The Vine: April 21, 2010
Hi Sars!
So, here’s the thing about TheKnot.com…they’re kinda hoity-toity over there. I mean, I’ve personally only been to one wedding (out of probably 50) in my life that had a sit-down dinner at the reception. And that was the wedding of an adult 40-year-old doctor and his wealthy bride. Anyway, since I’ve been planning my wedding, I’ve come to see that that seems to maybe be just a locale thing, or maybe just that I only know broke-ass people.
Needless to say, my fiancé and I will not be feeding dinner to any of our broke-ass friends at our reception. They’re getting cake, a chocolate fountain, and some fruit and cheese. We are paying for it ourselves, as our parents are not financially able. Also, our location has a maximum capacity of 150 people. Our guest list right now sits at 155. I realize only about 60%-ish of those people will show, but still. The less we have to feed, the better cheese we can afford!
So, because of all this, and the fact that we are not really very close to any young children, we are opting for the Adult Only / No Young Children thing. The ceremony and reception are actually going to be in the same exact room, so it’s not even like “children welcome to the ceremony, but adults only at the reception” is an option. So, my bright idea, was to add some wording to our website and also maybe to the bottom of the RSVP cards.
When I posted on the forums at TheKnot about this, just to get an opinion on my wording, it was met with a resounding “NO! YOU CAN NOT PUT THAT ON YOUR INVITATIONS OR ANY PART OF THE INVITE PACKAGE!!!” I was kind of shocked. First of all, I am not putting them on the invitations themselves. I’m putting a small note, in small font, at the bottom of an RSVP postcard. The wording I came up with is, “Due to location limitations, we ask that no children under 12 years of age attend. Thank you for understanding.”
One person replied to my post with, “It would be like sending out a birthday party invitation to a 5th-grade class and making a note that says ‘except for Suzie.'”
I’m not even sure how that’s even close to the same thing. I know that there’s a big fat chance that people will bring their kids anyway, because most parents instinctively seem to think, “Oh, that doesn’t apply to MY little angel!” But I’d like to avoid as much awkwardness as possible. To me, the little tiny RSVP note doesn’t seem like such a huge faux pas. But, I wanted to get your opinion and the opinions of your readers. Because, I feel like the Tomato Nation as a whole, is a lot more level-headed than a bunch of brides.
Thanks,
RSVP
Dear R,
You’re creating a problem that doesn’t exist from what I can see. I mean, if you don’t want young kids at your wedding, you don’t want young kids at your wedding, but your stated reason for wanting to note that explicitly on the reply card is that it’s a space/budget issue.
But you also say that 1) you don’t know very many children, and 2) your total invitation list is only five over capacity for the room. You’ll get a 75% acceptance rate, tops, first of all, and second of all, the pertinent question is how much food to provide for people who RSVPed, not the age of the people eating it. Let’s say 110 people tell you they plan to come; you buy, or tell the caterer to buy, enough fruit and cheese and cake for 120 people, just in case. If a guest has a babysitting emergency and shows up with a kid — or any other plus-one — last-minute, that food is already paid for; it’s not like you can charge back any uneaten cheese that sat out for three hours. Do you see what I’m saying?
You have to trust the RSVP and the wording of it to let people understand that the invitation is addressed to exactly whom it’s addressed to and that’s it. If you have people with kids on your invitation list, address the RSVP to the couple, and put their names on the card with spaces for checkmarks — or address it to the entire family and put everyone’s name with their respective checkmark spaces.
But your main problem here, honestly, is your attitude. You’ve assumed a defensive position, a put-upon air about having to pay for it yourself, that’s coming through rather off-puttingly throughout your letter. The “oh, not MY little angel” comment…why do you assume that it’s only the parents who won’t understand what an RSVP is designed to do? In my experience, cluelessness about RSVPs is a universal, unfortunately. And what’s with the “a bunch of brides” comment? The Tomato Nation is a lot of things, including, at this time of year, some brides.
I’ve gone to just about every kind of wedding — City Hall, wildlife-preserve destination wedding with a lodge, Stanford chapel, shores of Lake Champlain, you name it. Most of them, for the record, fed me a full dinner, but I never expected one. What I did expect is for the bride and groom not to focus on the potential for their guests to rook them out of some chocolate.
Look, I just bought a house, so I understand that feeling that everything costs twice as much as you expect, takes twice as long, and is not as satisfying to check off the to-do list as you’d hoped. I empathize with you. That said, weddings cost money, like it or not, and for your own sanity and the comfort of your guests — whoever they are in the end — you need to find a way to make your peace with it as an investment in a fun party that launches your lives together, instead of holding yourself rigid waiting for people to judge you or rip you off, which is the sense I’m getting from this letter.
Give yourself a break; give everyone else a break. You know? It’s your wedding day. So some unauthorized 10-year-old eats your grapes — who cares. It’s going to be fine. Write the RSVP cards as plainly, but politely, as you can; accept that some people will not Get It; move on.
When eating in a “family-style” restaurant, where food is shared among the guests at a table, what is the protocol for dietary restrictions? Does one announce restrictions beforehand? How much discussion needs to go into it, and when and how does one announce preferences? Do all the orders at a table have to conform to the dietary rules of all the people? If someone orders something that another person can’t have, is that person supposed to avoid the other’s dish?
For example, a group of 10 people, half of whom are vegetarian, decide to get pizza. They get two pizzas: one with meat and one without. Do the meat-eaters stay away from the vegetarian pizza, since the vegetarians can’t eat theirs?
If several people are going out for Chinese food, and some don’t eat seafood, and some don’t eat red meat, and some don’t like sweet and sour sauce, but all of them like tofu, eggs, chicken, and vegetables, and all of them like other sauces, and all of them like a balance of spicy and not spicy, then should they all get the foods they all agree on, or if somebody has a craving for seafood should they go ahead and get one seafood dish? What if two people want it?
Or two people go out for Thai food: one likes it really, really spicy; the other doesn’t. Does the spice-lover have to give up their preference, or does the spice-hater suffer along with some extra yogurt? Or do they just each get their own thing and not share? What if the spice lover then wants to try a lot of the not-spicy dish?
I’d like to have some kind of Ultimate Rule about this, and I know you’re the fairest judge: Who wins the arm-wrestle over dietary restrictions? Do the people who eat everything have sway because they are the most flexible, or do the fussy eaters win? And then, for dealing with people who are too foolish to read The Vine, is there a polite, diplomatic way for me to state up front that if I can’t eat your food, then it’s not fair for you to expect to eat mine?
When Can We Stop Talking About This Meal And Start Eating It
Dear Talking,
I don’t love the “let’s get two dishes and share them” thing, just generally. It’s not because, if the other person orders a meat entrée, it’s not so much “sharing” as “eating off my plate”; I just don’t care for it, I don’t know why. We can share an appetizer, but if I have an entrée in mind, I want that entrée and I want the whole thing.
Family-style is different, because the sharing is the whole point, and when it comes to that, you have to distinguish between “doesn’t like” and “can’t eat.” You want to respect “doesn’t like,” of course, but it’s the difference between “doesn’t like peanuts in main courses, but can push them to a corner of the plate” and “will blow up like a fugu if a peanut comes nigh.”
I find that people generally get it and don’t need a ruling. Vegetarians at the table help themselves to the veg dishes first and then everyone else gets a crack, and the meat-eaters don’t ordinarily impinge on my ability to eat what I can. And if they do, well, I ain’t starving; if I only get a single slice of pizza, sometimes it’s a mild irritant, but if you really want to control your order, you decline invitations to family-style meals.
The point of sharing a big family-style meal with friends isn’t the food itself; it’s the sharing, the family part. I have done the “territorial ordering” thing where I get something unpopular in order to fend off encroaching forks, but it’s seldom worth it, because it just makes you look like an inflexible pill.
Suggest a spicy or fish dish to the table (or their opposites), but if it doesn’t go over, you can manage; hope the meat-eaters don’t chow all your tofu and broccoli, but if you only get one serving, you can manage. Omniphages should try to respect the dietary needs of the others, within reason, and those with food issues should try to stay flexible (and pack in a snack just in case).
But the Ultimate Rule is this: the point of group dining is the group.
Dear Sars,
Here’s a story you’re probably all-too-familiar with: A few months ago, my boyfriend of 7+ years left me. We were best friends, had the same interests, had similar views on things. We had the same plans for the future, with the exception of my desire to make the most of our opportunities to travel and see the world. He didn’t want to separate so he decided to come with me.
We moved to London and on the way, spent 6 adventurous months travelling around. We spent every day together creating fun and funny memories and didn’t get tired of each other. We survived everything together, including the difficulties with settling down in a new country away from friends and family.
One thing about him though was his attitude to work. He’s very, very smart but gets easily frustrated because he thinks he is surrounded or managed by incompetent dickheads, and it galls him to think that people who are less smart are promoted above him or earn more money. I tried to tell him that that’s the way the real world works — there are lots of smart, talented, experienced people out there, there will be incompetent dickheads, and experience or luck or whatever can play as much a part in your career as brains. But he thought that London would be different — that if you work hard, you’ll get your rewards and recognition.
And so he worked himself to death. His long hours meant that I did all the housework etc., and while it wasn’t ideal, I supported him because it was his dream and the signs were there that his employer was impressed and would promote him. Although neither of us were professionally happy, we were personally happy. We travelled Europe together and made more plans for the future.
Then, he got fired. He tried to do something right but did it very wrong, and got himself into a lot of trouble. Compounding the problem was his visa situation — you see, he came over to London as my de facto spouse as I am a British citizen. After 2 years, he was able to apply for permanent residency, again on the basis of our relationship. He didn’t want to come to London, he doesn’t even like London, and he did not care about residency. But he had put his application in, and while our passports were away at the Home Office, he got fired.
It just about killed him. He never said anything but I know it was a devastating blow to his pride, self-esteem and his self-image. I got him a lawyer, I got him through it, I got our passports back (with his permanent residency), and both of us landed new jobs. I thought that it was the perfect time for us to start being professionally happy, especially since we had just grown closer after all the stress.
But I guess being fired affected him worse than I thought, and so he decided to leave. He said various things — that we’d grown apart, that we’d been having problems, that the spark had gone out of our relationship, none of which were true and none of which made sense to anybody with half a brain who had seen the way he’d looked at me up to and including the day he left. Anyway, it was his decision, I had no say in it, and I had to watch him walk out of the door the very next day. Needless to say, I am heartbroken.
I am trying to be dignified about this because we spent so many very happy years together and I don’t want to destroy his happy memories of me and our time together. But here’s the thing: no one is supposed to know he got fired or why. He and his former employer signed a legal agreement not to badmouth each other. He told his new employer he was made redundant. Chances are, if anyone knew what really happened, or that he’d lied during the recruitment process, he’d get into a lot of trouble. And then there is the fact that he left me less than 2 months after getting permanent residency. Which can’t be revoked.
I know everyone who gets left/abandoned/deserted/dumped wants revenge, but the thought of informing his new employer of what really happened kind of tortures me. As does the thought of doing whatever I can to get someone to revoke his permanent residency. I know he didn’t go through 7+ years for a visa, but can you blame me for feeling used and upset? Is it perfectly natural to want to spill his precious little secret and potentially ruin his professional life — which is so important to him because he’s dead-set on climbing the corporate ladder as fast as possible at his new job?I really want to do it but he’d know it was me as I’m the only other person in the world, other than the lawyers, who knows. I’m the only person in the world who knows him inside and out.
Sars, he broke my heart and I’m nowhere near out of the woods yet. It’s been less than 3 months and knowing that he is in my city, pursuing my dream, but not with me, is painful. But should I be entertaining these nasty thoughts? Is there a way of being as gracious and dignified as I would like to be?
London Calling
Dear London,
Entertaining them, sure. Doing anything about them, no. It’s “perfectly natural” to want to, to cause him the kind of pain he’s causing you, the basis of which you still don’t understand, so it’s that much harder to put it behind you. But if you do it, then you’re The Hag Who Ruined His Life.
If he did something illegal in the first place, something that endangered others…I can’t speak to the ethics of turning him in as far as whether that’s something you’d do if you didn’t know him personally, or resent him for walking away from seven years together. If it’s an issue of other people’s safety, well, that’s a different discussion.
It sounds, though, like it’s just one of those paperwork things, and what net good will come of blowing the whistle on him? He gets booted out of the country, possibly prosecuted — yeah, maybe in the abstract he deserves it, but is that why you’d do it? No. You want to punish him for interpersonal transgressions, not for the legal wrongdoing, which you apparently had no problem with when it kept him by your side.
And if I had to guess, I’d say that this is likely what his leaving is about: the amount of power you exercised in the relationship, that he followed you, that you “got him a lawyer” and “got him through it” and took over the housework while he worked long hours. Understand, this is not a criticism. But to a large extent, you called the shots on where the two of you would live; you worked and took care of the house; you had the citizenship; you did your job competently and without drama (as far as I know). He chafed under management and then fucked up royally. I don’t know all the particulars, but there is a dynamic I sense here of your proficiency, your drive, your goals, in opposition to a certain cluelessness and needing to be led on his part, and this is an alienating dynamic for some people, I think men more than women.
Like I said, this isn’t a judgment of you and I don’t want you to take it that way. I have had relationships end under analogous circumstances, I guess you could say, and it’s really not anyone’s fault…if I’m right about his issue here, and who knows if I am, but if he left because he didn’t want you to take care of things anymore, well, good luck to him.
The reason I bring this up is that I think that, for him, this is about the power balance in the relationship — and now I think you’re really feeling that, because the relationship is over, but yet he still has the power in it, the power to hurt and confuse you, and the desire to rat him out proceeds directly from that and everything else. And it’s totally, totally normal. Even if you didn’t have this information and you wanted to make some shit up and stick it to him: totally normal.
But you have to accept that; you have to content yourself with the idea that, if it’s really that bad, somebody is going to find out, or he’s going to hang himself some other way; and that, even if nothing bad becomes of him as a result, whichever way it goes for him, it isn’t your responsibility anymore. No more lawyers, no more cleaning around him while he stresses out with his laptop, no more revising your idea of the future so that he can fit into it — try to think of this as freeing, because in many ways, it is.
And if you’re asked about the situation by authorities, be truthful and do what you have to do, but unless and until that happens, he is not your problem anymore. This is what he wanted. I know it burns, having to let that be, but if he left seven years behind because he wanted to feel like a man or whatever the hell, he did you a favor. Leave it there, cut off contact, and remember that in another three months, you will feel much better about everything…or at least differently.
edited 4/22/10 to remove word “gyp”
Tags: boys (and girls) etiquette
RSVP, you may want to try the forums at indiebride.com, that’s where I ran to after the bitches on theknot forums attacked me for having the nerve to post about being anxious about forgetting to put on my engagement ring. I mostly agree with Sars’ advice, but I find the people who use theknot.com can be a bit harsh.
Re: RSVP. I gotta say, I think you’re being a little harsh on her, Sars. I didn’t get the nasty attitude from her letter that you did. Sure, there are the usual try-hard elements typical of many Vine letters (trying to funny, flippant, glib, whatever the writer thinks Sars thinks is cool), which generally fall flat. But I didn’t get a really truly unpleasant vibe from her. And I think it’s valid that she doesn’t want children at her wedding, regardless of the reason. If she doesn’t want to pay for people she didn’t really want there in the first place, I don’t see a problem with that. And I do think the trend of parents assuming their kids are invited where they are not is prevalent enough that it deserves a different approach than that taken towards general poor RSVP etiquette. Perhaps that is a perception unfairly reinforced by careful reading of STFU, Parents, but still. I really don’t see anything wrong with the language she proposes to clarify that the event is Adults Only, because it does seem that it’s a point that needs clarifying more often than should be necessary.
To London Calling: I agree with Sars that you’re better off. And that was the first thing that popped into my head when I read “He’s very, very smart but gets easily frustrated because he thinks he is surrounded or managed by incompetent dickheads, and it galls him to think that people who are less smart are promoted above him or earn more money.” You know, I’m not disagreeing that this happens, but if he thinks that about every work situation he’s in (and it happens in every work situation he’s in), chance’s are that it really isn’t them, it’s him. I have an aunt like this; every person she works with is incompetent, a jerk, etc., etc…you get the picture. It isn’t healthy, and frankly, I think the attitude carries over to your non-work life-as I think it clearly did here and as Sars correctly identified.
RSVP, one option you can consider that’s less blunt than “no kids” is “We have reserved __ seats for you.” I’ve seen a lot of fellow brides use that one to make it clear that the entire family isn’t invited.
When I rule the world, the people who ignore the fact that the invitation to an event lists ONLY the people invited, not their “plus one” or their kids, or “hey my friend will be in town that weekend can they come?” — well, their deaths will be slow and painful. And there will be bees.
But yeah, I agree with Sars. Budget for 150 people, knowing only 100-120 people will come. That leaves plenty of room for those who were raised by wolves and/or can’t read a damn card.
/yeah, I’m still bitter about the 35 extra people who showed up at my wedding.
Just wanted to 2nd the indiebride suggestion. I fled The Knot as well (god forbid we not want a wedding party) and found indiebride much more welcoming and totally helpful.
@RSVP: I think putting that information on the website and spreading it by word of mouth is fine, but I’m also not much on putting it anywhere in the invitation package.
Invitations are for the people to whom they’re addressed, and only for those people. There are folks who don’t know that, and for those people — which by your admission should only be a few, because you said you’re not talking about many kids here in any case — you might have to do the delicate phone call/email. Something like, “Hi, Jane! I was so glad to get your RSVP to the wedding, and I’m really looking forward to seeing you! I did notice that you responded for 4 people, and I wanted to make sure you were aware that we’re tight on space, so we’ve limited the guest list to adults only. I hope you’ll be able to find a sitter for little Janette and Janetta.”
I second the recommendation for indiebride.com if you’re finding that the Knotties all need to unclench. It’s definitely a different atmosphere over there.
Chime with Karen for RSVP.
Indiebride rocks! So does Offbeat Bride! They both have lots of folks are paying their own way, or folks whose parents don’t have piles of cash left over after paying all of their country club dues, and therefore want to be at least a little bit frugal about wedding planning.
For the record, I started getting caught up in the knot-ishness when I started planning my wedding. I had a very Sookie-esque moment at one point. If you have an extra half an hour or so, watching Season 2, Episode 17 is worth some wedding-planning humor.
I have to agree with Sars about putting the names of the people that you want to invite on the invitation, and then letting it go. People will do what they want, and there’s really no way to control it. Someone will bring a kid, regardless of how carefully you word things. Someone else will have a friend in from out of town, and be absolutely certain that you won’t mind if they crash the wedding. (Yes, I was the clueless friend from out-of-town once.) I also had a teeny wedding (less than 20 people). You will never make everyone else happy. Plan well, and then let go.
Gilmore Girls. Forgot to mention that the show for Season 2, Episode 17 is Gilmore Girls.
I got married a month ago, and we tried to have a small child free wedding. We didn’t invite the kids. The ceremony didn’t even start until 7:00 pm, so we figured it would be too late for kids anyway. We had our mothers tell people that we didn’t want kids.
Of course there were kids at the wedding. More than half a dozen. And yes, one cried through the ceremony. Did it matter? Not even a little bit. On the whole, they either slept through the whole thing (and we have a great picture of my uncle, with his granddaughter passed out on his shoulder) or danced all night. It was okay. It wasn’t what we planned or wanted, but it was just fine. Seriously. Kids on the day was a non-issue.
Also, try apracticalwedding.com Excellent anti-Knot website.
Re: RSVP – If you are trying to save $$, why eliminate kids? They eat less than adults anyway…and I’d bet the ones you ARE allowing (12+) will eat more than anyone. What time is the wedding? You might be able to swing 150 people & very little food for a 10 a.m. ceremony/reception, I guess.
One word of warning – our wedding was about the same size & I would say we had a 95-98% attendance rate. We got a lot of somewhat unexpected out-of-towners who came, some due to free-flight benefits, others because they had family/friends in the area & made it a short vacation (summer wedding). It was great, but we were really glad we budgeted enough so we weren’t short on food, booze, etc.
RSVP, if you really want folks to leave the kids at home for the reception, you could indicate that with a message that reads “We love your kids and we’d love to see them at the wedding. The reception is kind of a grown-up party and may not be fun for kids.”
Or some message that doesn’t sound like backseat parenting. My point is, some parents might appreciate knowing if the reception involves a lot of alcohol and music that’s inappropriate for children. I don’t know if that’s the case for you. I see nothing wrong with telling your friends that the reception isn’t kid-friendly. They don’t need to know why, necessarily.
Wow, Sars, that is some insightful advice to London Calling. I am impressed.
To the bride to be – Sars advice is spot on. Only the people on the outside of the invitation are invited so if you don’t put “and family” or “and guest” than they should not RSVP for them. Some people may call you and ask and you should have a response ready. But people will do this because they want an “and guest” or their kids.
My reason for commenting though is you say you want to put the “no kids” bit on the RSVP card. I just want to make sure you don’t mean the card that is returned to you. Because you don’t want people sending back the card that has any information on it that they might need before the wedding. We had two informational cards in our wedding invitations in addition to the invitation, rsvp card and rsvp envelope – yes, it weighed a ton and needed a big stamp.
London – Sars is right on in her advice, but I would like to suggest that for long term recovery and rebuilding you find a good therapist.
“…no more revising your idea of the future so that he can fit into it — try to think of this as freeing, because in many ways, it is.”
that SPEAKS, Sars. Wow, hit it home.
I second the rec for indiebride (also, I know many people who were HORRIFIED by the fact that I didn’t wear my engagement ring 24/7, which… what? really?). That said, I also second the opinion that including info about who’s not invited on the invitation is, well, tacky.
RSVP, it’s all about the attitude and the focus of the ceremony. Remember that the wedding and reception are supposed to be about celebrating your union with the people who mean the most to you. Try to focus on being honored that they would choose to celebrate your relationship and grateful that you have the right to publicly wed and to tell the world about it (as many among us do not have this basic right).
Our reception was at a separate location and there was dinner and entertainment (casino night–blackjack, craps, roulette, slots, etc., also a fortuneteller and a bellydancer), so we just put “adults-only casino-style reception” on the invite (and the names of just the individuals invited on the RSVP postcard). Since the entertainment included gambling (with fake money, of course), most people understood that kids wouldn’t like it, anyway. And no one brought them to the ceremony, either, even though they weren’t specifically told not to. But also, neither me nor my husband particularly like kids or babies, we don’t like being around them, we’re not used to their noises, and we just didn’t want them there. And I know that some parents assume that their kids are invited everywhere, so I was concerned about that, so I suppose it did put us both on the defensive, but I thought of it as trying to solve a problem before it arose. Our main focus with the wedding and reception was throwing a party that our family and friends would enjoy. I didn’t care about napkins or flowers or the cake (except that I wanted it to taste good so that people would want to eat it) or anyone else’s dress/hair/whatever but mine, or any of that. The no kids rule was pretty much the only one (well, that and keeping the ceremony to under 20 minutes), but the main consideration was “How can we make sure that our guests have a great time?” I’m sure that there are plenty of people who would flame me over not liking kids or for specifically not inviting them, but no one we invited took offense (but some said to us how glad they were that they got sitters, so that they could enjoy a night of fun and good food and gaming), and almost seven years later, people still talk about how much fun they had.
All of this is to say that excluding children can be done in a polite and respectful way, and there’s no reason to feel bad about wanting to do that if you have a legitimate reason (even if it’s just that you just don’t like kids) for wanting to do so. Budget worries are legitimate, but worrying that guests are going to eat too much or feeling like providing food for one or two more is too much to ask…not so legit.
Ditto, Karen and RSVP, on theknot.com forums. We had a very unique and fun wedding, and basically NOTHING I got from the website or forums was useful to me at all. Why no, I don’t want to spend $5 each on generic wedding favors when I can spend half that on letting our guests keep wine glasses with the winery’s (wedding location) logo on it. All of that to say, I think your wording and placement is very polite, and you should do what you need to in order to make your wedding day your own and special. Congrats!
Oh lord how I hate to hear myself talk… even when it’s written. I sound so snotty!!!
But thanks, Sars. I’ve calmed down about the whole thing, but at the time I wrote this letter, every other thread and forum I was reading, had to do with everyone bringing children to weddings who weren’t invited. I panicked! And, the brides at TheKnot are a whole kettle of fish that I’ve never dealt with before. I feel that they might be, as Karen stated, a bit bitchier than your average bride. And that’s what I meant by my poorly worded “a bunch of brides” comment.
But again, I do need to calm down, and I realize that. And I’m trying. But it’s HARD! Heh.
I’m just going to have to start with my Save the Dates (I refuse to call them STDs …hew) and address everything very specifically. I’m not close to a lot of kids, but a lot of people I know have kids, so that’s why I’m worried.
I’m rambling now… I thank you for the level-headed advice, and cringe to think how horrible I sounded in that letter.
Just an FYI to Sars: In some circles, the word “gyp” is considered offensive; a racial slur against gypsies. I think it’s more commonly frowned upon in Europe, but ever since I learned that, I try to avoid using it.
@ London Calling – I agree with Sars (what else is new! :))that unless your ex did something that seriously endangered someone, just have fun with the fantasy and then let it go. There is just nothing good that can come of acting on it.
There were some things that caught my eye about your letter about the relationship in general though:
“One thing about him though was his attitude to work. He’s very, very smart but gets easily frustrated because he thinks he is surrounded or managed by incompetent dickheads, and it galls him to think that people who are less smart are promoted above him or earn more money.”
I don’t know your ex personally; chances are he really does/did work with total jerks. But was this an attitude he had at every job, or just one? Because I can understand if he had one job with people who he felt were incompetent (in fact, I’d highly sympathize), but if this was a sort of running theme, I’d begin to be concerned about it as a whole.
“And so he worked himself to death. His long hours meant that I did all the housework etc., and while it wasn’t ideal, I supported him because it was his dream and the signs were there that his employer was impressed and would promote him. Although neither of us were professionally happy, we were personally happy.”
But then you say, “He didn’t want to come to London, he doesn’t even like London, and he did not care about residency.”
I don’t mean this to sound unkind – but it doesn’t sound like he was living his “dream” at all. It sounds like he was trying to live yours, and it wasn’t working for him. He may have been unhappy for a long time, but perhaps he kept trying to fit himself into a situation that in the end, just didn’t fit him, and so he ended up doing what he did – walking out. And don’t get me wrong, I’m not justifying that at all, and I’m not saying this is your fault in any way.
We try to fit ourselves into situations and lives and people’s lives, and they don’t always fit us, but we hold on, sometimes much too long, maybe because of fear or loneliness, or because we have the wonderful memories that you mentioned and because we think we’ll have those again. I think in time, when you’ve had a chance to heal and breathe and be alone for a while, you’re going to be a happier and healthier person, and you’ll find someone who truly shares your dreams and your goals and will want to share your life, and I wish you all the best in finding that person.
And I can’t help but envy you, because London is at the top of a very short list of places I want to see.
Talking, we had a similar situation fairly often with a gaming group; two were veggies, four were meaties. The way we worked it out was meaties ate the meat course only at the first serving. After the veggies got their first or second round, then leftovers were fair game. If one of the meaties didn’t like the meat course, we ordered extra veggie (even though I eat meat, I hate meat on pizza and prefer veggie ‘za). Everybody got enough.
@Stanley: “I didn’t get a really truly unpleasant vibe from her.” I didn’t either. Nor do I think it’s wrong if she wants no kids, or no plus-ones; it’s her wedding. But she led with a defensive “well, apparently it’s the thing to serve people dinner but we’re not doing that so there” kind of tone, which…hey, I eat plenty. You don’t have to feed me, that isn’t the point of the day. But I wouldn’t have thought twice about that either way if she hadn’t gone immediately to this DON’T JUDGE ME place, and it’s that that makes me think she needs to take a step back and consider how important she wants to make the cost-containment.
And as I’ve said in response to other letters wanting to ixnay a certain sort of wedding guest, if you make the rule, fine, but somebody’s got to enforce it, then, and is this something you want to focus on that day.
@arty: Well, if I’m right. Heh. (Thank you for the compliment, though.)
@Georgia: Noted, but that wasn’t the intent, so.
RSVP – maybe it’s different with your friends/family, but for our reception this May we sent out invitations for entire families, and got both verbal “Do you really want the kids to come? Because I’d rather leave them with a sitter…” and a printed “Woo hoo! No babies!” on the response card.
Not that our friends hate their children or anything, but often parents like to have a night out by themselves, especially for something like a wedding.
@Talking – As someone who is extremely sensitive to seafood (I yack on contact. I blame it on being a Pisces – the whole cannibalism thing, you know?), I generally try to let everyone else order first. Then I can adjust my order accordingly. Primarily seafood? I make my apologies, mumble about dietary restrictions, and order separately. 50/50? I add in a vegetarian/chicken dish as my request and order a bigger appetizer. Basically, I try to adjust my meal rather than make other people adjust their meals. I rarely have a problem.
Re: Family Style
I used to have a similar query as to drinking and communal style dining. I don’t really drink, and I’d find myself having to split meals with people who ordered multiple drinks and jacked up the bill, but I just sucked it up as a part of group outings. Nowadays, I do end up paying once in a while, but for the most part, people are aware and will come up with a lower amount for the non-drinkers to pay that’s a little fairer.
With meals, it’s a little different, I find. I actually like communal eating, and I eat most things. I’m often in charge of ordering at these meals, and I generally order things that avoid peoples’ allergies and dislikes, but not to the exclusion of items that most of the group wants. As long as everyone can share in most of the items, I’d just split the bill, and split the food in a fair manner. People usually behave. If there’s someone who really can only eat the one dish they’ve ordered, we usually come up with a lower number for him/her to pay for his/her item and that’s that.
Sars, I didn’t think you weren’t trying to be offensive. But basically the term gets used as a racial slur in the sense of, “Well, everyone knows that gypsies screw you out of your money; they gyp you.” (The American equivalent would be to say someone “Jewed” you, I think.)
Hey, RSVP — for what it’s worth (I realize: not much), I don’t think your concerns are unreasonable and nothing really made me cringe about your suggestion. (That whirring sound you hear is all my female ancestors spinning in their respective graves at my lack of respect for Proper Etiquette.) BUT, at the same time, a lot of people *do* take offense to that kind of thing and ultimately, I don’t think it’s necessary. Granted, there are a lot of people who don’t realize that that a wedding invitation is addressed to the specific invitees and that “Mr. and Mrs. Bob Smith” is not a stand-in for “whoever happens to live in the Smith house.” But, I think it might actually make things *more* awkward for some people — especially people who ordinarily do understand those things and have a babysitting emergency or something. Would you rather them not attend the wedding? I don’t know, maybe you would. And the odds of hordes of ravenous children materializing and devouring all the cheese is pretty unlikely, since, as you’ve said, you just don’t know that many. If there’s a particular problem-child you have in mind, it might be more appropriate to find a discrete way to suss out whether or not Damien’s parents understand the invitees-only concept, rather than, as Sars said, creating a potential problem where one probably doesn’t exist.
I’m babbling, so I’ll wrap this up with the best piece of advice I have to offer a bride: no matter how perfectly you plan things, someone or something *will* go off script at some point and in all probability you will either (a) not even notice or (b) notice and not even care, because at that point: Woo! Getting married! At my wedding, for example, all the flowers were delivered to a different room than had been planned and so went inexplicably missing for most of the day leading up to the ceremony, and we never did find all of them. While everyone else rushed around freaking out and whispering so as not to upset the bride with the catastrophe, I was all, “Seriousy guys, you can’t whisper for crap. But anyway, eh. Because: Woo! Getting married!” And I know they all wanted it to be perfect for me, but what I wanted most was for everyone to be having a good time, not to be stressed out.
I understand that before the wedding, particularly if you’re paying for it yourself and you’re financially strapped, a lot of things can seem like THINGS. I guess what I’m trying to say is, pick your battles, and this one — it’s a minor skirmish. Try to give yourself a break.
@RSVP: The people who’s names are on the envelope are the ones who are invited. Imagine a Venn diagram. One circle is people who don’t know the name on invitation rule. The other is people who will ignore the names on invitation, the note, and expressly being told by the bride yelling through a megaphone that KIDS ARE NOT INVITED!, and bring their kids anyway. There’s a HUGE overlap between these two circles, so you aren’t really gaining anything by including the note. You are just making yourself appear rude, inflexible, and inhospitable by berating the point to all your guests, with or without children. Don’t do it.
@Eat: I understand dietary restrictions and will try to accomodate them to some extent. (i.e. If eating with a vegetarian, I won’t eat more than one slice of the veggie pizza). But, bottom line, if I’m paying for it, I expect to get to eat some of it.
For the bride, I’ll chime in to agree with Sars’ advice, and also I’ll suggest a more open-minded online forum for wedding planning shenanigans: offbeatbride.com, they have some forums that are good for any alterna ideas you might have, which is nice. The Knot is good for resources, listings, etc., but I tended to avoid their message boards, and offbeat bride was really nice for a different vibe.
Oh and also? “Adults Only” at the bottom of the invite is totally acceptable, I think. I just got an invite like that last week and I did not clutch my pearls to my bosom in shock. Of course, I wasn’t planning on bringing my cats with me to the wedding anyway, so maybe I’m the wrong audience.
But, bottom line, if I’m paying for it, I expect to get to eat some of it.
I don’t know if that rationale works. In a group-dining situation, if we evenly split the check, I end up paying for the meat entrees too, which are more expensive than mine. I’m past caring about that part; the issue is that I can’t “expect to get to eat” some of the orange beef I subsidized, because I will get really sick.
Like I said, help yourself; I have fat reserves. But the argument that you underwrote an entree that I kind of have to eat because everything else on the table came from a cow? Nope. Have as much as you want, but don’t act like I’m serving at the pleasure of the president about it.
@RSVP-A friend of mine sent out invites to her wedding and got back response cards on which people had written extra names. And not just kids. One couple was staying with an aunt and uncle when they came to the town where the wedding was, so they added the aunt and uncle to the response card. One person added FOUR PEOPLE to their response card. Seriously. Just goes to prove there are lots of ways to muck up the RSVP card. An “I’m so sorry you misunderstood the response cards, aren’t these things confusing, I am so glad we will get to see [those of you we actually invited]” phone call is often the solution.
another vote for indiebride.
When I got married, I didn’t want kids at the wedding. I had no close friends/family with kids, but a lot of extended-circle “have to” invites with kiddos, many of whom are the type to respond to a “Mary plus one” invite with a cheerful “all 7 of us are excited to come!”
My solution was to include a line on the response card that said “____ of ____ attending”. Then, while addressing the invites, I filled in the second blank with the number of people I was actually inviting. So if I invited Ma and Pa only, but they wanted to bring their 3 little ones, they would have had to fill out the response card to say “5 of 2 attending”.
It worked really well, without us having to hit people over the head with the “NO KIDS” thing.
Reading London Calling’s letter made me sad. Sars’s advice was not what I was expecting, but clearly very sensible.
One other thing I’d add: LC’s comment describing his expressed reasons for wanting to split, that ‘nobody with half a brain’ would think were valid based on what she perceived as his behavior? I think maybe not. I think there were missed signals. Not many people make that kind of decision without preamble, and she’s angry about ‘not having any say’ in it rather that actually hearing him.
(Perhaps his stated reasons are nonsense. If that’s the case, it’s likely that he thought those were the reasons that would cut him loose, that the ‘real’ reasons would somehow not be acceptable. There are too many unknowns here for us to guess what they might be, but if you search your memory, I’m willing to bet you’ll see them.)
But here’s the thing: You don’t have any say in somebody leaving you. It’s not a negotiation. Maybe you negotiate the how, but not the whether. Each of us has agency. Your resentment of his exercise of his agency is fueling this. The revenge thing is pretty disturbing, frankly (absent unibomber-type transgression, that is). Free yourself and move on.
@RSVP: Good one, Stephanie! I like that! Direct, but still subtle! Of course, some people are just immune to subtlety and that’s that. There will always be SOMEONE who reads a request and gets SO offended. For that person, I use my mother’s mantra, “They’re mad? Oh, well, they’ll get glad again!”
Congratulations on your marriage!
@Talking I dislike meat on pizza and the toppings I like generally don’t go over well in a group (pineapple only, mushrooms and onions) so I’m pretty vocal when it comes to pizza ordering group and will chant, “cheese” until I’m assured a half-cheese will be order. When the pizza arrives, I usually grab enough slices to cover myself so I know I won’t be hungry (might you, this isn’t usually a huge pile of pizza). If I have room for more, I might check back and see if there’s cheese left. If there’s not, I might be bummed, but I’m not going to starve (tummy pudge to prove it). That being said, I often have been asked, “Hey can I have a slice of cheese?” having friends that know I’m eating the cheese pizza.
I guess if you’re a picky eater (determine for yourself what’s picky), you fend for yourself with group eating. If you have a serious food thing, you need to be vocal about it. I think most people aren’t going to snarf up your “special” food if you need something special unless you tell them all to try it.
@London. Have you gone for a haircut? At the risk of sounding glib, this sounds like a new haircut and possible color moment (sort of like the episode of Buffy when she turns invisible). Shake off the old.
Then, maybe you need to write an angry letter. Maybe two. Write them out long hand. Tell the company and England the things that you want to tell them. Then shred them. Cheesy? Yes. Helpful purge of emotions? Perhaps. Sort of like what you’ve started here on the Vine, only more so. I say write it out on paper, because you don’t risk saving it on your computer and having something go awry later. So, maybe write, shred, awesome new hair.
Re: group dining. It really is that simple–if you are in the position of needing a ruling on things like this then you probably shouldn’t be group dining. It is called “family” style for a reason. Members of a family don’t necessarily like the same thing, but they (most of the time…) don’t need a map and a grid of food choices and preferences to divide up portions of the nightly dinner. If the sharing doesn’t happen organically, then why share at all?
Thanks for all the tips and advice, everyone. I’ll check out offbeatbride.com for sure.
Our wedding and reception are on the 2nd floor of a round barn. There’s very limited space, and yes, there will be a limited supply of food. I said that I’m not close to many children, but that doesn’t mean that 90% of the couples we know don’t have children, because they do. I’m not close to those children, but they are in existance.
Oh, and for someone who inquired… it’s a 7pm Friday night wedding. I’m hoping that’s past some bedtimes.
But like I’ve said, I’ve totally calmed down about the whole thing, since writing that letter. I’ll probably be freaking out about it in a few more month again, but right now, I’m good.
Oh, Talking. Your email reminded me of my Valentine’s date with my boyfriend, who is decidedly not a vegetarian but is a very picky eater. (Does not really like seafood at all, thinks spinach — even a tiny bit — tastes like old socks). He took me to a restaurant with a special Valentines menu where you picked three courses and then shared them. Well somehow (I suspect because he didn’t want to seem to be forcing his tastes on me) we wound up with quite a few seafood dishes and lots of things with spinach in them. I loved everything we had — he picked at stuff. We had to stop at McDonald’s on the way home.
So I guess my advice is that everyone should be prepared to compromise a little in that situation, but you also have to be prepared to speak up if you feel your needs aren’t being met. (I feel like I should have offered to swap a seafood dish for a meat-based one, knowing his preferences, but he kept insisting it was fine.) But I agree with Sars: ultimately what mattered is not that he didn’t get enough to eat, but that we got all dressed up and had a nice, romantic meal together.
@RSVP-Actually don’t know what is worse- having more people than you expect or 40 people RSVP and then NOT show up when you’ve paid for all the food, like we did. We ended up donating it to a homeless shelter the next day, since there was no way we could possibly eat it all and it would have gone to waste!
RSVP:
This probably won’t apply in your situation, but I thought I’d throw it out there anyway.
At my wedding, virtually no one from my side of the family came. As a result, we were actually under our *minimum*. So (in one example), when one of C’s friends asked if she could bring a chick friend in lieu of a date, we were like, “Heck, you can bring her and you *both* can bring dates! Someone needs to eat all this food!”
So yeah, plenty of people will plus-one you, but especially if you’re having a small-to-medium wedding (yours is roughly the same size as ours), maybe see how your turnout is, one way or the other, before dropping the ax.
@Shannon: People really add names to the response card? I mean, I believe you, but I’d find such behaviour absolutely stunning. Does even a phone call along the lines of “Gosh, we’re so looking forward to seeing you and Bob on the big day, Carol! (leaving out any mention of Ted and Alice Add-Ins)” work in such a case? Am I wrong in thinking that B&C&T&A would all have to be kind of clueless? And does using these names make me old?
RSVP, I’ll echo Morgan’s recommendation of apracticalwedding.com — their motto is “weddings, minus the insanity, plus the marriage.” Meg and her commenters are incredibly smart and it’s a terrific resource for anyone planning a wedding.
Regarding potlucks (disclaimer: my volunteer job has mandatory potlucks so I have to deal with this crap all the time):
(a) Vegetarians get first pick of their food unless there is a ton of veg food available. When the veggies are full, the meat eaters can have what’s left. Likewise, the non-picky eaters can’t go eat fully off the food-issue person’s plate, or at least should get a smackdown if they try. The food issue people have enough problems getting fed in public as is without going there.
(b) If tons of people have picky food issues, everyone should either order what they all agree on (if such a thing exists), or not share foods.
(c) As a general rule, the picky/food issues people do have to have ultimate sway when it comes to food choices, presumably because they will get sick or dead if there is a food failure. (Example: spicy food eater has to go without because non-spicy person may be spending several hours of Quality Time with Mr. Toilet.) Now, this is less crucial if there’s 20something or more people doing potluck and there are other options for those with food issues, but in small groups it becomes extremely awkward.
My volunteer job has 4 people at minimum sharing dishes. When we had a vegan on shift, it was–I’m going to be honest here–incredibly irritating because the rest of us weren’t vegan and at least one of us screwed up the veganness of our dish every single week. None of us were used to or particularly good at nitpicking the content of every single dish. But on the other hand, it was undeniably rude to tell the vegan guy that he couldn’t eat our food every week, so we had to at least try. And when there’s a vegetarian on shift, it’s incredibly awkward if someone forgets and picks up a lot of meat sandwiches (“uh, gee, you’re a pescatarian, right?”). You just can’t do that crap in small groups when there’s few options for eating otherwise.
So, yeah. Always cater to the food issues if you’re sharing dishes.
I will add, that even though our guest list is at 155 and the max for our location is 150, besides my own issue with not being able to actually invite all 155 because of the cost, there’s also the fact that we are on the 2nd floor of a completely wooden structure, and I’m sure that 150 limit is there for a reason. LOL I’d hate for us to tear the place down.
RSVP: A couple of things came to mind. First, isn’t the cost issue usually tied to dinner? If you’re not serving dinner, I don’t really seen how the exact head count changes things all that much. Kids don’t drink alcohol, and they don’t eat much fancy cheese, either. That isn’t to say that you have to have them at your wedding if you just don’t want them there, but they probably won’t actually jack up the cost any at that kind of a wedding.
Second, I STRONGLY agree with those who suggested putting a number invited on the RSVP rather than bringing up the kids thing at all. It’s just stating the same thing as a positive rather than a negative–it’s very clear, and you get what you want without running the risk of leaving a bad taste in ANYone’s mouth. I don’t even have kids yet and I’d still be a tiny bit offput by a “don’t bring your brats” (even nicely stated) on the invite, just because it feels rude to me, like emphasizing that you DON’T WANT THEM PRESENT. I wouldn’t think twice about a “___ of 2 will attend”, though. It implies adults only without pointing out who is NOT invited. (which is, I think, what the “except Susie” comment was getting at, even though you’re right that it isn’t a good analogy, and about attitudes on TheKnot. I developed a serious lifelong aversion to the entire wedding industry while planning mine. You mean I can pay $1500 for flowers I could run down to the corner deli and get for $15 just because they’re labeled “wedding” and have a ribbon tied around them? NOTHANKYOU.)
By the way, at every wedding I’ve been to, including mine, the kids were, to me, one of the best parts of the reception. I’m not even a huge kid person but man, are they HILARIOUS, especially at big events like this. Doing the worm on a wet patio, passing out sound asleep spread eagled in giant pouffy dresses in the middle of a bunch of crazy drunk dancing…too funny! Just to say that if someone does bring one, it probably is not going to ruin your evening.
I just wanted to comment that in my family, it’s incredibly common to have “Adults only” or even “Children younger than 12 are not invited” on invitations. My mom has got some super-religious cousins with twelve and fourteen children of their own (you know, each) so it needs to be stated outright. No one has ever discussed it in, “Can you believe this?” kind of terms, it’s just how it is.
Though I have often been on the opposite side of TN regarding etiquette rules, so we might be incredibly tacky amongst ourselves and not know it.
@Talking: Oh, Lord, “family style”. What a rip. Customers plate their own meals and we pass the savings on to ourselves! Not to mention that the “family” in question apparently consists of 2.5 people; good luck trying to order for three! Oh, it’s a unique experience that I’ll remember forever? Well hey, why don’t you have the maitre’d come over and pound a tack hammer on my dick a few times? That really would be a unique experience I’d remember forever!
Although annoying “serve yourself” isn’t confined to Family Style Dining. Take the pizza place nearby. They used to be the go-to destination for retirements and celebrations, since they were A: close and B: cheap and C: would sell you beer even though they didn’t actually technically letter-of-the-law have a liquor license (if asked, the customers had brought it themselves, along with the 3500-pound industrial refrigerator out back.)
Then they decided that this dotcom thing was coming back and they needed to go upmarket, so they changed their minds. You could still bring a big party, but In Anticipation Of Increased Demand each table could only order two pizzas at a time. But you could get as much salad and breadsticks as you wanted. I remember one fine afternoon when fifteen people dined on breadsticks and salad, with one piece of pizza every twenty minutes. (Thank God we didn’t have any vegetarians, actually, I think we might have eaten them.)
I’m so glad I’m not the only one who thinks a ton of the women at The Knot are bitches. I got a lot of mean-spirited messages after posting about how I don’t wear my engagement ring or wedding band normally. I’m ok with it, my husband is ok with it, so why do some random strange women feel the need to yell at me?