Bridezilla: Was the salesperson at fault?

[DottyG]

I just went back and reread the actual story.  And, I think assuming that the future groom has already "played scrabble with one of the maids" is just that - an assumption (and an interesting one, at that).  That's not in the story at all.

[MariaE]

I just went back and reread the actual story.  And, I think assuming that the future groom has already "played scrabble with one of the maids" is just that - an assumption (and an interesting one, at that).  That's not in the story at all.

I think it's pretty heavily implied by the MOB saying "Last thing she needs is him %&*$#!#^ another one of the bridesmaids!" (emphasis mine).

[DottyG]

(emphasis mine).

I think that might be the key (and really is something that only the OP can clear up).  I didn't read it that way with that kind of emphasis.  It could go either way, depending on how it's said.

[wolfie]

(emphasis mine).

I think that might be the key (and really is something that only the OP can clear up).  I didn't read it that way with that kind of emphasis.  It could go either way, depending on how it's said.

I am not sure what other way it could be taken besides an indication that the groom slept with one of the bridesmaids.

[DottyG]

(emphasis mine).

I think that might be the key (and really is something that only the OP can clear up).  I didn't read it that way with that kind of emphasis.  It could go either way, depending on how it's said.

I am not sure what other way it could be taken besides an indication that the groom slept with one of the bridesmaids.

It can be said in such a way that it doesn't imply that.  It's not easy to convey on the screen.  You'd have to hear me say it.  But, it's possible.

[PeasNCues]

Either way, it's not nice or polite to predict the ending of a marriage you really know very, very little about.

[jimithing]

(emphasis mine).

I think that might be the key (and really is something that only the OP can clear up).  I didn't read it that way with that kind of emphasis.  It could go either way, depending on how it's said.

I am not sure what other way it could be taken besides an indication that the groom slept with one of the bridesmaids.

I agree. If she had left the "another" out, then it would just probably be hyperbole. But to say "another one" definitely indicates that he had slept with one of the BM's already.

[PeasNCues]

(emphasis mine).

I think that might be the key (and really is something that only the OP can clear up).  I didn't read it that way with that kind of emphasis.  It could go either way, depending on how it's said.

I am not sure what other way it could be taken besides an indication that the groom slept with one of the bridesmaids.

I agree. If she had left the "another" out, then it would just probably be hyperbole. But to say "another one" definitely indicates that he had slept with one of the BM's already.

I dont even see why it matters.

[Azrail]

I would agree if the letter writer hadn't specifically said that the family was getting really frustrated with her. If the family is getting frustrated - they mean what they say and want what they say they want and she should give it to them and stop trying to "guide" them in the direction she would prefer that they go.

And I agree about the divorce comment.

But failing to "get it" (i.e. what they want) is not rude.  I think she was having trouble understanding/finding what they want.  It sounds like this store may not of been right for this bride and have what she wants.  If her idea of low cut happens to be higher than the brides, that is not rude.  

I think she was more of a bad salesman that day than rude.  Yeah she likely did fail at her job that day, but failing is not rude.  Doing it on purpose would be.

The post said, "Finally, she got very frustrated that I was trying to politely choose things for her that were very lovely and feminine without being bawdy, which was obviously what she was craving," which leaves me to believe that yes, she knew that she was purposefully not fullfilling the brides' questionable but (as the poster admits themselves) obvious desire.

I agree with PeasNCues. She was deliberately not giving the bride what she wanted.

[couchpotato]

Reading this tale reminded me of a first season episode of Drew Carey where Drew's girlfriend (Lisa) & best female friend (Kate) are both up for the job of Store Personal Shopper. The decision was made when Drew had each of them shop for the notorious Mimi (if you've never seen Drew Carey, you should google Mimi Bobeck Carey--let's just say her make-up application is beyond memorable).

Kate managed to put together a tasteful outfit which actually was very flattering to Mimi if Mimi hadn't had such a sour expression on her face. Lisa dressed Mimi like a walking rainbow supernova on acid. Looked ridiculous, but it made Mimi happy. Lisa got the job because it was not about making the customer look good--it was about making the customer happy.

Sounds to me a certain bridal store employee missed this episode (or at least missed the point).

[missmolly]

No matter what the MOB said, that's still not a justification for the shop employee's comment at the end.

[Audrey Quest]

I think most brides go to find a gown that they will look good in, not one in which they are trying to look bawdy enough to keep the groom's sexual attentions on them.
 
I agree with the LW that maybe these folks would have been better off looking in a lingerie store instead of a bridal store.
 
It is certainly not good etiquette for the bride to dress as if she is trying to attract the sexual attentions of anyone--it is assumed that the bride already has the sexual attention of the groom.
 
These people were crass and should not have drawn the sales clerk into their sleazy little drama.

[missmolly]

I think most brides go to find a gown that they will look good in, not one in which they are trying to look bawdy enough to keep the groom's sexual attentions on them.
 
I agree with the LW that maybe these folks would have been better off looking in a lingerie store instead of a bridal store.
 
It is certainly not good etiquette for the bride to dress as if she is trying to attract the sexual attentions of anyone--it is assumed that the bride already has the sexual attention of the groom.
 
These people were crass and should not have drawn the sales clerk into their sleazy little drama.

For the record I think that the bride and her family sounded very demanding, but the LW was the rude one IMO. There's a line between a suggestion and imposing your views on others, and when the LW repeatedly refused to take the bride's request into account, she was imposing her own tastes onto someone else.

[Hushabye]

I think most brides go to find a gown that they will look good in, not one in which they are trying to look bawdy enough to keep the groom's sexual attentions on them.
 
I agree with the LW that maybe these folks would have been better off looking in a lingerie store instead of a bridal store.
 
It is certainly not good etiquette for the bride to dress as if she is trying to attract the sexual attentions of anyone--it is assumed that the bride already has the sexual attention of the groom.
 
These people were crass and should not have drawn the sales clerk into their sleazy little drama.

For the record I think that the bride and her family sounded very demanding, but the LW was the rude one IMO. There's a line between a suggestion and imposing your views on others, and when the LW repeatedly refused to take the bride's request into account, she was imposing her own tastes onto someone else.

Agreed.  If she couldn't/wouldn't accommodate them, she should have referred them elsewhere instead of intentionally wasting their time with dresses she knew they wouldn't like.  And her divorce comment at the end was just icing on the rude cake.

[Audrey Quest]

I think most brides go to find a gown that they will look good in, not one in which they are trying to look bawdy enough to keep the groom's sexual attentions on them.
 
I agree with the LW that maybe these folks would have been better off looking in a lingerie store instead of a bridal store.
 
It is certainly not good etiquette for the bride to dress as if she is trying to attract the sexual attentions of anyone--it is assumed that the bride already has the sexual attention of the groom.
 
These people were crass and should not have drawn the sales clerk into their sleazy little drama.

For the record I think that the bride and her family sounded very demanding, but the LW was the rude one IMO. There's a line between a suggestion and imposing your views on others, and when the LW repeatedly refused to take the bride's request into account, she was imposing her own tastes onto someone else.

I think though that the LW thought she was helping a regular bride and it turned out not to be the case.  The bride was not looking for a dress like most brides are, she was looking for something sleazy.  Would you expect the salesperson to come up with a dress that looked sleazy on her?
 
I don't think that's reasonable.  And the dress shop apparently didn't have what she was looking for because the bride herself perused the aisles and couldn't find something cut low enough for what she wanted--she was not limited to what the LW was bringing to her.
 
Essentially, they told the salesperson that there wasn't anything sleazy enough for them in her shop.  I wouldn't want to deal with people like that either.
 
Taste doesn't even enter into--its more of a lack of taste.  How distasteful can it be to dress in a bawdy way for your wedding because you can't keep the groom's attention.  Sounds like a bad situation all the way around.  And since wedding dress shops have to have repeated contact with their clients I can well imagine that the LW was relieved that they didn't find what they were looking for.