Weddings with a cash bar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, years ago. It’s not a big deal to me because I’m not a big drinker. The couple didn’t have a lot of money and they wanted to prioritize food, so they had a cash bar. I do think letting people know in advance is the right thing to do, but otherwise it’s not a huge deal. It’s just one night.

This. I mean, I get that is considered tacky, but I just don't like this notion that poor people should not be able to celebrate their wedding or invite as many people as they want or whatever. I'd love a heads up so I had money on me, but I'd certainly prefer a cash bar over a dry wedding. I feel lucky that my dad could pay for the wedding we wanted. But it is just luck.

[Anonymous]

For my wedding, we got married at my parents’ house and had only minimal alcohol.

Some people complained, but they didn’t know that we had alcoholics (from both sides) in attendance who were in recovery and we were trying not to challenge their sobriety.

And the wedding was in the south, with multiple Southern baptists in attendance who also objected to drinking for religious reasons.

We weren’t having a dry wedding but it was important to us to only have a small amounts of beer and wine bar to keep things reasonable for the non-drinkers. Nobody forced us to do this (and my parents definitely drink), but it was important to us.

My DC friends didn’t get it until we explained, but for those who didn’t ask, I’m sure they felt the same frustration as others on this thread. It’s all about the context though.

[Anonymous]

I don't think it's tacky but I do think they should have let people know they would need actual cash. In that situation I probably would have just not had a drink. The fact that your husband made an effort to go find an ATM speaks to why the bride and groom probably didn't want to have an open bar...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's open bar unless dc urban moms are attending and the bartender is serving chardonnay. Bankruptcy is no way to start a marriage.

No, they don’t drink. They are all looking for something very refreshing and tasty because water simply won’t do. They will want an array of fresh juices or lemonade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess I’m the outlier - I don’t mind a dry wedding at all. I’d rather attend a dry wedding than one with a cash bar.

I agree. I've attended dry weddings before and it was fine. Go out ahead of time and have a few drinks if you must. But if you can't go a few hours without alcohol, that's another issue.

Ok, grandma

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think if you have a cash bar, don’t expect too much dancing.

+1 exactly this

You pony up for the open bar to create the fun vibe and celebratory energy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone ever gone to a wedding with a cash bar?

We were completely caught off guard by it and my husband had to leave the venue to find an ATM to get money.

It was VERY tacky in my opinion.

I have. It's certainly not ideal, but since I lived in a part of the country where it's not unusual to have dry weddings when my friends first started getting married, I prefer a cash bar to no bar. IME it's usually people who are getting married younger without family support or who want to have a bigger wedding but aren't swimming in cash.

[Anonymous]

No, just don't have alcohol. I would not drink or buy any. Not a big deal.

[Anonymous]

I sort of feel like it depends on the wedding—if it’s clearly budget you can get away with it (and it’s okay to have a budget wedding if that’s all you can afford), but if the wedding vibe is fancy cocktail event that had a lot of money put into venue and decor, it comes off as cheap.

Dry weddings are a different story. There are legitimate reasons why a couple would want zero alcohol at their wedding and that’s fine.

[Anonymous]

I mean of course people can have fun without alcohol, but weddings aren’t usually that so it’s just a matter of being taken off guard. I’ve been to alcohol free weddings, but only one cash bar. And it was cash only. We didn’t have much cash so we didn’t drink much, we didn’t go looking for an ATM. But the rest of the reception was awful and just sort of reflected the fact that they couldn’t afford it. It was a buffet and we were given salad size plates. The minute everybody went through once they broke the food down immediately so it’s not like they were “prioritizing food.” It was just really strange. Oh, and off topic, but the bride’s mother was absolutely horrendous and she wound up getting into a car accident on the way to the reception, and no one actually noticed it until like halfway through dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty common where I’m from. Only wealthy people had open bars. And there weren’t many wealthy people. However usually it’s noted on the invitation.

It’s also common to have receptions in fire halls with a sandwich bar. So there’s that. We all loved them and they were the norm.

Same. Open bar is a wealthy person's choice and raised eyebrows. Alcohol can be the single most expensive line item in a big wedding budget. If the option is no alchol because the wedding host cannot afford it or a cash bar for those who want to drink alcohol, many guests would prefer the cash bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone ever gone to a wedding with a cash bar?

We were completely caught off guard by it and my husband had to leave the venue to find an ATM to get money.

It was VERY tacky in my opinion.

They’re C H E A P

[Anonymous]

You're sampling the wrong audience for this question. Most people posting on DCUM are UMC and come from those backgrounds. There are a few posters that have stated this is normal where they come from. For a major city--DC, NYC, San Francisco, it would be seen as odd. But for a small town in Arkansas, it might be considered perfectly normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, years ago. It’s not a big deal to me because I’m not a big drinker. The couple didn’t have a lot of money and they wanted to prioritize food, so they had a cash bar. I do think letting people know in advance is the right thing to do, but otherwise it’s not a huge deal. It’s just one night.

This. I mean, I get that is considered tacky, but I just don't like this notion that poor people should not be able to celebrate their wedding or invite as many people as they want or whatever. I'd love a heads up so I had money on me, but I'd certainly prefer a cash bar over a dry wedding. I feel lucky that my dad could pay for the wedding we wanted. But it is just luck.

If you look at how to plan your wedding sites and books and articles, cash bar is always listed as an option when the budget is tight, so I don't think it is considered tacky universally, unless you are wealthy and choosing to be cheap. Context matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For my wedding, we got married at my parents’ house and had only minimal alcohol.

Some people complained, but they didn’t know that we had alcoholics (from both sides) in attendance who were in recovery and we were trying not to challenge their sobriety.

And the wedding was in the south, with multiple Southern baptists in attendance who also objected to drinking for religious reasons.

We weren’t having a dry wedding but it was important to us to only have a small amounts of beer and wine bar to keep things reasonable for the non-drinkers. Nobody forced us to do this (and my parents definitely drink), but it was important to us.

My DC friends didn’t get it until we explained, but for those who didn’t ask, I’m sure they felt the same frustration as others on this thread. It’s all about the context though.

That’s messed up. Your family members are the alcoholics and it’s their problem, not your guests.