(Mod hat off)
I don't understand the resentment that people have toward couples who register even if they lived together beforehand. The prevailing objection I notice echoes what you object to--that the couple already has an established household, therefore already have what they want/need.
So what if this couple never lived together but both have the usual assortment of towels, sheets, kitchenware, etc. In other words, they have established households only separately. What's the difference?
Well for example let's say a couple in their 40's are marrying for the first time, both are successful and well established in their fields. They have a BWW with three wedding showers asking for new dishes, pots & pans, baking sets, linens, small appliances and some furniture.
I am gonna feel like that is gimme pig grabby.
And yet they have not lived together, have not been previously married and still want the hoopla of a big white wedding event. It's each situation individually.
I don't have an issue with the fact that they lived together before marrying...it just feels like they have been together 10 years and suddenly feel like they can replace all their belongings on others' dime. Or they've decided to get married and had the great idea that if they throw a big event they can collect big...again it's this situation in it's entirety.
So you're saying the only people entitled to a registry or showers are young couples who don't have the finances to establish a household?
Say what you will about this couples' motives. If you have such little regard for them then don't give them anything, or if you feel you must, a token gift.
Again, I said THIS WEDDING in it's entirety. And EACH situation is unique. Quit trying to put words in my mouth with generalizations.
I used the age of 40's in my example; it could be a couple well into their 60's getting married for the first time also. If they decide to have a BWW I say more joy to them. If they have three large wedding showers with a long list from registries it's still going to appear gift grabby.
There's a difference between a twentysomething couple just starting out and a late thirtysomething couple that have been living together over a decade and even a difference between a pair of 60 year olds. Each wedding is going to have unique circumstances. It's the presentation and circumstance that make something appear like a gimme grab.
I asked about this specific circumstance. Does it seem gimme pig grabby? Then I get a ton of "other" examples and once again someone is offended and I'm trying to defend my question.
You are getting other examples because people are attempting to understand the parameters that lead you to the conclusion that this situation is 'gift grabby'. It's not very useful to just say "Yes, I agree" or "No, I don't think it is". It's useful to discuss WHY. And the "why" leads to "well, what about this situation over here, that also falls inside/outside your 'why'/parameters".
Is it the fact that the couple has been living together for 10 years that bothers you?
Is it the fact that they are in their 30s?
Is it the fact that they have children?
Is it the fact that there is a long registry?
Is it the fact that there are three showers?
Is it some particularly combination of something above?
Your original post sounded as though you were annoyed primarily by the fact that they had done things in the 'wrong order', which seems a strange objection. A later post made it sound as though it was primarily their age (not being young, fresh, 20 somethings). And now it sounds a bit like you just have a problem with the fact that they are having a BWW when they've been living together for 10 years.
I'm frankly confused. None of these things seem 'rude' in any way to me, but I can't actually figure out which of them make you feel this is out of line.
(Caveat: inviting people to multiple showers is the one valid thing here that's inappropriate. However, that could easily be the fault of the shower hosts, not the HC, so I'm unwilling to lay that sin on the HC's head without further information.)