Not inviting GF's child to a wedding

[joazito]

I've been meaning to ask this one and now here it is.
I've known this friend since we were 3 years old, and he got married and invited me to his wedding. I assumed I could bring my girlfriend, and he said he was ok with it dispite not having planned it originally. Then my GF asked if she could bring her then 3 years old sun to the party, and he refused. He said the kid would distract me and that he wanted me to be there without the added concern of taking care of a small child. Note that he had met the child, at a mutual friend's wedding just some months before.
At this point my girlfriend starts a lifelong deep hatred for this friend. She also said that was I to attend to the wedding of such an inconsiderate person, she would call the relationship off. I would like to have attended to wedding alone but I choise not to, the relationship meant more to me. She is still my girlfriend to this day btw.

So what do you think? Was it incredibly rude of my friend to act this way? Was it too much of my GF to demand me not to go?

I have no mind for this kind of things and I know you guys have your morals straight, so help me make up my mind please. Thank you.

[friedo]

I'll side with your friend. A wedding is not an appropriate environment for a three-year-old, and I seriously doubt he would enjoy it anyway. Further, your girlfriend sounds ridiculously controlling. Your friends are your business; she has no right to blackmail you into ending your relationship with your buddy.

[Caricci]

I'm with friedo on this. It's very commonplace not to include kids at weddings. How long had you been with your girlfriend at the time of the wedding? I am guessing it wasn't that long or your friend would have known to include her. She sounds kind of nervy to me.

[foxymoron]

Did he invite you to be in his wedding? That's the only reason I can think why he would worry about you being distracted.
Were other small children 'allowed' at the event? If not, your friend did nothing wrong and your girlfriend needs to get over herself. If other kids were there, then your friend is a jerk for excluding ony your GF's kid.
IMHO, of course.

[Amazingrace]

I noticed that your location is Portugal, so maybe the ettiquette is different there than in the U.S., but here's what I see.


Your girlfriend wasn't invited, unless the invitiation was addressed to joazito and guest. Asking to bring someone is considered rude.
Not only was your girlfriend not invited, her child definitely was not invited. Often the happy couple do not want to deal with the distractions and exta preparation that goes along with having children at a wedding, as your friend mentioned.
Yes, your girlfriend is asking too much asking you not to go. This isn't the pit, so I'll refrain from saying anything stronger than "she needs to work on her manners."


Again, I don't know about ettiquette in Portugal versus the U.S. Even if people are frequenly allowed to bring along originally uninvited guests and their children, your friend has made his decison and IMHO it is unfair to ask him to change the rules that he and his fiancee have chosen regarding their wedding.

[yellowval]

I think both sides exhibited rudeness in this situation. First of all, your friend should have invited both you and your SO to his wedding, or if he didn't know about her, you and a "guest."

However, I think it's the right of the wedding couple to determine whether or not children are invited. Some couples welcome children with open arms. Others don't invite children who aren't family. I can't say that I blame them. I've been to too many weddings and seen children screaming and acting like brats during the ceremony. It was rude of your girlfriend to ask if she could bring her son.

I agree with friedo that your girlfriend sounds like a control freak. She shouldn't have threatened you with the relationship breaking up if you went. I'd be willing to bet that if you'd said "Fine. I'm going," she would have come crawling back. If not ... her loss, I guess. The point is that if you let her threaten the relationship over something so trivial, she's going to continue doing things like this to get her way for the whole relationship. Og help you in that case if you should get married yourselves and have children together!

[archmichael]

I assumed I could bring my girlfriend, and he said he was ok with it dispite not having planned it originally. Then my GF asked if she could bring her then 3 years old sun to the party, and he refused. He said the kid would distract me and that he wanted me to be there without the added concern of taking care of a small child.
I am obviously not understanding the setup.

He initially assumed that you were coming alone? Your invite didn't say "Joazito & friend"?

He is afraid you would be distracted from....what? Are you acting as a groomsman or best man? Since you GF would be there, why would he assume that you would do all the babysitting?

Just weirded out. The way you phrased it sound like he wants to monopolize you for this wedding.

Your GF is a wrong for making the ultimatum. There will be bigger hurdles than this in the future. Is she going to give more ultimatums?

[Happy Scrappy Hero Pup]

If you and your friend were close, he should have asked if you had a significant other and addressed your wedding invitation "Joazito and Guest."


If your wedding invitation was addressed solely to you, and there was no place to mark whether you were bringing a guest, then it was a you-only invitation fo rone reason or another and it was too forward of you to ask to bring a guest.


Your girlfriend has less connection to the groom than you do, and does not get to decide if she can bring a guest as well. It's presumptuous and impolite of her to insist. It's even more presumptuous, impolite, and controlling to insist that you not go to the wedding of someone you've known that long. That's the kind of power-trip that earns someone a one-way ticket to ex-ville.

[alice_in_wonderland]

Your girlfriend was very rude - your former friend was not. If he's picking up the tab for the day, he's allowed to decide who to invite.

It sounds like he invited you to come solo. You shouldn't have asked if your GF was allowed to come, but being that you did, and the groom said yes, asking if her child could also come was totally over the top. The fact that the groom said no is totally appropriate, and your GF acted like a controling jerk.

YMMV.

[Rhiannon8404]

Wow, I'm with the others. Your girlfriend sounds manipulative and controlling to make you chose between a life-long friend and her.

The only kids at my wedding were my own cousins and they were actually included on the invitation. I would have been annoyed to have random children showing up at my wedding. I don't understand why people think they are entitled to bring along whomever they please when they are invited to a wedding. And considering the GF wasn't even actually invited, it was totally presumptuous for her to expect her 3 y.o. to be allowed to attend. I'm pretty sure the little boy would not have been devastated by not going to the wedding (on the contrary "bored to death" comes to mind), so I'm not sure why the GF was so insistant on it.

Sounds to me like she was looking for a reason to break you up from this friend.

[joazito]

Hmmm I kind of thought so myself. Now the hard part is showing her this thread... :)
Oh and to clarify, I was never handed an official invite. We had a party at my parents house and he and a bunch of friends were there, and he just told me I was invited.
BTW, she was also pretty offended that I "don't get it" why I shouldn't have come. Recently I have been leaning towards this being rude from my friend, but I guess this thread pretty much stops that sentiment.

[Anaamika]

If my boyfriend ever gave me an ultimatum such as this,

"Do this or I'm leaving you,"

9 times out of 10 I'd tell him to go. The 10th time better be a doozy of a reason, as in I made a major mistake. Ultimatums do not belong in a healthy relationship.

And I love children but I sure am sick and tired of certain misbehaved children screwing up events. Certain parents bring their kids along and figure, free babysitters, while the kids run amuck screaming and disrupting everyone. I won't have children at my wedding unless they are of close & immediate family.

However, your friend should have invited you as you & guest. I also think it's rude to expect people to go places without their SOs just because they're not married. If you'd been married there's no way the invite could have been just for you. Speaking as half of a unmarried but very serious couple myself.

[overlyverbose]

So what do you think? Was it incredibly rude of my friend to act this way? Was it too much of my GF to demand me not to go?

I have no mind for this kind of things and I know you guys have your morals straight, so help me make up my mind please. Thank you.

Regardless of whether this kid has attended other weddings, if your friend made a concession for you to bring your girlfriend, I think it was extremely rude for her to assume she should be able to bring her child, too. Sure, it might be an inconvenience for her to have found a babysitter, but it's not her party. It was your friend's wedding, and he can invite whoever he wants.

Further, for her to demand you not go to the wedding, then threaten to dump you if you go? This guy is your lifelong friend, for cripes' sake! Your girlfriend was being completely unreasonable and very petty. If it were me and my husband had behaved like that while we were still dating, I very likely would have let him end the relationship. If someone is going to force you to choose between people you love, you're better off without that person.

[overlyverbose]

P.S. (and sorry for the double post) My husband and I had uninvited children at our wedding, and we were really irritated. Not only did we have to pay the caterer for additional meals, these kids were running around screaming during both ceremonies. Also, they pissed off a lot of our other guests.

[Annie-Xmas]

And if he said "yes" to the child coming, then it would have been her mother and the dog and her ex and who knows who else?

Your friend invited you. It was very gracious of him to say your girlfriend could come. It was incredibly rude of her to try to decide his guest list.

[Anaamika]

P.S. (and sorry for the double post) My husband and I had uninvited children at our wedding, and we were really irritated. Not only did we have to pay the caterer for additional meals, these kids were running around screaming during both ceremonies. Also, they pissed off a lot of our other guests.

Not to mention most kids won't even touch that $50 meal you put out in front of them.

[badbadrubberpiggy]

I think both sides exhibited rudeness in this situation. First of all, your friend should have invited both you and your SO to his wedding, or if he didn't know about her, you and a "guest."

!

At least in the US, the only guideline for inviting a guests SO is if they're married, engaged, or living together. Otherwise, it's at the discretion of the bride and groom who they invite. It is not required to invite a single person with a guest, if you don't have room for them. It is rude to ask to bring one if you weren't invited to do so.

If they're not on the invitation, they're not invited, period.

[Q.N. Jones]

Your girlfriend is the rude one.

First, one does not ask to bring a guest to someone else's wedding. You made a mistake asking in the first place, but it sounds like you were more confused about whether or not the invitation extended to her. Your girlfriend was out-and-out wrong, though, to request that the invitation be extended to her son. Your friend was under no obligation to invite the child, and your girlfriend made a huge etiquette faux pas.

It might have been forgiveable if she hadn't then decided to make you choose between her and your friend, which was a remarkably childish and manipulative move.

I hope she is otherwise a wonderful person, but she was very much in the wrong.

[Anaamika]

I would like to have attended to wedding alone but I choise not to, the relationship meant more to me. She is still my girlfriend to this day btw.

.

I also wanted to say, not to be mean, but you were fairly rude, too, in listening to her. Your friend specially wants you there, tries to accomodate you with your GF, and you don't go? I would have been dreadfully hurt.

[yellowval]

At least in the US, the only guideline for inviting a guests SO is if they're married, engaged, or living together. Otherwise, it's at the discretion of the bride and groom who they invite. It is not required to invite a single person with a guest, if you don't have room for them. It is rude to ask to bring one if you weren't invited to do so.

If they're not on the invitation, they're not invited, period.

It may not be required, but it is the polite thing to do, in my opinion. If you've ever been on the receiving end of it, you understand. Before my husband and I were married, I was invited to a wedding and the invitation did not include him, even though the person knew we were together. I respected that, said nothing, went alone, and left early. We had to make a lot of hard decisions when coming up with the guest list for our wedding because of my husband's large family. But we still had consideration for people like his unmarried cousin who had a girlfriend. I think it would have been rude not to invite her. But yes, it is rude to bring an uninvited guest.

[Q.N. Jones]

It may not be required, but it is the polite thing to do, in my opinion. If you've ever been on the receiving end of it, you understand. Before my husband and I were married, I was invited to a wedding and the invitation did not include him, even though the person knew we were together. I respected that, said nothing, went alone, and left early.

Emphasis mine.

You sound like you really resented that your then-boyfriend wasn't invited. I don't understand this thinking. Once two people are part of a couple, is it impossible for one of them to go out on their own with their friends and have a good time, without feeling guilty? Are party-givers obligated to extend every social invitation to both members of the couple, or risk being called rude? I'm sincerely curious--I don't get the problem. I have never felt this way when I was in a serious relationship.

[archmichael]

At least in the US, the only guideline for inviting a guests SO is if they're married, engaged, or living together. Otherwise, it's at the discretion of the bride and groom who they invite. It is not required to invite a single person with a guest, if you don't have room for them. It is rude to ask to bring one if you weren't invited to do so.

If they're not on the invitation, they're not invited, period. You would think a friend since the age of three would warrant a "& guest" invite. It's not like they're just co-workers or acquaintances.

Of course, I'm from the school that believes that you should go with a smaller wedding than send out "invitee only" invitations.

[badbadrubberpiggy]

You would think a friend since the age of three would warrant a "& guest" invite. It's not like they're just co-workers or acquaintances.

Of course, I'm from the school that believes that you should go with a smaller wedding than send out "invitee only" invitations.

You would think that, but that doesn't mean he was rude. He only wanted his friend there, and was pressed to have an extra guest he didn't want, that he's now going to have to pay for. He might be on a budget, and have limited his choices to who he can afford to have there. There isn't enough info in the OP to really establish wether that's true or not, but that is usually the case when a single person doesn't get an "& guest" invite.

Personally, I would have invited the GF, but that doesn't mean he's the bad guy for not doing so.

[joazito]

He might be on a budget, and have limited his choices to who he can afford to have there.
Your guess is as good as mine.

[Khadaji]

This is your friend's day. Not yours. Not your girlfriends. His. Since you are close, as you say, it seems reasonable for you to ask if the child is welcome. However, since you are close, you should understand and respect his refusal. It is his day.

[archmichael]

Are party-givers obligated to extend every social invitation to both members of the couple, or risk being called rude? For me, yes.Once two people are part of a couple, is it impossible for one of them to go out on their own with their friends and have a good time, without feeling guilty?No, but with a "& guest" invitation they have the option of making a choice of coming together or alone instead of having the decision made for them.

Most people find weddings romantic. Two people are making a life long commitment to be a couple. People who are forced to come without their SO, end up feeling real lonely.

[CrazyCatLady]

You would think a friend since the age of three would warrant a "& guest" invite.

Eh, you'd think if it were so serious as to warrant the SO being invited to the wedding, they'd rate a "& Ms. What'sherface" invite. I'm sorry, if you don't know the bride and groom well enough for them to invite you by name, you flat-out don't belong at their wedding. You just don't. And if you can't contrive to have a good time without bringing a date, you flat-out don't belong at the wedding. "And guest" has absolutely no place whatsoever on a wedding invitation.

And it is absolutely rude to put someone on the spot for an invitation, which is what the OP did. It is even ruder to then put them on the spot for a second invitation, and even ruder than that to then go back on your acceptance of an invitation because your demands for extra invites were not met. Shockingly bad manners, regardless of the informality of the original invitation.

Oh, and btw, all that stuff about you being distracted by the kid? That's not the real reason the child wasn't invited. It was just the groom's attempt to make a polite excuse. "I'd hate for you to be distracted," sounds much nicer than, "Fuck no we don't want some kid we've met once running around shrieking all day, and fuck you for entertaining the thought. Oh, and fuck your pushy-ass girlfriend, too."

[Q.N. Jones]

For me, yes.No, but with a "& guest" invitation they have the option of making a choice of coming together or alone instead of having the decision made for them.

Obviously, opinions on this issue will range all over the map. I think it's rude to expect your family and friends to always be included in an invitation. I think it's extremely rude to believe you should always be given the option to bring whatever second person you wish along with you to any social event.

And, just as an FYI: Miss Manners and other etiquette mavens will tell you that an "and guest" invitation is very rude. Either you invite a person by name, or don't invite them at all.

Most people find weddings romantic. Two people are making a life long commitment to be a couple. People who are forced to come without their SO, end up feeling real lonely.

Of course, you must realize that this is how you would feel. And probably some other people, too. But I certainly don't feel that way. In fact, I hate bringing an SO to a wedding unless they know the people who are there. I'm there to celebrate the marriage of friends and spend time with them--not gaze adoringly at my own SO, or whatever.

It seems clear to me that, in the end, the truth is this: people are not grateful enough for the hospitality of others. We should be glad to get an invitation to a social event, and accept it for what it is, not look for reasons to criticize and find fault and try to grasp for more.

[Spoons]

And, just as an FYI: Miss Manners and other etiquette mavens will tell you that an "and guest" invitation is very rude. Either you invite a person by name, or don't invite them at all.*sigh* Wish my cousins read Miss Manners. I well remember the time, a few years ago, when a cousin's wedding invitation arrived at my Dad's house. It was addressed to "[Dad's name] and Kids." Note that Mom had been dead for some years, so obviously, her name wasn't on it.

Anyway, the really sad part was that my sister and I--the "Kids" the invitation referred to--were both in our 30s at the time and each of us, though unmarried, had a pretty steady SO. But apparently, Cousin felt that we didn't warrant our own names on the invitation, much less separate ones with the vagueness of "Spoons and Guest" or "Sis and Guest." My sister and I were quite insulted and made our displeasure well-known to Dad (I threatened not to attend, myself), but at his urging, we each went--solo--just to keep peace in the family.

Anyway, count me as another vote for "Girlfriend is asking too much/is way over the top/is making an unreasonable demand/is being rude in wanting her child to attend your friend's wedding."

[yellowval]

Emphasis mine.

You sound like you really resented that your then-boyfriend wasn't invited. I don't understand this thinking. Once two people are part of a couple, is it impossible for one of them to go out on their own with their friends and have a good time, without feeling guilty? Are party-givers obligated to extend every social invitation to both members of the couple, or risk being called rude? I'm sincerely curious--I don't get the problem. I have never felt this way when I was in a serious relationship.

Maybe I did resent it. But it wasn't like the then-boyfriend (who also happens to be my now-husband) and I had only been seeing one another for two weeks. My husband was in the same class in school as this girl, and my husband and I began dating in high school. So yes, a "you're invited but he's not" invitation seemed pretty rude to me. And yes, I think both members of a couple should be invited, whether they are married, engaged, living together, or living separately. And for those who say a SO in a live-in relationship should be invited, but not an SO in a non live-in relationship, why? They're still only boyfriend and girlfriend. What gives them a special privelege because they're living together? And what about people in long-term same sex relationships? They may never be able to get "married," but does that mean they shouldn't be invited to weddings as a couple?

[The Devil's Grandmother]

At this point my girlfriend starts a lifelong deep hatred for this friend. She also said that was I to attend to the wedding of such an inconsiderate person, she would call the relationship off. I would like to have attended to wedding alone but I choise not to, the relationship meant more to me. She is still my girlfriend to this day btw.
I’ve had a really bad experience with this and sometimes it makes me overreact, so ignore me if I’m way off base.
The SO who tries to separate you from your friends/family is one of the first signs of a potentially abusive relationship.

Back on topic, yeah she was rude. And holding grudge over it is beyond rude.

[archmichael]

Wow, fast moving thread and a very interesting point of etiquette.

Hmmmm...

A wedding is a celebration. When you send out an invite you are inviting people come join in the celebration (have a good time). To put unreasonable (and I guess this is where we differ) restrictions on the guest's ability to join in on the celebration is IMO rude.

I have heard wedding horror stories where food was served for only some of the guests. Yes, it's their day. But is the lack of funds a good excuse for this? Or should you just be thankful you got an invite? I believe that when you give an invitation, the inviter (as host) takes on certain obligations to make sure his/her guests are happy.

Just a difference in attitude I guess. I can invite you all to my birthday party. It is my day. But if you show up I would want you to have fun. If I invited you to come just to honor my birthday and drop off gifts, I would be rude and vainglorious.

Seems to me, too many people are buying into the "It's their wedding day, let it slide" attitude which leads to the creation of so many bridezillas. Some of the stories here are horrifying. They sound like social snubbings out of Edith Wharton's "Age of Innocence". They sound like intentional insults.

[MissGypsy]

Eh, you'd think if it were so serious as to warrant the SO being invited to the wedding, they'd rate a "& Ms. What'sherface" invite. I'm sorry, if you don't know the bride and groom well enough for them to invite you by name, you flat-out don't belong at their wedding. You just don't. And if you can't contrive to have a good time without bringing a date, you flat-out don't belong at the wedding. "And guest" has absolutely no place whatsoever on a wedding invitation.

And it is absolutely rude to put someone on the spot for an invitation, which is what the OP did. It is even ruder to then put them on the spot for a second invitation, and even ruder than that to then go back on your acceptance of an invitation because your demands for extra invites were not met. Shockingly bad manners, regardless of the informality of the original invitation.

Oh, and btw, all that stuff about you being distracted by the kid? That's not the real reason the child wasn't invited. It was just the groom's attempt to make a polite excuse. "I'd hate for you to be distracted," sounds much nicer than, "Fuck no we don't want some kid we've met once running around shrieking all day, and fuck you for entertaining the thought. Oh, and fuck your pushy-ass girlfriend, too."

Bingo. That "& Guest" is rude, as is asking if you can bring along your friend/SO/kid/SO's kids, etc. If your name only is on the invitation, that's exactly who is invited, and no haggling allowed.

[ouryL]

When you are invited to any function, this does not entitle you to then invited someone else, ever.

This is just plain rude and unmannerly. :wally

[Q.N. Jones]

To put unreasonable (and I guess this is where we differ) restrictions on the guest's ability to join in on the celebration is IMO rude.

How is not asking/allowing the invitee to bring a guest a restriction on the ability to join in on the celebration?

I have heard wedding horror stories where food was served for only some of the guests. Yes, it's their day. But is the lack of funds a good excuse for this? Or should you just be thankful you got an invite?

No, that's just crappy hospitality. It's saying to an invited guest, "You're not good enough to warrant being fed." It's also rude to ask someone's attendance during a meal time and not feed them. (All per Miss Manners.)

Just a difference in attitude I guess. I can invite you all to my birthday party. It is my day. But if you show up I would want you to have fun. If I invited you to come just to honor my birthday and drop off gifts, I would be rude and vainglorious.

True. How is declining to invite one's SO the equivalent of saying, "bring me a gift and get out, bitch"--?

Seems to me, too many people are buying into the "It's their wedding day, let it slide" attitude which leads to the creation of so many bridezillas.

Well, if so, I'm not one of them. I'm an etiquette stickler.

I just don't think it can reasonably said to be rude to say (in essence) to your guests, "Sorry, but it is me giving the party, and I'm making the guest list, and my invitation to you does not give you the right to invite any other person of your choice."

That said, are most people going around deliberately trying to snub SOs, live-ins, etc? No, of course not. They're just hoping to have the all people they love most to a party/wedding. They're also hoping not to go broke doing it.

It just seems so petty to get angry because the host didn't invite the people you wanted him/her to.

What I don't understand is why people who are family and friends aren't willing to give each other the benefit of the doubt. If hosts and guests really like and care about each other, the guest should be willing to believe that the host has done his best to be considerate re: the invitations, and the host should try to take the guests' feelings into consideration.

Why draw the line at marriage/living together? I suppose because those are declared family/quasi-family relationships. There's no guesswork for the host, no trying to figure out who Yellowval is dating this week, or whatever. I personally would prefer if etiquette rules were more relaxed on this point, but that's not my call.

[Khadaji]

Wow, fast moving thread and a very interesting point of etiquette.

Hmmmm...

A wedding is a celebration. When you send out an invite you are inviting people come join in the celebration (have a good time). To put unreasonable (and I guess this is where we differ) restrictions on the guest's ability to join in on the celebration is IMO rude.
<SNIP>What is unreasonable about telling a person that he may not bring as many people as he wants? When I'm invited to a party, I certainly do not expect to be able to bring whomever I wish. My folks are in town that weekend, may I bring them too? How about my college buddy? My boss' wife is away and he'll be alone, can I bring him along? The groom issued an invitation to one person, he was kind enough to then offer an extension to the girlfriend. That was gracious. He was under no obligation whatsoever to invite the 3 year old.

If I invited you to come just to honor my birthday and drop off gifts, I would be rude and vainglorious I have no idea how you imagine this is the same thing as saying you may not bring extra people.

[amarinth]

Just to get this straight - you took it upon yourself to invite/drag along two extra people to his wedding and you're asking if he was rude?

Perhaps he should have used nicer language, but no, it is not the least bit rude to make the guest list for your own wedding.

[archmichael]

Q.N. Jones, although we are going back and forth I wanted to make clear I'm not getting hot about this. Until this thread, I didn't know you could politely invite only one person (especially a close friend), and I don't think I ever will be comfortable with the idea. At least now I know that not everyone thinks like I do, and consider a single invite a snub.

Just trying to wrap my head around it. :)

[overlyverbose]

Wow, fast moving thread and a very interesting point of etiquette.

Hmmmm...

A wedding is a celebration. When you send out an invite you are inviting people come join in the celebration (have a good time). To put unreasonable (and I guess this is where we differ) restrictions on the guest's ability to join in on the celebration is IMO rude.

I have heard wedding horror stories where food was served for only some of the guests. Yes, it's their day. But is the lack of funds a good excuse for this? Or should you just be thankful you got an invite? I believe that when you give an invitation, the inviter (as host) takes on certain obligations to make sure his/her guests are happy.

I also have to disagree with this. The OP in no way indicated that if he showed up with his girlfriend and her son in tow his friend would refuse to feed them. He merely stated that, while his friend wouldn't mind the girlfriend showing up, he would mind the girlfriend's son coming. How is it an unreasonable restriction for the groom to decide he doesn't want the girlfriend adding to the guest list, especially when he's already making a concession to have her there? It's rude in the first place to ask someone who was not invited to a party, but then to have the uninvited guest bring additional people? No way - that's apalling.

And I have never heard of people being invited to a wedding only to be refused food. Did the caterer run out of food or something, or were these people simply told not to eat? The former is a pretty embarrassing situation, but possibly understandable if these people never bothered to RSVP; however, if it's the former, that is just unforgiveable, and neither situation is in any way applicable to the OP's situation.

[overlyverbose]

The former is a pretty embarrassing situation, but possibly understandable if these people never bothered to RSVP; however, if it's the former, that is just unforgiveable, and neither situation is in any way applicable to the OP's situation.

Sorry - I meant the latter is unforgivable. :wally

[Anaamika]

And I have never heard of people being invited to a wedding only to be refused food. Did the caterer run out of food or something, or were these people simply told not to eat? The former is a pretty embarrassing situation, but possibly understandable if these people never bothered to RSVP; however, if it's the former, that is just unforgiveable, and neither situation is in any way applicable to the OP's situation.

It's not running out of food, it's much worse. See it's like this:

12 to 1 PM wedding
1 to 2 lunch
2 to 6 reception (or whatever)

Certain people are simply not invited to the luncheon. Can you stomach that? I've had friends wonder WTF they're supposed to do in a strange town for an hour as they've only been invited to wedding & reception.

Or you can do the wedding and reception on different days, so:

Dinner 6-7 PM
Reception 7-10 PM

So some people only get invited to the reception. How can this not be awkward, when one person says "Mmm, that food was yummy, didn't you think so?" And the other is forced to admit they weren't invited to dinner.

Rude IMO.

[overlyverbose]

So some people only get invited to the reception. How can this not be awkward, when one person says "Mmm, that food was yummy, didn't you think so?" And the other is forced to admit they weren't invited to dinner.

Rude IMO.

Yikes, I hadn't even considered either of those scenarios.

[CrazyCatLady]

I take it you've never read Etiquette Hell, overlyverbose? There are stories there of only the bridal party eating, or only a certain group of guests getting served by what was apparently design. There, and on wedding planning boards, I've also heard about people inviting people to bits and pieces of the celebration. This is usually for the big schmancy dinner-dance reception type weddings. You could apparently be invited to the ceremony and full reception, or the ceremony and dance (and have to find your own dinner in between), or just be invited to the dance. There were frequently questions about the best way to word the invitations to make it clear that B or C-list guests weren't getting dinner without sounding offensive. I just never could think of a gracious way to say, "please come dance and bring me presents, but I ain't feeding your ass."

[overlyverbose]

I take it you've never read Etiquette Hell, overlyverbose? There are stories there of only the bridal party eating, or only a certain group of guests getting served by what was apparently design. There, and on wedding planning boards, I've also heard about people inviting people to bits and pieces of the celebration. This is usually for the big schmancy dinner-dance reception type weddings. You could apparently be invited to the ceremony and full reception, or the ceremony and dance (and have to find your own dinner in between), or just be invited to the dance. There were frequently questions about the best way to word the invitations to make it clear that B or C-list guests weren't getting dinner without sounding offensive. I just never could think of a gracious way to say, "please come dance and bring me presents, but I ain't feeding your ass."

Good Lord, I feel so sheltered. I think my mom would have (quite rightly) slapped me silly if I had the temerity to ask someone to come to my wedding without inviting them to the reception and dinner.

[badbadrubberpiggy]

I agree that it's rude to not feed people / invite them to only certain parts of the wedding / basically make it look like you want gifts out of them and that's it. Personally, if I want someone at my wedding reception, I want them at my wedding, too. I would never make someone feel like they are good enough to come to one part of the celebration, but not the other. I think the only really good excuse for doing this is if you are having your wedding at a tiny church or temple or whatever, where people simply wouldn't fit.

You should never run out of food due to poor planning. Some people ARE going to come without RSVPing, and there should be some kind of plan if this happens. It is just plain rude to invite people and not feed them on purpose. I would be mortified if at my wedding, my guests didn't have enough food, whatever the reason. I've never heard of that happening, but maybe I just haven't had enough experience w/ weddings. I've only been to four wedding myself, and two of those was when I was very young, so I don't remember much.

As to the guest issue: the fact is, people make their guest-lists for good reasons. If you can't bring a guest, it's probably b/c there isn't enough money, or room for one. Also, it could be a fairness issue. While Joe and Jane want you at their wedding and like your boyfriend, they don't want to have to also invite all their cousins whose boyfriends or girlfriends they hate. It would cause a lot less trouble to just say "no guests". It's a slipperly slope with these things, like making an exception for one kid. If one kid gets to come, people are going to see him at the wedding and wonder why their kid couldn't come, too.

[Eureka]

Q.N. Jones, although we are going back and forth I wanted to make clear I'm not getting hot about this. Until this thread, I didn't know you could politely invite only one person (especially a close friend), and I don't think I ever will be comfortable with the idea. At least now I know that not everyone thinks like I do, and consider a single invite a snub.

Just trying to wrap my head around it. :)
While I understand that you are coming from a position of one half of an established couple, I have a different point of view. I'm chronically single. I really don't date and there has certainly never been a person in my life whom I would feel comfortable inviting to a wedding with me. Therefore the invitations that I have recieved that say Eureka and Guest have always amused me a little. What, should I grab a guy off the street? Invite my mother? Ask Cynthia the girl who loves weddings to come so we can critique the wedding?

Actually, there was one wedding that I ended up flying to that if I'd been a little closer to I might have been tempted to invite my mother. That way I wouldn't have to drive three or more hours each way by myself. And by bringing her to the wedding, I wouldn't have to leave her alone in a strange city.

And I was sufficiently blindsided by the invitation (didn't know the groom was dating anyone, let alone that seriously) that it was not inconceivable that I had gotten serious about someone since the groom and I had last corresponded. So I appreciated the thought. It's just the assumption that one should always give someone an option to bring a date can contribute to some of us singles feeling awfully left out. Much better to entertain oneself with old friends who also did not bring guests. (At the reception, there was one table dedicated to people who had known the groom in grad school, plus one fiance who was happy to meet some of these people he'd heard about for monthes).

[Stonebow]

*raises hand*

semi-professional etiquette consultant here, and I pretty much agree with the sentiment voiced by most people in this thread.

I do not know how long you and your SO had been together by the wedding date, but I do know that unless she was an established part of your life (long term gf, engaged, married), there's no clear expectation to have her invited as well.

Even assuming that, your host has limited resources. Inviting someone else on your own, or raising a stink, is just tacky. It shows a lack of consideration for his efforts.

As for the child- your SO is just wrong. I have been to many kid-free events, and have never been offended by an acknowledgment that there are times and places where children either don't belong or would not enjoy themselves (we have 3 kids). A wedding is certainly one of these. The host is already providing you with free food and entertainment- you want them to provide a babysitter too?

Now, I don't know anything about your SO other than this thread- but if this is an indicator of her normal behavior, I think you're in trouble.


*btw- as for 'and guest' invites: for formal gatherings like weddings, where you are mixing family members with friends that may or may not know everyone, inviting a guest is a way to make sure they have someone to talk with, and ease social interactions with others. So I don't find anything inherently wrong with them. That doesn't obligate the host to provide for it, though.

[archmichael]

overlyverbose: My post was in regards to yellowval's story not to the OP. I maintain the weddings are a "couple" oriented function, and all invitees should have the option to bring one other person.

[yellowval]

Bingo. That "& Guest" is rude, as is asking if you can bring along your friend/SO/kid/SO's kids, etc. If your name only is on the invitation, that's exactly who is invited, and no haggling allowed.

Personally, I'd rather be rude by adding "& Guest" to an invitation than run the risk of offending someone close to me by leaving out his/her SO. Seems to me you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Tastes of Chocolate]

CrazyCatLady]You could apparently be invited to the ceremony and full reception, or the ceremony and dance (and have to find your own dinner in between), or just be invited to the dance.

Being invited to the dance but not the ceremony and dinner is quite common where my dad is from. The church is small, the people are poor, and not everyone is Lutheran. So the weddings can be for close friends and family, as is dinner. That evening, the community hall is opened up with a wide open invitation for the whole area. Friends, neighbors and the guy that pumps out your septic tank all show up. Sandwiches, hot dishes and beer are available for all. The band plays until the wee hours of the morning, and everyone has sore feet the next day.

The bridal party gets to share their day with everyone. Everyone gets to congratulate the bride and groom. The kids all get to get wired up and run around. Everyone is happy.

Miss Manners and Emily Post don't have all the answers, and anything that goes against their rulings isn't rude.

[AngelicGemma]

IMHO, your girlfriend was quite rude.

And there are so many conflicting opinions on guest lists here that I am now afraid to do mine. It's a good thing my wedding isn't until 2008. :) I don't want to offend anyone, but the line has to be drawn somewhere about who gets an invite.

[Eats_Crayons]

If my boyfriend ever gave me an ultimatum such as this,

"Do this or I'm leaving you,"

9 times out of 10 I'd tell him to go. The 10th time better be a doozy of a reason, as in I made a major mistake. Ultimatums do not belong in a healthy relationship.Ditto. But I'd lean to 10 times out of 10 the person would be told to hit the bricks.

But as you said... If there was one mother doozy of a reason. Then maybe. In the case of the OP, I would give her overnight to calm down, if she still had such an intollerably assinine attitude and stuck to her ultimatum the relationship would have ended.

[Cat Whisperer]

IMHO, your girlfriend was quite rude.

And there are so many conflicting opinions on guest lists here that I am now afraid to do mine. It's a good thing my wedding isn't until 2008. :) I don't want to offend anyone, but the line has to be drawn somewhere about who gets an invite.
When we got married two years ago, we didn't invite kids, and made it very clear on the invitation that it was an adult-only affair. In my opinion with regard to invitation etiquette, invite who you want to your wedding, but just make it clear who is and who isn't invited. (Not that it stopped my sister and brother-in-law from giving us a hard time about not inviting kids. :rolleyes: )

As for the OP, one more vote for your girlfriend needs to grow up a wee bit.

[archmichael]

Asked my wife. She says that because of the cost of catering, there is no hard and fast rule about "only" invites.

So I will.... admit that there is a .... possibility that I.... might be.... wrong.

:sulks:

:D

[catsix]

Spoons said:
*sigh* Wish my cousins read Miss Manners. I well remember the time, a few years ago, when a cousin's wedding invitation arrived at my Dad's house. It was addressed to "[Dad's name] and Kids." Note that Mom had been dead for some years, so obviously, her name wasn't on it.

I know how you feel. My cousin got married a couple of years ago, and the wedding invitation went to Mr. & Mrs. Six and Daughters. Neither my sister nor I are children, nor did we live with parentsixes. If that was just a way to be cheap and not have to mail two extra invitations, it was still rude as hell. I am old enough, and have been on my own long enough, to warrant being considered an adult for the purposes of invitation.

I went, because my grandmother wanted moral support (she was there under protest too), but never again.

If I can't be invited by specific invitation with my name on it, I shouldn't be there.

[Cheesesteak]

I think we need to give joazito a bit of a break over asking if the GF is invited. The "invitation" was verbal, during a party, not a carefully planned and worded printed invitation. Just because friend didn't think to say "I want you and your GF to come to my wedding" instead of "I want you to come to my wedding" doesn't mean GF is automatically and irrevocably not invited.

The point of etiquette is to make people comfortable. That's why invitations are carefully worded, so it's clear who is and isn't invited, no awkward clarification necessary. Verbal are often unclear, so clarification may be necessary. As long as everyone understands WHY it's unclear and doesn't get their panties in a twist, it's all good, and we were fine up until when GF decided her kid should be invited too.

Kids are a totally different thing than inviting someone's SO. They change the dynamic of a party completely. My wedding had well over 10% of the guests under 13, and fully half the wedding party was kids. Definitely a different wedding than an adult only affair. If you want an adult party, the kids gotta stay home, and it's very rude to bring your kids uninvited.

[Kiwi Fruit]

Check this thread too.

Damn Weenie Wedding (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=252893)

[Scarlett67]

Personally, I'd rather be rude by adding "& Guest" to an invitation than run the risk of offending someone close to me by leaving out his/her SO. Seems to me you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.
No, there is a simple solution. You call up your close friend and say, "Hey, I'm sending you an invitation to my wedding -- is there someone you would like me to invite to attend with you?" If the answer is yes, then get the other person's name and address and send them an invitation. It's not difficult at all.

(I have to wonder: How close is this person to you if you don't even know if they have an SO, much less the person's name?)

[Keapon Laffin]

Oh, and btw, all that stuff about you being distracted by the kid? That's not the real reason the child wasn't invited. It was just the groom's attempt to make a polite excuse.
My first thought as well.
I think we need to give joazito a bit of a break over asking if the GF is invited. The "invitation" was verbal, during a party, not a carefully planned and worded printed invitation.
Yup, just wanted to point these out. The "& Guest" doesn't really apply here. He invited the OP, and then the GF, but held his ground on the child issue. Nothing wrong that I can see.

And I don't think there was anything wrong with the GF asking if her kid could come along (that would be quite normal I imagine).
But forcing an ultimatum was just a petty tantrum.

[jayjay]

overlyverbose: My post was in regards to yellowval's story not to the OP. I maintain the weddings are a "couple" oriented function, and all invitees should have the option to bring one other person.

Hmmm... I have to disagree. This isn't the prom. The only couple that is at all relevant to a wedding is the bride & groom. If weddings are a couple-oriented function, in your perception, it's your perception that has the problem, not the situation.

[Anaamika]

Hmmm... I have to disagree. This isn't the prom. The only couple that is at all relevant to a wedding is the bride & groom. If weddings are a couple-oriented function, in your perception, it's your perception that has the problem, not the situation.
We're not talking about just any wedding, though, we're talking about his good friend, his childhood friend's wedding. Why didn't he know there was an SO? If my childhood friend invited me and not my SO, I would certainly ask her, "Hey, is it OK if he can come along?" If not, though, I wouldn't throw a tantrum.

[jayjay]

We're not talking about just any wedding, though, we're talking about his good friend, his childhood friend's wedding. Why didn't he know there was an SO? If my childhood friend invited me and not my SO, I would certainly ask her, "Hey, is it OK if he can come along?" If not, though, I wouldn't throw a tantrum.

I wasn't addressing the situation in the OP, though, just archmichael's contention that weddings are "couples" functions. I agree that if his friend should have known to include the girlfriend in the invitation. My own take on it is that the friend doesn't particularly like the girlfriend and was hoping the subject of her attending wouldn't come up, with or without a child. Judging from the subsequent events, I could see how jaozito's buddy might not really care all that much for her...

[Anaamika]

I wasn't addressing the situation in the OP, though, just archmichael's contention that weddings are "couples" functions. I agree that if his friend should have known to include the girlfriend in the invitation.



Right, gotcha.


My own take on it is that the friend doesn't particularly like the girlfriend and was hoping the subject of her attending wouldn't come up, with or without a child. Judging from the subsequent events, I could see how jaozito's buddy might not really care all that much for her...


How true. jaozito, I must reiterate, your friend must have been really hurt you chose not to come.

[CrazyCatLady]

We're not talking about just any wedding, though, we're talking about his good friend, his childhood friend's wedding. Why didn't he know there was an SO?

Well, the OP said the groom had met the kid at some other wedding a few months back, so presumably he knew about the girlfriend. Why wouldn't he invite her to start with? Dunno. Maybe the budget is tight. Maybe he thought she was a flavor-of-the-month sort of girlfriend. Maybe if they invited her, they had to invite other SO's who they really dislike. Maybe he doesn't like her because she's the sort of person who would hold a lifelong grudge over something like this. Could be a million different things.

[Abbie Carmichael]

I can't believe you picked your girlfriend over your lifelong buddy.

If he's still your friend, I'm amazed.

[irishgirl]

Our venue has room for 110...that's guests and wedding party. We have about 50 relatives between us, so it's really only 50 guests for dinner. There is enough room for another 60 in the evening, after dinner. An evening reception carries no obligation for a gift, and is merely a way of extending an invitation for people you would love to have there, but can't because of space constraints.

Our rule is, if we're not friendly with both members of a couple who aren't living together (none of our friends are engaged or married) only our friend gets invited. Obviously, any co-habiting couples are both coming, as are the couples where we know both people well. I want OUR friends there, not some of our friends and their partners who I don't know, with other close friends excluded.

We don't have unlimited space or money to feed people we barely know, so if the choice is between a friend's SO who I've never met or a friend I've known for years, I'll invite my friends without their partners.

[archmichael]

Hmmm... I have to disagree. This isn't the prom. The only couple that is at all relevant to a wedding is the bride & groom. If weddings are a couple-oriented function, in your perception, it's your perception that has the problem, not the situation.I get the impression that single women, if they are in a relationship, don't like to go to weddings alone. I'm not sure how guys feel about this

Aren't things like the bouquet and garter toss reminders for the single people to get married? I would guess it would suck for a woman to catch to bouquet, and wasnt allow to bring their SO.

If Janet had caught the bouquet and Brad wasn't invited they probably wouldn't have ended up in Dr Frank-N-Furter's castle. :D

But judging by the support I'm getting on this issue you're probably right

[SkeptiJess]

[quoteAnd yes, I think both members of a couple should be invited, whether they are married, engaged, living together, or living separately. And for those who say a SO in a live-in relationship should be invited, but not an SO in a non live-in relationship, why? They're still only boyfriend and girlfriend. What gives them a special privelege because they're living together? And what about people in long-term same sex relationships? They may never be able to get "married," but does that mean they shouldn't be invited to weddings as a couple?[/quote]The etiquette principle that this all turns on it that of the "social unit." Social units must, according to standard etiquette, be invited togather socially. Now, it used to be that only married or engaged couples constituted a social unit. In the last few decades, however, we've seen the concept of people living together spousally become respectable, so, nowadays, moving in together is considered to be a declaration of social unitude. So, from an etiquette perspective, at a minimum people who are married, engaged or living together (and this includes people in same-sex relationships living together) should be invited together. BTW, you should never use "& guest" to invite someone's significant other. The etiquette rule is this: both halves of a social unit must be invited to social events, and they must be invited by name.

"& guest" is cmpletely different. Inviting someone "& guest" is allowing them to bring someone of their own choosing to your party. It isn't wrong, to do this, really, but it isn't necessary either. If you can afford to do it, and you want to, you can. But no couple should feel obliged to leave actual friends off of their guest list in order to allow their guests to bring strangers to their wedding.

As for the OP -- if you and your girlfriend are fairly long term and since this was a verbal invitation, I wouldn't consider you rude to clarify whether or not you could bring your girlfriend, or even her kid. If there had been a written invitation with just your name on it, that would have been different -- the only people invited to an event are the people written on the invitation. But it was rude for your girlfriend to demand that she MUST bring her son, and it was controlling and rude for her to demand you not attend the wedding unless her son was included.

[joazito]

I can't believe you picked your girlfriend over your lifelong buddy.

If he's still your friend, I'm amazed.

I have to reply to this one. I have known him all my life, true, but ever since highschool (6 years ago) we pretty much lost touch. And frankly... I think he's a fine person, but he wouldn't be my first pick when I wanted a friend... Had it been the wedding of one of the friends I love and things might have been different.
Since then I've seen him once, we played football and what happened was never brought up.

[Elenfair]

You might want to poke around the Etiquette Hell messageboard sometime. There's good advice to be had.

As others have stated by now, invitations ONLY apply to those whose names are written on the formal invite. Don't assume someone forgot your girlfriend, your dog, or your step child. The general etiquette rule is to invite "established" couples (i.e. people who have been cohabitating as married couples for ages), those who are engaged to one another, and married couples. If the children's names are not on the invitation, then they are not invited.

It was rude of you to ask for your girlfriend to tag along, but your friend was accomodating. It was even MORE rude for your girlfriend to ask for the child to come along and then get all huffy when she was told no.

Some people just don't WANT kids at their weddings, and while we may or may not agree with their reasons why, it's THEIR choice (and ultimately, their money when it comes to paying for the meals...)

[Little Lioness]

Miss Manners says that a couple who are living together are presumed to be secretly engaged. Live-in significant others are invited because engaged couples are invited (yes, this applies to same-sex SO's, gay marriage has been legal in Massachusetts for some time, the constant rain of frogs has been horrible on my commute). I agree with other posters that "and guest" is rude. If the "and guest" hasn't been around long enough for the bride and groom to know his/her name, then there's no reason to invite him/her. I say this as someone who was talked into adding "and guest" to invitations and ended up with a wedding album and video clogged with my husband's numerous idiot cousins' dates-of-the-day.

Oh, and your gf is a manipulative and unpleasant shrew. Your friend sounds like a nice guy. Keep him, ditch her before she attaches herself to your wallet like a remora.

[zuma]

I can't believe you picked your girlfriend over your lifelong buddy.

If he's still your friend, I'm amazed.

His histrionic, just-looking-for-an-excuse-to-be-offended gf, at that.

I'm in no way qualified to offer advice based on a paragraph or two post on a messagbe board, but that won't stop me :)

If this woman issues ultimatems over such trivial things, I'm sure there will be much bigger drama later in your relationship. In ffact, I am going to go out on a limb and guess that she has created similiar drama a whole lot of times before.

And as far as not going to your best friend's wedding, you should work on repairing that relationship... I'm sure it was noticed.

[yellowval]

The etiquette principle that this all turns on it that of the "social unit." Social units must, according to standard etiquette, be invited togather socially. Now, it used to be that only married or engaged couples constituted a social unit. In the last few decades, however, we've seen the concept of people living together spousally become respectable, so, nowadays, moving in together is considered to be a declaration of social unitude. So, from an etiquette perspective, at a minimum people who are married, engaged or living together (and this includes people in same-sex relationships living together) should be invited together. BTW, you should never use "& guest" to invite someone's significant other. The etiquette rule is this: both halves of a social unit must be invited to social events, and they must be invited by name.


Ah, so our mistake was not living together before we were married. It's all clear to me now. :rolleyes:

[Elret]

Ah, so our mistake was not living together before we were married. It's all clear to me now. :rolleyes:
Huh? She didn't say that at all. She said couples who are married or engaged have made it clear to society that they are an official unit. Because at that time you and your husband were not married or engaged, society as a whole finds it difficult to distinguish that your relationship is so much more serious than Uncle Fred and the chick he picked up at the bar last weekend. Certainly extremely close friends ought to be better able to judge the seriousness of your relationship and make appropriate judgements from there, but in general couples who are dating do not appear as serious as those who have made their commitments more visible.

[yellowval]

No, she said that living together is considered, as engagement or marriage, to be a "declaration of social unitude." Thus warranting a live-in boyfriend/girlfriend an invitation but not couples who aren't living together.

[Elret]

I think the idea is, if you have made a visible, public, major life change in order to faciliate your long-term/lifelong commitment to a person, then people in general can use that as a way to gauge how serious you are about the relationship. Marriage, engagement, and more recently, moving in together, all are commonly recognised means of saying "Hey world, this person and I are in this together!"

If you are dating a person you have not married, become engaged to, or moved in with, it is harder for people in general to know that your relationship is more serious than other dating couples who may be broken up next week. Like I said, if you and your husband were serious about each other at that time, then yes, I personally would expect a close friend to recognise and acknowledge that. But as a general rule, it can be hard to tell who is dating "seriously" and who is dating "casually", since from all outward appearances those relationships often look the same.

Please note, I am not in any way saying that the relationships of those who aren't married, engaged, or living together are in any way less important or serious or right than those who are. I just mean, I can see what Jess is saying about the "social unit", and I understand and appreciate how such a guideline would have been adopted.

[overlyverbose]

overlyverbose: My post was in regards to yellowval's story not to the OP. I maintain the weddings are a "couple" oriented function, and all invitees should have the option to bring one other person.

Sorry I misunderstood you, archmichael. Still, I'll have to disagree. While it would be nice to accommodate everyone and their brother at a wedding, the couple is under no obligation, and should be under no obligation, to ask if there's someone their guests would like to bring.

As for who's invited and who's not, I think that wedding invitation etiquette is pretty explicit. If your name isn't mentioned regarding someone's baby shower, you'd probably assume "I guess I don't know the mommy-to-be well enough to qualify." Or if your name isn't included on the guest list for a sit-down dinner party, you'd probably assume you weren't invited. To me, anyway, it's pretty obvious that if an invitation is not addressed to me or to my SO and me, I'm not included.

For example, when I was just out of college, many of my friends got into a frenzy of getting married. My roommate often received wedding invitations from our mutual friends, and my name was never on the invitation, so I never attended the weddings because, well, my name clearly wasn't included. I was kind of hurt, but my roommate was closer to these people than I was, so I just assumed that perhaps they had a tight budget or wanted only the closest friends and family present. Finally, one of these friends said, "Hey, why didn't you come to our wedding anyway? We asked your roommate, and she said you weren't invited. Of course you were invited - we addressed the invite to her and guest." I didn't quite put it this way, but I always thought to myself, why the hell wouldn't you explicitly state my name on the invitation then? Am I supposed to read your mind and assume that I'm invited? If you send an invitation to "overly's roommate and overly" or a separate invitation to each of us, it's quite obvious who is invited and who is not. Besides, when you're that age, you're often dating a lot, and my roommate was always going out with her man du jour - regardless of who the man-and-wife-to-be thought they had invited, of course she wasn't going to invite me as her date. So just because you're close friends with someone or living with them does not necessarily mean you're automatically invited, and regardless of my friends' intentions, it would have been rude of me to assume I was.

[yellowval]

Please note, I am not in any way saying that the relationships of those who aren't married, engaged, or living together are in any way less important or serious or right than those who are. I just mean, I can see what Jess is saying about the "social unit", and I understand and appreciate how such a guideline would have been adopted.

I understand, and respect those of you who disagree with me on this. I in no way pretend to be an etiquette expert, nor do I want to be. My whole point was that I think it's a load of hooey for people to say boyfriend/girlfriend relationships don't warrant an invite, but live-ins do. I would have a much easier time accepting a no boyfriends/girlfriends period policy. That's all. I apologize if I gave people the impression that I was more worked up about this than I am. I'm already married, did things the way I felt most comfortable for my wedding, and never plan to get married again. So everybody's stuck with both of us at their weddings now! :D

I'd be interested to hear an update from joazito to see if he's talked more with his girlfriend about this issue and her behavior.

[archmichael]

Marriage, engagement, and more recently, moving in together, all are commonly recognised means of saying "Hey world, this person and I are in this together!"

Way off topic: I am a big fan of living together before getting married, but I thought that 'shacking up' was generally still frowned upon. Is my perception on this way off as well?

[joazito]

This is your friend's day. Not yours. Not your girlfriends. His. Since you are close, as you say, it seems reasonable for you to ask if the child is welcome. However, since you are close, you should understand and respect his refusal. It is his day.

Hi, i'm the rude GF you've all been talking about and i find it very curious how you can say all those mean things you have been saying without hearing the other side of the story.
First of all they are not close friends, they have met at the age of 3, but they haven't seen or called each other for six years (and not because of me).
Second, he would have never invited my BF if he haden't gone to the Farm that belongs to my BF's grandma (not parents house) to play soccer (it has a private field made specially for Joazito). And he only went there cuz the other friends wanted to visit my BF.
Now about that wedding:
My BF told me about the wedding and told me he wasn't sure had invited me too, but he probably did because he invited all the other friends GF's. I told my BF that it wouldn't matter since i wouldn't go without my sonand he wasn't invited for sure.
After that he called his so called friend, didn't explain the whole story as he should have and only after the friend gave his stupid answer, did i get pissed.
He said he didn't want my son at the wedding cuz then Joazito wouldn't have any time for his friends.
The other thing that made me furious was when he said that he didn't know i had a son (remember that we were all at the farm the day he went there and his fiancé played whit my son the whole afternoon). So is he short sighted or is he just stupid?

About the ultimatum, i only did it because the groom was very unpolite at the phone and i would never go to a wedding if my BF wasn't welcome.

Signed:

Joazito's GF

[Elret]

I see what you're saying. And you and your hubby can both come to my wedding. Just don't bring your dog.

[Elret]

My last post was in response to yellowval but folks sneaked in before I posted. The rest of y'all can't come. But your dogs can.

[Eureka]

overlyverbose,
Some of your friends were bonkers. To assume that sending an invitation to "overly's roommate and guest" is equivalent to inviting overly and her roommate? I can't imagine doing that. Of course, I'd probably assume that both you and the roommate wanted a copy of the invitation to keep and treasure(or at least I'd pretend that I did) and so send you each an invitation. For a more casual event, I can imagine addressing one invitation to both people, but I'd be more mad about being intended as the "guest" of my roommate than I would have been by not being invited at all.

[Elret]

Way off topic: I am a big fan of living together before getting married, but I thought that 'shacking up' was generally still frowned upon. Is my perception on this way off as well?
As someone mentioned above, some etiquette mavens will politely look the other way under an assumption that people living together must be secretly married or engaged.

[overlyverbose]

overlyverbose,
Some of your friends were bonkers. To assume that sending an invitation to "overly's roommate and guest" is equivalent to inviting overly and her roommate? I can't imagine doing that. Of course, I'd probably assume that both you and the roommate wanted a copy of the invitation to keep and treasure(or at least I'd pretend that I did) and so send you each an invitation. For a more casual event, I can imagine addressing one invitation to both people, but I'd be more mad about being intended as the "guest" of my roommate than I would have been by not being invited at all.

I wasn't too ticked off mainly because I had sort of grown apart from my friends due to a relationship in which my then-boyfriend insisted I not hang out with my friends. He did a very good job of isolating me almost completely, and when we broke up and he moved back to NY, I was essentially alone except for my roommate and then former friends, all of whom I'd blown off earlier. It would have been nice had my friends' not including me on the invitation not implied "overly's roommate, oh, and that other girl"; however, I just chalked it up to forgetfulness, not maliciousness. Maybe I should have been more upset, but things worked out well in the end. I'm closer to those people than I was during college, and most of them felt terrible for not having thought to include me on their invite list by name (which was perversely satisfying - while I don't wish my friends to feel bad, I was glad they had the hindsight to realize what they did could be construed as offensive).

[yellowval]

I see what you're saying. And you and your hubby can both come to my wedding. Just don't bring your dog.

Are you sure? He's a really cute dog. I suppose now you're going to tell me I can't bring the cats, either. How about my imaginary kids? They're much better behaved than my 27-year-old (the husband).

[Cat Whisperer]

Hi, Joazito's Girlfriend. People comment on one side of the story all the time here - it's usually all we get, and the people receiving the comments should know to take them for what they're worth. It's a public message board - I hope nobody is making important life decisions based on what goes on here.

It may be differnent in Portugal, but in North America, kids aren't invited to every adult function; you do socialize with your boyfriend without your son sometimes, don't you?

[Q.N. Jones]

Personally, I'd rather be rude by adding "& Guest" to an invitation than run the risk of offending someone close to me by leaving out his/her SO. Seems to me you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Here's the thing: in this situation, it means you don't even know that the SO exists, let alone their name.

If the invitee hasn't even bothered to introduce her SO to you, why on earth should she expect that person to be invited to a social function?

If a person "close to you" is going to get upset because you don't always give her the option to bring any person she happens to be dating at the moment, I'd say she's not a very good friend.

Q.N. Jones, although we are going back and forth I wanted to make clear I'm not getting hot about this....Just trying to wrap my head around it.

Me neither. I'm just baffled by you. :)

I get the impression that single women, if they are in a relationship, don't like to go to weddings alone. I'm not sure how guys feel about this.

Well, I'm single 99% of the time, and I absolutely hate bringing a date or being expected to bring a date. I don't need to bring along some random person to be my crutch or shoulder to cry on when I break down in misery because I'm still single. Sheesh. I love being single, and never want to be married, and while I'm happy to celebrate the marriages of my friends, they don't make me feel lonely.

Where does the idea that all single women are miserable and desperate to get married come from? (oh, right, from other single women who feel that way...) :)

We asked your roommate, and she said you weren't invited. Of course you were invited - we addressed the invite to her and guest."

This person is clueless and will probably never get it.

Way off topic: I am a big fan of living together before getting married, but I thought that 'shacking up' was generally still frowned upon. Is my perception on this way off as well?

It's frowned on morally by some people, but not by etiquette guides. Actually, attempts to impose your morality on others will often run you afoul of Miss Manners and the other proper ladies.

[CrazyCatLady]

Hi, i'm the rude GF you've all been talking about and i find it very curious how you can say all those mean things you have been saying without hearing the other side of the story.

Because no matter what, it is rude to put someone on the spot for an invitation for your child. The correct thing to do in that situation is to send your very politest and most gracious regrets that you will be unable to attend. And no matter what, it is unreasonable to conceive a lifelong hatred of someone for not wanting to invite your child to a social event. And no matter what, it is controlling and manipulative to forbid someone to attend their friend's wedding just because your kid isn't welcome there. "You do what I say or else" has no place in a mature adult relationship between equals. It just doesn't.

After that he called his so called friend, didn't explain the whole story as he should have and only after the friend gave his stupid answer, did i get pissed.
He said he didn't want my son at the wedding cuz then Joazito wouldn't have any time for his friends.
The other thing that made me furious was when he said that he didn't know i had a son (remember that we were all at the farm the day he went there and his fiancé played whit my son the whole afternoon). So is he short sighted or is he just stupid?

He's neither. He's offering a polite fiction to cover the fact that your kid is just not invited. And he wouldn't have had to do that if you guys hadn't put him on the spot. As I've mentioned before, putting someone on the spot for an invitation somewhere is massively impolite. So I have to blame that lie on your boyfriend as much as on the groom

About the ultimatum, i only did it because the groom was very unpolite at the phone and i would never go to a wedding if my BF wasn't welcome.

So...he wasn't very polite about being put in a very awkward and uncomfortable position, and you're going to hold that against him till the end of time. Very mature of you. Quite commendable, that. Leaving aside the issue of expecting someone else to feel exactly the same way you do about every single thing, I'd like to remind you that you were entirely welcome at the wedding. It was your child who wasn't welcome. If you weren't willing to go without your son, that's your fault, not the groom's.

[overlyverbose]

After that he called his so called friend, didn't explain the whole story as he should have and only after the friend gave his stupid answer, did i get pissed.
He said he didn't want my son at the wedding cuz then Joazito wouldn't have any time for his friends.
The other thing that made me furious was when he said that he didn't know i had a son (remember that we were all at the farm the day he went there and his fiancé played whit my son the whole afternoon). So is he short sighted or is he just stupid?

About the ultimatum, i only did it because the groom was very unpolite at the phone and i would never go to a wedding if my BF wasn't welcome.

joazito's girlfriend, why on earth is your boyfriend's friend's answer stupid? He was gracious enough to say that you could attend, then tried to make arrangements for your child, then conceded your kid could come, too, and his answer is "stupid?" Also, why would you issue an ultimatum to someone you love? "It's your friend or me. Choose." That doesn't seem very mature - it seems like you really don't care about anyone's feelings but your own. You might as well just stamp your foot and throw a tantrum or scream "I hate you forever and ever!" and run into your bedroom and lock the door.

And, by the way, some people do forget the names and faces of others. Even if he did meet your son and play with him, perhaps he didn't realize he was yours, or he simply forgot. That makes him stupid? Haven't you forgotten someone's name before?

[Q.N. Jones]

Hi, i'm the rude GF you've all been talking about and i find it very curious how you can say all those mean things you have been saying without hearing the other side of the story.

None of the circumstances you mention matter.

It is always rude for an invitee to ask to be allowed to bring extra people with them to a wedding.

I recommend that you buy this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393058743/qid=1107541784/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-5568901-8238203?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) and read it.

[Guinastasia]

Hi, i'm the rude GF you've all been talking about and i find it very curious how you can say all those mean things you have been saying without hearing the other side of the story.

Joazito's GF

No offense, but you might want to get your own guest account, rather than post on your boyfriend's.

[Elret]

Hi joazito’s girlfriend!
It’s nice to hear the other point of view, but I to be honest, it doesn’t change my opinion of what happened. I don’t think there’s anything “stupid” about the groom’s answer to why your son couldn’t attend. It’s perfectly reasonable to want an adult you invite to an adult function spending time with the other adults. I know I don’t know what tone the groom was taking on the phone, but I just truly don’t see anything impolite about his behaviour as you have related it here.
I also really don’t for the life of me understand why you couldn’t attend without your son, and I am with others here who have said that I cannot imagine ever giving an ultimatum like that, even under much, much more serious circumstances than the ones here.

[SkeptiJess]

yellowval -- Elret kept making the exact same responses that I would have made had I been here. In etiquette terms, it isn't the seriousness of the relationship that makes you a social unit, it's the public declaration. Marrying, becoming engaged, or moving in together are all public gestures declaring the couple to be a unit. Also, in my original post, you'll notice that I said "... from an etiquette perspective, at a minimum people who are married, engaged or living together (and this includes people in same-sex relationships living together) should be invited together." This is the bare minimum required by etiquette. People can expand that definitionas far as they like. I usually tell brides that they should try to include long-term, or serious boy- and girl-friends of friends, even if they don't live together. The term "social unit" usually helps clarify the idea. The bride will think, "Gee, Patty and Bob aren't living together or engaged, but they've dated for 5 years and go everywhere together... So I'd better invite him." But by name, not as "& guest." I don't think "& guest" is rude, but it is impersonal. A close friend's significant other should not be treated so impersonally. "& guest" is only appropriately used for a guest with no serious significant other, who might want to bring a random guest whose name the bride and groom don't know -- and who the guest might not even know until the last minute. It's a nice enough thing to do, if the couple can afford the extra guests, but it isn't required by etiquette.

[Khadaji]

Hi, i'm the rude GF you've all been talking about and i find it very curious how you can say all those mean things you have been saying without hearing the other side of the story.
First of all they are not close friends, they have met at the age of 3, but they haven't seen or called each other for six years (and not because of me).
Second, he would have never invited my BF if he haden't gone to the Farm that belongs to my BF's grandma (not parents house) to play soccer (it has a private field made specially for Joazito). And he only went there cuz the other friends wanted to visit my BF.
Now about that wedding:
My BF told me about the wedding and told me he wasn't sure had invited me too, but he probably did because he invited all the other friends GF's. I told my BF that it wouldn't matter since i wouldn't go without my sonand he wasn't invited for sure.
After that he called his so called friend, didn't explain the whole story as he should have and only after the friend gave his stupid answer, did i get pissed.
He said he didn't want my son at the wedding cuz then Joazito wouldn't have any time for his friends.
The other thing that made me furious was when he said that he didn't know i had a son (remember that we were all at the farm the day he went there and his fiancé played whit my son the whole afternoon). So is he short sighted or is he just stupid?

About the ultimatum, i only did it because the groom was very unpolite at the phone and i would never go to a wedding if my BF wasn't welcome.

Signed:

Joazito's GFYou quoted me, but I gotta say, nothing that I said was mean. When I say
This is your friend's day. Not yours. Not your girlfriends. His. this is not mean. If you think it is, you have lived a sheltered life, 'cause I could show you mean if I had a mind to.

It is simple. The man is getting married and it is his day. How will you feel if you are lucky enough to get married? Will you feel that the Girlfriend of a distant friend (remember, you say they aren't close) should have any say in procedings, or will you think that the wedding and the day are about you?

You are "curious" that we commented when we only heard one side of the story? Well, we were ASKED for comments. (see orignal post. In case you have trouble spotting it, it is the part where he says I have no mind for this kind of things and I know you guys have your morals straight, so help me make up my mind please.) If your BF didn't want our opinion, he should not have asked for it, and certainly not asked in a forum entitled "In My Humble Opinion."

And lastly, It is incredably rude for an invitee to ask to be allowed to bring extra people with them anywhere, especially if they are not close friends (again, you tell us they are not.) I have some friends that I am very close to. I might call and ask for a favor, but I would respect their wishes if they said no. I would never ever call a person I wasn't close to and impose in such a rude manner.

Having heard "the other side" of the story, I have to say that both you and joazito were rude, and more rude for being upset when you were told no.

[Nava]

Posting from Spain (other end of teh country from Portugal, but still closer than most other posters!).

My cousin's wedding is March 12th. The bride is from my hometown, so that's where the wedding will take place, at her parish.

I was included in the invitation received by my mother, along with her other single child. My married brother and his wife got a separate invitation. If I happened to have a BF and the family knew about it, _and_ he was invited, we would have gotten a separate invitation.

In my brother's wedding, there were very few people who had little kids, so we asked them not to bring them. Nobody had a problem with this, specially since it was an afternoon wedding and nobody likes putting the 5-yr-old at bed at 4am after he's been dancing all night... or having him wake up suddenly and crying in the car on the way home, after falling asleep during dinner. Same for another cousin's wedding, it was no-kids.

My best friend had a ton of little nephews and nieces, so it was a kiddie wedding. Also one with the church at 11am and everybody folding by 1am except the staunchest youths (what, you mean people in other places don't have 14-hour weddings?)


Unless your girl really didn't have anybody who could care for the kid, I think she was very rude. The bride and groom get to decide who gets invited and whether they want kids or not - it's bad enough when their parents start inviting every second- and third-cousin out there, they don't need it from friends!




PS: Mom claims that all those second- and third-cousins meant more expense for the parents and more gifts for the happy couple... but I still would have preferred less guests. If the guest list had been what my brother and sister in law had planned, I would have been sitting with friends and cousins that I've known since childhood, not with a bunch of people I've seen twice in my life!

[PunditLisa]

All of this mess would have been avoided if it weren't for men. They are clueless wonders.

The most likely scenario is this. Joazito goes to a party at his GF's grandma's house and sees a guy he used to be friends with. They are glad to see each other after all these years and after the obligatory thumps on the back, they ask each other what's new. The friend mentions he is getting married. Then he feels awkward because he thinks that Joazito's feelings will be hurt because he wasn't invited. So friend issues him Joazito a verbal invitation without for one second considering the repercussions should Joazito accept. After all, HE'S not paying for the wedding! He also doesn't consider that Joazito's GF should also be invited because that's what etiquette dictates. He doesn't realize what deep mierda he will be in when he tries to explain to to his betrothed why her cousin Leo was excluded but "Joazito from the soccer game" was issued an 11th hour invitation.

And then Joazito calls and asks if his GF and her child can come as well. Hee Hee Hee.

See, women GET that we don't issue invitations to the biggest formal party we'll ever host in the middle of a soccer game. Women GET that such an invitation, if offered, should be politely declined. But we're dealing with men here.

So, here's my NSHO. The groom was wrong for issuing an invitation to his wedding in the middle of a soccer game and without consulting his bride to be. Joazito was wrong for asking if his GF could also come. And Joazito's GF was wrong for not thwacking Joazito on the head and saying, "Dude, he was only being polite!"

[joazito]

Well I never intended to live this thread to die without a summary of the outcome regarding, my GF, so here goes: she didn't change her mind about what happened, she got royally pissed at me for divulging personal information about her in a public message board, and she got really upset at everyone calling her a manipulative bitch. I'm sorry for that she had to see this, I probably shouldn't have posted in the first place and I probably shouldn't have shown it to her thinking it would allow her to see thinks in a different light. Anyway, life goes on.
In another news, she broke up with me today. She was my first GF, had been together for a couple of years, and her kid just called me dad on the phone. He has no ideia. Damn... Maybe I should start another thread for support. Or maybe there are too many threads about breaking up. Or maybe I should stop posting personal info on a public message board. Baaaah.

[badbadrubberpiggy]

Um, since none of us have any idea who she is or who you are, it's not really personal. And she IS a manipulative bitch, though I'm sorry you're going through this. Breakups suck, and it looks like her kid is going to be missing out by not having you around.

[AngelicGemma]

Break ups are always hard, but usually for the best. Try and remember this. Oh, and chocolate always helps. :)

[Miller]

That sucks that she dumped you, joazito, but honestly? From what I've seen in this thread, you're better off without her.

[overlyverbose]

I'm sorry about your breakup, joazito, but I have to agree with the others that you're probably better off without her.

[yellowval]

I think the one thing in this thread that pretty much all of us agreed upon, joazito, was that your girlfriend was trying to control you and that you needed to change that or you were in for a lifetime of misery. I'm very sorry that your relationship had to end this way, and I'm sorry that her son is having to go through this, but I think it will be the best for you in the long run. You definitely deserve better!

Good luck!

[CrazyCatLady]

I wouldn't say you were wrong for posting this, hon. Posting about personal issues with people off the boards can be really therapeutic. If nothing else, it allows you to vent, and having to articulate your feelings to people who don't know anything about the situation forces you to examine them and clarify what you're really feeling. Plus, an outside opinion can help open up issues that you wouldn't necessarily see on your own. Sometimes the Dopers will tell you that yes, you're completely right, sometimes we'll tell you that you're both partly wrong, and sometimes we'll tell you that you're a real asshole and need to apologize. Very helpful stuff sometimes.

I wouldn't say you were wrong to show her this thread, either, though from what I've seen and heard of her you were almost certainly wrong to think this would cause any self-examination or change on her part. She doesn't seem mature enough to accept that she might sometimes be wrong and then act accordingly. The real problem here is not that she was a bitch. Everybody's a bitch sometimes, so having been a bitch doesn't really say anything about someone's character. How you respond to having been a bitch, though, says everything about your character. Someone who says, "I was a real bitch, and I'm sorry" then tries to make sure it doesn't happen again is usually a good and mature person, somebody you should probably try to work things out with. Someone who refuses to admit to having been a bitch, or who makes excuses for being a bitch, or worse yet claims it's all your fault that she was a bitch...that person is generally not a very good or mature person, and is probably not worth your time.

I'd like to ask you a couple of questions, also. You don't have to answer them here, but you really should answer them for yourself, and be completely, totally honest. If this thread had been full of support for your ex's behavior, would she have still been pissed about you posting it? Did you really want to go through the rest of your life with your social life being dictating by who's pissed her off and who hasn't?

[joazito]

Wise words.
So... Hi again. I'm reopening this thread to say me and my girlfriend are back together. I can't thank you enough for making me realise some thinks are not meant to be accepted. Anyway, if things go on according to plans between the both of us, I'm really going to appreciate having you around. You know I'm going to need it... :)
What a great bunch of people all of you. You've taught me tremendously. Thanks.