General Etiquette > Life...in general

Wedding begging invitation Update #29

<< < (6/7) > >>

Twik:

--- Quote from: Rusty on April 25, 2013, 07:35:14 PM ---This sort of wedding invitation has become very common where I live.   I have received three wedding invitations with no reply card, just a phone no. or email for rsvp.   Also two of these asked for money donations "to pay for the honeymoon", with one actually including Travel Agents details for direct payments.   At the time I asked around among my friends and found it is now the norm to ask for money.   

I did think it  was in poor taste myself but I suppose young couples these days are often already living together and have set up house. However, the suggestion should be just that, a suggestion, not a demand.

--- End quote ---

Actually, it shouldn't even be a suggestion. As much as we expect wedding presents to go along with weddings, they should be considered entirely at the discretion of the guest. If the guest asks, the can then be given a suggestion. If they don't ask, and end up giving the HC a velvet painting of a llama, the HC smile, and say thank you.

peaches:

--- Quote from: Redneck Gravy on April 23, 2013, 10:06:47 AM ---Yesterday I received a wedding invitation from a niece wording as follows:

Miss Jane Doe and
Mr John Smith
invite you attend their wedding
on x day, at x place, etc. 

Instead of traditional wedding gifts
Jane and John request monetary gifts or gift cards

A pre-addressed envelope was included.  There was no rsvp card so I assumed it was for me to mail my donation back.

Oh my, is this going to be the new and acceptable trend?

--- End quote ---

Rude on several counts:

*Invited to the wedding but (apparently) not to the reception
*Gifts mentioned in wedding invitation
*Asking for monetary gifts

It may be new but it's not acceptable, and I can't imagine that it ever will be.
 

Aeris:

--- Quote from: jpcher on April 30, 2013, 07:00:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Redneck Gravy on April 25, 2013, 02:06:40 PM ---The envelope was self addressed, no stamp.

There is no mention of a reception, although I do know there is one.

--- End quote ---

Then you weren't invited to the reception.

Although you're more than welcome to attend the church ceremony, and just to make things easier on you (no "Where do I put my card?" quandary at the church) here's an envelope for you to send us a gift.

Please make it a hefty gift because, as you can see, we can't even afford the stamps for the return envelope. ::)



I would definitely give a pass on this event, both gift-wise and attendance-wise.

You've been "B" listed.

--- End quote ---

It does seem likely, but it's not necessarily so.

I've received a number of invitations to weddings that neglected to include a 'reception to follow' note, simply because the ceremony and reception were all in the same place and the couples didn't think it necessary to note what they probably thought was obvious. (It's EXTREMELY common here to have the reception on location *immediately* following the ceremony, so no time or location info would really be needed).

Just a possibility.

mrkitty:

--- Quote from: Aeris on May 01, 2013, 12:39:22 AM ---
--- Quote from: jpcher on April 30, 2013, 07:00:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Redneck Gravy on April 25, 2013, 02:06:40 PM ---The envelope was self addressed, no stamp.

There is no mention of a reception, although I do know there is one.

--- End quote ---

Then you weren't invited to the reception.

Although you're more than welcome to attend the church ceremony, and just to make things easier on you (no "Where do I put my card?" quandary at the church) here's an envelope for you to send us a gift.

Please make it a hefty gift because, as you can see, we can't even afford the stamps for the return envelope. ::)



I would definitely give a pass on this event, both gift-wise and attendance-wise.

You've been "B" listed.

--- End quote ---

It does seem likely, but it's not necessarily so.

I've received a number of invitations to weddings that neglected to include a 'reception to follow' note, simply because the ceremony and reception were all in the same place and the couples didn't think it necessary to note what they probably thought was obvious. (It's EXTREMELY common here to have the reception on location *immediately* following the ceremony, so no time or location info would really be needed).

Just a possibility.

--- End quote ---

I have been invited to two weddings (in my life) in which the reception followed immediately after the ceremony in the same location, one of which was my brother's. Not only was it indicated on the invitation I received, but as his sister it was expected that I was going to attend (or rather, that I.Had.Better.Be.There.Or.Else. But that's just how my family operates. Threats. Hee.)  ::) So, as an immediate family member, yes, I absolutely knew the plans. For the other wedding, it was helpful to know that the reception was immediately following the ceremony in the same location, so that 1. I knew I was actually invited to be there for that and 2. I was made aware that I should  not actually leave after the wedding assuming we were going to be done at that point. But in my geographical location, that's how weddings were done...stuff was spelled out in the invite. I can see how other regions/cultures could operate differently, i.e. have the wedding and reception in a hotel ballroom, say, or the ceremony at the church and the reception in the church hall, for example.

But then, if that were the case here, it seems logical to me that Redneck Gravy would already be familiar with any regional custom to that effect. So, I'm going to operate under the assumption that there is no regional tradition of the sort and that information regarding the reception whether immediately following ceremony at the same location or elsewhere is communicated to guests in some fashion at some point prior to the event. (OP please correct me if I am incorrect about that assumption.) Because, otherwise, Redneck Gravy wouldn't be in doubt in the first place as to whether or not she is invited to the reception. She'd already be well-acquainted with the accepted custom in her area. So it has to be some other reason that there was no mention of a reception on her invitation.

Though it's possible that the invitation was merely lacking pertinent information about attending the reception (and, possibly, the HC assumed that the bride's Aunt, as family, would naturally be aware of the reception and expected to attend), it would seem to me that unless it was somehow communicated to her by someone in the family that she was invited or expected to attend the reception portion, the HC would have to assume she didn't know about it, and would therefore endeavor to communicate that her presence would be welcome. Unless they phone her or contact her through some other means - or assign that task, even informally, to another family member - it would seem to me that the actual wedding invitation would be the most convenient way to let her know about that, considering they mentioned attending the wedding itself and the request for a financial gift. So, if it's not a cultural or regional tradition to NOT notify guests that they are, in fact, invited guests, then it either has to be an unintentional oversight or she really isn't invited to attend the reception portion of the event.

Napoleon once said "never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence." On that note, I say it's possible that they just sent out an incomplete and poorly worded invitation, whilst committing the additional faux pas of including a solicitation for money.

However, my contention is that Napoleon surely must be wrong on this one. The HC invited Redneck Gravy's money, but not Redneck Gravy herself.

Actually, that's partially inaccurate. Redneck Gravy WAS invited, but specifically ONLY to attend the wedding, and NOT the reception. She knows for sure there is a reception, but no mention of that whatsoever was included in the invitation...however, the betrothed DID remember to "suggest" she send her congratulations with cold, hard cash. They were ever so thoughtful -- or, perhaps, coldly efficient -- in taking steps to  ensure that Redneck Gravy wouldn't have to trouble herself to locate an envelope of the appropriate size to accommodate sending a large bundle of cash, money order, or check securely through the mail. They DID make sure address that envelope, so at least they don't have to risk Redneck Gravy making an error copying that address in her excitement.

The HC also managed to to leave off the stamp, as well any request of the honor of her presence at the reception. After all, the expense of a stamp would cut too much into their haul. Since she's already supposed to send a heap of money, let Redneck Gravy eat the additional cost of the stamp, so no stamp included on that self-addressed envelope. (The cost of all those stamps for all those invitations they are sending out would add up quickly, after all!) But, in the end, on the happy day itself, it looks like the only thing Redneck Gravy will be eating will be the expense of that stamp, because she's not been invited to the actual reception. Just the ceremony. You know, it just wouldn't look right, having a mostly empty church...those seats have got to be filled, and the HC is already having to lay out the funds for the church's fee...so pack those seats. It's the same cost, no matter how many attend or don't attend the ceremony. Plus, maybe it'll soften the blow a little bit, you know, by inviting the "B" listers to attend the ceremony...it'll make them feel like they're included in the Big Day (even though they really aren't)...and maybe they'll send more than if they were to just get a wedding announcement with that invoice "suggested donation."

So, it's not incompetence. That just leaves one possibility: rudeness.

My two cents (pun intended), based on the info supplied, is that Redneck Gravy's financial contribution is certainly invited to the reception, but not Redneck Gravy herself.  However, she is graciously allowed to attend the wedding service in the church and bask in the glow of the newly married and soon to be enriched happy couple...which is even better, since they are apparently planning to not even have to cut into their proceeds to share with Redneck Gravy so much as a refreshing sip of water to help celebrate the nuptials.  >:( 

How very efficient indeed.

Two cents, by the way, is two pennies too many to send to these jerks, imho. If I were Redneck Gravy, I'd send them a brief note on a slip of paper expressing my regrets, and I'd struggle to include a line by way of congratulations at that.  >:(

Redneck Gravy - I absolutely do not mean to be insulting to you. Please know that. This is my own interpretation of the invitation (which could be very, very wrong!) and based on that I am deeply offended on your behalf, since I think your niece is being terribly rude in not specifically inviting you to her reception while at the same time soliciting a financial gift from you. The above is my general feeling about including ANY mention of gifts (even registry info) anywhere NEAR an invitation or announcement of any kind of event, be it a birthday, graduation, etc. I certainly understand the logistics and convenience to the event organizer by including that information...I just don't like the (hopefully inadvertent) insulting and alienating message (that I think) it sends.

I suppose guests are supposed to help fund the cost of the wedding attire and church decorations if they expect to be able to gaze upon the magnificence in person. I wonder if this HC will send a wedding photo with that thank you card? And if they do, will they include a bill for the cost of the photo, the stationery, the ink and the stamp? Oh, this just chaps my hide.  >:(  !!!

Redneck Gravy:
Update:

There was supposed to be a reply card - there just wasn't one in my envelope.  That is what the self addressed envelope was for, not for checks.   (whew)  I just stuck in a note saying I would be attending. 

There was a reception following the ceremony in the same room as the ceremony.  Unfortunately, this couple did not ask nor were they advised that "reception following" or anything else should have been put on the wedding invitation.  This is why I recommend paying a printer for your invitations, using a wedding planner and/or buying an etiquette book before you take on a project like this by yourself.  Of course, then they would have known to leave the cash request off - so maybe this was their ultimate plan after all, who knows.   

Yes, the invitation in itself was tacky!  But I am giving them the benefit of the doubt for their ignorance.   

I wrote a check for the same amount I do for all the nieces/nephews graduations & weddings.  Exactly the same (because Aunt Redneck loves everyone the same).

I actually attended the wedding & reception and it was very nice.  Low key but still very nice.  They could have saved money by doing other things but they didn't ask for my opinion, nor did I offer it (tongue held tightly).  The bride wanted a fancy wedding - she couldn't afford it so they trimmed here and there and it was lovely enough.  If you didn't know her you wouldn't have known that it was so much less than what she wanted.  But again, it was still lovely. 

And I didn't say a word about the tackiness of the invitation to anyone beyond eHell.  She said to me that it was so much smaller (fewer attendees) than Sister X's wedding last year.  Well, she knows FEWER people - what did she expect? 

Anyway, I am just hoping that this request for money on the invites doesn't catch on!



Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version