Why do people still have expensive weddings?

16-05-2013 09:03AM

JustAThought wrote: »

Im mortified. I read this thread to see what people think of gifts & I see that people must have been talking about me & bitching about me behind my back for years.

I never give cash.

I now always give vouchers -which in 50 pages noobody has mentioned.

If there is a wedding list I always buy from that so that I know my hard found money will go on something the couple would actually like rather than something I think they might like- no point in wasting money.

In fairness I did mention vouchers a couple of times in the thread. A nice voucher for something is a good alternative to cash if you don't want to give cash.

fishy fishy · 16-05-2013 09:19AM

Big Mouth wrote: »

Some amount of bitter people on this thread. Most of you seemed to have spent a fiver on your wedding :rolleyes: and "everyone said it was the best wedding they've ever been to". Did you cater the event with a giant pack of Monster Munch?

We're having an expensive wedding with a small amount of guests. Quality over quantity for us I won't horrify people on here with the amount but we certainly won't be making a profit (who would think like that?), what we are doing is making a weekend out of it for our family and close friends because we are very close to all our siblings, their partners etc and everyone is going to a 5 star hotel for what should be a great weekend and out of the norm.

Everyone is really looking forward to it and we're laying on the best of everything because you only have one wedding and yes I presume most gifts will be cash as we already live together but I have mde it very clear that no one is under pressure to give more than the are comfortable with as I would know people on my sides circumstance and OH knows hers (I wouldn;t take a brown penny of my younger sister)

Judging by the tone of some of the posts here they seem bitter about money, maybe haven't got a close family.....those posters would hate my wedding and I would hate theirs.

I don't want hand made "thoughtful" gifts and I will enjoy splashing out but that doesn't make me a show-off, ours is a low key event not a facebook advert. I personally hate the show off type of person with over extravagant, ostentatious weddings, not me at all however I can't stand the if you spend big money on a wedding so you're an arsehole.

Finance wise I will need a few business deals to come off over the year to get costs back but I'm not too bothered as I'd rather have a good time and no money than a bad time with lots of money.

how sensible and well thought out. Of course you would want cash instead of a "well thought out gift" - what is a "well thought out gift" from the give might be a useless piece of tat to the receiver - thats why money is the better option - it gives you and your partner, as full grown adults, the choice of what to do with the money.

I cannot understand for the life of me people who, although they might already know that money is the better choice, will purposefully not let the couple choose what they want themselves and instead INSIST that they get some sort of present whether they want it or not.

I know from experience that (although my wedding was a long time ago) I preferred decorating and putting things in my house that I wanted in there, not a pile of stuff that somebody else bought - why should I decorate and stock my house with things I had no say in buying.

Anyway, it seems if you give money to a wedding couple you are Satan him/herself. I can live with that.

For those people who INSIST on purchasing presents even tho they know it is not practical ...carry on with the tea set buying tho - make sure to get it in a sturdy cardboard box tho as it will spend its time in the attic.

:D

Shenshen · 16-05-2013 09:34AM

fishy fishy wrote: »

how sensible and well thought out. Of course you would want cash instead of a "well thought out gift" - what is a "well thought out gift" from the give might be a useless piece of tat to the receiver - thats why money is the better option - it gives you and your partner, as full grown adults, the choice of what to do with the money.

I cannot understand for the life of me people who, although they might already know that money is the better choice, will purposefully not let the couple choose what they want themselves and instead INSIST that they get some sort of present whether they want it or not.

I know from experience that (although my wedding was a long time ago) I preferred decorating and putting things in my house that I wanted in there, not a pile of stuff that somebody else bought - why should I decorate and stock my house with things I had no say in buying.

Anyway, it seems if you give money to a wedding couple you are Satan him/herself. I can live with that.

Carry on with the tea set buying tho - make sure to get it in a sturdy cardboard box tho as it will spend its time in the attic. :D

I have to wonder, why is it that the only alternative to cash you seem to be able to contemplate are household items?

I haven't received any for my wedding, nor have I ever given any for any wedding. When a colleague got married a while back, we all chipped in to give her and her husband a trip to London to see a special exhibition at the British Museum - they had two of the Terracotta Warriors on loan at the time. We knew both her and her husband were very interested in Chinese culture and history, but didn't really have the money to travel to China itself, so the gift was very well received indeed.

fishy fishy · 16-05-2013 09:36AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have to wonder, why is it that the only alternative to cash you seem to be able to contemplate are household items?

I haven't received any for my wedding, nor have I ever given any for any wedding. When a colleague got married a while back, we all chipped in to give her and her husband a trip to London to see a special exhibition at the British Museum - they had two of the Terracotta Warriors on loan at the time. We knew both her and her husband were very interested in Chinese culture and history, but didn't really have the money to travel to China itself, so the gift was very well received indeed.

they probably would have preferred the money rather than be dictating to what they were getting and they better like it or else.

I'm out of this "conversation" now - as I said keep giving what you "think" they need or want - its probably so wrong it will never see the light of day, but carry on....if thats what makes you happy.

fishy fishy · 16-05-2013 09:56AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have to wonder, why is it that the only alternative to cash you seem to be able to contemplate are household items?

I haven't received any for my wedding, nor have I ever given any for any wedding. When a colleague got married a while back, we all chipped in to give her and her husband a trip to London to see a special exhibition at the British Museum - they had two of the Terracotta Warriors on loan at the time. We knew both her and her husband were very interested in Chinese culture and history, but didn't really have the money to travel to China itself, so the gift was very well received indeed.

you could have given her the money instead to set up a "Trip to China" fund. They really would have had a headstart into their "Chinese Culture" interest then, instead of sending them to London for English culture.

Shenshen · 16-05-2013 10:02AM

fishy fishy wrote: »

you could have given her the money instead to set up a "Trip to China" fund. They really would have had a headstart into their "Chinese Culture" interest then, instead of sending them to London for English culture.

Good grief, are you meaning to be this aggressive and unpleasant or am I just lucky?
I thought you said you were out of this conversation anyway?

They would not have been able to go to China, for reason that need not concern you here.
But since you already know them well enough to be 100% certain that getting the trip was a big disappointment to them all round, and that really they would have been so much happier with the money, I'm sure I don't need to even mention that to you.

kylith · 16-05-2013 10:27AM

Shenshen wrote: »

Good grief, are you meaning to be this aggressive and unpleasant or am I just lucky?
I thought you said you were out of this conversation anyway?

They would not have been able to go to China, for reason that need not concern you here.
But since you already know them well enough to be 100% certain that getting the trip was a big disappointment to them all round, and that really they would have been so much happier with the money, I'm sure I don't need to even mention that to you.

The point is that unless they had been sitting around saying 'Gee, I'd love to go to London to see those terracotta figures. And I have the time off work and everything', or unless they were involved in the planning of the trip rather than it being a surprise, you're mandating where they go on holiday, when they go, possibly even where they stayed.

No matter how well intentioned it was, and I'm sure it was, and it may have been just what they wanted, organising a trip for someone else is a bit much. If someone walked up and handed me a trip to Paris, while I'd love to go, unless they've also arranged pet sitters, time off work, someone to look after the house, and spending money too, then the trip is a hindrance rather than a treat, and if you can't get the time off work, for example, for the rest of time you'll be the person who wasted that trip they bought you.

I've been thinking of getting a weekend away for my parents, but I simply don't know enough about what's going on in their day to day lives to take the liberty of saying "You! You're going on a romantic holiday next weekend!". I'm not privy to all their plans.

ronjo · 16-05-2013 10:29AM

Shenshen wrote: »

Good grief, are you meaning to be this aggressive and unpleasant or am I just lucky?
I thought you said you were out of this conversation anyway?

They would not have been able to go to China, for reason that need not concern you here.
But since you already know them well enough to be 100% certain that getting the trip was a big disappointment to them all round, and that really they would have been so much happier with the money, I'm sure I don't need to even mention that to you.

Dont pay any attention to her.
It sounds like a well thought out gift and I am sure it was very happily received and appreciated.

16-05-2013 10:43AM

This is one of those arguments that go nowhere, people can do what they like its their own money.

I personally think it is madness and double so if they have taken out a loan, it is grasping and vulgar to expect to make back the cost of the wedding from the presents.

I always give money because it is the easiest thing to do and I wouldn't dream of going to a wedding without something, its rude in the extrem to go to wedding with out a something, but the it should reflect what you can afford, its is extremely ungracious to complain about the what you receive, have people forgotten all about being modest.

16-05-2013 11:10AM

fishy fishy wrote: »

they probably would have preferred the money rather than be dictating to what they were getting and they better like it or else.

I'm out of this "conversation" now - as I said keep giving what you "think" they need or want - its probably so wrong it will never see the light of day, but carry on....if thats what makes you happy.

You just don't understand the concept of 'gifts', do you? Sad.

16-05-2013 11:28AM

Originally Posted by Alison Eager Bobsled You just don't understand the concept of 'gifts', do you? Sad.

You took the words out of my mouth.

fishy fishy wrote: »

I'm out of this "conversation" now - as I said keep giving what you "think" they need or want - its probably so wrong it will never see the light of day, but carry on....if thats what makes you happy.

fishy fishy wrote: »

you could have given her the money instead to set up a "Trip to China" fund. They really would have had a headstart into their "Chinese Culture" interest then, instead of sending them to London for English culture.

fishy fishy wrote: »

For those people who INSIST on purchasing presents even tho they know it is not practical ...carry on with the tea set buying tho - make sure to get it in a sturdy cardboard box tho as it will spend its time in the attic. :D

That's a masterclass in passive-agressive smiley use.

16-05-2013 11:29AM

JustAThought wrote: »

Im mortified. I read this thread to see what people think of gifts & I see that people must have been talking about me & bitching about me behind my back for years.

I never give cash.

I now always give vouchers -which in 50 pages noobody has mentioned.

If there is a wedding list I always buy from that so that I know my hard found money will go on something the couple would actually like rather than something I think they might like- no point in wasting money.

I'm mortified.

Perhaps this is why 50% of the couples whose wedding I have attended, taken days off work for , and stayed at quite a cost in out of the way hotels have not have the courtesy to send a thank you note for the gift/voucher.

I think I now see it wasn't because they forgot/didn't bother -it seem clear from what the majority say that they must have simply hated them.

They're pig ignorant. No other reason. If someone gave me a Bic biro as a present, I'd still send a thank you note. Find better friends.

16-05-2013 11:36AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have to wonder, why is it that the only alternative to cash you seem to be able to contemplate are household items?

I haven't received any for my wedding, nor have I ever given any for any wedding. When a colleague got married a while back, we all chipped in to give her and her husband a trip to London to see a special exhibition at the British Museum - they had two of the Terracotta Warriors on loan at the time. We knew both her and her husband were very interested in Chinese culture and history, but didn't really have the money to travel to China itself, so the gift was very well received indeed.

In fairness there is nothing wrong with the above gift imo.

16-05-2013 11:54AM

mariaalice wrote: »

This is one of those arguments that go nowhere, people can do what they like its their own money.

I personally think it is madness and double so if they have taken out a loan, it is grasping and vulgar to expect to make back the cost of the wedding from the presents.

I always give money because it is the easiest thing to do and I wouldn't dream of going to a wedding without something, its rude in the extrem to go to wedding with out a something, but the it should reflect what you can afford, its is extremely ungracious to complain about the what you receive, have people forgotten all about being modest.

It is the aspirational nature of weddings as a social function that has led to the whole expecting money business. It's a new tradition mostly borne of the desire of people who were newly affluent to demonstrate that wealth. The expectation of receiving cash or cash equivalents is almost solely the preserve of that social group.

Traditionally the multi-generationally wealthy gave very understated gifts. The top socio-economic groups considered 'big' gifts to be an insult, implying that the giver thought the receiver couldn't afford to buy or acquire that 'expensive' gift for themselves. Money would be at the apex of the vulgarity triangle, since it implied (to this social group) that the receiver had less than the giver to the extent that cash was preferred to a convertible asset

In a very real way, the traditional working class always had more in common with the very upper class than the aspirational middle class. Working class people accepted gifts of cash or equivalents only from parents, and it was considered an unwelcome display of misplaced charity to offer cash as a gift. Again, the inference was that the couple was so poor they needed handouts and people risked hurt pride.

So the social reality, generally, is that only the aspirational lower middle class - or 'new' money if you prefer - expect cash. I'm sure there are exceptions, but in broad terms its a recent social phenomena borne (in Ireland) of the Celtic Tiger, as is the sense of entitlement to cash gifts.

April O Neill · 19-05-2013 10:14PM

Candie wrote: »

It is the aspirational nature of weddings as a social function that has led to the whole expecting money business. It's a new tradition mostly borne of the desire of people who were newly affluent to demonstrate that wealth. The expectation of receiving cash or cash equivalents is almost solely the preserve of that social group.

Traditionally the multi-generationally wealthy gave very understated gifts. The top socio-economic groups considered 'big' gifts to be an insult, implying that the giver thought the receiver couldn't afford to buy or acquire that 'expensive' gift for themselves. Money would be at the apex of the vulgarity triangle, since it implied (to this social group) that the receiver had less than the giver to the extent that cash was preferred to a convertible asset

In a very real way, the traditional working class always had more in common with the very upper class than the aspirational middle class. Working class people accepted gifts of cash or equivalents only from parents, and it was considered an unwelcome display of misplaced charity to offer cash as a gift. Again, the inference was that the couple was so poor they needed handouts and people risked hurt pride.

So the social reality, generally, is that only the aspirational lower middle class - or 'new' money if you prefer - expect cash. I'm sure there are exceptions, but in broad terms its a recent social phenomena borne (in Ireland) of the Celtic Tiger, as is the sense of entitlement to cash gifts.

Fascinating read. Thanks for that!

IK09 · 05-06-2014 12:04PM

IK09 wrote: »

Im getting married next year it will be a big enough occasion. First to get married out of my immediate family. My fiancee has what i call an "aging" family, she has 3 grand parents alive, and well lbh, there gonna kick the bucket soon enough. 1 last chance to get everybody together like that...priceless.

We are going to be having between 200-250 people. Ya its gonna cost a shít load, but the likely hood is that we'll receive a large proportion of that back in gifts. That makes it a little easier to digest the cost.

Personally, i would just as easy head to Vegas and get married by Elvis, and tbh i thought about it, but when i had a chat with my mam about it and she explained it too me like that, that it would probably be the last time her whole family would be together before they started to pass away, it was a no brainer.

I wouldnt explain it to my fiancee like that, but its the main reason why im ok with having a big wedding.

Hate to drag up an old thread but, I came across this comment I wrote just over a year ago. Thinking back, to when I made the above comment and the reasoning for justifying a big wedding. Since I made the above comment, I lost my Auntie, someone who was looking forward to my wedding as if I were her own son. She even convinced my fiancee about the colour of the bridesmaids dresses and always pushed us to do what we were comfortable with rather than pleasing others.

My Fiancee's Father has died. Again, someone who had treated me like his own son for the last 10 years, always challenged me when I needed it, and always provided advice to me about my fiancee. We had so many projects together, always making something out in the shed. Luckily, I had asked his permission before I asked her to marry me, old fashioned I know, but it is something I will hold on to forever.

Her Granddad died. He was an elderly age, such a kind man. Speaking of old fashioned, he pulled me aside after we got engaged and asked "what my intentions were for her"!, how do ya answer that! I know its not PC to say it, but she was definitely his favorite Grandchild. He adored her.

For me there is no question, a big wedding maybe a pain in the ass and expensive, but I wish we had had it this time last year. We put it off so we could save, in order to afford a big wedding. We getting married in July, we cant wait and though we have lost people in the meantime, it has shown us the importance of family, both immediate and extended. The likelihood is we will probably not see our extended families again until someone dies.

tashiusclay · 05-06-2014 04:23PM

IK09 wrote: »

Hate to drag up an old thread but, I came across this comment I wrote just over a year ago. Thinking back, to when I made the above comment and the reasoning for justifying a big wedding. Since I made the above comment, I lost my Auntie, someone who was looking forward to my wedding as if I were her own son. She even convinced my fiancee about the colour of the bridesmaids dresses and always pushed us to do what we were comfortable with rather than pleasing others.

My Fiancee's Father has died. Again, someone who had treated me like his own son for the last 10 years, always challenged me when I needed it, and always provided advice to me about my fiancee. We had so many projects together, always making something out in the shed. Luckily, I had asked his permission before I asked her to marry me, old fashioned I know, but it is something I will hold on to forever.

Her Granddad died. He was an elderly age, such a kind man. Speaking of old fashioned, he pulled me aside after we got engaged and asked "what my intentions were for her"!, how do ya answer that! I know its not PC to say it, but she was definitely his favorite Grandchild. He adored her.

For me there is no question, a big wedding maybe a pain in the ass and expensive, but I wish we had had it this time last year. We put it off so we could save, in order to afford a big wedding. We getting married in July, we cant wait and though we have lost people in the meantime, it has shown us the importance of family, both immediate and extended. The likelihood is we will probably not see our extended families again until someone dies.

Then why didn't you have your wedding last year when those relatives were still alive, instead of postponing it to keep saving for a bigger one, your desire for a big (bigger) wedding cost you and your Fiancee the presence of three significant family members due to bereavements through the passing of time. Or am I missing something here?

And I'm sorry for both you and your Fiancee's losses.

IK09 · 06-06-2014 09:40AM

tashiusclay wrote: »

Then why didn't you have your wedding last year when those relatives were still alive, instead of postponing it to keep saving for a bigger one, your desire for a big (bigger) wedding cost you and your Fiancee the presence of three significant family members due to bereavements through the passing of time. Or am I missing something here?

And I'm sorry for both you and your Fiancee's losses.

We postponed it so that we would be able to afford to have everyone together. Both our families are large, over 140 in mine and about 120 in hers. We thought if we postponed it by a year, we could get everyone together. We didnt want to get ourselves into debt by borrowing for the wedding.

I understand what your saying, and regarding her Granddad I agree, but her Father and my Aunt were both under 50 when they died.

Grayson · 06-06-2014 09:57AM

IK09 wrote: »

We postponed it so that we would be able to afford to have everyone together. Both our families are large, over 140 in mine and about 120 in hers. We thought if we postponed it by a year, we could get everyone together. We didnt want to get ourselves into debt by borrowing for the wedding.

I understand what your saying, and regarding her Granddad I agree, but her Father and my Aunt were both under 50 when they died.

of that 140 in yours are they all incredibly close? Or does that include the cousins etc that you hardly ever see?

A small wedding would still have had the people who are important.

My sister got married abroad so she they could invite the 200+ people they had to invite and at the same time know that only the important people would turn up. There were about 60 present and some people flew from around the world to be there.

IK09 · 06-06-2014 10:13AM

Grayson wrote: »

of that 140 in yours are they all incredibly close? Or does that include the cousins etc that you hardly ever see?

A small wedding would still have had the people who are important.

My sister got married abroad so she they could invite the 200+ people they had to invite and at the same time know that only the important people would turn up. There were about 60 present and some people flew from around the world to be there.

On her side, extremely close, they basically populate a village. They will all be there. On my side, I grew up with most of them. I havent seen most of my cousins for 3-4years as they are abroad. I have 1 cousin in Canada who cant afford to come home for it. The rest are coming home for it.

folan · 06-06-2014 10:15AM

add the word "wedding" to most things and a premium gets added.

hoodwinked · 06-06-2014 10:20AM

IK09 wrote: »

We postponed it so that we would be able to afford to have everyone together. Both our families are large, over 140 in mine and about 120 in hers. We thought if we postponed it by a year, we could get everyone together. We didnt want to get ourselves into debt by borrowing for the wedding.

I understand what your saying, and regarding her Granddad I agree, but her Father and my Aunt were both under 50 when they died.

no matter when or how you get married there is always a "What if" you will never find that perfect time, or that perfect way,

if you got married last year and had a loan this year and nobody passed away, you could be saying "god i wish we waited until this year, everyone would have been there and we wouldn't be in too much debt to enjoy the first year of marriage"

if you got married last year and had a small wedding you could be saying "oh now we regret having such a small wedding it would have been good to have everybody together for the last time"

i say do what you want, the way you want, when you want, you can't control who'll be around, you can't see the future, but you'll have the least amount of regrets if you do it your way.

Red21 · 06-06-2014 10:50AM

The reaction to a wedding invite often depends on what age you are when you recieve it. Generally from late 20's on people/couples are sick of them, they're costly, they've become boring, and getting locked drunk isn't done as freely as it used to be...
It doesn't matter how close to someone you are, if they are a couple in early to mid thirties with kids and have been dozens of weddings over the years chances are they've become allergic.
So go ahead and arrange the flowers in that special unique way for your special day but you cant change the truth of the matter which is that you've just spent €30000 and countless hours organizing something that people can't wait just to get it over and done with.
(not directed to you IK09 just thread in general)

randombar · 06-06-2014 11:13AM

Red21 wrote: »

The reaction to a wedding invite often depends on what age you are when you recieve it. Generally from late 20's on people/couples are sick of them, they're costly, they've become boring, and getting locked drunk isn't done as freely as it used to be...
It doesn't matter how close to someone you are, if they are a couple in early to mid thirties with kids and have been dozens of weddings over the years chances are they've become allergic.
So go ahead and arrange the flowers in that special unique way for your special day but you cant change the truth of the matter which is that you've just spent €30000 and countless hours organizing something that people can't wait just to get it over and done with.
(not directed to you IK09 just thread in general)

Not necessarily, as I get older and the amount of weddings per year goes below 6 I find that they are something to look forward to, a chance to meet up with friends etc. that you wouldn't do on a week to week basis. A couple in their mid thirties with kids I reckon would be top of the list to enjoy a wedding, day away from kids etc. etc.

@IK09 My condolences, it's always a sad part of any wedding day missing the people that should be there, and as people pass you get an idea of who your true friends are etc. who's there for you in the sad times. Friend of mine regretted not inviting certain people to his wedding as they were very good during the sad times since the wedding.

otpmb · 06-06-2014 11:13AM

Shenshen wrote: »

A lot of people seem to see a wedding not so much as a couple's special day, but as a cheap day out at someone else's expense, and they do feel entitled to it.
Odd.

Weddings are not cheap for those invited either:
1)Wedding presents (at about €100 a head these days)
2)Possible night in a hotel/taxi home/petrol
3)Buying/renting/dry cleaning outfits
4)Cost of babysitting kids at home (7-10 euros an hour and more after 12 o clock)
5)Cost of buying drinks for people
6)Miscellaneous
An invitee could definitely end up spending several hundred euro.

Weddings are rarely a cheap day out for someone else, in my opinion they can be and generally are expensive for everyone involved.

michellie · 06-06-2014 11:20AM

otpmb wrote: »

Weddings are not cheap for those invited either:
1)Wedding presents (at about €100 a head these days)
2)Possible night in a hotel/taxi home/petrol
3)Buying/renting/dry cleaning outfits
4)Cost of babysitting kids at home (7-10 euros an hour and more after 12 o clock)
5)Cost of buying drinks for people
6)Miscellaneous
An invitee could definitely end up spending several hundred euro.

Weddings are rarely a cheap day out for someone else, in my opinion they can be and generally are expensive for everyone involved.

Exactly! I've never been to a wedding that was a cheap day out.

randombar · 06-06-2014 11:24AM

otpmb wrote: »

Weddings are not cheap for those invited either:
1)Wedding presents (at about €100 a head these days)
2)Possible night in a hotel/taxi home/petrol
3)Buying/renting/dry cleaning outfits
4)Cost of babysitting kids at home (7-10 euros an hour and more after 12 o clock)
5)Cost of buying drinks for people
6)Miscellaneous
An invitee could definitely end up spending several hundred euro.

Weddings are rarely a cheap day out for someone else, in my opinion they can be and generally are expensive for everyone involved.

If you don't want to go to the wedding then don't go.

If you can't afford to buy drinks for people then don't buy drinks for people.

Rawr · 06-06-2014 11:26AM

I detest the amount of a deal weddings can become. People piling a mountain of stress and debt upon themselves, and very often it has little to do with their own desires, but with the overbearing expectations and selfish demands of particular friends and relatives.

I'm soon to be married myself, and to my delight my fiancee is on the same wavelength as myself. We have resolved to have the smallest wedding possible, and to do it in Spain.

There are two reasons for this.

1) Cost.
The wedding proper will cost about €50. Add everything in, you might be looking at €500 - €1000, and that is including nice hotels and transport. This is essentially the honeymoon too, saving us on that as well. Still a pretty penny, but a far cry from a crippling loan.

2) Stress caused by relatives
We both know that wedding stress hasn't as much to do with the event proper (you know, the wedding itself) than the silliness you get from people moaning about seating arrangements, food, lodging and transport for *their* 'Day Out'. Early in the process we identified a handful of troublesome characters, and decided that the best way to get them not to come while still sparing their feelings was to invite no-one at all. That's also part of the reason why it's in Spain. Far enough away without encountering jet-lag.

As it stands the savings we'll make should allow us to have an awesome honeymoon, and on the day itself we'll finish up not with a reception, but with drinks by the beach. Neither of us will miss the damned cake.

kylith · 06-06-2014 11:39AM

Rawr wrote: »

2) Stress caused by relatives
We both know that wedding stress hasn't as much to do with the event proper (you know, the wedding itself) than the silliness you get from people moaning about seating arrangements, food, lodging and transport for *their* 'Day Out'. Early in the process we identified a handful of troublesome characters, and decided that the best way to get them not to come while still sparing their feelings was to invite no-one at all. That's also part of the reason why it's in Spain. Far enough away without encountering jet-lag.

One of the reasons OH and I won't be getting hitched in the foreseeable future is family stress. I come from a big family, he only has one sibling. One of my SiLs is a borderline alcoholic who gets verbally abusive with a few scoops in her. His parents are divorced and his mum is pretty much guaranteed to cause trouble with his dad's new wife.

I can feel my blood pressure going up just thinking about it.

Red21 · 06-06-2014 12:13PM

GaryCocs wrote: »

Not necessarily, as I get older and the amount of weddings per year goes below 6 I find that they are something to look forward to, a chance to meet up with friends etc. that you wouldn't do on a week to week basis. A couple in their mid thirties with kids I reckon would be top of the list to enjoy a wedding, day away from kids etc. etc.

.

This is an arguenent for going on a night out rather than a wedding, check out the above costs for "a chance to meet up with friends". Big weddings nearly always have stags, hens so if you have 5 in a year you might be catching up with the same old friends 10 times in the one year.

Why do people still have expensive weddings?

Comments