Stingy Wedding Presents & None at All

amdublin

clint_silver wrote: »

Are you saying people shouldnt get married with a ceremony of their choosing or they shouldnt invite friends and family? they shouldnt dress up, feed the guests and put some entertainment on and capture the day?

I am far from perfect but it does p1ss me off going to church weddings when we all know that some (most) b&g's haven't seen the inside of a church since they were teenagers.

Quorum

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Also considering that people's tastes vary wildly when it comes to clothes, music, travel, interior design, hobbies and just about anything else you can think of why are Irish weddings so uniform in nature?

I've pondered this myself. I get the impression that a lot of people (women mostly) feel this is the say they should want and that they should do all the little traditional things. It's almost like it's indoctrinated or something. My cousin just got married. She was always unconventional growing up, did art, was a bit hippyish. Yet, she's just had a wedding that, while it was a civil ceremony, was cookie-cutter in every other way. Colour me surprised.

El_Dangeroso

Quorum wrote: »

It's not that simple, and you know it. There are some weddings you simply can't NOT attend. We all have duties we have to fulfill. I agree with the poster you quoted. I was excited going to the first few weddings, then it got old.

I bet the Bride and Groom are over the moon that they are paying for all the food and drink on the day just so you can 'fulfill' a duty.:rolleyes:

I think most couples would hate to think someone was attending their special day when they didn't want to, I know I would. What a truly two-faced thing to do, accepting an invite while resenting it!

The argument that you have to go to a wedding is just as ridiculous as the one that you have to bring a cash gift. Get some balls and make up a good reason, the B&G will get over not having your presence somehow, maybe after years of counselling.:pac:

ABajaninCork

Muckit wrote: »

I just don't buy a lot of these reponses.

'Oh I would never go to a wedding without bringing a present, yet I am OK with others not giving me a present for my wedding.'

What a crock of sh*t.

What are your reasons for giving a gift? Do you not think other people should be or think the same?? Or do ye think ye are somehow above other people?...'Yes I see why I should have to give a gift... but it's OK for others not to give anything...bless 'em'

What a nasty, bitter person you are. I was brought up to show good manners. What about you??

El_Dangeroso

Quorum wrote: »

I've pondered this myself. I get the impression that a lot of people (women mostly) feel this is the say they should want and that they should do all the little traditional things. It's almost like it's indoctrinated or something. My cousin just got married. She was always unconventional growing up, did art, was a bit hippyish. Yet, she's just had a wedding that, while it was a civil ceremony, was cookie-cutter in every other way. Colour me surprised.

It's a LOT cheaper/easier to go the conventional route, everything is set up that way. I worked with a girl who went down the unusual route and the stress was not worth it she admitted after the fact.

amdublin

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

The argument that you have to go to a wedding is just as ridiculous as the one that you have to bring a cash gift. Get some balls and make up a good reason, the B&G will get over not having your presence somehow, maybe after years of counselling.:pac:

I got the cold shoulder for months from a work colleague for declining her invite.

I got texts and pressure from another bride when I told her my partner would not be going to her meal and would just be at the afters "why can't he change his hospital appointment?" eh, because he's waited months for it and his health is more important than a party.

El_Dangeroso

amdublin wrote: »

I got the cold shoulder for months from a work colleague for declining her invite.

I got texts and pressure from another bride when I told her my partner would not be going to her meal and would just be at the afters "why can't he change his hospital appointment?" eh, because he's waited months for it and his health is more important than a party.

Wouldn't that be the colleague's problem and not yours? What if someone gave someone the cold shoulder for not getting an adequate gift? Would that not be their issue and not yours?

amdublin

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Wouldn't that be the colleague's problem and not yours? What if someone gave someone the cold shoulder for not getting an adequate gift? Would that not be their issue and not yours?

Of course it's their problem/their issue. But I got the brunt of their issue.

I am not getting your point tbh.

El_Dangeroso

amdublin wrote: »

Of course it's their problem/their issue. But I got the brunt of their issue.

I am not getting your point tbh.

I am drawing an equivalance between the silliness of attending a wedding you don't want to go to with the expectation a cash gift be given The whole direction of this thread is that the OP is being chastised for expecting a gift.

A previous poster said that people should be happy that they attended at all given the expense of attending. I'm saying that no one HAS to go to a wedding, but if you do go, it is extremely bad manners not to bring even a token gift.

Basically would you entertain the 'brunt' of the cold shoulder if it were because you did attend but did not bring a 'sizeable' gift. It's basic assertiveness 101. Why would you let yourself be emotionally manipulated either way?

amdublin

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Basically would you entertain the 'brunt' of the cold shoulder if it were because you did attend but did not bring a 'sizeable' gift. It's basic assertiveness 101. Why would you let yourself be emotionally manipulated either way?

Because I can't control people's responses to my decline

Of couse I can respond, which I do.

Are you trying to derail this thread?

amdublin

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

A previous poster said that people should be happy that they attended at all given the expense of attending. I'm saying that no one HAS to go to a wedding, but if you do go, it is extremely bad manners not to bring even a token gift.

Ps. Did you read the op? The token gift of crystal glasses is not up to the op's standards.

clint_silver

amdublin wrote: »

I am far from perfect but it does p1ss me off going to church weddings when we all know that some (most) b&g's haven't seen the inside of a church since they were teenagers.

but this isn't the guests problem. if b&g want a church wedding, a civil ceremony thats up to them. It would cross my mind about the hypocrisy of the church for about 1.5 seconds. but where else are they gonna do it? So they dont go to church any more, is that a reason for them not to have a ceremony in the church, maybe they still believe in godd but jsut dont go to church? card carrying member of the lapsed catholic regime right here.

There are tons of threads on here about people wanting to hire X or do Y to make their evening special and unique and entertain their guests etc. All very noble and yes you should feed and entertain your guests but no one remembers any of it. I have no idea what I had for dinner at any wedding I was at. I have no recollection of what the flowers looked like or if there were favours, or chair covers as practically all the weddings I've been to were so similar

So the novelty does indeed wear off because the bride and groom often think they are providing some sort of unique experience or that the pick and mix trolley or fireworks etc is something that will stand out and make their wedding unique they forget that this 'unique selling point' is one small fraction of the day and the other 99% of the day is the same as every other wedding and guests know exactly how the day will pan out from the minute they get up.

Also considering that people's tastes vary wildly when it comes to clothes, music, travel, interior design, hobbies and just about anything else you can think of why are Irish weddings so uniform in nature?

I play in band at weddings. easily played at 6-700 over the years. A lot are the same. maybe 4 out 5. same dresses, same chair covers, same food, same drunk guests, same clothes. what makes everytime is the people and how happy they are to be there for the b&g. Its the happiness factor. you can walk in to a room and gauge it. You remember those ones as they are quite simply brilliant. people laughing and dancing like they haven't in ages. If youre lucky enough to have been at one of those then youd know it. I had 4 weddings in the last week, 3 were the same and fall into the category that you talk about, still good nights just not memorable, however 1 was brilliant, was probably the least fancy in terms of venue and style and expense but was unbelievable in terms of atmosphere. I'll remember it for years.
For anyone who ever says they're all the same, they need to attend a wedding like that to change their mind.

Why are all the other weddings the same? well your joe average couple are not weddings planners. not party planners. have average taste. they just dont know. they have to get lucky with everything. noone says to them dont have it miles away fro everyone imposing cost. noone tells them you dont need to hire a helicoptor to fly them in. noone tells them the bridesmaids dresses are tacky. Guests just turn up and judge, B&G have to get lucky.

El_Dangeroso

amdublin wrote: »

Ps. Did you read the op? The token gift of crystal glasses is not up to the op's standards.

Ok, I'll try and explain my point once again. I'm not condoning that. I am saying that, you cannot complain about people's expectation for gifts while cowtowing to people's demands of attendance. You either allow yourself to be manipulated or you do not.

Yes of course there will always be unreasonable couples, but most people will be fine with a lack of attendance. However to go to a wedding that you can barely afford to attend, and as a result not bring any gift at all is the height of stupidity in my eyes.

amdublin

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Yes of course there will always be unreasonable couples, but most people will be fine with a lack of attendance. However to go to a wedding that you can barely afford to attend, and as a result not bring any gift at all is the height of stupidity in my eyes.

What about throwing a party you cannot afford? One that you need your guests to give you money to pay for?

What's that the height of in your eyes?

El_Dangeroso

amdublin wrote: »

What about throwing a party you cannot afford? One that you need your guests to give you money to pay for?

What's that the height of in your eyes?

Also stupidity, but it doesn't let the invitees off the hook! Don't go to a wedding that is going to be a massive drain on your finances! How simple is that?

Quorum

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

What a truly two-faced thing to do, accepting an invite while resenting it!

Two-faced? On the contrary, I think it's a sign of a good friendship that people go to these things despite the expense, hassle and tedious uniformity of them. Like it or not, at an average wedding, a good lot of people would prefer to be anywhere else. If you consider that two-faced, well, then there's a LOT of two-faced people out there. Like it or not, many of guests will be there out of duty.

Quorum

clint_silver wrote: »

For anyone who ever says they're all the same, they need to attend a wedding like that to change their mind.

As a person who works in the industry, you're going to come across those amazing weddings a lot more frequently than your average punter because, well, you are present at a lot of the things. Your average person might have to wait years for a wedding like that.

0ph0rce0

I seen this post when it was first posted, cant believe its still going. You didn't get a gift, Your moaning that she got her sister a gift for her birthday and you nothing for a wedding that happenned over a year ago, You really need to get over it.

Pretty petty if you ask me, theres people starving, loosing jobs and dying all over the world, and this is your main worry in life.

You have more than most people could probably ever dream of, Grow Up.

El_Dangeroso

Quorum wrote: »

Two-faced? On the contrary, I think it's a sign of a good friendship that people go to these things despite the expense, hassle and tedious uniformity of them. Like it or not, at an average wedding, a good lot of people would prefer to be anywhere else. If you consider that two-faced, well, then there's a LOT of two-faced people out there. Like it or not, many of guests will be there out of duty.

Oh god, really? This is just typical of exactly what I am talking about it. Rather than actually DO anything to improve the situation, you just want to whine while all the time validating the whole exercise with your attendance and acceptance.

Do you really think that the Bride and Groom spend thousands of euro to put their guests through 'expense, hassle and tedium' as you so put it? I presume you make the couple aware of this fact? or do you just smile to their face while secretly resenting them? No, that's not two-faced at all.

I've wanted to go to and enjoyed every minute of weddings that I have attended, and you know the ones I didn't want to go to due to aforementioned hassle and expense. I didn't go!

I seriously pity any couple who ever invited you to their special day, you're clearly not very grateful for what I consider to be an honour.

Jerrica

Quorum wrote: »

Two-faced? On the contrary, I think it's a sign of a good friendship that people go to these things despite the expense, hassle and tedious uniformity of them. Like it or not, at an average wedding, a good lot of people would prefer to be anywhere else. If you consider that two-faced, well, then there's a LOT of two-faced people out there. Like it or not, many of guests will be there out of duty.

Just a point on this. Given the forum and the fact that many brides and grooms to be are looking at it, this is a disappointing and quite upsetting thing to hear. I have no control over how many weddings people will have been to before mine, and I would be quite distressed to think that people will be there under duress. Perhaps I'm naive, but I'm hoping that the folks at my shindig will be there because they want to, they'll be glad to share my big day, my partner and I will be doing our best to make sure they'll have as much craic as we do and no-one will be obliged to give us anything.

If you take the approach that you feel that a lot of your guests won't want to be there why bother at all?

rainbowtrout

Quorum wrote: »

I've pondered this myself. I get the impression that a lot of people (women mostly) feel this is the say they should want and that they should do all the little traditional things. It's almost like it's indoctrinated or something. My cousin just got married. She was always unconventional growing up, did art, was a bit hippyish. Yet, she's just had a wedding that, while it was a civil ceremony, was cookie-cutter in every other way. Colour me surprised.

I don't get it myself. Do people that get married actually enjoy all of the stuff they arrange? Or just feel they have to do it because it's the done thing?

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

It's a LOT cheaper/easier to go the conventional route, everything is set up that way. I worked with a girl who went down the unusual route and the stress was not worth it she admitted after the fact.

It depends on what you decide to have. I understand the importance of feeding your guests and providing them with some form of entertainment, but it doesn't have to be in the form of a sit down meal in a hotel for 200 people. Renting a marquee and hiring caterers can also be expensive, but people seem to be stuck in the mindset that it all has to be so formal. There's nothing to stop people going off and getting married in the morning or early afternoon just with immediate family and friends and then throwing a party in the local pub/GAA club, community centre in the evening and just having an informal celebration with less stress and expense all round. I'm sure plenty of guests would be delighted that they didn't have to attend an all day wedding and could go for a few hours in the evening and have a good time. It mightn't sound terribly wild or exciting or a world away from a 21st party, but people seem terrified to deviate at all from the norm.

There was another thread on here in the last week or two about weddings and a post mentioned having a BBQ and how it was great craic and one response was 'I couldn't have a BBQ, it wouldn't be special, can have a BBQ anytime', even though a 3 course meal in the local hotel isn't special either and can also be done anytime.

Quorum

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Oh god, really? This is just typical of exactly what I am talking about it. Rather than actually DO anything to improve the situation, you just want to whine while all the time validating the whole exercise with your attendance and acceptance.

Improve the situation? Why would I spend ANY time doing that? I'll focus on my own wedding when the day comes. It will be me and my fiancé and two strangers as witnesses, just as my folks did 35 years ago. This is what I want, and it will happen. I can't control what other people do for theirs.

But oh, when you have your wedding, everyone will definitely want to be there and not be bored at all. Definitely.

If you don't like the thought of spending thousands on an event not everyone will enjoy then... don't spend thousands, perhaps?

mikom

Looks like the honeymoon is over.........

Jerrica

Quorum is there really a need to be so horribly personal??? That's a nasty, spiteful thing to say. Don't push your derision of wedding attendance onto someone else's celebration.

Quorum

Jerrica wrote: »

Just a point on this. Given the forum and the fact that many brides and grooms to be are looking at it, this is a disappointing and quite upsetting thing to hear.

I know, I'm honestly not trying to upset anyone. But why gloss over it? Is this a forum where we just hear positive things? Maybe I am out of line, and I'm sure the mods will let me know if I am. If I am being out of line, I'll refrain.

I'm surprised though that you've never heard anyone express their dislike for weddings though, I've heard it a lot!

Jerrica wrote: »

Quorum is there really a need to be so horribly personal??? That's a nasty, spiteful thing to say. Don't push your derision of wedding attendance onto someone else's celebration.

The thing is, every wedding will have guests like this. So, it's not even a comment on someone's celebration!

Jerrica

Quorum wrote: »

I'm surprised though that you've never heard anyone express their dislike for weddings though, I've heard it a lot!

Oh there's been times I dreaded going to weddings. When I did, I politely declined. I would feel awful about pretending to enjoy an event, the b&g deserve to happen there who truly want to be.

Quorum

Jerrica wrote: »

If you take the approach that you feel that a lot of your guests won't want to be there why bother at all?

I won't be! Hate being the centre of attention anyway, and feel the taking of vows is a very personal thing between two people.

Jerrica

Quorum wrote: »

The thing is, every wedding will have guests like this. So, it's not even a comment on someone's celebration!

Every wedding will have people who make spiteful sarcastic comments to the bride to be about how many of their guests won't like it? Ok.

rainbowtrout

clint_silver wrote: »

I play in band at weddings. easily played at 6-700 over the years. A lot are the same. maybe 4 out 5. same dresses, same chair covers, same food, same drunk guests, same clothes. what makes everytime is the people and how happy they are to be there for the b&g. Its the happiness factor. you can walk in to a room and gauge it. You remember those ones as they are quite simply brilliant. people laughing and dancing like they haven't in ages. If youre lucky enough to have been at one of those then youd know it. I had 4 weddings in the last week, 3 were the same and fall into the category that you talk about, still good nights just not memorable, however 1 was brilliant, was probably the least fancy in terms of venue and style and expense but was unbelievable in terms of atmosphere. I'll remember it for years.
For anyone who ever says they're all the same, they need to attend a wedding like that to change their mind.

Why are all the other weddings the same? well your joe average couple are not weddings planners. not party planners. have average taste. they just dont know. they have to get lucky with everything. noone says to them dont have it miles away fro everyone imposing cost. noone tells them you dont need to hire a helicoptor to fly them in. noone tells them the bridesmaids dresses are tacky. Guests just turn up and judge, B&G have to get lucky.

I understand exactly what you are saying, and throwing money at lavish affairs doesn't mean the wedding will be a success in terms of people having a good time, really I suspect in a run of the mill wedding it's often the mix of people that makes it fun, but aside from doing the church/civil ceremony which is the only actual requirement of the day, doesn't anybody stop to think for one minute when planning that it's ok to deviate from the normal?

Jerrica

Quorum wrote: »

I won't be! Hate being the centre of attention anyway, and feel the taking of vows is a very personal thing between two people.

So that's YOUR take on it, which you are entitled to. But to extrapolate that to loads of guests is unfair and misrepresentative.