Inviting a +1 to a wedding
 

My friend asked me my advice on this, and seeing as I have very little wedding experience I figured I'd pose the question to GC.

He's in one of his friends wedding in late October and wanted to bring a guest, which is okay with the bride/groom.

How far in advance should you ask someone to be your +1 to a wedding?

I would think anytime before the R.S.V.P. date so the wedding throwers can plan for that +1.

In the same vain, when is it appropriate to invite a +1? Is it like a standard thing or only when the invitation asks for your # of guests? I have not been to many weddings so this has never come up for me.

I'm in the same boat you are...my last wedding my was dad's 11 years ago, but now all of my friends are starting to get engaged and have babies etc, so I'm also curious about the etiquette. The more you know...:)

The invitation should make it clear. The inside envelope will say Christiangirl and guest or something to that effect. Every person who is invited, even if unnamed, should be listed. As a family, an invitation to my parents might have side "Dubaisis Family" or Dubaisis, DubaiMom, DubaiDad, Dubai Oldestsis, etc., all spelled out. Unless you are a family member or they know you have a bunch of mutual friends attending the wedding, it would be pretty rude to NOT allow you a +1.

As far as when the guest should invite the +1, if it's a long time SO, go ahead and RSVP early. The bride will appreciate it. If you are gonna have to go trolling for a date, I'd probably wait until fairly last minute so you don't end up with an embarrassing sitch of having to change your +1. But still, presuming you're good friends, you could advise the bride that you are definitely attending, but don't know yet about your +1. Waiting for those RSVPs to come in is freakishly stressful so anything you can do to let her know is a good thing.

This. Unless the invitation is addressed to christiangirl and guest, chritiangirl does not get to bring a +1.

That said, I have to disagree with it being rude for the hosts (traditionally the bride's family, but often not these days) to not allow a +1 unless they know you'll know many people there. Making up guests lists for weddings can require diplomacy on the level of the UN Security Council. I know that when I was a bachelor, I was invited to a number of weddings where I didn't know people and where I didn't get to bring a +1. I didn't think anything of it.

The general rule is that if you're inviting someone whom you know to be engaged or in a reasonably serious relationship, then the invitation should be for that person "and guest." Otherwise, it's completely up to the hosts and their diplomatic needs.

Apparently most people don't read etiquette books, because NO ONE has ever written "and guest," but everyone expects me to bring my bf.

2 sample conversations:

Wedding #1 - I showed up alone, as that's what I RSVP'ed for.
BRIDE: Oh, it's great to see you!! Where's [BF], is he having a good time.
ME: Oh, I didn't bring him, I didn't think he was invited.
BRIDE: OF COURSE he was invited!

...how the hell was I supposed to know that?!

WEDDING #2 - was a few hours away. I'm not a huge fan of long-distance driving, so I was hoping to bring my boyfriend. The invite didn't say anything about a guest, but I really wasn't sure if I wanted to drive 5 hours by myself, so I called the bride. (I know this is tacky, but I wasn't sure what else to do). She exclaimed that she just assumed that single guests would bring a date. Again, NOT noted on the invite/RSVP card.


Seriously, is it something in my generation's water?! I've been dating my boyfriend for over 2 years now, so I kind of assume most people know I would like to bring him, but it still makes me nervous for those people that DO know etiquette and are not putting +1 because (gasp), they don't want me to bring anyone!

I mostly call other guests with boyfriends and see what's on their card, if none have bf's name or plus one, I go ahead and take BF, but if they do, I assume I should go alone. It is an imperfect system, for sure.

Also, make sure you write your guest's FULL NAME on the RSVP card. That way if the bride and groom are doing place cards they have it, and if they keep a spreadsheet of guests + gifts and addresses (like I did for my friend's shower), they have the full name for thank you notes.

Although, it's been forever since I've received an invitation as "agzg and guest." Live-in's stuck around long enough that my friends all know not only his first and last name, but middle and probably social security number or something. :p Facebook makes some things easier.

I should add that for weddings for his friends and family, they address it to both of us, as well.

They should be addressing the invitation to you and your boyfriend both if you're both invited, since you've been together longer than a year now.

Not to mention living together. But yep.

Oh I missed that they were living together. Yes - a live-in boyfriend/girlfriend should AT LEAST get a +1 invite, but the most polite is to address the invitation to both you + boyfriend or girlfriend.

Unless they don't want the boyfriend/girlfriend there. :p In which case, forget about the invite all together.

Wedding etiquette is just pathetic so much more often than it should be. I got a wedding invitation once that had no RSVP card in it at all. I mentioned it to her since whoever was doing the invitations forgot this important piece. Turns out, no RSVP was required or requested. It turned out to be THE WORLD'S MOST REDNECK wedding. There was a guy in a black mesh t-shirt there. And he wasn't laughed outta the joint.

I attended another wedding once that didn't use RSVPs, but it turned out it's because once you have EVERYONE on the planet there, do you really need to put an exact number on it? They had easily 600 people at this wedding reception.

HA! But if they're not requiring RSVPs, is that really a faux pas? Perhaps they should have just put on the invitation "No RSVP required, bring your mama too."

According to Miss Manners, you shouldn't even have RSVP cards; the guest should reply himself or herself. And you're supposed to follow the wording of the invitation: "Miss Jane Doe accepts the invitation of Mr. and Mrs. John Smith for August 22, 2011, for 7:00." In blue or black ink on white or ivory paper.

My cousin once received an invitation like that, only her reply was a little chattier, and her husband's aunt, who was the mother of either the bride or the groom (I forget which), called her up and chewed her out over it. So much for etiquette.

Well, you're right. The lack of RSVP itself wasn't the faux pas, but trust me when I tell you they had plenty of others.

Technically, as Shellfish notes, an RSVP card isn't required even if an RSVP is expected. For that matter, the phrase "RSVP" isn't required. It was added as a reminder to those who apparently didn't know that one should always RSVP. And the cards were put in to make it easier for people to remember to RSVP and actually do it.

That said, let me tell you about the small Southern town of my youth. This was the normal practice when I was growing up: Unless the wedding was truly going to be private (family and maybe close friends), it was understood that everyone in town was invited. Literally. Invitations were only sent to out-of-town guests and family/close friends in town (because, of course, they'd want to see it). A few weeks before the wedding, a copy of the invitation would appear (1) in the church bulletin of the bride's church (and the groom's if he was from town), and (2) in the town newspaper. No, I'm not making this up. Depending on the time of year, the Wednesday paper could have two or three invitations in it.

This system actually worked quite well. Because this was how things had always been done, one could predict how many would really attend fairly well. Many if not most people would RSVP informally, like if they ran into the bride's mother at the grocery store and said "We're so looking forward to the wedding." And sometimes, when friends of the bride's mom would ask "what can I do to help," the answer was "Call A-C in the phone book." What this meant was calling "everyone" (all involved knew who to call) to say "So-and-so asked me to call to say she's hoping you'll be at the wedding next Saturday." This gave a good general count as well.

It has to be remembered that sit-down-meal receptions were unheard of. (I think I was in my late 20s or early 30s before I ever went to a reception where there was a true meal, and in that case, the bride's family was from "away.") The typical reception was held in the church hall, at the country club or maybe another similar venue, or at the bride's home. The food was all finger food, though it could be substantial finger food. No alcohol if the reception was at a church (unless it was the Episcopal church).

And don't even get me started on the newspaper write-ups. They could cover half a page.

Alright so here is a question/scenario:

One of my chapter sisters is getting married this next year. She and her husband-to-be don't have that much saved up for the wedding and are cutting costs by not allowing anyone other than the bridesmaids/groomsmen to have dates. This includes significant others of guests even if you are living together/engaged/serious relationship, unless the sig other was also good friends with the couple (basically would have been invited anyway even if y'all weren't a couple).

Mainly I'm bringing this up because we found this info out yesterday and I'm feeling confused. While I understand that they want close friends and family there, a few of the sisters (myself included) live with our boyfriends/fiancee and have all been together for over a year. It is also more or less a destination wedding that is about 2-3 hours minimum from everyone, in snow country in snow season. I'd rather not drive alone.

Does this make sense/is it weird?

It does kind of make sense. Having been to a few weddings along these lines, I'm also betting that it was a pulling teeth fight with the families to get even sisters on the guest list.

If you want to go, get all the sisters together and drive there together. If you don't want to go because of the SO omission, that's your prerogative too. But don't bring a date if you've been told it's not OK.

It's weird. It's especially weird that the bridesmaids/groomsmen can have dates but no one else. In my opinion. bringing a +1 that isn't your significant other is awkward anyway when you're in the wedding party because you don't have much time to hang with them and might not even sit with them at dinner.

To be honest, if I were in your situation and concerned about driving alone I would decline the invitation with regrets and send a gift. But, live-in and I have been together for longer than a lot of the couples we're seeing getting married right now anyway, so there's no logical reason not to invite both of us.

I understand cutting costs, but I would do it a different way - limit "primary" guests to very close friends (and obviously family), then allow them to bring their significant other, if they have one. The whole chapter would not get an invitation.

Also, be prepared to hear at the last minute "oh it's OK to bring SO" after they have gotten the declinations from Aunt Agatha who HAD to be asked but who hasn't left her house in 60 years.

This thread should probably be moved to the Dating and Relationships forum as there are already plenty of wedding threads going on over there.

Yes, please. My husband's drama-queen aunt did not provide her guest's name. We figured it was her boyfriend, but a) how could we be sure? and b) we didn't know his full name as we've not been around him.

So guess what his placecard said? "Guest of [Drama Queen]" Yeah, I got bitchy at that point.

I have been to several of these!!! Based on my experience, they seem to be common in places such as India and Pakistan. My husband and I got married in the United States, but my in-laws planned a reception for us in Pakistan when we went to visit after the wedding since no one other than my husbands parents, one aunt and uncle, and a few cousins could make it to our wedding. There was no RSVP for the event, but something like 400 people showed up (all on my husband's side and he hasn't lived there in 12-13 years).

This, though the destination aspect of it can also be an excuse for not going.

And I'll just say it: I'm not a fan of destination weddings. And the idea of on one hand not having much money for the wedding and so cutting costs by limiting guests, while on the other hand having a destination wedding is . . . odd . . . to me.

I don't think she means that it's a destination in the sense of going to a resort or Bermuda or something, rather that it basically becomes that for everyone not from the town it's in because it's a long ass drive to BFE.

We had a sister wedding like that that was almost at the NY border. Fine for her family but awful for her friends, none of whom were from there, and in the middle of nowhere. And no alcohol and just h'ors d'ouvres.

My big-city-Northern mind has just been completely blown by MysticCat's post. Truth.

:D

Did I mention that it was also common for the bride's family to display all the wedding gifts? (Well, except for china, silver and crystal -- for that, a single, full place setting would be laid.) Friends would call on the bride's family for the express purpose of ooohing and ahhhhing over the gifts.

"Call on" tee hee hee. Reminds me of Little Women.

If a person is not explicitly listed on the wedding invitation envelope, he or she is NOT INVITED. PERIOD.

The members of a couple who are dating but living separately should each receive his/her own invitation, and it is acceptable to invite one and not the other.

The members of a couple who are engaged but living separately should each receive his/her own invitation, and it is NOT acceptable to invite one and not the other.

The members of a couple who are living together are considered engaged (whether they are or not) and should receive one invitation, addressed to "Miss Donna Noble" <newline> "Mr. Lance Bennett". It is not acceptable to invite one and not the other.

A married couple should receive one invitation, addressed to "Mr. and Mrs. John Smith", or to "Ms. Gwen Cooper and Mr. Rhys Williams" if they do not have the same last name. If they have children and the children are invited, their names should go on the inner envelope, e.g. "Mr. and Mrs. John Smith" <newline> "Mary, Sara, and George". If the children are not invited, their names should be omitted from the inner envelope.

A single, divorced, or widowed man is "Mr. John Smith". A single woman is "Miss Rose Tyler". A widow is "Mrs. Peter Tyler" and a divorced woman is "Mrs. Jane Doe" (sorry, couldn't think of any Doctor Who characters who fit that profile ;) ).

This is trumped where someone has a professional title, e.g. "Dr. Martha Jones" or "Dr. and Mrs. John Smith".

I'll shut up about naming conventions now. :D

According to Miss Manners, it's not necessary to include RSVP cards - the invited guest(s) "should" know that they should write a "yes" or "no" letter back - but in this day and age, if you don't include RSVP cards, you're going to be making a lot of phone calls.

THANK YOU! I don't get it either. It's one thing to have a destination wedding for immediate family only. Once you're inviting all kinds of people, it makes no sense to me. Do you really want me to spend $1000 to go to some destination for your wedding? It isn't going to happen and it feels selfish (on their part) when I get those invites.

^^^^ Agree on all fronts. All of the destination weddies that I have known were immediate family, Best Man and Maid of Honor.

I think we must be from around the same place. Do people outside the South not have big wedding showers where everyone comes over to see the gifts? I knew a girl who had over 600 people on her shower guest list. One of the most amazing displays of wedding gifts I have ever seen.

The one I went to was great. There were at most 20 of us. It was the bride and groom's immediate family and close friends. We spent a week in Hawaii in a close gathering of cabins and then walked out to the beach for the ceremony. If there had been more than 20 people, there would have been way too much coordination/confusion.

As for my earlier question: it wasn't that I was going to show up with my boyfriend, it's just weird to think of. I think it may be out of the possibility for me as the drive is 2 - 3 hours and the only sisters who live by me are in the bridal party and have to be there earlier than the rest of us.

If you are doing a destination, make it someplace that means something to you or is an amazing place. Driving to desert Oregon that means nothing to the couple and will have nothing of interest around it for the guest all of whom have to drive a couple of hours and spend a few days in town is not a great idea. Hometowns, place you met, Hawaii, vacation places etc. are a much better idea.

My small Southern home town was the same. I will add that the announcement in the paper often included a line saying "Only out of town invitations will be sent."

If I didn't know better, I would say we were from the same town. :)

Should I get married, anything addressed To "Mrs. [spouse] Doe" is getting thrown in the trash, wedding invitation, lottery winnings or long lost relative's plea for help, doesn't matter, whether my spouse is living or dead.

Naming conventions need to catch up to the realities of modern society. It's why most of the Dear Abby/Ann Landers/Miss Manners sort of thing is just so inapplicable to today. When there's no reason for the 'etiquette' other than 'that's how it's done' we're doing it wrong.

I have a sneaking suspicion that if that time comes to pass you will make very clear to loved ones or anyone else who may be inviting you to weddings that they ain't getting a cake plate if your invite says Mrs Droleshubby. :)

When the person expresses a preference, that ALWAYS trumps the "rules" of etiquette. I think it's more or less always been that way. But if you don't know the person that well, the rules are there to fall back on.

Oh indeed I would be, whether it was Droleshubby or Droleswife*, but it's fine to have 'default' rules. It's just less fine when those rules are sexist and heterosexist. There's no really good reason to refer to a woman married to a man by his first name whether he's alive or dead other than 'it's always been done that way.' (And of course the root of it is, well, yeah.)

Too much of how manners and etiquette are used are about distinguishing the people who know the right thing to do from those who don't. It's a class issue (as noted from a certain "redneck" wedding described above.) That's not all manners, or etiquette, are but that is how they are used by people. If it's just an excuse to look down one's nose, then we're doing it wrong.

*Random aside: I also have a strict rule that if I die in a car accident or by something stupid that was my fault, my friends and family are forbidden from a) making my death the spur for some cause to ban whatever stupid shit I was doing and b) putting up a roadside memorial. Because I think those things are dumb.

Thanks for such a lively discussion.

My friend is a groomsmen, and is allowed to bring a +1. He was just unsure of when to ask someone (his gf, though not serious) to be his date to the wedding...he didn't want to ask too soon, or too late.

As much as I believe in etiquette, my mother's saying of
"Politeness is to do and say
The kindest thing in the kindest way."

So, once you've made your calling name clear, it would be more proper to call you by which you wish to be called.

Totally and completely agree!

Which I agree with. It's the defaults I have an issue with.

(And of course the "GASP you wore THAT to a WEDDING! The horror! It's like white after Labor day and using the dessert fork for your fish!")