and value/love you just as much (and expect that you will feel the same way about them). It may be more about how important the WEDDING is in their lives, or perhaps how important they thing THEIR wedding is (or ought to be) in YOUR life. It's *their* wedding, perhaps they think; you're just audience, so why would you care so much?

It may even be more about the idea that the wedding is for THEM, and not for all the other family members.

So, yes, the underlying truth is that having everyone at their wedding just doesn't matter that much. But that is NOT the same as "a message being sent to us."


(It is also true that many, many people will say, "we'll have a destination wedding and then we don't have to invite everyone, or we can invite them but they won't come bcs it's so far. That's how we'll keep the guest list down." People say that--in my old job, I used to hear from brides and grooms, and some of them said that. But that doesn't mean you would be accurate to decide that it's a deliberate snub.
   For one thing, the world is full of peripheral relatives who act as though their cousin's wedding should be all about them. A difficult-to-attend wedding means that the relative, will have to send a message TO THEM about how important *they* truly are to that relative. It sort of works out to be an informal test.)
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Hmmmmm on April 07, 2013, 04:08:18 PM
I think reading a message into it is..well, understandable, but maybe overall not helpful. to me, 'message' implies they deliberately thought 'We don't care about guests, we care about venue' and that probably wasn't the case. In my experience, people just don't think that way. It was more likely to be 'Oh, this sounds like a wonderful venue, we would love this type of wedding!'

If it's logistically bad for you to go, then the couple certainly can't offended when you don't. Maybe they do want a small, low-key wedding, or maybe they didn't put too much thought into it. It comes up frequently on this forum that different people see weddings very differently.

But, I personally just don't think looking for the message is likely to be useful for anyone, as the message directly sent to you was 'come to our wedding if you can' by inviting you. What would be the purpose of looking for anything else? Do you feel maybe perhaps they don't really want you there?

But at some point after thinking "this is a greats venue." They've would have thought "if cross country, less family can attend but I'm ok with that because we prefer small wedding."

I don't see where that is trying to send a message. But it's is clearly indicating what type of wedding they want. And it's not one with a large attendance of family and friends who live in the other side of the country.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LadyL on April 07, 2013, 04:10:10 PM
A Thursday in the off season with campground cabins being the main accommodation screams "we are trying to do something personalized on a budget" to me. Having looked into that sort of option, I will say that Thursdays are usually the cheapest days for venues and parks or other public facilities tend to be a fraction of the cost of a private venue. The accommodations sound like they will be quite inexpensive, if there are shared bathrooms. It is also an event that sounds geared a bit towards younger people who are maybe okay forgoing some creature comforts.

It is not as if "having the whole family there" definitely isn't on their priority list - it might just be below "having a wedding that costs under X  thousand  dollars" and "having a more personalized venue than the local Elk's lodge."
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 07, 2013, 04:11:12 PM
Full disclosure - my wedding was where I and my SO lived at the time, a plane ride away for almost all family members on both sides.  This was not typical in my family, but for various reasons was what we chose.

I don't think there is any message being sent.  They've planned an event they will enjoy, and presumably think their guests will enjoy.  If you won't enjoy it, don't go.  From your first post, it sounds like you are making some assumptions about accommodations without checking out or inquiring about all of what's available - the B&Bs you mentioned.

It strikes me as looking for offense to take away that they don't value your company.

What an interesting assumption.

i have indeed explored the B&B options and spent several hours doing so. I even attempted to call the one I found most appealing and had the accommodations we need, only to find that the phone is disconnected and their on-line booking service inoperable.  When I asked for other suggestions and opinions, the B&G were not able to give us any.

There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting.  It is the fact that they seem to be doing everything to make it difficult to attend. I know that his siblings and parents pointed out how difficult his choices were making it for them before the plans were finalized.

I don't think it's looking for offense to think that people who knowingly make it difficult for you to attend don't really care if you attend or prefer a smaller, low-key wedding.  I'm somewhat disappointed since we've always been close to him and spent a good deal of time together, even meeting up with us Europe when we were there for his DB's wedding, but I certainly would not be offended if he prefers a smaller, more intimate wedding. I just think that he feels that this is a better way to achieve that without insulting us by not extending an invitation at all.

And they did tell one aunt (the one who teaches at two universities) that they would never speak to her again if she didn't attend - jokingly, of course.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sweetonsno on April 07, 2013, 05:04:53 PM
I really don't think they're sending a pointed message to you. I think that's actually a teeny bit conceited, to think that your NON-attendance matters so much that they'd deliberately make choices to make it hard for you.

I do think it's true that if they had to choose between
  1)  guaranteeing that you'll all be there by making it really easy for everyone to attend; and
  2) having their wedding at a place they really will enjoy;
that #2 is their pick.

That doesn't translate into a deliberate snub, or an insult, or a rejection of you.

Maybe having everyone at their wedding is just not that big a deal to them. And it's not a reflection of your importance in their lives; they can really value you and still think that it's not important to have you there on THAT day; they'll see you the next time it works out, and value/love you just as much (and expect that you will feel the same way about them). It may be more about how important the WEDDING is in their lives, or perhaps how important they thing THEIR wedding is (or ought to be) in YOUR life. It's *their* wedding, perhaps they think; you're just audience, so why would you care so much?

It may even be more about the idea that the wedding is for THEM, and not for all the other family members.

So, yes, the underlying truth is that having everyone at their wedding just doesn't matter that much. But that is NOT the same as "a message being sent to us."


(It is also true that many, many people will say, "we'll have a destination wedding and then we don't have to invite everyone, or we can invite them but they won't come bcs it's so far. That's how we'll keep the guest list down." People say that--in my old job, I used to hear from brides and grooms, and some of them said that. But that doesn't mean you would be accurate to decide that it's a deliberate snub.
   For one thing, the world is full of peripheral relatives who act as though their cousin's wedding should be all about them. A difficult-to-attend wedding means that the relative, will have to send a message TO THEM about how important *they* truly are to that relative. It sort of works out to be an informal test.)

POD, especially to the bolded. Inivtees aren't the only one with schedule and budget constraints.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: delabela on April 07, 2013, 05:08:05 PM


The wedding will be at a state park on an island. There are cabins available, but I've been told that all seven of the cabins with bathrooms were booked before the save-the-date cards were sent out; the rest have "nearby" facilities. I've learned that there are some B&Bs on the island, but no one has given any information about which ones are close by or desirable.



My assumption was based on what you told us in your original post, which did not indicated you had actually attempted to contact these places.  I appreciate the additional information clarifying that you are attempting to look into the available resources. 

I'm sorry you are hurt by the choices they have made for their wedding (I know tone is difficult to convey in writing - please know that I mean that sincerely).  For the future of the relationship, if I was in your shoes, I would assume there were reasons other than they didn't value my company.  A wedding is one day, the relationships are forever.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Cami on April 07, 2013, 05:23:25 PM
I doubt anyone has gotten through a major social event like a wedding without making someone angry or feel unwelcome, even if one is trying their hardest and done as much research as possible.

I certainly don't expect others to provide the same level of hospitality that we extended, but neither do I think that giving some thought to accommodating your guests is too much to expect. Those who stay in the cabins, both those with and without bath facilities, will need to provide their own sheets, blankets, pillows, towels, dishes, etc., which is obviously impossible if you are flying.

And they do have every reason to expect everyone will attend their wedding. A few years ago everyone flew to another continent for his brother's wedding, and we've all gone to his other brother and sister's weddings, which involved interstate travel, if not quite this distance.

We can afford this trip and do have the time for it, but wonder making it difficult for your guests to attend is a way to keep peace in the family by inviting everyone when you don't want them there or care if they attend.
Given the bolded, I'm betting that this couple is assuming that since they are not asking people to fly to another continent -- big time and money expenditures -- they are being thoughtful and considerate in comparison. They don't sound like they know how to be the most efficient or hospitable hosts, but that doesn't make them bad, just ignorant.

If this guy were close to me, I'd probably call him up and ask him for advice. That would be a good way to let him know that guests are having trouble actually attending his wedding. Maybe you'll find out that he doesn't care and if so, then you can cheerfully send your regrets and stop spending time trying to make this event work. Or maybe you'll find out that he's been a bonehead and he's aghast at how he screwed up.

 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 07, 2013, 05:33:17 PM
Full disclosure - my wedding was where I and my SO lived at the time, a plane ride away for almost all family members on both sides.  This was not typical in my family, but for various reasons was what we chose.

I don't think there is any message being sent.  They've planned an event they will enjoy, and presumably think their guests will enjoy.  If you won't enjoy it, don't go.  From your first post, it sounds like you are making some assumptions about accommodations without checking out or inquiring about all of what's available - the B&Bs you mentioned.

It strikes me as looking for offense to take away that they don't value your company.

What an interesting assumption.

i have indeed explored the B&B options and spent several hours doing so. I even attempted to call the one I found most appealing and had the accommodations we need, only to find that the phone is disconnected and their on-line booking service inoperable.  When I asked for other suggestions and opinions, the B&G were not able to give us any.

There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting.  It is the fact that they seem to be doing everything to make it difficult to attend. I know that his siblings and parents pointed out how difficult his choices were making it for them before the plans were finalized.

I don't think it's looking for offense to think that people who knowingly make it difficult for you to attend don't really care if you attend or prefer a smaller, low-key wedding. I'm somewhat disappointed since we've always been close to him and spent a good deal of time together, even meeting up with us Europe when we were there for his DB's wedding, but I certainly would not be offended if he prefers a smaller, more intimate wedding. I just think that he feels that this is a better way to achieve that without insulting us by not extending an invitation at all.

And they did tell one aunt (the one who teaches at two universities) that they would never speak to her again if she didn't attend - jokingly, of course.
[/quote
You are reading way too much into this by saying they knowingly made it too hard. Should they wait till the person in college is done?  Or find a place that may cost more to insure that the guests have accommodations that are up to the guests standards?  They may not have the time or money to do this any other way,  they may have a special attraction to this spot and this is the only time they could get it, or many of other millions of reasons that make sense to them.  Maybe they have agonized knowing that this may mean some family members may not make it, but they had to weigh the options and this is what worked best for them.  I have missed out of town weddings for some beloved relatives because I could not afford the travel and accommodations and not once did I get angry at the couple because of their choice.  The wedding is about the couple, period.  It is nice when you can have all your loved ones around to help celebrate, but sometimes, it just isn't to be.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Miss Tickle on April 07, 2013, 05:40:26 PM
Your post makes me feel terrible all over again, because my MIL is a (Impolite word) who holds grudges and thinks of her #1 son first of all things.  She asked us to move our wedding because #1 Son had planned his vacation for the same time.  What I didn't realise at the time was she suggested we move it to a date her brother and sister in law (and their two kids) would be unable to attend. I hadn't met them, but there was some long standing feud. I guess my DH didn't want to cause any fuss, so he didn't say anything to me, but I could tell he was disappointed.

Now I wish I asked more questions or pushed more for what we wanted.  The family we cut out, and really that's what my MIL did, have turned out to be some of my closest "Family" for the last 10-15+ years. They were crushed we chose that time-frame as it made it impossible to attend, a fact MIL knew and didn't tell me. The sacred vacation for which we had to reschedule was BIL's fourth or fifth trip to Vegas that year, and he didn't know his mother asked us to move the wedding for him.

Had I known then what I know now I would have done things differently, but there's no way I can go back and fix it.

It sounds like the B&G are trying to limit the guests by putting constraints on the attendability of the venue, or they just really don't care and want to do things their way. I mean really, a place where people have to leave to go to the bathroom sounds self-limiting.   Is there anyone you can ask and see which way the wind blows?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: artk2002 on April 07, 2013, 06:38:30 PM
I think that it does send a very clear message. Whether they intend it or not, the HC are making it clear that they value something, whether it's the location or the value or whatever, over the attendance of some of their invitees and the comfort of others. That is their choice and that, in and of itself, isn't rude. But it does tell the OP and others where they stand relative to other things in the HC's lives. The invitees are free to send a message back to the HC in a similar fashion: That their relationship with the HC is (or is not) worth the expense or discomfort. All of our interactions with each other send messages, all the time.

I will say that I hope that it is intended -- that the HC made the conscious decision that whatever factor(s) made this location and date appealing were more important than other factors, like the ability of friends and relatives to attend. Too often couples make this kind of decision without thought and to me that's worse. All they can think of is having that special place or date and don't even consider that it causes problems for others.

A host can have the kind of event that they want; a good host balances that with consideration for their guests.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: HannahGrace on April 07, 2013, 06:51:15 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 07, 2013, 06:57:38 PM
Why should the day that two people pledge their lives to each other be about the guests and what is most convenient to them?  Yes, their choice of date and location makes it difficult for some, but an invitation is not a summons, right?  I have gone to weddings that have raised my eyebrows up so far they were in the back of my head, but I would never say "this is not what I would do, this is not how I did my wedding so this isn't right."  I would just accept this is what the couple wanted/could afford.  If you love them, be happy for them that they are getting married instead of whispering among the family how they aren't doing it right.  I bet they do want you all there, but maybe this is the best they can/want to do and to judge their love for you based on their wedding plans that you find less than ideal is kind of rude on the guests part.   My  former
MIL tried to get me to change things to suit her tastes and her family members (many who we did not even know) so badly that we ended up giving up and eloped with just my BF, her husband and my sister because we decided our commitment wasn't about making everyone happy by catering to the guests wishes,  but it was about us. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Allyson on April 07, 2013, 07:10:11 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

These threads always make me feel that way! The idea that every interaction, especially to do with a wedding, is sending a message is quite alarming, especially taking into consideration different social norms, different family traditions, and so on. It just seems so easy to accidentally say 'I don't care about you' to someone, when that wasn't the intent at all--and when someone does choose to have a small wedding, there is often that tone of 'well, if they *want* to choose their comfort/finance over their family, that's their choice...'.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 07, 2013, 07:11:50 PM
I think that it does send a very clear message. Whether they intend it or not, the HC are making it clear that they value something, whether it's the location or the value or whatever, over the attendance of some of their invitees and the comfort of others. That is their choice and that, in and of itself, isn't rude. But it does tell the OP and others where they stand relative to other things in the HC's lives.

The bolded in particular really crystalized what I don't get about this thread: Why is a wedding the sum total of statements about the couple's relationships?

It's one day that is not exactly how you would prefer it.  The rest of your relationship with the couple over the years (past and future) doesn't disappear and isn't invalidated because it's difficult to attend their wedding and because it isn't as guest-focused as you might like. 

To some people, the wedding is about two people pledging their love for each other, in the manner that makes them happy and comfortable rather than about placating and including their entire extended family.  Perhaps nature is something that brought this couple together, and so celebrating at a state park is more true to their relationship than celebrating at a nice hotel would be.  That doesn't mean they don't love and value their family. 

As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

These threads always make me feel that way! The idea that every interaction, especially to do with a wedding, is sending a message is quite alarming, especially taking into consideration different social norms, different family traditions, and so on. It just seems so easy to accidentally say 'I don't care about you' to someone, when that wasn't the intent at all--and when someone does choose to have a small wedding, there is often that tone of 'well, if they *want* to choose their comfort/finance over their family, that's their choice...'.

I agree.  I don't understand why, if you love your family members, it's so important to see out offence in everything they do
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: violinp on April 07, 2013, 07:13:47 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: artk2002 on April 07, 2013, 07:50:48 PM
I think that it does send a very clear message. Whether they intend it or not, the HC are making it clear that they value something, whether it's the location or the value or whatever, over the attendance of some of their invitees and the comfort of others. That is their choice and that, in and of itself, isn't rude. But it does tell the OP and others where they stand relative to other things in the HC's lives.

The bolded in particular really crystalized what I don't get about this thread: Why is a wedding the sum total of statements about the couple's relationships?

It's not about the sum total of the relationship. In this one context, some things are more important than others. That's all. Many people would be upset at arrangements like these in the OP because they feel that their relationship with the HC is a better one than what is being shown.

Let's take an extreme example. Let's say my sister loves to sky dive so she wants to get married while jumping out of a plane. I'm an acrophobe and won't do it, so she's chosen that activity over my attendance. That's her choice and she isn't being rude, but she is telling me where I fit in the scheme of things - the parachute is more important than my attendance. Now, if someone were to chide me for not attending, that would be rude. Just as someone chiding the OP or anyone else for not attending the subject wedding would be rude.

People make these choices all the time. Someone who wants an expensive wedding may have a limited guest list. The people not invited are less important to the HC than having the quality of wedding that they want. There's nothing wrong with that in etiquette, but it does have relationship implications. We get our knickers in a twist here all the time when people try to have both the quality and quantity, but have to turn to pot lucks and wedding-party labor to achieve that. The acceptable alternative is to prioritize -- quality or quantity -- which is more important? In fact, I find this thread to be quite ironic. We have a HC who has chosen to prioritize, but those of us who point out that that's what the HC did are meeting with quite a bit of resistance.

Quote
To some people, the wedding is about two people pledging their love for each other, in the manner that makes them happy and comfortable rather than about placating and including their entire extended family.  Perhaps nature is something that brought this couple together, and so celebrating at a state park is more true to their relationship than celebrating at a nice hotel would be.  That doesn't mean they don't love and value their family. 

Nobody is saying that it isn't about two people declaring their love in a way that makes them happy and comfortable. But if the way that makes them happy and comfortable excludes many people who would like to celebrate with them and they would like to celebrate with, then it's telling those people that this specific thing that makes the HC happy and comfortable is more important than the other people.

I'm sorry that this is making folks uncomfortable, but it's a fact of human relationships. If you exclude someone, deliberately or inadvertently, you're telling them where they stand in relationship to you. The fact that it's a wedding doesn't make everything ok.

What bugs me, and I think other people, is the fact that the circumstances around this particular wedding make it exceptionally difficult for many of the invitees. I'm happy to put up with some discomfort, if that's what makes the HC happy.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: HannahGrace on April 07, 2013, 08:25:12 PM

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.

See, most of the weddings I've been to - including family weddings and friend weddings in which I was in the wedding party - did not have rehearsals, or rehearsal dinners.... so, this isn't something that I would do, and definitely not a mandatory wedding event to me.  Again, this goes to my point that there are many ways to celebrate and it would really make me sad to think that people I care about would feel slighted by choices my partner and I made or would take such choices as a reflection about how we feel about them.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 07, 2013, 08:36:31 PM
I'm sorry that this is making folks uncomfortable, but it's a fact of human relationships. If you exclude someone, deliberately or inadvertently, you're telling them where they stand in relationship to you. The fact that it's a wedding doesn't make everything ok.

Oh, it's not making me uncomfortable.  I simply disagree with you. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: artk2002 on April 07, 2013, 08:50:46 PM
I'm sorry that this is making folks uncomfortable, but it's a fact of human relationships. If you exclude someone, deliberately or inadvertently, you're telling them where they stand in relationship to you. The fact that it's a wedding doesn't make everything ok.

Oh, it's not making me uncomfortable.  I simply disagree with you.

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 07, 2013, 08:58:40 PM
I'm sorry that this is making folks uncomfortable, but it's a fact of human relationships. If you exclude someone, deliberately or inadvertently, you're telling them where they stand in relationship to you. The fact that it's a wedding doesn't make everything ok.

Oh, it's not making me uncomfortable.  I simply disagree with you.

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

I disagree that having a small wedding or a wedding in a location the couple prefers and that is meaningful to them says anything significant about their fondness for family members.  I think that deciding it does is too simplistic and is looking for offence, when being happy for the couple and sending them best wishes is the best way to handle the situation. 

Not everything is about you, and not everything makes a statement about you -- "you" in this scenario being the extended family members who are upset/offended. 

Just let the couple have the wedding that they feel best represents their love and themselves.  Everyone should be allowed that much without bringing family drama into it. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 07, 2013, 09:08:59 PM
The issue here is, the HC are NOT excluding people at all.  They sent people the save the dates, invitations will come out next.  Because due to some peoples preferences and schedules, some guests may not be able to come and others may have to seriously alter their lives for a weekend .  That is not the couples fault, nor is it an indication they are excluding people.  They want the wedding of THEIR dreams...that it doesn't fit what others want or the  need to make it easier on their guests to make it is not the couples issue.  I find it rude for anyone to dictate how the couple decides to have their day just because some might not like the location or it interferes with their work/school schedule or decide the couple just doesn't love them enough to do it like everyone else in the family has done it.  There are 2 families involved...his and his bride's and if they had to sit each guest down and decide what works for the guest, I would bet that there would be a problems trying to make everyone happy...on a day that you are supposed to be happy for them. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: MizA on April 07, 2013, 09:14:41 PM
I think that it does send a very clear message. Whether they intend it or not, the HC are making it clear that they value something, whether it's the location or the value or whatever, over the attendance of some of their invitees and the comfort of others. That is their choice and that, in and of itself, isn't rude. But it does tell the OP and others where they stand relative to other things in the HC's lives.

The bolded in particular really crystalized what I don't get about this thread: Why is a wedding the sum total of statements about the couple's relationships?

It's one day that is not exactly how you would prefer it.  The rest of your relationship with the couple over the years (past and future) doesn't disappear and isn't invalidated because it's difficult to attend their wedding and because it isn't as guest-focused as you might like. 

To some people, the wedding is about two people pledging their love for each other, in the manner that makes them happy and comfortable rather than about placating and including their entire extended family.  Perhaps nature is something that brought this couple together, and so celebrating at a state park is more true to their relationship than celebrating at a nice hotel would be.  That doesn't mean they don't love and value their family. 

As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

These threads always make me feel that way! The idea that every interaction, especially to do with a wedding, is sending a message is quite alarming, especially taking into consideration different social norms, different family traditions, and so on. It just seems so easy to accidentally say 'I don't care about you' to someone, when that wasn't the intent at all--and when someone does choose to have a small wedding, there is often that tone of 'well, if they *want* to choose their comfort/finance over their family, that's their choice...'.

I agree.  I don't understand why, if you love your family members, it's so important to see out offence in everything they do

POD to all of the above. Planning something as major as a wedding brings up all sorts of weird ideas about entitlement, and issues about family relationships.

Unless you've spoken directly to your relative to outline your concerns, it's best to not make assumptions about why they're doing things the way they are. To come perfectly clean, I'm planning a wedding right now- we're about 5 weeks out. And, well, we're a little older, and are choosing to do it in a manner which we'll enjoy and suits us- After all, we're both adults who've been living independently for a loooong time, and we're paying for our wedding ourselves. While we did make sure our date was ok with our immediate families, we absolutely didn't check with the rest of our family members. Nor would it occur to us to do so. After all, we don't run other major decisions by them, and it has no bearing on our relationships with them.

If you're really upset, call him and talk to him about it. If you don't feel you can, then are you as close to him as you claim?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: gramma dishes on April 07, 2013, 09:16:16 PM
If everyone in the family flew to another continent for his brother's wedding, I would imagine that this bride and groom think they're having a relatively low key wedding that could accommodate more people, not fewer.  There are a lot of people who could drive or fly across country who wouldn't even consider being able to attend a wedding on a different continent!

I think the bride and groom are having the wedding of their dreams and they don't have to consider what any or everyone else might find more acceptable.  No matter what kind of wedding they have or when and where it takes place, it will be inconvenient for someone. Probably lots of someones. 

My guess is that yes, they know a certain number of people won't be able to attend.  That happens.  But I certainly don't think it means they're trying to imply that they don't want certain people to come or that they don't care about them.  They just know they can't possibly please everyone and so have decided to please themselves and on this day, if never again, it really is almost "all about them". 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: katycoo on April 07, 2013, 09:18:40 PM
A wedding is always inconvenient to someone.  Noone wants to play favourites with their guests and at some point, the wedding should be more about what the B&G want, than what would make the guests happy.

I do think that expecting most guests to travel to a place with little accomodation is a poor choice.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: DragonKitty on April 07, 2013, 09:25:47 PM
My wedding was planned in less than a month for a particular date, and was inconvenient for some of my relatives.

Depends what is more important for them.

Though it would be nice if they could come up with better contact info for some of the B&B's.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: ChiGirl on April 07, 2013, 09:27:50 PM
I doubt the HC is intending to send a message, but they're managing to do it nonetheless.

I'm with Art on this one: the HC's hospitality is lacking.  It seems that they want it all: they want all the relatives there (since they invited all the relatives), but still have it in a remote location, midweek (presumably because they're on a budget)...as the OP's dilemma with the B&Bs demonstrates, the HC is not going to get all those things.

By way of real-life comparison: my best friend had long dreamed of getting married on a mountaintop.  But once the actual planning began, she quickly realized that her grandmother would not be able to climb a mountain to see her get married.  She couldn't have both; she had to choose; she chose her grandmother over the mountain.

I really doubt that the HC is totally clueless about this.  At some point in the planning process, someone had to have pointed out "gee this is going to be hard for your guests."  They've made their choice.

And for those posters who think the OP is overreacting because she's faaaaamily, I would point out that the HC's venue/timing choices are going to make it hard for ALL guests, including their friends.




Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 07, 2013, 10:01:30 PM
As far as the accommodations, the invites haven't come out yet, only the STD cards, which in my time working in the invitation industry, never had info on accommodations.  That info comes with the invitation, so maybe they are setting something up and you will have more info when you receive yours.  Has anyone talked to him or the bride, or is this all speculations about motives just chatter among relatives?  I am sure the HC understands that people have jobs and school and that might make their attendance difficult or impossible due to work/school/travel issues.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Venus193 on April 07, 2013, 10:10:51 PM
It would be impossible to please everyone and in doing so the couple would end up pleasing no one, not even themselves.

When I was in the SCA there were members who wanted to have an SCA wedding, which meant that the guests were invited to wear historical garb.  Many of their families were not down with this.   Most ended up with the official wedding (with mostly family) and the wedding of their dreams (Medieval or Renaissance) with their friends.

No message in their choices.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: nuit93 on April 07, 2013, 11:23:30 PM
I come from a very large extended family, and there have been several weddings in the past few years.  Inevitably, there was at least one relative that couldn't make it, including one brother of the bride who couldn't be present--because he was in medical school 5000 miles away.

Yes, everyone would have preferred to have all the relatives there, but had every HC in my family waited until every single relative was free, none of them would be married yet.

An invitation is not a summons.  I have received invites to weddings I would not be able to attend for various reasons. 

Would I have liked to attend?  Yes. 
Was I offended, or even hurt, that they didn't check with me personally to make sure I could be there?  No. 

I can't be at everything.  I have a busy schedule and a budget.  That's life.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: NyaChan on April 07, 2013, 11:33:48 PM
In other situations though, haven't we said that when people schedule things at times/places they know you can't come they might be telling you something?  Like when a friend threw a birthday party for his girlfriend.  Her friend let him know that she would be out of town on one of the two dates he floated as possibilities to us all (he specifically asked about which we'd prefer).  He chose that date anyways because his own friends found it more convenient.  That to her IMO sends a clear message that those friends' presence outweighed the value of her own presence at the party to him. 

Granted in this situation there are far more factors, but on some level, the couple made a choice to schedule the wedding in a time and a place that would make it more difficult for people to attend.  I don't think that is an absolute message saying they don't want those people to attend at all, but I do think that it shows that the couple is willing to take the risk that those people may not come in return for having that type of wedding. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: kudeebee on April 07, 2013, 11:34:05 PM
The HC are planning the wedding that they want in a location that they like/can afford.  They probably  selected Thursday, as others have suggested, due to the lower costs involved.  I am sure that the cabins with bathrooms were booked by members of the family/bridal party.  That leaves the other cabins and the b&b's on the island for other guests who are attending.

I am sure when they booked this site and choose to do it on a Thursday, they realized that not everyone would be able to attend.  Choices have consequences, and when we make choices we have to live with the consequences.  So, HC can send out their std's and then the invitations, but cannot get mad when some people that they may have liked to attend rsvp "no".  They may be thinking 'this is the day we have selected and we have checked with our bridal party and close family and it works for greatest majority of family, we can have it at the place we want and save money; so this is what we want and those who can attend will attend, and those who can't will be missed."

No HC figures that everyone they invite will be able to attend.  Invited guests have a life of their own and the date that a HC has selected may not work for all of their guests.  HC should be happy about the guests that are able to attend.  So, I doubt that this was done deliberately to offend or hurt you (or other guests who live far away) or to send a message that you aren't important.  They could have easily picked another date==on a weekend with lots of nearby accommodations--that wouldn't have worked for you either.

They may not realize how inconvenient it would be for guests traveling across country by air to bring sheets, blankets, pillows, towels, dishes, etc.  Maybe they think those flying in will buy and then donate the items, maybe they don't have a clue, maybe they just don't care, maybe they have a plan for supplying these--have you asked about that? 

If you want to attend, check out the b&b's on your own.  I would not wait for the couple to assist you on this. 

If the b&b's don't work for you, you need to reassess whether you want to lug all of that stuff along with you or spend the money to buy it there and then perhaps donate it to an organization.  Do you want to traipse outside at night, maybe in the rain, to use the bathrooms?  Would you get a good night's sleep?  Can you afford to miss work during the middle of the week?  If this is more than you want to do in relation to the cabins or can't take the days off from work, then decline the invitation and move on--send a nice card/gift and wish them well.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: johelenc1 on April 07, 2013, 11:37:32 PM
On the other side of the coin, maybe the HC is thinking, "this is the wedding of our dreams.  If people really love us, they will do whatever they have to do to support us and be at our wedding even if it means missing class, missing work, and walking through the dark in the middle of the night to pee.  If they don't come, it must mean they don't really care about us."

This, of course, is as ridiculous as believing that not being invited to a wedding means the couple doesn't care about you.  Or, if you are invited and it's on your anniversary, birthday, child's BD, doesn't allow your precious children, is a destination wedding, on a Thursday, on a holiday, in the middle of the afternoon, is located in the middle of a lake...all these things also mean the happy couple just must not care if you attend and should affect your relationship for all eternity.

I think people need to just stop taking everything so personally.  The OP was invited.  The OP even wants to go.  All this is great.  But, circumstances may prevent it.  That's just the way it is.  The OP should send a lovely gift and a heartfelt note declaring just how much they would have loved to be there, but you just can't.  The HC will be sad, since I'm sure they sincerely care about the OP's family and would love to have them there, but they will be sad...and then they will move on.  As should the OP.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: kareng57 on April 08, 2013, 12:25:35 AM

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.

See, most of the weddings I've been to - including family weddings and friend weddings in which I was in the wedding party - did not have rehearsals, or rehearsal dinners.... so, this isn't something that I would do, and definitely not a mandatory wedding event to me.  Again, this goes to my point that there are many ways to celebrate and it would really make me sad to think that people I care about would feel slighted by choices my partner and I made or would take such choices as a reflection about how we feel about them.


I feel somewhat the same way - I will be hosting the rehearsal dinner at my son's wedding next year, and I would only be including everyone participating in the ceremony along with their SOs.  There will be no guests who will be travelling more than about 3 hours, and all of them are well acquainted with the area.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: cicero on April 08, 2013, 01:31:16 AM
I don't think there is always a *message*.

some people are uber-organized, and set up weddings the way you did. and some people just aren't. I was recently at a family wedding where I (and other family members) flew up to 12 hours to be there. with a 2 month warning. missing/miscommunications/last minute changes were all involved in this. so if i *really* wanted to, i *could* think that there is a message here that we are not wanted. but that isn't true - what *is* true is that in our case, the parents are extremely disorganized/dysfuncitional etc. there was no message and I am glad that I went because if I had read anything into the "logistics" that were planned, I would have thought "eh, why bother. they obviously don't want us there", and I would have missed out.

I am not saying that you should or shouldn't go to the wedding; obviously, that is your choice. I *am* saying that I wouldn't read *anything* into this.

Would it be nice if your relative would be more considerate of out of towners? - yes.
would it be nice if your relative had actually arranged alternative accommodation for his guests - yes.
but I see the above as more of a style issue than a "message"
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 08, 2013, 04:22:16 AM
Full disclosure - my wedding was where I and my SO lived at the time, a plane ride away for almost all family members on both sides.  This was not typical in my family, but for various reasons was what we chose.

I don't think there is any message being sent.  They've planned an event they will enjoy, and presumably think their guests will enjoy.  If you won't enjoy it, don't go.  From your first post, it sounds like you are making some assumptions about accommodations without checking out or inquiring about all of what's available - the B&Bs you mentioned.

It strikes me as looking for offense to take away that they don't value your company.

What an interesting assumption.

i have indeed explored the B&B options and spent several hours doing so. I even attempted to call the one I found most appealing and had the accommodations we need, only to find that the phone is disconnected and their on-line booking service inoperable.  When I asked for other suggestions and opinions, the B&G were not able to give us any.

There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting.  It is the fact that they seem to be doing everything to make it difficult to attend. I know that his siblings and parents pointed out how difficult his choices were making it for them before the plans were finalized.

I don't think it's looking for offense to think that people who knowingly make it difficult for you to attend don't really care if you attend or prefer a smaller, low-key wedding.  I'm somewhat disappointed since we've always been close to him and spent a good deal of time together, even meeting up with us Europe when we were there for his DB's wedding, but I certainly would not be offended if he prefers a smaller, more intimate wedding. I just think that he feels that this is a better way to achieve that without insulting us by not extending an invitation at all.

And they did tell one aunt (the one who teaches at two universities) that they would never speak to her again if she didn't attend - jokingly, of course.

I actually agree with delabela.  It appeared to me you were searching for offense.

They sound a bit clueless, but also having a wedding on a budget. 

I don't believe they intentionally set out to make it so people couldn't come.   Unless they are Jewish, I would not expect them to know the important Sept holidays their wedding is between. 

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: iridaceae on April 08, 2013, 06:21:44 AM

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 06:27:46 AM

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.

I agree.  I wanted my guests to have a nice time, but when I planned my wedding I focussed on what I and Mr Lemur wanted.

We married in a register office because it was what we could afford.  We booked the largest room they had but were still restricted to 30 people.  That meant we had to pare down my guest list and not invite a few of the more distant relatives.  However, being married was more important to me than having a big wedding some years later.  It certainly wasn't sending a message to anyone.  It was my wedding and if people could come, then great.  I wasn't going to arrange my wedding based on what other people want to do, and I wouldn't expect anyone else to arrange their wedding based on my preferences either.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LeveeWoman on April 08, 2013, 06:36:38 AM
I certainly don't expect others to provide the same level of hospitality that we extended, but neither do I think that giving some thought to accommodating your guests is too much to expect. Those who stay in the cabins, both those with and without bath facilities, will need to provide their own sheets, blankets, pillows, towels, dishes, etc., which is obviously impossible if you are flying.

And they do have every reason to expect everyone will attend their wedding. A few years ago everyone flew to another continent for his brother's wedding, and we've all gone to his other brother and sister's weddings, which involved interstate travel, if not quite this distance. 

We can afford this trip and do have the time for it, but wonder making it difficult for your guests to attend is a way to keep peace in the family by inviting everyone when you don't want them there or care if they attend.

What about electricity? If there is none, and even though it's in August, will it get cool at night? What are you to do? Bring your own firewood?
  ???
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: gramma dishes on April 08, 2013, 09:23:57 AM
On the other side of the coin, maybe the HC is thinking, "this is the wedding of our dreams.  If people really love us, they will do whatever they have to do to support us and be at our wedding even if it means missing class, missing work, and walking through the dark in the middle of the night to pee.  If they don't come, it must mean they don't really care about us."

This, of course, is as ridiculous as believing that not being invited to a wedding means the couple doesn't care about you.  Or, if you are invited and it's on your anniversary, birthday, child's BD, doesn't allow your precious children, is a destination wedding, on a Thursday, on a holiday, in the middle of the afternoon, is located in the middle of a lake...all these things also mean the happy couple just must not care if you attend and should affect your relationship for all eternity.

I think people need to just stop taking everything so personally.  The OP was invited.  The OP even wants to go.  All this is great.  But, circumstances may prevent it.  That's just the way it is.  The OP should send a lovely gift and a heartfelt note declaring just how much they would have loved to be there, but you just can't.  The HC will be sad, since I'm sure they sincerely care about the OP's family and would love to have them there, but they will be sad...and then they will move on.  As should the OP.

This is an excellent post!  Balanced and with a touch of humor.  But mainly, I think, just beautifully realistic.  This is what's really going on and no one is served by anyone (either the B&G or the guests) taking it too personally.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Hmmmmm on April 08, 2013, 10:13:17 AM
We are having a lot of weddings in our family this year so the topic is much discussed.

First couple decided to have a destination wedding at a remote Carribean island on a Sunday night. Couple understood that this would restrict number of family and friends attending all around but their dream was a beach side wedding at an ubber fancy resort. They got the wedding of their dreams, were gracious when they received mostly No RSVP's (though the mom's tried to coerce family members to attend... if you pay to fly to big island, I'll pay your flight to small island or I'll pay for one night of the $350 a night hotel room. Both mom's were a little sad that they weren't able to celebrate the wedding of their first children to wed with their families of origin which is common in both families. And bride later told me that she had really thought I would be able attend so I do feel a little guilty about not going now.)

Second couple did work around big date issues with their immediate families (parents, siblings and was even nice enough to reach out to some of their aunts to get some input) but were committed to a specific location. So while a date a couple of weeks later after school year was over would have been easier for the extended family (we know this because they set up an online survey to get date input and everyone could see other responses), they went with the earlier date when they could get the reception location. No one that I know of is put out about their choosing location over extended family convenience. We will all be there for the wedding but in our case will miss so day before activities.

In talking with 3rd couple and being more engaged in their planning, I've thought they've jumpled through too many hoops trying to find the "perfect" date to please everyone. But as the  bride told me, the most important part of her wedding is having family and friends there to celebrate their new life and where the event or when the wedding is held is of secondary concern. So before they even started looking at locations, they had the dates ranked by convience for the majority of the family and wedding party.

Knowing these 3 couples as well as I do, I am not suprised about any of the choices they made or where they put the emphasis. First couple gets along well with family but they are never the ones to reach out. They live a very independent life. If they have the option to spend Christmas skiing in Aspen or come to a big family Christmas celebration, they'll Instagram a picture of them on the slopes.

Couple 2 are close to their immediate families and have made comments about wanting to keep close connection with extended families because they want their kids to have those relationships. They'd come to the Xmas gathering but leave early to head out on a shortened ski vacation.

Couple 3 couldn't imagine a holiday that not celebrated in the midst of family. They can go skiing (well, with them it would be scuba diving) another time.

So again, I don't think any couple was trying to "send a message" that we don't value our family and friends. But your choices do indicate where you are placing priorities.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: DavidH on April 08, 2013, 10:40:23 AM
I don't think the choices were made to specifically send a message to the OP, since unless there is a backstory we haven't heard why would they single the OP out over any other relative.  On the other hand, they have succeeded in sending the message that they are either clueless (and unwilling to be clued in) or care more about the location than the attendees.  I think there is a lot of middle ground between these plans and a Saturday evening wedding at the airport hotel in Chicago (a very easy place to find flights to and from). 

If you want to attend, I'd call the HC and say that you are trying to make this work, but it's quite a challenge.  What are others doing and can they recommend any places to stay.  On the phone you can convey tone, make it a discussion and discuss the options they suggest and what you've looked into yourself.  They might have ideas you haven't considered or with any luck as they actually try to handle the logistics they may decide it's too difficult and alter their plans.  I really think this has to be a phone call or in person so that it is a conversation rather than texts or email.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 08, 2013, 11:07:56 AM

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.

Pod! I normally agree with Art, but it sounds like Art is saying that a couple cannot have the wedding they want or make it about them.   There is nothing wrong with that.  We see it all the time. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 08, 2013, 11:11:51 AM
I don't think the choices were made to specifically send a message to the OP, since unless there is a backstory we haven't heard why would they single the OP out over any other relative.  On the other hand, they have succeeded in sending the message that they are either clueless (and unwilling to be clued in) or care more about the location than the attendees.  I think there is a lot of middle ground between these plans and a Saturday evening wedding at the airport hotel in Chicago (a very easy place to find flights to and from). 

If you want to attend, I'd call the HC and say that you are trying to make this work, but it's quite a challenge.  What are others doing and can they recommend any places to stay.  On the phone you can convey tone, make it a discussion and discuss the options they suggest and what you've looked into yourself.  They might have ideas you haven't considered or with any luck as they actually try to handle the logistics they may decide it's too difficult and alter their plans.  I really think this has to be a phone call or in person so that it is a conversation rather than texts or email.

The bolded bugs me.  Many people here have posted the same thing.  What bugs me is it appears this means that the HC is wrong to choose a location over having family attend.  A wedding is a once in a lifetime thing.  I think a HC have full carte blanche to have the wedding they want.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: gramma dishes on April 08, 2013, 11:19:17 AM
...The bolded bugs me.  Many people here have posted the same thing.  What bugs me is it appears this means that the HC is wrong to choose a location over having family attend.  A wedding is a once in a lifetime thing.  I think a HC have full carte blanche to have the wedding they want.

I agree.

This thread got me to thinking back about my own wedding.  To be absolutely totally honest, I don't think we gave much consideration at all as to whether or not it would be convenient for our guests.  We simply wanted it to be in a convenient location for us and for a price WE could afford.  (We totally paid for our own wedding.) 

It was intended to be a small wedding and it was.  (Roughly 70 guests altogether and that's counting children.)

I assumed that many of my relatives would not be able to come because they were older and lived two states (or more) away.  I also had the audacity to assume that they would still wish us happiness. And I believe they did.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: fountainof on April 08, 2013, 11:31:27 AM
I think some of the comments seem to indicate that a marrying couple needs to choose things just for family.  What if someone cannot afford to have a wedding with everyone, isn't that allowed?  I think people should have the weddings they want and can afford so if a Thursday suits their budget people can either go or turn it down. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: artk2002 on April 08, 2013, 11:55:33 AM

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.

Pod! I normally agree with Art, but it sounds like Art is saying that a couple cannot have the wedding they want or make it about them.   There is nothing wrong with that.  We see it all the time.

Ack. I'm rather offended that people are reading me in that way.

I have said, over and again, that the HC are free to make whatever choices they wish in their wedding. But I'm also saying that those choices do send a message about the relative priorities in the HC's lives. It's not possible to make choices without those choices having some kind of consequence. The choice to have a wedding on a mountaintop may mean that wheelchair-bound Aunt Mildred can't attend.  The HC is perfectly fine to decide to have the mountaintop wedding, but that means, like it or not, that the mountaintop wedding is more important than Mildred's attendance. How can it not be? If Mildred's attendance were more important than the mountaintop, then they'd pick a different venue.

I'm not saying that the HC are wrong for making whatever decision that they make. I really wish people would stop reading that into what I've written. They are free to choose the location/date/whatever over the attendance of family or friends. What I am saying is that sends a clear message that the location/date/whatever is more important to the HC than the attendance of those family or friends. It's a simple statement of fact with no moral judgment about the appropriateness of that decision. The decision is going to be "right" or "wrong" only in the context of a particular wedding.

This is no different than any other decision a HC might make that would include or exclude people. Someone is fine to choose a small venue that means they can't include first cousins, or to choose a large venue and include the cousins. Either choice is correct in etiquette.  But each choice indicates which is more important to the HC, the venue or the cousins.

Again, I'm rather amused at the irony here. If someone came here and said "I'm planning on a beach wedding at noon in mid summer with no shade, no seating and no water available," they would be excoriated for not thinking of their guests; it's happened multiple times over the years. But in this thread, the HC can, it seems, make whatever decisions they want to make without any consequence at all. Would someone please explain how this thread is different?

I think some of the comments seem to indicate that a marrying couple needs to choose things just for family.  What if someone cannot afford to have a wedding with everyone, isn't that allowed?  I think people should have the weddings they want and can afford so if a Thursday suits their budget people can either go or turn it down. 

I absolutely agree with you. All I'm doing is pointing out that having the wedding they want may mean excluding people and that indicates that the wedding that the HC want is more important to them than the attendance of those people. Saying "I  want a skydiving wedding and want all of my family to attend" simply isn't possible. The HC have to choose one or the other. That choice says which is more important, the skydiving or the family attendance. That's all.

I want a new car, and I want a nice vacation. I can't afford both. I choose the car because the car is more important to me, now, than the vacation is. The wedding choices are no different. We make choices based on the relative importance of the options. Either that or we flip a coin.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: turnip on April 08, 2013, 12:07:51 PM
Look, you started this thread

Quote
What's the message here?

The message is that they are having a wedding that is appropriate and meaningful for them, they love you and hope you can attend, and they understand if you can't.   This is the message every couple sends with every wedding thrown.  What alternative message are you looking for?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: gramma dishes on April 08, 2013, 12:27:34 PM


...  The message is that they are having a wedding that is appropriate and meaningful for them, they love you and hope you can attend, and they understand if you can't.   This is the message every couple sends with every wedding thrown.  What alternative message are you looking for?

LOL!   So true ... and said so succinctly!!  ;D

Great post!
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: turnip on April 08, 2013, 12:33:28 PM


...  The message is that they are having a wedding that is appropriate and meaningful for them, they love you and hope you can attend, and they understand if you can't.   This is the message every couple sends with every wedding thrown.  What alternative message are you looking for?

LOL!   So true ... and said so succinctly!!  ;D

Great post!


Thank you gramma dishes :-)   Reading your replies ( among others ) really helped crystallize my thoughts on this thread.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: TootsNYC on April 08, 2013, 12:39:01 PM
I think reading a message into it is..well, understandable, but maybe overall not helpful. to me, 'message' implies they deliberately thought 'We don't care about guests, we care about venue' and that probably wasn't the case. In my experience, people just don't think that way. It was more likely to be 'Oh, this sounds like a wonderful venue, we would love this type of wedding!'

If it's logistically bad for you to go, then the couple certainly can't offended when you don't. Maybe they do want a small, low-key wedding, or maybe they didn't put too much thought into it. It comes up frequently on this forum that different people see weddings very differently.

But, I personally just don't think looking for the message is likely to be useful for anyone, as the message directly sent to you was 'come to our wedding if you can' by inviting you. What would be the purpose of looking for anything else? Do you feel maybe perhaps they don't really want you there?

But at some point after thinking "this is a greats venue." They've would have thought "if cross country, less family can attend but I'm ok with that because we prefer small wedding."

I don't see where that is trying to send a message. But it's is clearly indicating what type of wedding they want. And it's not one with a large attendance of family and friends who live in the other side of the country.

The bolded is an "interesting assumption." It could be completely, "I'm OK with that because I want this venue so badly." Or "I'm OK with that because attending other people's weddings is a burden for people anyway."
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Judah on April 08, 2013, 12:43:55 PM
Look, you started this thread

Quote
What's the message here?

The message is that they are having a wedding that is appropriate and meaningful for them, they love you and hope you can attend, and they understand if you can't.   This is the message every couple sends with every wedding thrown.  What alternative message are you looking for?

This exactly.

When DH and got engaged we agreed that he would pick the date and I would pick the location.  I picked a location that was not convenient to anyone, not my family, not his family, none of our friends, but had special meaning to me.  DH picked a date almost a year and a half out that happened to fall on a holiday weekend.  If you received a wedding invitation from me it was because I very much wanted you at my wedding, but understood that many people might not be able to attend. 

We planned a wedding that was meaningful to us and we wanted to share our day with the people we loved, but we weren't expecting people to go to uncomfortable lengths for us. Frankly, it never entered my mind that people would be put out about the date or location. If they could make it, great. If they couldn't make it, we'd miss them and share the pictures later.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Cami on April 08, 2013, 12:52:13 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
In my experience, the only people attending the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner are the wedding party. I've never known anyone ot have a wedding breakfast either.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 01:05:48 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
In my experience, the only people attending the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner are the wedding party. I've never known anyone ot have a wedding breakfast either.

The wedding breakfast is the meal taken with guests after the ceremony.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Hmmmmm on April 08, 2013, 01:16:12 PM
I think reading a message into it is..well, understandable, but maybe overall not helpful. to me, 'message' implies they deliberately thought 'We don't care about guests, we care about venue' and that probably wasn't the case. In my experience, people just don't think that way. It was more likely to be 'Oh, this sounds like a wonderful venue, we would love this type of wedding!'

If it's logistically bad for you to go, then the couple certainly can't offended when you don't. Maybe they do want a small, low-key wedding, or maybe they didn't put too much thought into it. It comes up frequently on this forum that different people see weddings very differently.

But, I personally just don't think looking for the message is likely to be useful for anyone, as the message directly sent to you was 'come to our wedding if you can' by inviting you. What would be the purpose of looking for anything else? Do you feel maybe perhaps they don't really want you there?

But at some point after thinking "this is a greats venue." They've would have thought "if cross country, less family can attend but I'm ok with that because we prefer small wedding."

I don't see where that is trying to send a message. But it's is clearly indicating what type of wedding they want. And it's not one with a large attendance of family and friends who live in the other side of the country.

The bolded is an "interesting assumption." It could be completely, "I'm OK with that because I want this venue so badly." Or "I'm OK with that because attending other people's weddings is a burden for people anyway."
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that everyone who plans a wedding at a location distant from a majority of guests want a small wedding. Was just using that as an example of a couples thinking. There could be lots of reasons.

I mentioned a neice who did a destination wedding. She and her DH would have been thrilled to host a 100+ guests at their wedding. But they were fine with having the 20 that attended because the location was very important.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Calistoga on April 08, 2013, 01:28:08 PM
When we got married, we set our date to be as convenient as possible- we did it over a long weekend so that people would have an extra day off from work, we announced our dates well in advance. ALL of our guests were from out of state, some within easy driving distance, some from 2000 miles away. We wanted everyone to come, but we knew we were asking a lot, so we weren't at all upset when people couldn't make it. But the fact of the matter was that no date would be perfect for everyone.

I think the HC in the story is probably of the same mind set. You want people to come, it's important to you...but you can't always make it happen.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Just Lori on April 08, 2013, 02:32:24 PM
There seems to be an assumption that the HC is perfectly fine with people declining the wedding because the location is too inconvenient.  I don't think we have confirmed that anywhere.  It will be interesting if the OP can update us as the date draws near.

I would be sad if our beloved nephew chose a location like the couple in the OP.  Such a location would be a logistical nightmare for us, and we would have to decline.  That doesn't mean the couple is rude.  It doesn't mean we're selfish.  It simply means that I would be sad to miss the couple's wedding. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LadyL on April 08, 2013, 02:47:22 PM
It is interesting to me that some people feel that the wedding is about the couple, and therefore the couple's preferences therefore overrule those of their guests on all fronts. LordL and I are paying for the majority of our wedding, which in my understanding makes us the hosts. Hosts are supposed to take into consideration the hospitality they extend their guests. To not do so would feel rude to me, but it sounds like most people believe it wouldn't be. For example, if I felt like being physically active was a defining thing for my fiance and I and therefore we were going to have all our guests hike a mile up to our ceremony with us and then have everyone stand instead of sit for a one hour ceremony, would this truly be chalked up to "that's the couple's preference, nothing more and nothing less"? If it would be rude to throw a party with certain accommodations omitted (like not having easy access to bathrooms) why is it ok for a wedding?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 02:49:37 PM
Because as long as you are up front about it and are nice if/when people decline, it really isn't an issue.  An invitation is not a summons.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: dawbs on April 08, 2013, 02:51:31 PM
When we got married, we set our date to be as convenient as possible- we did it over a long weekend so that people would have an extra day off from work, we announced our dates well in advance. ALL of our guests were from out of state, some within easy driving distance, some from 2000 miles away. We wanted everyone to come, but we knew we were asking a lot, so we weren't at all upset when people couldn't make it. But the fact of the matter was that no date would be perfect for everyone.

I think the HC in the story is probably of the same mind set. You want people to come, it's important to you...but you can't always make it happen.

This isn't intended to pick on this poster, but is a prime example of "you can't win for loosing"; there will always be people peved w/ the date.

I don't like weddings over holiday weekends.  I get very few of these per year and they're one of the FEW times Mr. Dawbs and I have the same day off --I don't share those weekends with anyone but the closest of the close--and then, sometimes grudgingly.
Generally, for a weekend wedding, he has to work (and declines) and I don't have work and attend.  If it was over, say Labor Day weekend?  I'd skip it, unless it was one of a very select handful of people.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: DavidH on April 08, 2013, 03:00:09 PM
On the other hand, they have succeeded in sending the message that they are either clueless (and unwilling to be clued in) or care more about the location than the attendees.

I'd like to clarify what I meant.  You all may still disagree. 

They have picked a venue and time that is particularly inconvenient for many people to attend.  It is their right to do so since it's their wedding, but it is still a choice.  By doing so, there are two possibilities.  One is that they don't realize that it's inconvenient in both time and place, which is what I meant when I said clueless.  The other is that they are making a choice and saying to themselves, the location and time is very important to us, so important in fact, that we will forgo having people attend who would be able to attend a weekend wedding closer to a motel or hotel.  Again, they're find to make that decision, but should recognize it for what it is. 

It's kind of like what Judah said below, "When DH and got engaged we agreed that he would pick the date and I would pick the location.  I picked a location that was not convenient to anyone, not my family, not his family, none of our friends, but had special meaning to me.  DH picked a date almost a year and a half out that happened to fall on a holiday weekend.  If you received a wedding invitation from me it was because I very much wanted you at my wedding, but understood that many people might not be able to attend. "

She knew the venue might she chose might mean that some people couldn't attend, but choosing a venue that had special meaning to her was more important than making it easier for those people to be there.  It's not a slight against anyone in particular, and certainly not the same way not inviting Aunt Tilly would be to Aunt Tilly.  It's about prioritizing.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: dawbs on April 08, 2013, 03:34:51 PM
There's a 3rd factor besides clueless and choosing based on other priorities..."things the rest of us don't know about played in".

For example, the last time I had a *big life event* that I had a chance of happening on a schedule, I planned around my mom's chemo treatments.  Moving things from a Monday to a Tuesday was awkward for a lot of people...but it meant she felt better during the event than she would have if it had been on Monday.
No one outside of immediate family knew that was why I moved things (it was nobody's business).

And all 'other factors' aren't as dramatic as that; but they certainly exist.  The OP has no way of knowing if there is something--a close friend's deployment, a family member's illness, the dog's knee surgery, that a horoscope said they should only do this on Thursdays and where certain lay lines cross--something that makes this date/location the 'best' choice for them.

One is either close enough to the happy couple to know their reasoning or just has to assume that they ahve their reasons and that they'll be reasonable about any declines.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Cami on April 08, 2013, 03:42:12 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
In my experience, the only people attending the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner are the wedding party. I've never known anyone ot have a wedding breakfast either.

The wedding breakfast is the meal taken with guests after the ceremony.
Oh, I see. I took the words "the morning after the wedding" to mean that it was the morning THE NEXT DAY after the wedding, not the same day.  Apparently everything happens in the morning? No evening weddings? Or do you call the meal at an evening wedding a wedding breakfast?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: violinp on April 08, 2013, 03:45:34 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
In my experience, the only people attending the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner are the wedding party. I've never known anyone ot have a wedding breakfast either.

The wedding breakfast is the meal taken with guests after the ceremony.

In the States, I've only heard it referred to as a meal the day after the wedding. I know that the UK and other countries do it differently, but that's how it's referred to by the people in the US with whom I am acquainted.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 03:46:22 PM
As someone who may be planning a wedding in the not-distant future, this thread is a bit frightening. While I know I'd never plan an event on a Thursday and definitely would not have anything resembling a cabin in the mix, it also wouldn't occur to me to plan a weekend of events. And what ideas I have had are no doubt inconvenient for someone in ways I may not anticipate. I would hate to think that my idea of a meaningful and fun celebration were taken by a relative or friend as a message that I don't care about their presence.

Well, there's the rehearsal and subsequent dinner, the day of the wedding and, in some cases, a wedding breakfast the morning after the wedding. That's a pretty full weekend to me.
In my experience, the only people attending the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner are the wedding party. I've never known anyone ot have a wedding breakfast either.

The wedding breakfast is the meal taken with guests after the ceremony.
Oh, I see. I took the words "the morning after the wedding" to mean that it was the morning THE NEXT DAY after the wedding, not the same day.  Apparently everything happens in the morning? No evening weddings? Or do you call the meal at an evening wedding a wedding breakfast?

The first meal after the ceremony, no matter the time of day, is called the "breakfast".

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 03:47:19 PM
Yeah, I'm in the UK.

Most weddings take place in the daytime here, usually afternoon.

Interestingly, it has only recently become legal to have wedding ceremonies outside daytime hours.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: violinp on April 08, 2013, 03:50:15 PM
Yeah, I'm in the UK.

Most weddings take place in the daytime here, usually afternoon.

Interestingly, it has only recently become legal to have wedding ceremonies outside daytime hours.

In the weddings I've experienced (in the US, obviously), the couple spends all day getting ready, gets married at 3 or 4 in the afternoon, and spends the rest of the night partying.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: TootsNYC on April 08, 2013, 03:58:23 PM
The first meal after the ceremony, no matter the time of day, is called the "breakfast".

This is U.K. terminology.

It is NOT U.S. terminology.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 08, 2013, 04:01:54 PM
The first meal after the ceremony, no matter the time of day, is called the "breakfast".

This is U.K. terminology.

It is NOT U.S. terminology.

I'm just saying what I know.  I didn't know terminology was different across the pond.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Calistoga on April 08, 2013, 04:07:48 PM
We call our meals breakfast, lunch, and dinner depending on the time of day, no matter what kind of special event we have that day. We may have a "Late lunch" or an "Early dinner" etc, but the time of day is the determining factor there.

Wedding meals in the U.S are all over the board. I've seen wedding breakfasts AND dinners on the same day, or no "wedding meal" at all.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Snowy Owl on April 08, 2013, 04:29:51 PM
The first meal after the ceremony, no matter the time of day, is called the "breakfast".

This is U.K. terminology.

It is NOT U.S. terminology.


I'm just saying what I know.  I didn't know terminology was different across the pond.

Agreed with RTL as regards the UK.  Most of the time breakfast is what you eat in the morning but in wedding terms the meal you have to celebrate after the ceremony is the wedding breakfast.  As I understand it, the reason is because people used to have communion at the ceremony and it wasn't permitted to eat before communion so you were literally breaking your fast after the ceremony. 

Most people don't now have communion (or a church wedding at all) but the name lingers. I'm going to a wedding this summer and the ceremony is mid-afternoon, then photos then reception with the formal sit-down meal at 7pm.  It's still called the wedding breakfast. 

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Surianne on April 08, 2013, 05:42:57 PM
I'm loving the info about UK vs. US terminology -- very interesting.  I'm in Canada and weddings tend to be in the late afternoon or early evening (4pm-6pm) and then there's a reception dinner afterward. 

I've known of (but not been to) weddings with a "wedding breakfast" the next day, and it's been a pay-your-own-way meal at breakfast or brunch time for everyone to get together the day after the wedding.  No one I know likes them, because they're often too early for hangovers and too expensive for the quality of breakfast food you get  :D
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LeveeWoman on April 08, 2013, 08:58:58 PM
There's something that's been bothering me, so I went back to MammaVan3's first post:

The STD cards!  Ours was addressed to Moma and Pappa (wrong spelling of my name, no last name), at the wrong street number. These people are not kids; he's almost 40. If I hadn't bee outside when the mailman came so he could check with me, we probably wouldn't have gotten it.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 08, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
LadyL..I think their is difference in hosting a wedding as opposed to holding say a dinner party.  The wedding is first and only for people to come together and celebrate one of life's biggest milestones and it should be done the way the couple chooses.  If you choose to have a catered sit down dinner for 200 or have it in front of a lake with just a few friends, it is what the couple thinks is what says the most about themselves.  Again, because the the in laws felt our wedding was more about what the family wanted than what we wanted (small and fun as opposed to her invited the world mentality), we gave up and went to a JP.  It is nice if you can make sure a date or location  works for immediate family, but trying to put together a wedding that is going to appease everyone's tastes and schedules would be such a nightmare, and I personally feel it would take away from the intent of the event.  And I think it is so presumptuous to lay blame on the HC in the OP by saying they are making a statement.  What they are doing is planning the wedding in the way they find meaningful/convenient/economical or whatever and to take them to task for being rude or clueless or even to question their level of love for anyone, without even having talked to them (remember, this is now from a STD card and family gossip) is not showing them the love she professes.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: kareng57 on April 08, 2013, 10:00:09 PM

I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. Are you saying that making a choice is not making a choice? That somehow choosing to have the wedding you want, that excludes certain people doesn't mean that you've prioritized that wedding over the people? How can it not mean that?

Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.

Pod! I normally agree with Art, but it sounds like Art is saying that a couple cannot have the wedding they want or make it about them.   There is nothing wrong with that.  We see it all the time.

Ack. I'm rather offended that people are reading me in that way.

I have said, over and again, that the HC are free to make whatever choices they wish in their wedding. But I'm also saying that those choices do send a message about the relative priorities in the HC's lives. It's not possible to make choices without those choices having some kind of consequence. The choice to have a wedding on a mountaintop may mean that wheelchair-bound Aunt Mildred can't attend.  The HC is perfectly fine to decide to have the mountaintop wedding, but that means, like it or not, that the mountaintop wedding is more important than Mildred's attendance. How can it not be? If Mildred's attendance were more important than the mountaintop, then they'd pick a different venue.

I'm not saying that the HC are wrong for making whatever decision that they make. I really wish people would stop reading that into what I've written. They are free to choose the location/date/whatever over the attendance of family or friends. What I am saying is that sends a clear message that the location/date/whatever is more important to the HC than the attendance of those family or friends. It's a simple statement of fact with no moral judgment about the appropriateness of that decision. The decision is going to be "right" or "wrong" only in the context of a particular wedding.

This is no different than any other decision a HC might make that would include or exclude people. Someone is fine to choose a small venue that means they can't include first cousins, or to choose a large venue and include the cousins. Either choice is correct in etiquette.  But each choice indicates which is more important to the HC, the venue or the cousins.

Again, I'm rather amused at the irony here. If someone came here and said "I'm planning on a beach wedding at noon in mid summer with no shade, no seating and no water available," they would be excoriated for not thinking of their guests; it's happened multiple times over the years. But in this thread, the HC can, it seems, make whatever decisions they want to make without any consequence at all. Would someone please explain how this thread is different?

I think some of the comments seem to indicate that a marrying couple needs to choose things just for family.  What if someone cannot afford to have a wedding with everyone, isn't that allowed?  I think people should have the weddings they want and can afford so if a Thursday suits their budget people can either go or turn it down. 

I absolutely agree with you. All I'm doing is pointing out that having the wedding they want may mean excluding people and that indicates that the wedding that the HC want is more important to them than the attendance of those people. Saying "I  want a skydiving wedding and want all of my family to attend" simply isn't possible. The HC have to choose one or the other. That choice says which is more important, the skydiving or the family attendance. That's all.

I want a new car, and I want a nice vacation. I can't afford both. I choose the car because the car is more important to me, now, than the vacation is. The wedding choices are no different. We make choices based on the relative importance of the options. Either that or we flip a coin.



I agree completely.  I don't think that the HC has any kind of hidden message here, but they have clearly made a choice.

While no date is always going to be convenient for even in-town guests - some will be more convenient than others.  Choosing a mid-week date in a more inaccessible location and accomodations without plumbing facilities will mean that some guests will reluctantly have to reply "no".  And that does not make the HC rude or bad people - but they also cannot declare that they want as many guests as possible at their special day.  (I'm being hypothetical, I'm aware that the HC in the OP did not say that).  The location is clearly the priority for them.

My DS #1 and his fiancee were briefly considering a destination wedding, but were intending on inviting only me, her mom, and his brother. They did not want to have invited guests reluctantly replying "yes"  even in the scenario that the date/cost was inconvenient for them.  (Yes, I know that an invitation is not a summons, but lots of people will think that they really do need to make the effort).  They did change their minds, and the wedding will be local - they decided that they really want more of their nearest-and-dearest to be present.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LeveeWoman on April 08, 2013, 10:17:34 PM
You have mis-spelled my name, and have left off my last name.

I must bring linens and cooking paraphernalia to your wedding site....
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Venus193 on April 09, 2013, 05:55:16 AM
I have often wondered whether destination weddings aren't often elopements to avoid family drama.  That isn't necessarily the case with this example, but I would certainly recommend it to a couple who are under pressure from either set of parents to have a wedding the parents want for them rather than the one they want for themselves.

Their actions aren't rude, although a non-weekend date (other than during the typical Christmas vacation period) will definitely trim the list of attending guests.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: daen on April 09, 2013, 09:42:47 AM
I have often wondered whether destination weddings aren't often elopements to avoid family drama.  That isn't necessarily the case with this example, but I would certainly recommend it to a couple who are under pressure from either set of parents to have a wedding the parents want for them rather than the one they want for themselves.

One of my friends did exactly that. Well, almost exactly. He and his bride took off for the weekend, got married by a JP, spent the night in a nice B&B, almost got snowed in but didn't, and were back at work on Monday.

However, they "eloped" with the blessing of both sets of parents, because a) his mother was dealing with medical issues that would have made travel impossible and b) her family's circle followed some very strong ethnic traditions that would have made a small wedding impossible - it was either elope or invite 400 people - and c) they had limited time and resources.

There was a small reception in his parent's home town for his childhood friends and family a few weeks later, which was lovely. There were also plans in the works for a full-scale celebration of the wedding in Bride'sHomeCountry for the following year, but I never heard how it went.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: White Lotus on April 09, 2013, 12:13:21 PM
Parks are often booked way in advance, often as soon as reservations open, which can be a year early, which may be why the en-suite cabins were booked.  My guess is the Thursday in September is as close as they could get to a weekend with reasonable weather.  I go with the idea the couple want a personalized yet budget approach, and I think it sounds like fun for those who can reasonably attend.  I also think there is some cluelessness because people who are flying can't reasonably haul full camping gear with them.  I would bet there are HomeAway, airbnb, and similar options available.  If I could get the time off and had the money, I would look at those, or possibly renting a RV (I don't know if it is boat access only.)  I would call somebody and ask, starting with the HC, but including the park itself.  The people who work there probably get this question all the time.  If I wanted to go, and could do so reasonably.  If not, I'd decline.  And not worry about it.
Yes, every choice establishes a priority, because it will inconvenience someone and someone else won't be able to attend, but I don't think that is rude, unless it is directed at a specific person.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Spring Water on Sundays on April 09, 2013, 12:27:08 PM
Here's how I see it:

Perhaps a HC has a very important, meaningful reason for choosing a specific date and venue. Also perhaps, they see the ceremony as private and personal so it is simply not important or meaningful for them to be surrounded by well-wishers during their marriage ceremony. However, as a nod to the importance some loved ones may place on witnessing the actual ceremony, they are still sending out invitations to give those people the opportunity to attend if they choose.

In the above scenario, I don't believe there is any sort of obligation for the HC to make concessions on this important and meaningful venue and date in deference to the importance and meaning others may place on witnessing the ceremony. It's natural for people who place importance on witnessing the ceremony to interpret this choice as the HC not caring about them/their relationship and possibly feeling hurt. It is difficult, as humans, to separate what we find important and meaningful from the idea that others don't feel the same and it's easy to take it personally (i.e. "It was meaningful to me that people I love witness me get married but it's not meaningful to them that I witness them get married. Therefore, they must not value our relationship the way I do.")

So basically, some people place great importance on witnessing the marriage ceremony of people they love. But a HC choosing something different based on what *they* find important doesn't necessarily speak to how they feel about their relationships with their loved ones.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 09, 2013, 12:46:24 PM
Late to the thread and didn't get through all the comments, but I don't think that the HC are consciously sending messages that they don't care if their guests attend or not...but, I do think they are sending a message. And that message is that the location is their priority.  I don't think they are being rude to have the wedding they want as long as they can accept that a wedding that is inconvenient for guests will likely have fewer guests.  A destination wedding like this is usually more about the place than the people in attendance, which is perfectly ok.  It would be rude of them to insist that all their friends and family attend but not rude for them to invite those that they know may like to attend and accept the very real posibility that most of them won't be able to.

In the OP's position, I would just make a decision about would or wouldn't be doable for my family and go from there.  I wouldn't waste time wondering if the invitation was any kind of slight or had hidden messages.  I think it's ok to be disappointed that a wedding you'd like to attend isn't convenient to attend, but I wouldn't communicate that to the HC outside of "I'm so sorry that we aren't able to be there.  I would have loved to witness you get married!" 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: turnip on April 09, 2013, 01:25:23 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.

I mean, why not just rent the high school gym, order a bunch of pizzas to be delivered, wear your Sunday best, and invite every single relative and friend you can name _and_ offer to pay their travel and hotel expenses during their stay if they can't afford them?  We would have certainly had more guests had we decided to do that.   But we did want a pretty location, nice clothes, and a sit-down dinner.    You can make what judgement you like about our priorities based on that - but it just seems like a hard standard to hold. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Cami on April 09, 2013, 01:37:19 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.

I mean, why not just rent the high school gym, order a bunch of pizzas to be delivered, wear your Sunday best, and invite every single relative and friend you can name _and_ offer to pay their travel and hotel expenses during their stay if they can't afford them?  We would have certainly had more guests had we decided to do that.   But we did want a pretty location, nice clothes, and a sit-down dinner.    You can make what judgement you like about our priorities based on that - but it just seems like a hard standard to hold.
But first, you have to do a survey and determine which time, date and location will work best for the majority of your guests. And since asking people to wear nice clothes might be an undue burden because they don't want to wear anything that isn't "comfy", just tell them to wear their pajamas and we can have a gigantic sleep over in a church parish hall with pizza, popcorn, ice cream and watch movies on the tv. That way everyone is "comfy" and you could probably afford to invite everyone you've ever met. Also, plan on having a "make-up day" party for those who couldn't attend in the location of their choice. After all -- isn't that how one sends a message that guests' wishes are a priority -- bring the party to them.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: turnip on April 09, 2013, 01:45:23 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.

I mean, why not just rent the high school gym, order a bunch of pizzas to be delivered, wear your Sunday best, and invite every single relative and friend you can name _and_ offer to pay their travel and hotel expenses during their stay if they can't afford them?  We would have certainly had more guests had we decided to do that.   But we did want a pretty location, nice clothes, and a sit-down dinner.    You can make what judgement you like about our priorities based on that - but it just seems like a hard standard to hold.
But first, you have to do a survey and determine which time, date and location will work best for the majority of your guests. And since asking people to wear nice clothes might be an undue burden because they don't want to wear anything that isn't "comfy", just tell them to wear their pajamas and we can have a gigantic sleep over in a church parish hall with pizza, popcorn, ice cream and watch movies on the tv. That way everyone is "comfy" and you could probably afford to invite everyone you've ever met. Also, plan on having a "make-up day" party for those who couldn't attend in the location of their choice. After all -- isn't that how one sends a message that guests' wishes are a priority -- bring the party to them.

I have to admit, that sounds kind of awesome  :)   Maybe for my second wedding!
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LadyL on April 09, 2013, 01:45:31 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.


I think it depends on what level you mean. The main priority LordL and I had for our venue was that it be a historical building since we both love history. Other than that, we managed to secure a place that is very close to the majority of our guests (20 minutes or less driving distance), close to major public transportation, has parking, has reasonable hotel accommodations nearby,  can fit all our family and close friends, is wheelchair accessible, etc. When we were choosing the date we ran it by both sides of our families to make sure there wasn't a major conflict (i.e. milestone birthday that many people were travelling elsewhere to celebrate). I would say that if there was an even more fabulous venue that didn't have all those things, we would probably have picked the less fabulous place so that more people could make it. But then again, we are only having a "big" wedding because we care about having our families there - in theory we would both love to elope at the courthouse and be done but we see our wedding as a community event moreso than an event just about us. I've come to realize this is a minority viewpoint.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: turnip on April 09, 2013, 01:49:44 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.


I think it depends on what level you mean. The main priority LordL and I had for our venue was that it be a historical building since we both love history. Other than that, we managed to secure a place that is very close to the majority of our guests (20 minutes or less driving distance), close to major public transportation, has parking, has reasonable hotel accommodations nearby,  can fit all our family and close friends, is wheelchair accessible, etc. When we were choosing the date we ran it by both sides of our families to make sure there wasn't a major conflict (i.e. milestone birthday that many people were travelling elsewhere to celebrate). I would say that if there was an even more fabulous venue that didn't have all those things, we would probably have picked the less fabulous place so that more people could make it. But then again, we are only having a "big" wedding because we care about having our families there - in theory we would both love to elope at the courthouse and be done but we see our wedding as a community event moreso than an event just about us. I've come to realize this is a minority viewpoint.

I think that is unkind.  It's about balancing different priorities, not deciding that a wedding is 'just about us'.   
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 09, 2013, 01:54:03 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.

I mean, why not just rent the high school gym, order a bunch of pizzas to be delivered, wear your Sunday best, and invite every single relative and friend you can name _and_ offer to pay their travel and hotel expenses during their stay if they can't afford them?  We would have certainly had more guests had we decided to do that.   But we did want a pretty location, nice clothes, and a sit-down dinner.    You can make what judgement you like about our priorities based on that - but it just seems like a hard standard to hold.

I'm not sure what you're getting at or what standard you're referring to.  Of course when planning a wedding a couple makes a whole host of decisions and compromises and priorities come into play with how all that plays out.  It's not judgement so much as it is natural inferrment based on decisions that have to be made.

Like I said, I think a couple needs to plan the wedding they want and are not rude to do so.  At the same time, guests have the option of not attending if the location, date, time, etc are not convenient for them.  And I tend to side more with the HC in situations like this.  I think it's more important, in general, for them to choose the location and dates that are important to them, then accommodate every single person on their guest list.   For certain people, I'd definitely put in more effort, but at the end of the day, the HC are what matters most, IMO. 

In this case, they chose a destination wedding and that's great for them.  In doing that, they prioritize the destination over the need to have everyone on their guest list attend.  I'm all for that.  I think the OP decides if she can or can't go and RSVPs accordingly.  Etiquette-wise, the HC is totally in the clear.  And, unless they start pressuring their guests to attend or complaining that not enough people are attending,  they remain that way. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Eeep! on April 09, 2013, 02:24:07 PM
For me, the whole thing hinges on the couple's expectations regardint attendance. As far as I can tell, the OP hasn't weighed in on that particular issue specifically.  If the couple is indeed fine with people not attending because of the circumstances of the wedding they planned than I think they are OK.  But if they are going to be mortally offended because people choose not to attend, then they are rude. 

And I do understand what Art is saying - there is really no escaping that what you do does send messages.  But the people receiving the messages' own perceptions will color what message they receive.  If I otherwise think my nephew is a thoughtful caring guy, I will likely color my response to his invitation with that. But if I feel like he can't even be bothered to spell my name right than I'm likely going to view the invitation through that lense. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 09, 2013, 02:31:33 PM
For me, the whole thing hinges on the couple's expectations regardint attendance. As far as I can tell, the OP hasn't weighed in on that particular issue specifically.  If the couple is indeed fine with people not attending because of the circumstances of the wedding they planned than I think they are OK.  But if they are going to be mortally offended because people choose not to attend, then they are rude. 

And I do understand what Art is saying - there is really no escaping that what you do does send messages.  But the people receiving the messages' own perceptions will color what message they receive.  If I otherwise think my nephew is a thoughtful caring guy, I will likely color my response to his invitation with that. But if I feel like he can't even be bothered to spell my name right than I'm likely going to view the invitation through that lense.

I'm guessing the nephew/cousin probably wasn't the one that addressed the invitations.  In every wedding I've been a part of (including my own), for some reason that duty fell on the bride.  And not to excuse her that she didn't have some obligation to double check spellings and make sure everything was right, but if I were the OP, I wouldn't assume that my cousin, that I am otherwise really close to, is suddenly trying to covertly send me some message about our relationship through a wedding invitation.  Destination wedding probably had nothing to do with the OP and whether or not she could attend and the mispelling of the name may have been nothing more than a mistake....even if a careless one.   
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: #borecore on April 09, 2013, 03:15:23 PM
This thread is funny to me because I approached my wedding knowing everything I did would send a message to someone, and I'd probably offend a few. So far, though, I think our message of, "We love you but we're on a strict budget" has come through clearly and our guests have understood that things like having it during the school year (to reduce headcount, but also to avoid Texas summer heat!), hosting at our tiny place of worship and a backyard, having it where we live instead of somewhere inconvenient to us, and printing nontraditional, 1 page front-and-back  invitations were NOT meant as snubs.

If anyone is hurt by my low-budget wedding, I will be disappointed. But I don't feel I have anything to apologize for -- yet.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: TootsNYC on April 09, 2013, 04:25:23 PM
it is what the couple thinks is what says the most about themselves.

But then, there is a message and that could be seen to be, "we aren't the people who go to great lengths to accommodate or include family."

Which might be accurate and STILL not be in any way a snub or an indicator that they don't care about you.

(remember that I'm personally not a fan of getting upset about this issue)
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LadyL on April 09, 2013, 04:34:12 PM
And that message is that the location is their priority. 

I just keep feeling like every couple at some level prioritizes the details of their wedding above their guest list.


I think it depends on what level you mean. The main priority LordL and I had for our venue was that it be a historical building since we both love history. Other than that, we managed to secure a place that is very close to the majority of our guests (20 minutes or less driving distance), close to major public transportation, has parking, has reasonable hotel accommodations nearby,  can fit all our family and close friends, is wheelchair accessible, etc. When we were choosing the date we ran it by both sides of our families to make sure there wasn't a major conflict (i.e. milestone birthday that many people were travelling elsewhere to celebrate). I would say that if there was an even more fabulous venue that didn't have all those things, we would probably have picked the less fabulous place so that more people could make it. But then again, we are only having a "big" wedding because we care about having our families there - in theory we would both love to elope at the courthouse and be done but we see our wedding as a community event moreso than an event just about us. I've come to realize this is a minority viewpoint.

I think that is unkind.  It's about balancing different priorities, not deciding that a wedding is 'just about us'.

Maybe I should have phrased it "primarily about us" instead of saying "just." I meant to provide a contrasting perspective to ones like these:


Pod! I normally agree with Art, but it sounds like Art is saying that a couple cannot have the wedding they want or make it about them.   There is nothing wrong with that.  We see it all the time.


Because maybe the wedding isn't about the guests but about the couple who are marrying.


I agree.  I wanted my guests to have a nice time, but when I planned my wedding I focussed on what I and Mr Lemur wanted.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 09, 2013, 05:31:41 PM
There is no way to plan a wedding without offending someone.  I was invited to my step brothers small formal wedding, some other relatives were not.  It was not a snub...we are extremely close, the others just talk with him at family events but nothing else, but because they were step relatives, it should have been automatic invites.   My wedding was a JP event..my inlaws were hurt they were not invited (and MIL was the reason we did it this way) because in their family, shin digs are supposed to be huge blow outs with everyone sharing even the smallest shred of DNA must be invited and that wasn't what we wanted to go into debt over.  My BF's wedding had offended relatives because it was adults only (and yes, someone still brought their kid) because in their weddings, they allowed kids.  Just because you do things a certain way, certainly does not mean everyone does it that way.  And there are 2 different families to take into consideration.  I get the OP feels hurt because she has never seen a wedding like this before in the family, where it seems to be a weekend family affair that they are comfortable with, but maybe this couple isn't comfortable doing it that way.  Again, I think instead of burning up the phone lines with other family members discussing how this wedding isn't how they do things, she needs to call her nephew, congratulate him, and say to him that you are having trouble finding accommodations, can he suggest something?  And do it without sounding put out that the HC is planning their wedding their way. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: gellchom on April 09, 2013, 08:08:44 PM
I'm frustrated by the all-or-nothing tone of many of the posts.  A wedding does not have to be "all about the guests, accommodating every possible desire and need" on the one hand or "all about he bride and groom and what is meaningful to them" on the other.

Nor does something need to be intended as a snub or or a personal rejection or a passive-aggressive statement of "I'm inviting you because I have to/want a gift, but I don't really want you to come, so I'm going to make it really difficult" in order to be a "message."  As several posters said, and as I believe the OP meant, a "message" doesn't only mean one deliberately intended to be sent by the hosts.  It can also be, as they pointed out, simply the inevitable result of making a choice.  The location and time were more important to them than the convenience, and likely attendance, of the guests.  That isn't "wrong."  There may be EXCELLENT, unselfish reasons for those preferences, as some posters have suggested, but the bottom line is still the same: time and place over guests.

And it doesn't mean it is wrong or rude, and I don't think anyone said it was.  And it doesn't mean that people get offended, even if they are disappointed.  (Nor did the OP say she was "offended," if memory serves.)

Conversely, the hosts are deluding themselves if they think that no one is going to see it that way.  They don't get to decide how others are allowed to feel about their choices.  It's just as wrong to have the viewpoint of "But it's Ourrrrr Daaaaay!!!" as it is to have the viewpoint of "You have to do it for the faaaaaamily!"  You make your choices, the same as anyone must.  And then you own them; you don't excoriate people whom they disappoint or hurt.

LadyL, I hear you.  While it is true that a wedding isn't the same as a dinner party, which is SOLELY about the guests' entertainment and comfort, it's still true that the hospitality obligations of hosts don't entirely fly out the window just because it is a wedding.  This kind of thing is an unfortunate byproduct of the trend for HCs to host their own weddings; it can be tricky to be both the guests of honor and the hosts.  My daughter has always dreamed of a winter wedding, but summer it will be, because that is the most convenient time for her fiance's parents to get time off work (they must come from overseas).  I am proud of her for making that considerate choice.

Now, of course it's true that it's virtually impossible to make plans that are the most convenient for everyone.  (For example, the schoolteachers and students in our family are going to be un-thrilled at another Labor Day weekend wedding.)  And we are talking about things like dates and venues, not something like agreeing to get married in an unacceptable religious tradition or having 500 people instead of 10 or waiting two extra years or something -- that is a different matter.  But I do think it's smart as well as considerate to try the best you can to accommodate your nearest and dearest -- such as giving up your preferred season in favor of the groom's parents' work vacation time and moving the festivities off the mountaintop so that Grandma can attend.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: LadyL on April 10, 2013, 08:09:54 AM

  It's just as wrong to have the viewpoint of "But it's Ourrrrr Daaaaay!!!" as it is to have the viewpoint of "You have to do it for the faaaaaamily!"  You make your choices, the same as anyone must.  And then you own them; you don't excoriate people whom they disappoint or hurt.


POD. I think the main question left is how the HC is handling declines - if they are graciously accepting that their date and locale mean a high decline rate, or if they are complaining or being passive aggressive about it.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 10, 2013, 10:01:19 AM
I'm frustrated by the all-or-nothing tone of many of the posts.  A wedding does not have to be "all about the guests, accommodating every possible desire and need" on the one hand or "all about he bride and groom and what is meaningful to them" on the other.

Nor does something need to be intended as a snub or or a personal rejection or a passive-aggressive statement of "I'm inviting you because I have to/want a gift, but I don't really want you to come, so I'm going to make it really difficult" in order to be a "message."  As several posters said, and as I believe the OP meant, a "message" doesn't only mean one deliberately intended to be sent by the hosts.  It can also be, as they pointed out, simply the inevitable result of making a choice.  The location and time were more important to them than the convenience, and likely attendance, of the guests.  That isn't "wrong."  There may be EXCELLENT, unselfish reasons for those preferences, as some posters have suggested, but the bottom line is still the same: time and place over guests.

And it doesn't mean it is wrong or rude, and I don't think anyone said it was.  And it doesn't mean that people get offended, even if they are disappointed.  (Nor did the OP say she was "offended," if memory serves.)

Conversely, the hosts are deluding themselves if they think that no one is going to see it that way.  They don't get to decide how others are allowed to feel about their choices.  It's just as wrong to have the viewpoint of "But it's Ourrrrr Daaaaay!!!" as it is to have the viewpoint of "You have to do it for the faaaaaamily!"  You make your choices, the same as anyone must.  And then you own them; you don't excoriate people whom they disappoint or hurt.

LadyL, I hear you.  While it is true that a wedding isn't the same as a dinner party, which is SOLELY about the guests' entertainment and comfort, it's still true that the hospitality obligations of hosts don't entirely fly out the window just because it is a wedding.  This kind of thing is an unfortunate byproduct of the trend for HCs to host their own weddings; it can be tricky to be both the guests of honor and the hosts.  My daughter has always dreamed of a winter wedding, but summer it will be, because that is the most convenient time for her fiance's parents to get time off work (they must come from overseas).  I am proud of her for making that considerate choice.

Now, of course it's true that it's virtually impossible to make plans that are the most convenient for everyone.  (For example, the schoolteachers and students in our family are going to be un-thrilled at another Labor Day weekend wedding.)  And we are talking about things like dates and venues, not something like agreeing to get married in an unacceptable religious tradition or having 500 people instead of 10 or waiting two extra years or something -- that is a different matter.  But I do think it's smart as well as considerate to try the best you can to accommodate your nearest and dearest -- such as giving up your preferred season in favor of the groom's parents' work vacation time and moving the festivities off the mountaintop so that Grandma can attend.

While I completely agree with your entire post, I do have to say that there is no evidence that this particular bride and groom aren't considering their nearest and dearest.  The OP is a cousin.  And as fond as she may be of her cousin and as much as they may have visited together through the years, the fact remains that it is very likely she wasn't on the top of the list of people to consider when planning this wedding.  Just like the teacher aunt or other cousins in graduate programs probably weren't the top considerations.  This is a destination wedding and in most cases, destination weddings tend to have a smaller attendance than a local one.  There is nothing wrong with that or with the bride and groom choosing this kind of wedding.  For all we know, they checked with parents, grandparents, and those in the bridal party for feasibility of this date/location (maybe they are the ones that have the cabins with bathrooms) and decided that they'd invite the rest of the family, understanding that they may not come, but if they did then bonus.    And even then, while I think it's nice to check with parents and immediate family, I still don't think a couple would be rude not to do so (some people aren't as close to their parents as others and that is ok). 

Also, the OP only mentions STD cards not actual invitations.  So maybe all the hotel information, blocking rooms, etc is coming with the invites (something I'm used to seeing) vs. the STD cards (which I've never seen). 

So, do I think that the HC is sending the OP a specific message that her attendance isn't important?....NO.  Do I think that they are sending the general message that the destination wedding is more important to them then an extended guest list?...YES.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: lmyrs on April 10, 2013, 02:07:53 PM
I'm another who sees no message in this. A couple of things:

1. People keep calling this a "destination wedding" but the OP only said it's across the country from most of the groom's family. She never said where the couple or the bride's family lived and I assumed that they lived where the wedding is. So, I don't think you can define this as destination.

2. This is exactly the kind of wedding that has happened multiple times in my extended family, so it is the norm and in my family, this invitation would mean, "Hey - I'm getting married; we'd like you to come."

3. Just because it's not the norm in the OP's family, doesn't mean it's not the norm for the bride's family. Maybe the bride's family would have a really hard time paying for a hotel room in a fancy hotel with an "appropriate" ballroom, etc.

4. I also saw the location and timing and immediately thought - budget saving. It's a way to invite a large number of people and stay within your budget rather than go into huge debt or cut the guest list. And what would the OP have thought if she hadn't been invited at all? Is that better or worse?

5. As a PP said, just because the time of year is incovenient to some aunts and cousins doesn't mean that it's not the absolute best time for closest friends, other family, etc. When I got married, I had several teachers invited and several farmers. Our wedding was during the school year even though some teachers couldn't make it. Air travel over school breaks is WAY more expensive than other times. And, it would have been literally impossible for me to acccomodate both teachers and farmers unless I was prepared to postpone my wedding for one to two years so that I could get one of the 3 or 4 weeks in July that meet both needs.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 10, 2013, 03:08:43 PM
I have been busy helping DD, who is 8.5 months pregnant, with our DGS and the plans for his third bday and came back to find eight pages. I am amazed.

I've only read the first two pages and will attempt to clarify a few things as I read the rest.

The first thing is that I am not offended nor did I say that I was. Disappointed, yes. At least in my world, weddings serve as mini-reunions (so much better than those at funerals), and it would have been the first time all of the newest generation of cousins would have had a chance to meet since most were not born at his DS's wedding four years ago. I know I'd love to meet all the new little ones and that the parents would love to show them off. However, life is full of disappointments. I don't think being disappointed equates to being offended. And I do not feel singled out for some reason. We are retired and can easily spend the time and money to attend. (The accommodation story is another matter, but it also impacts most of the other guests.)  There are many teachers and professors in the family, as well as families with school-aged children, all of whom will have to travel a great distance and miss school shortly after it begins. However, that does not pertain to me directly, but it is one of the things that led me to think that they do not want a large wedding.

One of the people who will probably attend but will find it exceedingly difficult to do so is his DB, for whom he stood as best man at his wedding. It is this DB's wife who teaches at a university and who will have to take his children out of school to attend. So this is not a case of "extended" family not being able to attend. He is making it exceedingly difficult for his closest relatives too.

The choice of September is not a cost-cutting measure as this is the most desirable month for this location, which would, I assume, make it the most expensive. All of the weekend nights were already booked, more than the year in advance that they started planning, hence the Thursday night.

On their STD they included a link to their wedding web page, which, in turn, had the link to the B&Bs, so AFAICS, they have provided all of the information they intend to provde. Since this is the  high season, I would think that we should make our reservations soon.  They said that they planned to spend the week before at the camp and invited everyone to do the same. I think they will be disappointed at the number who do.

This is the fourth sibling to be married from this family. Additionally, he's attended weddings for other family members. All of the weddings have involved at least overnight travel. All of the other weddings were on a weekend. For all of the others the hosts either provided hotel information or blocked rooms or did both.  This is not a new concept for him.

I do know that there were no other factors like someone's chemo in choosing a Thursday in September because I spoke with his DM yesterday, who also told me his siblings were unhappy with the date.  There is no special significance to the date or venue, as it was one on a list of several they were considering.

The bride did not address the STD's. I know my nephew's handwriting. And even if she had, it is customary to include a last name to ensure delivery.  Neither DD or his DA's invitation had a last name, so it was not an inadvertent omission.

The cabins are not significantly less expensive than a moderate hotel room would be unless you squeeze several people in a room. Additionally, the DB's family is also from another state, and having the wedding at this location means that everyone must rent cars for several days and cannot use mass transit or taxis. Theirs is an urban lifestyle so they and most of their friends do not have a car, so they can't provide transportation for many people.

I never said that I viewed this as a slight or that I was offended. I never felt their plans were rude. My question was do all of these choices send the message that having many of their friends and relatives at the wedding was not a priority for them and that they would prefer to keep it small and intimate and it was better for family relationships to achieve that by making it difficult for many people to attend and so they will decline rather than not inviting them.

I apologize to those on this thread who felt that they were being criticized because the location/setting/timing of their wedding was more important to them than having family members there. It is/was your wedding, and there is nothing wrong in making that your priority.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 10, 2013, 03:45:54 PM
Thanks for all your clarifications.  I wonder if this groom and bride may not want their wedding to serve as a mini reunion?  They may want something a bit more intimate, small.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 10, 2013, 03:49:56 PM
Thanks for all your clarifications.  I wonder if this groom and bride may not want their wedding to serve as a mini reunion?  They may want something a bit more intimate, small.

That is exactly my thought and why I asked the question.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 10, 2013, 03:59:48 PM
My question was do all of these choices send the message that having many of their friends and relatives at the wedding was not a priority for them and that they would prefer to keep it small and intimate and it was better for family relationships to achieve that by making it difficult for many people to attend and so they will decline rather than not inviting them.


After your update, I still say that the choices say that this location was the most important to them (hence the willingness to get married on a weekday vs. a weekend somewhere else).  And this choice does mean that the wedding will undoubtably be smaller and more intimate had they made different choices.  But, it sounds like you are accusing them of not wanting you (and others) to come to their wedding at all and instead of just not inviting you, they are deliberately making choices to force you to decline.  I have a hard time seeing how/why someone would go through this much trouble (travel, pick a weekday, etc).  Is your family so intent that *everyone* be invited and get so insulted when they're not that this couple would feel the need to go through all this extra trouble?  It seems unlikely, though I guess, not impossible.

I get why you would be disappointed if you were thinking that this wedding would be an opportunity to meet/see the extended family and I even understand that this is the norm for your family.  But, I do think that it's an unrealistic expectation to put on this couple.  Surely, hosting everyone in the extended family (add friends, the brides whole extended family...to be fair..etc) can get expensive.  And it may just not be the atmosphere they are going for.   I think it's much kinder that unless given evidence otherwise, you assume that you were invited because they would like you to be there on their wedding day.  And the location was picked solely because it's the place where they want to be married.

As for the misspelling and no last names and the lack of information on the website, etc...I'll give it to you that maybe they are sloppy in their organization and their coordination of this wedding.   But, that just makes them poor planners/organizers, not people deliberately trying to keep you from attending their wedding.  The easiest way to do that would be to just not invite you.   
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 10, 2013, 04:24:01 PM
Thanks for all your clarifications.  I wonder if this groom and bride may not want their wedding to serve as a mini reunion?  They may want something a bit more intimate, small.

That is exactly my thought and why I asked the question.

I can say that I took your OP that you were offended that their plans didn't conform to how weddings are typically done in your family.  Maybe you didn't realize it, but it sounded like you thought they were sending a message intentionally that family wasn't as important as the location.  It sounds like they just want a smaller, more intimate wedding.  No message.   

ETA: Saw Bah's post after mine and agree with her as well. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: nuit93 on April 10, 2013, 05:21:21 PM

I apologize to those on this thread who felt that they were being criticized because the location/setting/timing of their wedding was more important to them than having family members there. It is/was your wedding, and there is nothing wrong in making that your priority.

I don't think this was your intent, but the wording comes across as passive-aggressive which I think is where a lot of people are taking issue.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Venus193 on April 10, 2013, 06:11:40 PM
This update makes me think of many past discussions we've had when brides wonder and worry whether their mothers (or other relatives) are looking to hijack their weddings into family reunions or "meet the baby" of their siblings or other relatives.  It sounds to me like a situation where "Family reunion time and -- BTW -- somebody's getting married."

I don't come from a big family and neither do most of my friends, but I can easily see someone getting fed up with this and deciding to cut this back so that their wedding ceremony and reception be the purpose for the occasion rather than an excuse for a different type of family event with a different atmosphere.

Nothing wrong with trying to buck the trend.  The bride and groom are adults, they're paying for the event, and they are entitled to the wedding they want.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: delabela on April 10, 2013, 08:43:56 PM
I absolutely agree with bah12.

OP, you stated that they are making it exceedingly difficult for people to attend.  I would offer that the goal is not to make it difficult for people to attend, but rather to have the wedding they want.  A side effect may be that fewer people can come, but to read a message in it is uncharitable. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 10, 2013, 09:27:57 PM
This update makes me think of many past discussions we've had when brides wonder and worry whether their mothers (or other relatives) are looking to hijack their weddings into family reunions or "meet the baby" of their siblings or other relatives.  It sounds to me like a situation where "Family reunion time and -- BTW -- somebody's getting married."

I don't come from a big family and neither do most of my friends, but I can easily see someone getting fed up with this and deciding to cut this back so that their wedding ceremony and reception be the purpose for the occasion rather than an excuse for a different type of family event with a different atmosphere.

Nothing wrong with trying to buck the trend.  The bride and groom are adults, they're paying for the event, and they are entitled to the wedding they want.

Wherever did you get the idea that they are paying for the entire wedding themselves?  I know that the groom's family is making a sizable contribution, equal to what they paid to host their DD's wedding.

Perhaps your wedding attendance experiences are different from mine, but while all of the attention during the ceremony and certain parts of the reception are on the HC, socializing during the reception with family members and friends has certainly been the norm. I have a hard time imagining a bride and groom so self-centered that they would expect their guests' attention to be focused on them at all times.  Spending SOME  time at a reception catching up with family members (which is the extent of the mini-reunions I've experienced) does not equate to taking the focus of attention away from the reason for the celebration but rather good hosting because you want your guests to enjoy themselves.

Do you not talk to and dance with the other guests at the weddings you've attended?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mammavan3 on April 10, 2013, 09:30:16 PM
My question was do all of these choices send the message that having many of their friends and relatives at the wedding was not a priority for them and that they would prefer to keep it small and intimate and it was better for family relationships to achieve that by making it difficult for many people to attend and so they will decline rather than not inviting them.


After your update, I still say that the choices say that this location was the most important to them (hence the willingness to get married on a weekday vs. a weekend somewhere else).  And this choice does mean that the wedding will undoubtably be smaller and more intimate had they made different choices.  But, it sounds like you are accusing them of not wanting you (and others) to come to their wedding at all and instead of just not inviting you, they are deliberately making choices to force you to decline.  I have a hard time seeing how/why someone would go through this much trouble (travel, pick a weekday, etc).  Is your family so intent that *everyone* be invited and get so insulted when they're not that this couple would feel the need to go through all this extra trouble?  It seems unlikely, though I guess, not impossible.

I get why you would be disappointed if you were thinking that this wedding would be an opportunity to meet/see the extended family and I even understand that this is the norm for your family.  But, I do think that it's an unrealistic expectation to put on this couple.  Surely, hosting everyone in the extended family (add friends, the brides whole extended family...to be fair..etc) can get expensive.  And it may just not be the atmosphere they are going for.   I think it's much kinder that unless given evidence otherwise, you assume that you were invited because they would like you to be there on their wedding day.  And the location was picked solely because it's the place where they want to be married.

As for the misspelling and no last names and the lack of information on the website, etc...I'll give it to you that maybe they are sloppy in their organization and their coordination of this wedding.   But, that just makes them poor planners/organizers, not people deliberately trying to keep you from attending their wedding.  The easiest way to do that would be to just not invite you.

There's a bible verse that says, "Where your heart is, there your treasure will be," and IME this has proven to be true. If something is important to you, you take the time to do it correctly. If I want you to get a piece of mail, perhaps I make a mistake in the spelling of your name or your street number, but I will put your last name on it.  Unless I'm six and sending it to Grammy and Grandpa. I think omitting last names takes a little more than disorganization.

I do not think that the B and G deliberately set out to find a way to invite people but not have them attend, but when you select a date and your parents and siblings, with whom you are very close, tell you that your choice will mean that there will be several people who do not come and many others who will be very inconvenienced by doing so and you decide to do so anyway, what else is to be assumed other than that the location is more important than having those people attend?  And, once more, there is nothing wrong with that.

And as for it being easier just to not invite you, that's true, but that might also mean fewer wedding gifts. Their wedding web site pages are all blank - those meant to detail how they met, photos, the wedding party, details about accommodations in the area except for the C of C link to the list of B&Bs, and information about the ceremony and reception, but the registry pages are completely filled out, with details about the $200 Le Creuset pans and $200 coffee maker they'd like as well as their honeymoon fund.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 10, 2013, 09:36:29 PM
This update makes me think of many past discussions we've had when brides wonder and worry whether their mothers (or other relatives) are looking to hijack their weddings into family reunions or "meet the baby" of their siblings or other relatives.  It sounds to me like a situation where "Family reunion time and -- BTW -- somebody's getting married."

I don't come from a big family and neither do most of my friends, but I can easily see someone getting fed up with this and deciding to cut this back so that their wedding ceremony and reception be the purpose for the occasion rather than an excuse for a different type of family event with a different atmosphere.

Nothing wrong with trying to buck the trend.  The bride and groom are adults, they're paying for the event, and they are entitled to the wedding they want.

Wherever did you get the idea that they are paying for the entire wedding themselves?  I know that the groom's family is making a sizable contribution, equal to what they paid to host their DD's wedding.

Perhaps your wedding attendance experiences are different from mine, but while all of the attention during the ceremony and certain parts of the reception are on the HC, socializing during the reception with family members and friends has certainly been the norm. I have a hard time imagining a bride and groom so self-centered that they would expect their guests' attention to be focused on them at all times.  Spending SOME  time at a reception catching up with family members (which is the extent of the mini-reunions I've experienced) does not equate to taking the focus of attention away from the reason for the celebration but rather good hosting because you want your guests to enjoy themselves.

Do you not talk to and dance with the other guests at the weddings you've attended?

Well you did say weddings in your family turn into mini reunions.  Maybe they don't want that for their wedding.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 10, 2013, 10:28:46 PM
Mammavan3, your updates do make it sound like you are upset and resentful.  They are having a wedding they want, which is so different from any wedding your family has ever seen.  That is ok.  Yeah, he screwed up on the STD cards, sounds like he has no clue how to address an envelope.  But you are taking every decision they make to heart...they don't have to tell people how they met on a wedding website, they can register for a chunk of heaven if they want, doesn't mean anyone HAS to get it for them, you are mad about the date, location, accommodations, and that it won't be a 3 day blowout family affair.  Maybe she has a small family and is intimidated by a large gathering, maybe they don't want children at their wedding.  Maybe you envision them to be closer to the family than they really are.  And just because the grooms family made a sizable contribution does NOT mean they have to do things the 'family' way.  They happened to be getting a sum of money  that the groom's brother received when he got married.  Maybe they are going to use it for their honeymoon or a down payment on a house.  Someone you love is getting married...be happy for them instead of trying to read between the lines.  They sent you a STD card, meaning you will get an invite...if there was a message, it would be no invite at all.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: kareng57 on April 10, 2013, 10:29:00 PM
I absolutely agree with bah12.

OP, you stated that they are making it exceedingly difficult for people to attend.  I would offer that the goal is not to make it difficult for people to attend, but rather to have the wedding they want.  A side effect may be that fewer people can come, but to read a message in it is uncharitable.


I don't disagree, but I honestly wonder how they can budget for this kind of wedding, where they seem to be figuring that the majority of invitees will not attend.

Of course, that can also occur when overseas guests are invited - but when a wedding is in North America and many family invitees are in Italy - it's probably fair to make an educated guess that that most (especially if they are fairly elderly) will not be able to attend.  But I think it's a lot trickier when it's within driving distance for a lot of guests, even if the date (weekday) is not great, and the most accessible accommodations are pretty rustic.  So they might figure that 30% of their guests will say "yes" - but what happens if it turns out to be 70%?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: iridaceae on April 11, 2013, 07:16:45 AM
The first thing is that I am not offended nor did I say that I was. Disappointed, yes. At least in my world, weddings serve as mini-reunions (so much better than those at funerals), and it would have been the first time all of the newest generation of cousins would have had a chance to meet since most were not born at his DS's wedding four years ago. I know I'd love to meet all the new little ones and that the parents would love to show them.


I think the thing people are noticing is that nowhere in the block of text above do you mention the wedding itself,  the bride's side of the family or anything else wedding-related.

Personally I'd Hate to find out that my wedding was seen more as a chance for the family to gave a mini-reunion (with the implication ghat the groom's family is to be ignored) than as a chance to,  you know,  celebrate my wedding.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Dr. F. on April 11, 2013, 07:28:42 AM
Threads like this make me absolutely, positively CERTAIN that, should I ever get married (cue hysterical laughter), I will elope. Weddings are just not worth the angst.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: dawbs on April 11, 2013, 07:38:31 AM
OP, it really sounds like you don't like these relatives.

There are, more or less, 8 pages here of ehellions saying that they 'get' the frustration but, really, the bride and groom are doing nothing wrong by not having completely filled out the wedding website, by possibly accommodating what its 'done' by the bride's side, by making plans for a location important to them, for possibly having reasons you don't know about, and for planning the wedding they want to have instead of the wedding some of their family wants them to have.

And your response has been to say that you 'get' that...and then imply they are gift-grabby, self-centered, and deliberately snubbing you.

Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 11, 2013, 10:02:02 AM
I agree.  OP, you do sound extremely offended and angry in your posts.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 11, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
My question was do all of these choices send the message that having many of their friends and relatives at the wedding was not a priority for them and that they would prefer to keep it small and intimate and it was better for family relationships to achieve that by making it difficult for many people to attend and so they will decline rather than not inviting them.


After your update, I still say that the choices say that this location was the most important to them (hence the willingness to get married on a weekday vs. a weekend somewhere else).  And this choice does mean that the wedding will undoubtably be smaller and more intimate had they made different choices.  But, it sounds like you are accusing them of not wanting you (and others) to come to their wedding at all and instead of just not inviting you, they are deliberately making choices to force you to decline.  I have a hard time seeing how/why someone would go through this much trouble (travel, pick a weekday, etc).  Is your family so intent that *everyone* be invited and get so insulted when they're not that this couple would feel the need to go through all this extra trouble?  It seems unlikely, though I guess, not impossible.

I get why you would be disappointed if you were thinking that this wedding would be an opportunity to meet/see the extended family and I even understand that this is the norm for your family.  But, I do think that it's an unrealistic expectation to put on this couple.  Surely, hosting everyone in the extended family (add friends, the brides whole extended family...to be fair..etc) can get expensive.  And it may just not be the atmosphere they are going for.   I think it's much kinder that unless given evidence otherwise, you assume that you were invited because they would like you to be there on their wedding day.  And the location was picked solely because it's the place where they want to be married.

As for the misspelling and no last names and the lack of information on the website, etc...I'll give it to you that maybe they are sloppy in their organization and their coordination of this wedding.   But, that just makes them poor planners/organizers, not people deliberately trying to keep you from attending their wedding.  The easiest way to do that would be to just not invite you.

There's a bible verse that says, "Where your heart is, there your treasure will be," and IME this has proven to be true. If something is important to you, you take the time to do it correctly. If I want you to get a piece of mail, perhaps I make a mistake in the spelling of your name or your street number, but I will put your last name on it.  Unless I'm six and sending it to Grammy and Grandpa. I think omitting last names takes a little more than disorganization.

I do not think that the B and G deliberately set out to find a way to invite people but not have them attend, but when you select a date and your parents and siblings, with whom you are very close, tell you that your choice will mean that there will be several people who do not come and many others who will be very inconvenienced by doing so and you decide to do so anyway, what else is to be assumed other than that the location is more important than having those people attend?  And, once more, there is nothing wrong with that.

And as for it being easier just to not invite you, that's true, but that might also mean fewer wedding gifts. Their wedding web site pages are all blank - those meant to detail how they met, photos, the wedding party, details about accommodations in the area except for the C of C link to the list of B&Bs, and information about the ceremony and reception, but the registry pages are completely filled out, with details about the $200 Le Creuset pans and $200 coffee maker they'd like as well as their honeymoon fund.

I'm finding it hard to equate that this is a cousin that you are so fond of (from your OP) and also someone who you think, without question, would purposely plan an entire wedding to specifically exclude all his family members all the while getting expensive gifts from them.  And if his family is paying for a large portion of it and allowing this "terrible" behavior, then they are just as guilty, right?

If you can acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with them choosing the wedding they want over the wedding that you expect them to have, then I don't see the problem.  If them not having the large, family reunion type wedding that you are accostomed to makes it difficult for you to respect their choices and just be happy for them, then you're better off not going and not sending a gift.   And the end of the day, this wedding really is about them.  It doesn't matter that all the focus will not be on them all the time.  It doesn't have to be for it to still be about them.  It doesn't matter that they have an obligation to the guests that are able to come to make sure that they are fed, comfortable, and enjoying themselves.  They can meet all those obligations and still throw the wedding that makes them the happiest.  And it seems to be a wedding at a State Park on an Island on a Thursday.  And it even seems that they wanted you to attend, because they sent you a STD card. 

And, I'm really having a hard time understanding how not putting your last name on the card is evidence that all they want is gifts.  Last names don't have to be on envelopes to receive mail.  But even if they did, and the goal was for you to never get the card(seems like a waste of stamp, when they could just lie about sending you one), then it can't possibly be a gift grab.  How would you know to buy them a gift?  And, to me, this is the most frustrating because we are talking about STD cards, not actual invites.  STD cards, IME, are sent out early in the planning stage (when the date and location are known), so people can keep their calendars clear, not when every single detail of the wedding has been worked out.  Maybe their website isn't completed yet.  Maybe all the plans aren't set in stone right now. (And again, not filling in how they met is just missing fluff, not evidence that they are trying to exclude you.)

Bottom line, you got a STD card with the date and location of the wedding in the mail.  This does not equal behavior of someone that is trying to exclude you from their wedding.  If your family is not important enough to consider working around their preferences when choosing a date and a location, why would they be important enough to go through all this planning and effort to make it appear like you're invited when in reality you aren't welcome at all?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Hmmmmm on April 11, 2013, 10:41:49 AM
MammaVan, I get where you are coming from. But I think a lot of readers were immediately put off the the phrase of "sending a message" which implies an overt act of trying to indicate desires without actually saying it.  I don't think you believe your nephew is actively saying "don't come to my wedding, I don't want you ."

For the readers who think she is mad, upset, and disgruntled about the wedding format.  What if instead she had stated the below?

My dear nephew is getting married later in the year. Our family takes great effort to try and attend all weddings. It's a time to show support of the new couple, welcome the new family member, and get a chance to visit with other families. It is sort of taken for granted that everyone will try their best to attend the weddings. This groom's older sister married a few years ago and most of the family was in attendance.

We received our save the date card last week and now I'm concerned. The wedding will be on a Thursday at a state park cross country from where most of our family and the bride's lives. From the enclosed information there seems to be very little options for accomodations close to the park. Also, many of our family works in education or has children in school and taking time off during the week during the school year is a big hardship for many.

We don't want the groom, or his parents who are helping pay for the wedding, to feel slighted by a small family turn out. But based on the logistics involved it sounds like they are probably prepared for that outcome.

I suggested to other family members that the bride and groom have selected a location that is important to them and they are aware they'll have fewer family members in attendance? But many of them are still feeling guilty about not attending.


I think the majority of you would say "The B&G planned a wedding they wanted and aren't expecting a large turn out of family and probably doesn't care if family attends."
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 11, 2013, 10:46:04 AM
MammaVan, I get where you are coming from. But I think a lot of readers were immediately put off the the phrase of "sending a message" which implies an overt act of trying to indicate desires without actually saying it.  I don't think you believe your nephew is actively saying "don't come to my wedding, I don't want you ."

For the readers who think she is mad, upset, and disgruntled about the wedding format.  What if instead she had stated the below?

My dear nephew is getting married later in the year. Our family takes great effort to try and attend all weddings. It's a time to show support of the new couple, welcome the new family member, and get a chance to visit with other families. It is sort of taken for granted that everyone will try their best to attend the weddings. This groom's older sister married a few years ago and most of the family was in attendance.

We received our save the date card last week and now I'm concerned. The wedding will be on a Thursday at a state park cross country from where most of our family and the bride's lives. From the enclosed information there seems to be very little options for accomodations close to the park. Also, many of our family works in education or has children in school and taking time off during the week during the school year is a big hardship for many.

We don't want the groom, or his parents who are helping pay for the wedding, to feel slighted by a small family turn out. But based on the logistics involved it sounds like they are probably prepared for that outcome.

I suggested to other family members that the bride and groom have selected a location that is important to them and they are aware they'll have fewer family members in attendance? But many of them are still feeling guilty about not attending.


I think the majority of you would say "The B&G planned a wedding they wanted and aren't expecting a large turn out of family and probably doesn't care if family attends."

Well, that would have sounded a lot better...because it is her worried about sending a message to them (not wanting to be there to support them) that wasn't true vs what she actually said...which was an accusation that they were purposely planning a wedding to exclude the family but still get gifts from them.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Hmmmmm on April 11, 2013, 11:00:06 AM
MammaVan, I get where you are coming from. But I think a lot of readers were immediately put off the the phrase of "sending a message" which implies an overt act of trying to indicate desires without actually saying it.  I don't think you believe your nephew is actively saying "don't come to my wedding, I don't want you ."

For the readers who think she is mad, upset, and disgruntled about the wedding format.  What if instead she had stated the below?

My dear nephew is getting married later in the year. Our family takes great effort to try and attend all weddings. It's a time to show support of the new couple, welcome the new family member, and get a chance to visit with other families. It is sort of taken for granted that everyone will try their best to attend the weddings. This groom's older sister married a few years ago and most of the family was in attendance.

We received our save the date card last week and now I'm concerned. The wedding will be on a Thursday at a state park cross country from where most of our family and the bride's lives. From the enclosed information there seems to be very little options for accomodations close to the park. Also, many of our family works in education or has children in school and taking time off during the week during the school year is a big hardship for many.

We don't want the groom, or his parents who are helping pay for the wedding, to feel slighted by a small family turn out. But based on the logistics involved it sounds like they are probably prepared for that outcome.

I suggested to other family members that the bride and groom have selected a location that is important to them and they are aware they'll have fewer family members in attendance? But many of them are still feeling guilty about not attending.


I think the majority of you would say "The B&G planned a wedding they wanted and aren't expecting a large turn out of family and probably doesn't care if family attends."

Well, that would have sounded a lot better...because it is her worried about sending a message to them (not wanting to be there to support them) that wasn't true vs what she actually said...which was an accusation that they were purposely planning a wedding to exclude the family but still get gifts from them.

I think it's all in interpretation because what I wrote is how I read her first post with a few added details from her second.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Bookgirl on April 11, 2013, 12:05:13 PM
There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting. 

One thing that's been bothering me is that this is being referred to as a "destination" wedding but it's not.  Not for the HC anyway.  It's where they live.  Yes, it's across the country from most of the groom's family (what about the bride's family?) but it's where the couple lives *now*.  A destination wedding, at least to me, is one where the HC has to travel to get to along with their guests.  Yes, it's in a national park and I'm sure they don't actually live in the national park but it's still local to them. 

When we got married, we had to travel about a half hour to get to our location and some of my family had to travel an hour.  My in laws had to travel several hours.  That doesn't mean that we had a destination wedding and I don't think any of my family would think that we had one either.  And yes, I realize that across the country is completely different than a couple of hours but I still don't think the HC having a wedding at a location near their home makes it a destination wedding.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: sparksals on April 11, 2013, 12:25:51 PM
Mammavan wrote:
Quote
"Where your heart is, there your treasure will be," and IME this has proven to be true. If something is important to you, you take the time to do it correctly.

So what they are doing is wrong then?  Your idea of correct and theirs is obviously completely different.   You don't seem to be thinking that there is also the bride's family to consider and that they may have their own traditions that are quite different from yours. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 11, 2013, 01:19:40 PM
There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting. 

One thing that's been bothering me is that this is being referred to as a "destination" wedding but it's not.  Not for the HC anyway.  It's where they live.  Yes, it's across the country from most of the groom's family (what about the bride's family?) but it's where the couple lives *now*.  A destination wedding, at least to me, is one where the HC has to travel to get to along with their guests.  Yes, it's in a national park and I'm sure they don't actually live in the national park but it's still local to them. 

When we got married, we had to travel about a half hour to get to our location and some of my family had to travel an hour.  My in laws had to travel several hours.  That doesn't mean that we had a destination wedding and I don't think any of my family would think that we had one either.  And yes, I realize that across the country is completely different than a couple of hours but I still don't think the HC having a wedding at a location near their home makes it a destination wedding.

I think I'm the one that started using that term and I called it that because the OP said that the wedding is in a State Park on an island.  Where I seriously doubt they live.  I didn't see the OP say that this wedding is near their home...but if it is, then that makes the "message" that they are purposely excluding their relatives even crazier.  If they are planning a wedding convenient to where they live, then the message is more likely "we are planning a wedding that is near us.  It makes no sense for us to plan and coordinate a wedding near the grooms family because it's too far to do that effectively."  Not "We refuse to plan a wedding far away from us because we don't want the grooms family to come.  We'll invite them, but will make it difficult for them to attend." 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 11, 2013, 01:35:22 PM
MammaVan, I get where you are coming from. But I think a lot of readers were immediately put off the the phrase of "sending a message" which implies an overt act of trying to indicate desires without actually saying it.  I don't think you believe your nephew is actively saying "don't come to my wedding, I don't want you ."

For the readers who think she is mad, upset, and disgruntled about the wedding format.  What if instead she had stated the below?

My dear nephew is getting married later in the year. Our family takes great effort to try and attend all weddings. It's a time to show support of the new couple, welcome the new family member, and get a chance to visit with other families. It is sort of taken for granted that everyone will try their best to attend the weddings. This groom's older sister married a few years ago and most of the family was in attendance.

We received our save the date card last week and now I'm concerned. The wedding will be on a Thursday at a state park cross country from where most of our family and the bride's lives. From the enclosed information there seems to be very little options for accomodations close to the park. Also, many of our family works in education or has children in school and taking time off during the week during the school year is a big hardship for many.

We don't want the groom, or his parents who are helping pay for the wedding, to feel slighted by a small family turn out. But based on the logistics involved it sounds like they are probably prepared for that outcome.

I suggested to other family members that the bride and groom have selected a location that is important to them and they are aware they'll have fewer family members in attendance? But many of them are still feeling guilty about not attending.


I think the majority of you would say "The B&G planned a wedding they wanted and aren't expecting a large turn out of family and probably doesn't care if family attends."

Well, that would have sounded a lot better...because it is her worried about sending a message to them (not wanting to be there to support them) that wasn't true vs what she actually said...which was an accusation that they were purposely planning a wedding to exclude the family but still get gifts from them.

I think it's all in interpretation because what I wrote is how I read her first post with a few added details from her second.

I wish I saw it that way, but going back and reading the posts, no where does she mention any concern for how she may be making the HC feel or worry that while she wants to support them, she can't because it's too difficult.  Instead, she talks about disappointment that this may not be an opportunity for a mini-reunion, that the accommodations (cabins) aren't conducive to those who fly in (even though they are already booked and therefore not an option anyway), the problems with the STD cards, and how this doesn't compare to the wedding she hosted for her daughter. 

Her issue is more to do with how they failed to meet her expectations vs. concern that she may not be able to meet theirs.  The only thing that comes close is the statement "we all flew to another continent for his brother, so there is an expectation for us to come to this one" with a follow on that he must not really want it (note: no statement like "I don't want him to feel slighted or be disappointed that we aren't there").  And it makes even less sense because if having a wedding on another continent wasn't too difficult for the mini-reunion and didn't send a message that family wasn't welcome, how could one a days drive away do so.  Because it's on a Thursday?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: MizA on April 11, 2013, 01:44:05 PM
Mammavan3, your updates do make it sound like you are upset and resentful.  They are having a wedding they want, which is so different from any wedding your family has ever seen.  That is ok.  Yeah, he screwed up on the STD cards, sounds like he has no clue how to address an envelope.  But you are taking every decision they make to heart...they don't have to tell people how they met on a wedding website, they can register for a chunk of heaven if they want, doesn't mean anyone HAS to get it for them, you are mad about the date, location, accommodations, and that it won't be a 3 day blowout family affair.  Maybe she has a small family and is intimidated by a large gathering, maybe they don't want children at their wedding.  Maybe you envision them to be closer to the family than they really are.  And just because the grooms family made a sizable contribution does NOT mean they have to do things the 'family' way.  They happened to be getting a sum of money  that the groom's brother received when he got married.  Maybe they are going to use it for their honeymoon or a down payment on a house.  Someone you love is getting married...be happy for them instead of trying to read between the lines.  They sent you a STD card, meaning you will get an invite...if there was a message, it would be no invite at all.

POD. If they didn't want you there, you likely would not have been notified of the wedding at all.

And to speak briefly to the family reunion aspect of it all- If one would like a family reunion, there is nothing stopping one from planning it. My DF's family was hoping to use our wedding as a reunion, which would have *doubled* our guest list and rendered our budget exploded. We gently explained that we were sorry, but it just wasn't possible. And I'll bet you a cookie that family members are going to be muttering about the message we sent when we put our feet down to have the wedding that we had originally planned for. Weddings are *weddings*, a day for the couple to celebrate with their loved ones their union. They're not family reunions.

As far as the who's-paying-what aspect- Well, actually, that doesn't matter. As stated in numerous places on this site, it's best to not assume anything about another's finances. It's money that was gifted to them, so they can use it any way they'd like.

It's difficult to read threads like this whilst planning a wedding. No matter what accommodations one makes, no matter how one bends, one can anticipate others taking offense where none was meant. Bacon in the brussels sprouts? Clearly you don't care that some of your guests don't eat pork. Non-traditional ceremony? Obviously, you don't want your more elderly or religious guests there. Wedsite not finished? Obviously, you don't want anyone to actually come.

Why not just be happy that these folks are getting married and would like to extend the invitation to share the day with you?
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: jemma on April 11, 2013, 01:51:19 PM
Ah, addressing wedding invitations.  My best friend from high school is named Sara.  My mother feels she's a Sarah.  I corrected her name on our invitation list no joke five times, and had discussions 1,000,000 and 1,000,001 with my mother about how to spell her name.  Before my mom sent the invites to the printer, she corrected the spelling on Sara's name.  Fortunately, my friend is awesome and just assumed my mother did the invites.  That's not nearly as embarrassing as how I invited my fil's female relatives.  He gave us a list of names including Mr. And Mrs. Husband's name and wife's maiden name.  I addressed them to Mr. And Mrs husband's name and Miss wife's maiden name.  My husband and mil didn't catch it since those were familiar names.  So twenty guests were invited twice...  Unless you have evidence that your nephew has refused to learn your name because he doesn't care about you, the message sent there is that the bride's family wants you to come to the wedding since you are important to the groom
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Bookgirl on April 11, 2013, 03:40:34 PM
There is no problem with flying across the country to attend the wedding; it's where they live and an area we have been looking forward to visiting. 

One thing that's been bothering me is that this is being referred to as a "destination" wedding but it's not.  Not for the HC anyway.  It's where they live.  Yes, it's across the country from most of the groom's family (what about the bride's family?) but it's where the couple lives *now*.  A destination wedding, at least to me, is one where the HC has to travel to get to along with their guests.  Yes, it's in a national park and I'm sure they don't actually live in the national park but it's still local to them. 

When we got married, we had to travel about a half hour to get to our location and some of my family had to travel an hour.  My in laws had to travel several hours.  That doesn't mean that we had a destination wedding and I don't think any of my family would think that we had one either.  And yes, I realize that across the country is completely different than a couple of hours but I still don't think the HC having a wedding at a location near their home makes it a destination wedding.

I think I'm the one that started using that term and I called it that because the OP said that the wedding is in a State Park on an island.  Where I seriously doubt they live.  I didn't see the OP say that this wedding is near their home...but if it is, then that makes the "message" that they are purposely excluding their relatives even crazier.  If they are planning a wedding convenient to where they live, then the message is more likely "we are planning a wedding that is near us.  It makes no sense for us to plan and coordinate a wedding near the grooms family because it's too far to do that effectively."  Not "We refuse to plan a wedding far away from us because we don't want the grooms family to come.  We'll invite them, but will make it difficult for them to attend."

The part I quoted from Mammavan3 is where it is stated that the HC live in the same area as the venue. It was mentioned on page 2, not in the OP.  I read the OP the same way everyone else did, as if it were truly a destination wedding but it turns out that it's not. 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Mikayla on April 11, 2013, 04:16:31 PM

Do you not talk to and dance with the other guests at the weddings you've attended?

OP, I'm late to this, but wanted to add something specific related to wedding-as-family-reunion. 

I think it's absolutely fine for the HC or the hosts of the event to want a reunion, and it's fine for them to invite accordingly.  Where it becomes problematic is the expectation of guests that either they, or other family members, should be invited to create the family reunion.  If anything, it's the opposite.  I know I've read at least one credible source saying that weddings aren't family reunions.

You mentioned in an update that this would have been the first time the newest generation was all together at one event.  If you feel so strongly about that, and since money isn't a problem, there's nothing stopping you from organizing one.  I don't mean this in a snarky way, either.   It's a legit idea if you're wanting everyone together at the same time, and it's much more stress free than hoping upcoming brides see it the same way.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 11, 2013, 05:03:49 PM
As far as a wedding being a family reunion, that seems selfish when one side decides how the HC will have their wedding.  This is the joining of 2 individuals with 2 families.  If Mammavan3's family wants this wedding to be a way for the newest generation to be introduced, what about the brides family?  Should they just sit back and feel like outsiders as it turns into the grooms families party?  Or should they also plan a family reunion, so instead of a day to celebrate the marriage of the couple, it is all about meeting new babies and catching up with great aunt myrtle ?  And if I were the couple and caught wind of the discussions
being bandied about among the family about how the wedding was not being done the way the family expects (much less the comments about being gift grabby & how others think a monetary gift that all the sibling get for their marriage should be spent), I would be cutting the guest list down.  I would not want to inconvenience anyone who feels that my wedding was being done wrong.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Just Lori on April 11, 2013, 09:46:04 PM
Here's the thing - if I were having a small, intimate wedding, I would invite only those that I reasonably expected to come.  Yes, there might be an invitation sent to a relative across the globe on the off-chance that I thought she might make it, but I wouldn't invite more people than I expected to be able to accommodate.

I hear a lot of people saying this couple wanted a small, intimate wedding.  That's fine, but it sounds like they've invited a lot of extended family to this small, intimate wedding, without ensuring that there are appropriate, comfortable accommodations available.  I do believe it's unrealistic to expect out-of-town guests to travel to with cooking and camping gear, unless your particular circle is made up of outdoor types and camping aficionados.

There is nothing wrong with a small, intimate wedding.  But you don't invite people with the expectation that they'll say no.  And when you do invite someone, you should be able to offer them reasonable options for accommodation.  I may love the heat of the summer, but I wouldn't invite guests to an outside wedding in July unless I knew there was plenty of shade options and water available.  You have to consider your guests' comfort.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: *inviteseller on April 12, 2013, 12:37:28 AM
They may want a small intimate affair, hence the date and location, but are feeling pressured to invite people because that is how OP's daughter did it, and how the groom's brother did it.  This, obviously hits a nerve with me, because thanks to the non stop pressure and PA stuff from MIL, we did not get the wedding we wanted, instead we ended up doing it (nicely) at a JP with no parents (I couldn't ask mine and not his).  Because they had always had the big family reunion weddings on his side, we were expected to also and when we said no, it would be small (100 people tops but we were planning on cutting that down).  She, no matter how many times we explained that we were paying for it, said "well, this is how my family celebrates any occasion and you will just have to ask your father for the money.(her initial list had over 200 people!)  I also received money from my dad, the same amount he gave my sister but we were using that for our relocation to another state for his job.  I think the OP is making assumptions without speaking to the HC, altho they are under no obligation to explain why they want to have their wedding this way.  Also, as far as making it about your guests...yes, there should be decent food & drink for the guests and the couple should make a point of speaking to each guest throughout the reception, but as far as making sure the guests have accommodations they find up to their individual tastes, I think all the couple is responsible for is giving suggestions for places to stay in the area and leaving it up to the invitees to decide what works for them. 
And as far as their registry, just because they have one doesn't make it mandatory to buy off of it.  A lot of times with registries, employees work with the couple and convince them that they just have to have the $200 silver chafing dish, or the $500 tea service, so they put it on, knowing darn well they aren't getting it.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Eeep! on April 12, 2013, 06:46:02 AM
Here's the thing - if I were having a small, intimate wedding, I would invite only those that I reasonably expected to come.  Yes, there might be an invitation sent to a relative across the globe on the off-chance that I thought she might make it, but I wouldn't invite more people than I expected to be able to accommodate.

I hear a lot of people saying this couple wanted a small, intimate wedding.  That's fine, but it sounds like they've invited a lot of extended family to this small, intimate wedding, without ensuring that there are appropriate, comfortable accommodations available.  I do believe it's unrealistic to expect out-of-town guests to travel to with cooking and camping gear, unless your particular circle is made up of outdoor types and camping aficionados.

There is nothing wrong with a small, intimate wedding.  But you don't invite people with the expectation that they'll say no.  And when you do invite someone, you should be able to offer them reasonable options for accommodation.  I may love the heat of the summer, but I wouldn't invite guests to an outside wedding in July unless I knew there was plenty of shade options and water available.  You have to consider your guests' comfort.

This is how I feel too. I'm actually quite surprised that some people seem to think they it's ok to just throw whatever wedding YOU want without any regards to logistics of how your guests will be able to attend. Perhaps I am picturing the location as more remote than it is but if it is somewhere where the distance will require people to stay there than I do find it is a bit much to expect your guests to bring their own linens when going to what appears to be an otherwise normal wedding. Now perhaps the B&G are really planning on having a more rustic/camping type wedding. But if this is true, they have a website and should be able to make that nice and clear. I get that it can be hard if you want to have a different wedding than is the norm in your family. They puts a lot of added pressure on you. But I personally think you are doing your guests and yourself a disservice to not acknowledge that fact. (Although I have been wondering if the whole first name only on the invites was a bungled attempt to show it was more casual?).

I'm curious - and I truly am not trying to be snarky - would people really think that it's ok to throw your wedding somewhere where there is a limited amount of accommodations - say on an island - and just invite however many people you want without ensuring there would be somewhere for them to actually stay? I would like to think that the rule should be that if there are only accommodations for 45 people than you only invite that many (maybe a percentage more allowing for declines. But not even sure on that.) Or do you just invite however many people and figure they can decline if it doesn't work out?

I know the OPs situation isn't that extreme, but where is the line? Is it really ok to set your wedding somewhere atypical and then just expect your guests to fend for themselves in finding accommodations? I personally think that expecting your guests to either share bathroom facilities ( and it sounds like even those are limited) or cull through a list of b&bs, during a high season, hoping to find somewhere to stay us a bit much. What if they can't find somewhere? What then?   
 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on April 12, 2013, 08:03:55 AM
Every wedding I have been to outside my area has required that I find a B&B.  I've done it for people's birthday parties, anniversary parties etc as well.  I don't see the problem.

An invitation is not a summons, if guests don't want to attend that type of event they can decline.
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: Calistoga on April 12, 2013, 09:34:13 AM
Quote
This is how I feel too. I'm actually quite surprised that some people seem to think they it's ok to just throw whatever wedding YOU want without any regards to logistics of how your guests will be able to attend. Perhaps I am picturing the location as more remote than it is but if it is somewhere where the distance will require people to stay there than I do find it is a bit much to expect your guests to bring their own linens when going to what appears to be an otherwise normal wedding. Now perhaps the B&G are really planning on having a more rustic/camping type wedding. But if this is true, they have a website and should be able to make that nice and clear. I get that it can be hard if you want to have a different wedding than is the norm in your family. They puts a lot of added pressure on you. But I personally think you are doing your guests and yourself a disservice to not acknowledge that fact. (Although I have been wondering if the whole first name only on the invites was a bungled attempt to show it was more casual?).

I think so long as you let your guests know well in advance that your wedding will be a little unusual in that regard, you have the right to throw whatever wedding you want.  If they have to bring linens, tell them before the RSVP date so that they know exactly what they're signing up for.  The other important factor is that you understand and gracefully accept that some people may not want to come to a wedding that requires a zip line to get to your ceremony and sleeping in a drainage ditch. You can invite people to whatever you want, but don't be surprised/hurt/offended when they say no.

Quote
I'm curious - and I truly am not trying to be snarky - would people really think that it's ok to throw your wedding somewhere where there is a limited amount of accommodations - say on an island - and just invite however many people you want without ensuring there would be somewhere for them to actually stay? I would like to think that the rule should be that if there are only accommodations for 45 people than you only invite that many (maybe a percentage more allowing for declines. But not even sure on that.) Or do you just invite however many people and figure they can decline if it doesn't work out?

If you know ahead of time that you can only accommodate X amount of people, only invite X amount of people. In a situation where your guest list is determined by the space you are using, you send your invites, get RSVPs, maybe send some more invites to people who were farther down the list, but at no point should you be actively inviting more people than you can accommodate. That's just asking for trouble.[/quote]

Quote
I know the OPs situation isn't that extreme, but where is the line? Is it really ok to set your wedding somewhere atypical and then just expect your guests to fend for themselves in finding accommodations? I personally think that expecting your guests to either share bathroom facilities ( and it sounds like even those are limited) or cull through a list of b&bs, during a high season, hoping to find somewhere to stay us a bit much. What if they can't find somewhere? What then?   

I think it depends on the size of the city your in. We got married in Memphis, so there were TONS of hotels around for our fairly small guest list to stay at. If you're having your wedding in a town that only has a few small hotels available, let people know well in advance. I don't think you need to find their rooms for them, but a nice heads up that TinyTown only has 2 hotels is polite.

 
Title: Re: S/O of The Postponing the Wedding thread - What's the message here?
Post by: bah12 on April 12, 2013, 10:11:20 AM
About the accommodations:  The OP said that there are 7 cabins with bathrooms (and I am assuming others without) that require guests to bring linens.  The 7 with bathrooms are already booked and therefore not even an option, so I'm not sure why she's worried about the cabins and what they do and don't come with.  She also said there were B&Bs in the area.  She just hasn't gotten any information on where they are located and was expecting that the HC would block rooms somewhere...she hasn't received word that they've done that.

As someone mentioned, and I missed, this is in an area where the HC live.  So, it's probably logical to conclude that they have friends (and maybe even the bride's family) in the area that will be attending their wedding.  So, the cabins might actually be a perfect and affordable option for them.  For those that are flying (the grooms family), they can stay at another hotel.

And I'll give it to the OP that having that information or having a block of rooms reserved somewhere is nice.  And maybe the HC will still do this...they haven't even sent the invites yet...this is just info on a STD card and a yet to be completed wedding website.  But, even if we assume that they don't do anything else as far as information on where to stay, I don't understand why people planning to attend can't get on the internet and do their own research...maybe even call the HC and ask for recommendations.  It's nice to have that all laid out for guests, but is it required?  I don't think so.

Yes, it's great when a couple can consider everything that their guests may want/like to see for their wedding, but it's nearly impossible to do so. The OP is a cousin.  I doubt that she's on top of the list of people that have priority in preferences for this wedding.  And she shouldn't be.  She has no idea (as far as I can tell) if the HC hasn't already considered their closest family and friends (and I still say they don't have to as long as they can accept "no" as an RSVP).

As for the small, intimate affair.  It's totally possible to have a large wedding in a remote location. I don't think people are saying that it's obvious they want a small wedding when it's unclear how many people they invited, but that the choices they are making will likely result in a smaller wedding than if they had made choices that made it convenient for the families to have a reunion.    What I don't think is happening is that they want a small/intimate wedding, but are inviting everyone and then purposely making choices so that they won't attend, but will send gifts. I think this is a ridiculous and uncharitable accusation, especially since it's based only on the limited information on a STD card.  And I also think that it's likely they are not looking at turning their wedding into a family reunion, regardless of how many family members they did invite.