You’re still rationalizing. You didn’t get randomly assigned to a venue. You chose a venue with a capacity limit that means you have to make tough choices, and you’re choosing not to extend plus ones to the wedding party so you can invite other people. It’s rude as hell. The fact that other clods do it doesn’t mean it’s not rude. You’re right about one thing, though; this probably does go over better with twenty-somethings who have not yet been in serious, long term, adult relationships and aren’t used to being treated like adults yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.

I have not really commented and I probably haven’t been to a wedding in 20 years. I had assumed that all the people getting upset about not being able to bring a guest were young and immature. They still needed a security blanket to make it through a few hours.

You're sock puppeting. Do you realize how much money a bridesmaid spends on being a bridesmaid? I spent thousands. I'd be furious if I didn't have a guest.

You can actually ask Jeff. This is my third post. What does spending money have to do with bringing a guest? It’s about engaging with the event. I have been a bridesmaid and a bride. Nothing is remarkably different about attending a wedding today versus 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.

I have not really commented and I probably haven’t been to a wedding in 20 years. I had assumed that all the people getting upset about not being able to bring a guest were young and immature. They still needed a security blanket to make it through a few hours.

You're sock puppeting. Do you realize how much money a bridesmaid spends on being a bridesmaid? I spent thousands. I'd be furious if I didn't have a guest.

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.

Anonymous wrote:This is hilarious. A rare dcum consensus and op is big mad about it. Also lol at only being allowed to bring a finance or spouse. I know a few couples that have been together 15 plus years and have kids/a household together but aren’t legally married. Guess those relationships don’t count? You sound awful op.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.

I have not really commented and I probably haven’t been to a wedding in 20 years. I had assumed that all the people getting upset about not being able to bring a guest were young and immature. They still needed a security blanket to make it through a few hours.

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.

Anonymous wrote:

You’re just rationalizing doing something rude. The fact that you can’t afford to extend plus ones to your wedding party, who are more than just guests, in no way means that it’s not rude not to do so. The fact that it’s not highly unusual for people with budgetary constraints to cut corners in this manner does not mean that it’s not a rude thing to do.

We actually have no budgetary constraints - at all. And our planner is aware of this fact. We DO have occupancy constraints imposed by the venue. We also have three twenty-something kids who, between them, attend at least a wedding a month and have been in many weddings, and universally they report that they are invited to bring a guest (DC who is engaged) and they are never invited to bring guests (DCs who don’t have SOs). One DC was in a wedding in Europe, and it never occurred to DC to even register that they were not invited to bring a guest because they were there with a bunch of college friends who - gasp! - also did not have guests. I am convinced that most of the people responding on this thread have not attended a wedding in 20 years and don’t have kids in that stage of life, because so many of these posts are completely out of touch with common practice. We are not unsophisticated or rude but know from our own experience what conventions apply today.