Pet Peeves: Aka Things That Make You Go "Gah!"

[KittyMom4]

57 minutes ago, theredhead77 said:

I attended one wedding (which I ranted about here) with a surprise open bar. It seemed to be open bar, for about an hour then all of a sudden the bartenders started charging for drinks. We still have no idea if the open bar part was an accident or if it was intentionally for an hour. Regardless, many were caught off guard by this without cash or cards for payment. I worked with the groom and he would talk about how much things were adding up and what they were doing to cut costs. Everything they cut impacted the guest experience: no champaign for the toast, all alcohol (except for that hour) was at the guest expense. The food was mediocre buffet and they cut down on that too due to cost. If they hadn't invited half the office (they both worked at the company) they would have had more budget.  As it was, the co-worker tables were in the back, off to the side and by the time I left I felt I was invited as an obligation (and I wasn't the only one).

I attended a wedding of a coworker several years ago, she and I were pretty close, or so I thought. My then-husband and I attended the ceremony and the reception, we only knew a few other people from my job. At the reception we were told it was a cash bar, at the time we didn't have a lot of money so we had a couple beers and then opted for water or soda for the rest of the night. After a while one of my coworkers commented that she'd noticed people handing tickets to the bartenders and wondered what that meant. It dawned on my husband and me that the cash bar was only for some of the attendees, but others had been given tickets to get free drinks for the night, and no these were not just the bridal party members or just family. I thought it was not only tacky but rude to segregate guests by those who you would supply free alcohol for and those that you wouldn't, just don't invite me then.

50 minutes ago, MrSmith said:

I think your reaction was reasonable. I would have felt the same. I'd rather invite fewer people, have a better experience, and explain to any interested-and-not-invited that it was due to cost but that I would have liked to have invited them - or figure out some way to smooth things over with those people who were not invited.

My daughter and her boyfriend are hoping to get married this summer, they can't afford much and don't want a big wedding anyway, so they are keeping the invitee count low so they can have things like enough food and an open bar for their guests. I told my daughter not to worry about the folks she's not inviting, including some cousins she barely knows, I'd rather she have the wedding she enjoyed to a wedding she'd be in debt for just so other people's egos aren't bruised.

[emma675]

Who knew the subject of cash bars would get us all so talkative on a Tuesday! lol

[MrSmith]

7 minutes ago, BookWoman56 said:

For me, again, it's a moot point. I like to drink Scotch on occasion. I don't have objections to people consuming alcohol. But I'm unlikely to be friends with someone who can't deal with the idea of going 2-3 hours without a drink, just as I'm unlikely to be friends with someone who demands that nobody is allowed to consume alcohol. My gut impression about people including alcohol or not at a wedding reception because of cost is that people are inviting way the hell too many guests who are not really close family or friends. Ditto with having to tell the bar staff which guests shouldn't be served alcohol. Fuck convention. If you want to have a wedding reception with alcohol, then don't invite people who are going to show up and get drunk, and don't inflate your guest list by inviting people who are just casual friends or acquaintances, or family members that you're not really close to.  If people get pissed off because they were not invited, have the courage to tell them flatly that they weren't invited because you've seen them make asses of themselves by getting drunk at other weddings, or that you're sorry, but the event was limited to only very close family and friends. 

For the wedding where my brother got beer poured on his head, this was definitely the problem. The couple (or their parents, because my family is like that) invited way too many people and invited people that they hadn't seen in years simply because they were 3rd or 4th cousins, etc. I don't remember who it was got married at that wedding; what I do recall is that I didn't even know who the hell it was at the time we went. And I remember asking my mother about it and the response included "We haven't seen them in X years" (where I think X was greater than 10). My mother acted like this was going to be some wonderful family reunion. Ugh.

When I married my wife, the only people we invited from my side of the family were my parents. We did the whole thing rather spur-of-the-moment after being engaged for 7 years. We (well, really *I* if I'm being honest about it) finally decided to just do it and get it done rather than try to save up for some bigger affair. So my wife had three weeks to invite people and plan the whole thing. I couldn't help because I was working about 50 hours a week at that time and attending college with a full load. To her credit, my wife was a trooper and got it done. We didn't invite people from my side of the family because I knew none of them would be able to make it. My aunt and uncle who live in the Eau Claire area were both working full time. My younger brother (who I didn't want in attendance anyway) works for AT&T and couldn't have gotten time off in that short notice. My other aunts and uncles all live out East (Connecticut, NY, Maryland) and I very much doubt they would have come with that short notice. Fifteen years later and my mother is still pissed off at me about that, even though I explained my rationale to her. Oh well.

[KittyMom4]

4 minutes ago, MrSmith said:

When I married my wife, the only people we invited from my side of the family were my parents. We did the whole thing rather spur-of-the-moment after being engaged for 7 years. We (well, really *I* if I'm being honest about it) finally decided to just do it and get it done rather than try to save up for some bigger affair.

I had a big affair for my first marriage, it was completely controlled by my parents in NY as I was living in CA waiting for my discharge from the USMC, so 200+ guests of their choosing. They enjoyed it, my memories of it was just being so tired of talking to people I didn't know. I told my BF that if/when we decide to tie the knot it will be a JOP at courthouse and a small dinner with my parents, his mom, my kids & his kids. Done.

[ZaldamoWilder]

15 minutes ago, MrSmith said:

We didn't invite people from my side of the family because I knew none of them would be able to make it. My aunt and uncle who live in the Eau Claire area were both working full time. My younger brother (who I didn't want in attendance anyway) works for AT&T and couldn't have gotten time off in that short notice. My other aunts and uncles all live out East (Connecticut, NY, Maryland) and I very much doubt they would have come with that short notice. Fifteen years later and my mother is still pissed off at me about that, even though I explained my rationale to her. Oh well.

Do you think they interpreted this as "he didn't want us to come" or "it was my decision and he made it for me"?  or some other perception....?     

Ya'lls first Thanksgiving afterwards....

[Maharincess]

I have to say, I feel bad for people who can't handle not having alcohol for a few hours.  I feel sorry for people who can't have fun at a wedding reception if they can't drink alcohol. But I mostly feel bad for the bride and groom who seem to be scorned by those who can't go a few hours without booze. I don't get the "have the reception you can afford" just because there's no alcohol.   I've been to weddings where there was no alcohol and everyone had a blast. Then again,  the people I know can have fun without alcohol. 

[Katy M]

7 minutes ago, Maharincess said:

I have to say, I feel bad for people who can't handle not having alcohol for a few hours.  I feel sorry for people who can't have fun at a wedding reception if they can't drink alcohol. But I mostly feel bad for the bride and groom who seem to be scorned by those who can't go a few hours without booze. I don't get the "have the reception you can afford" just because there's no alcohol.   I've been to weddings where there was no alcohol and everyone had a blast. Then again,  the people I know can have fun without alcohol. 

And, even if cost is the reason you're not providing alcohol, you're still having the reception you can afford.  If I had to make the choice between providing alcohol (or more expensive food), and having more of my friends and family around, I would choose the extra guests.  As long as you're clear as to what kind of reception it will be (i.e. fancy food, alcohol, etc OR soft drinks, buffet-style food) then people can make the decision on their own if they want to come.

[theredhead77]

2 hours ago, ZaldamoWilder said:

The bar was opened initially, then went all cash, then closed an hour later.   

That's really crappy. 

On the flip side, I went to a wedding in April with not only an open bar, that was only closed for an hour during the bridal party entrance and again for a half hour during the toasts, they kept extending how late it was going to stay open, ultimately going from 11pm closing to 1am closing. The bartenders weren't thrilled (and I was long gone by then). The bride told me the venue said that was the loudest wedding and most alcohol ever consumed at a wedding reception. Mission accomplished!

[Bastet]

8 hours ago, theredhead77 said:

Serious questions to those who think it's in poor taste to not provide a bar at a wedding:

Should the bride and groom skip the reception because they can't afford a bar or should they provide a cash bar?

Should a bar be provided even though a close friend or family member is in recovery and the temptation to drink is still too great? Should that friend or family member just skip the event instead?

1. Since a cash bar is the height of tackiness, the first option would be preferable, but what's better is not hosting an event you can't afford to do properly.  So invite fewer people, spend less on flowers, whatever, and then you have room in the budget.  But if you want to skip alcohol entirely - if you're not even going to offer so much as wine with the meal or champagne with the cake - then have your reception during a time/with a meal that makes it logical not to offer alcohol.  If your reception is a casual thing during the day, then you provide what logically goes with that, so you could even just do snacks rather than a meal.  But if your reception is an evening one with a sit-down dinner, then provide what logically goes with that. 

2. Every addict in recovery I know would say, as part of their guiding philosophy that the world is not supposed to change for them, they are supposed to learn how to manage their addiction in the real world, they should skip the event if their recovery is still so new and tenuous that being around alcohol would be too tempting -- they'd go to the ceremony and then go home.  Now that it has come up, I have fuzzy memories of a co-worker dealing with this years ago when she was getting married; I think it was her sister whose sobriety was still pretty young, and she hadn't quite worked up to attending large social gatherings at which she'd normally drink (I think she was going out to dinner with folks and stuff like that and handling it, but not going to parties and such until she felt more confident), so she was going to skip the reception.  My co-worker wanted to postpone the wedding, but her sister wouldn't hear of it, and then they wound up having to postpone anyway because the groom's father took ill, and by the time they had it, the sister was comfortable in such situations and it was a non-issue.

Anyway, speaking of some posts about having things on hand for guests that you don't eat or drink yourself, I realized this morning that I need to get light beer and Coke by this weekend (I have three friends coming over to watch movies, and one of them usually has beer and prefers light while one of them almost always drinks Jack and Coke) and today is probably my best day to go shopping, so I'm going to take a lunch break shortly and go do that.

(Now watch it be like the time I bought a bottle of Coke Zero for my best friend, who usually has that with rum, and then when she arrived she wanted a martini.  No problem, as I just made her a martini and then sent the soda home with her, but it made me laugh because I'd rushed in at the last minute when she'd called to ask if she could stop by after work for a couple of drinks, and then that was one of the rare times she drank anything else.)

Oh, and I didn't see anyone say they refused to attend weddings without alcohol, that alcohol should be served at any and all gatherings, or that they couldn't have fun without alcohol. 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Bastet

[BookWoman56]

To me, it's not just the question of alcohol or no alcohol, cash bar or free bar, etc. It's the idea being promulgated by the wedding industry that unless you spend tens of thousands of dollars on a wedding, it's not a real wedding, and the bride/groom can't possibly be happy with something low-key and small. If people have extra cash lying around they want to spend on a wedding, fine. But I've worked with people before who ended up literally taking out a second mortgage on their home so they could throw an elaborate wedding and reception for their daughter that was well above what they could truly afford. Maybe it's because I first got married in a time when it was fairly common to reject the notion of a formal wedding, anyway, and opt for a very casual wedding on a beach or in the middle of a field, but I fail to see the correlation between spending a fuckton of money on a wedding/reception and whether the participants and guests actually enjoy the wedding/reception. As noted earlier, my own first wedding was a small event held at my parents' church and the reception was at the church fellowship hall. I distinctly remember reaching the point where I felt that I no longer gave a flying fuck about what color the tablecloths were at the reception, and whether hot tea should be served in addition to punch and coffee. I just wanted it over, and I cannot imagine having to deal with the logistics and stress of a large wedding.

We did have a small informal reception at our apartment after the regular reception, for a few close friends and family members. Turns out they were taking bets as to how long it would be before I wanted out of the marriage. They were wrong, not about me wanting out of the marriage but the timing; I'd realized a week or so before the wedding that I really, really did not want to get married, but succumbed to the idea that the invitations had already been sent, it would look bad to cancel, etc. In retrospect, I should have have cancelled and dealt with a week or two of people being upset versus a few years of living in misery. 

[Katy M]

7 minutes ago, Bastet said:

- then have your reception during a time/with a meal that makes it logical not to offer alcohol. 

I don't really drink, so I think it's always logical to not offer alcohol:) Especially if there are kids or teenagers there.  Which brings up a point.  What if the couple, or at least one of the couple, is under 21.  Is it then OK not to serve alcohol?  I guess my thinking is that alcohol is not required at a wedding reception.  Or at any function.  If people want to serve people alcohol, that's great.  If they don't, that's also great. 

[SunnyBeBe]

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

I don't really drink, so I think it's always logical to not offer alcohol:) Especially if there are kids or teenagers there.  Which brings up a point.  What if the couple, or at least one of the couple, is under 21.  Is it then OK not to serve alcohol?  I guess my thinking is that alcohol is not required at a wedding reception.  Or at any function.  If people want to serve people alcohol, that's great.  If they don't, that's also great. 

If you or your servers, even professional, serve alcohol to underage guests, you could get sued and charged criminally in some states.  Here's a case from my area.  It was horrible. The underage guest left the reception (home of the bride where they had hired professional catering for food and alcohol), wrecked his car and died.  It was a horrible thing for all concerned. Of course, the dead boy's parents blamed the hosts. When this happened, I decided that it's just not something that I want to be potentially involved with. 

http://abc11.com/news/couple-not-guilty-in-fatal-teen-crash-son-sentenced/895492/

Edited February 6, 2018 by SunnyBeBe

[bilgistic]

15 hours ago, Maharincess said:

Another peeve that's more of a heartbreak is parents who put their ridiculous religious beliefs ahead of their own children.  And disown and abandon those children when they need them most, simply because some book said they did something wrong.  I'm seeing the affects of that right now and aside from breaking my heart, it pisses me the hell off. 

Recently, I read an opinion somewhere that compared to child abuse some religious teaching like I was brought up in. (Not all religion is that way.) In the hellfire-and-brimstone Southern Baptist church I was raised in in the 1970s and 1980s, it was a constant message of "if you don't give yourself to God, you will burn in Hell" or "if you commit this sin, you will burn in Hell". And the ever-present "the rapture is coming, so be prepared; you don't want to be left behind. You don't know who of your friends and family will be left behind."

That is TERRIFYING for a child. There are horrifying movies that we were made to watch during "lock-ins" (highly supervised youth slumber parties, usually held at a rec center). The movies show post-apocalyptic scenes and fiery hellscapes with people screaming in agony, and are supposed to scare you to come to Jesus.

All any of this did was terrify me, give me nightmares, make me question everything, and ultimately turn me off organized religion forever.

The family members of mine who are most religious are the most judgmental and unforgiving. There's no way of thinking other than their own, and no room for trying to understand others' situation.

Anyway! @Maharincess, how is your "niece" doing?

Edited February 6, 2018 by bilgistic

[SunnyBeBe]

Yeah, what I call religious abusers are at the top of my Pet Peeve list.  I saw it first hand growing up in the south.  It was and in some cases, STILL horrific. 

[Quof]

Guests do not pay, for anything, at an event that is being hosted.   A wedding reception is a big dinner party. Would you invite people to dinner at your house, and charge them for alcohol?  Of course not.  Don't serve alcohol, if you don't want to, for whatever reason.  People can go for a few hours without a drink.   If you choose to serve it, serve what you can afford.  If your guests complain they don't like the selection, they're the rude ones.  

[NutMeg]

20 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

I had a bunch of new light fixtures today.  I didn't realize how dim everything was before, I can see clearly now.....how badly I need to replace the carpet with new flooring. 

Me on a sunny day, looking at the mess I made on the French windows when until then I though I had done a job job cleaning them - how on earth do you clean these monsters????

18 hours ago, Bastet said:

I agree that's the point of a wedding.  I don't agree it's true of a reception (but omit expensive, as that's not necessary).  I think any time you host an event, you should be a host.  What that means varies by event - what it's for and when/where it's held - but I'd no more have people over to watch a football game without offering soda, beer, and snacks than I'd put on a Saturday night wedding reception without providing dinner and a bar.  Or anything in between.  (And, of course, the flip side is most people attending will bring something in appreciation, again appropriate to the scale of the event, but that's beside the point for me.)

Agree about being a good host when you are the host. Back in the 60s, my mum was very impressed that my paternal grandfather, a teetotaller, always offered good Champagne and wines to his guests.

I never got the point of spending more than you can afford for a big splashy wedding. I'd go for a lavish holiday if you really want to splurge, and dinners with family and friends (dinners, plural, because it might work better to separate those for different vibes). Maybe the internet is to blame, I would have thought Hollywood and the big wedding movies who I think the industry that has emerged around wedding must be grateful for, but as I'm not on social media, it's possible that it's even more hyped there.

My youngest brother in law was despairing about how much was going to be spent for his big event of a wedding, but went with it because as the last one to marry, he felt he owed it to his parents (none of his siblings had gone for the huge all-extended-family wedding, which seem to be a huge thing for them).   

[SunnyBeBe]

Peeve:  People who spend months planning elaborate birthday parties for their kids, themes, venue, PRICEY cakes, huge guest list, etc., while putting ZERO time and effort into their kid's education and development.  And when they can't afford the basics. 

Edited February 7, 2018 by SunnyBeBe

[Zola]

Peeve - opening an "adult" birthday gift in front of family and close friends without prior warning!

I had my parents and some close relations round yesterday evening for a small birthday party. I opened cards and presents, and we really had a good old time.

Then my girlfriend gave me a some roses, chocolates and a  wrapped "small gift".

So I unwrapped it in front of everybody - as one would normally do in such circumstances - only to discover from the colour photos on the packaging, it was a adult "toy"!!

You could hardly hear a pin drop. There were one or two embarrassed chuckles, but I think my girlfriend very quickly realised she had made a huge error in judgement/taste/timing.

It kind of soured the rest of the evening, and now its a case of a lot of bridge-building needs to be done between her and everyone at my party.

I like surprise presents and cards etc, but to just hand me one to open in front of one's family and without any warning, was not only hugely embarrassing & disappointing, but incredibly annoying that someone would find that funny.

[SunnyBeBe]

Zola, I might be peeved too.  Do you know your girlfriend well?  Perhaps a momentary lapse of judgment....?

[Zola]

1 minute ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Zola, I might be peeved too.  Do you know your girlfriend well?  Perhaps a momentary lapse of judgment....?

Just a few weeks really. She's okay I guess: bit of a political live-wire at times, and doesn't know when to shut the hell up once she's on a roll. But am learning new things about her nearly every day, most of them quite positive. But last night's faux-pas was a real opener! Perhaps she just misjudged the relatively conservative lifestyles my parents keep. And oddly my g/f hasn't really apologised other than saying "oops, my bad!" and shrugging it off.

Of course that moment from last night will stick with all and sundry forever and a day!

[Blergh]

Look at the bright side, Zola: at least your girlfriend realized she made a terrible judgment call rather than got defensive  that everyone else didn't think it was a hilarious or apt gift. I've seen friendships end due to having very different tastes and refusing to acknowledge others' rights to agree to disagree about them.

 

Oh while we're on the subject of booze and wing dings: I don't see why there's any need to serve alcohol (and especially get drunk) where it's known that minors are attending. Either don't have minors there if one drinks or wait till they're gone to get hammered (and I'd also expand that courtesy to the elderly  and others who one may have good reason to want to respect the feelings of re being exposed to altered states).

[MrSmith]

17 hours ago, ZaldamoWilder said:

Do you think they interpreted this as "he didn't want us to come" or "it was my decision and he made it for me"?  or some other perception....?     

Ya'lls first Thanksgiving afterwards....

Well, I suppose they probably interpreted it as "he didn't want us to come". And LOL at the gif. My mother has disliked my wife since I started dating her, though she seems to be warming up to her the last couple of years. Visits with my parents are considerably more enjoyable than they have been previously.

[SunnyBeBe]

Sometimes, you have to rebuild trust. That takes time. 

[PRgal]

Re the whole "big, splashy wedding" thing:  It isn't necessarily the so-called "wedding industry," but sometimes, FAMILY, due to cultural reasons.  Some cultures (Italian, Indian, Chinese and Jewish (or at least Eastern European/Ashkenazi communities), for example) have had "big, splashy" weddings for decades - at least decades before Anglo North Americans did.  My mom's friend was SHOCKED that I didn't have three dress changes (only one and no Chinese dress) nor did I wear a Chinese bride's bracelet.  I wasn't given much gold, either.  Why?  Because I hate accessories.  And at 5'2" and a size 0, I'd look ridiculous!

[peacheslatour]

2 hours ago, PRgal said:

Re the whole "big, splashy wedding" thing:  It isn't necessarily the so-called "wedding industry," but sometimes, FAMILY, due to cultural reasons.  Some cultures (Italian, Indian, Chinese and Jewish (or at least Eastern European/Ashkenazi communities), for example) have had "big, splashy" weddings for decades - at least decades before Anglo North Americans did.  My mom's friend was SHOCKED that I didn't have three dress changes (only one and no Chinese dress) nor did I wear a Chinese bride's bracelet.  I wasn't given much gold, either.  Why?  Because I hate accessories.  And at 5'2" and a size 0, I'd look ridiculous!

I had three changes of clothes only because the thing took the whole day. I had my wedding dress, the dress I wore to the reception and the tank top and jeans I wore on the plane. And here is something that will probably get me flamed. I wore my wedding dress to the reception at the church but changed into a red party dress to wear the reception at the club. I think there's something unattractive and unseemly about cavorting around at the reception in a wedding gown.

[harrie]

26 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

I had three changes of clothes only because the thing took the whole day. I had my wedding dress, the dress I wore to the reception and the tank top and jeans I wore on the plane. And here is something that will probably get me flamed. I wore my wedding dress to the reception at the church but changed into a red party dress to wear the reception at the club. I think there's something unattractive and unseemly about cavorting around at the reception in a wedding gown.

I don't know about unseemly or unattractive, but depending on the complexity, cut and possibly weight of one's wedding dress, who wants to haul around in that thing for hours?  You might as well be comfortable and enjoy yourself at your own wedding reception.  (But red -- you Jezebel!)

[peacheslatour]

26 minutes ago, harrie said:

I don't know about unseemly or unattractive, but depending on the complexity, cut and possibly weight of one's wedding dress, who wants to haul around in that thing for hours?  You might as well be comfortable and enjoy yourself at your own wedding reception.  (But red -- you Jezebel!)

I guess it's because I had seen too many drunken brides wearing what I consider a sacred garment while reeling around like sailors on leave.

Hey, I wanted to wear a red dress at the wedding itself but my DH vetoed that. Funnily enough years later he said he regretted it and said it would actually have been cool.

Edited February 7, 2018 by peacheslatour

[NutMeg]

4 hours ago, PRgal said:

Re the whole "big, splashy wedding" thing:  It isn't necessarily the so-called "wedding industry," but sometimes, FAMILY, due to cultural reasons.  Some cultures (Italian, Indian, Chinese and Jewish (or at least Eastern European/Ashkenazi communities), for example) have had "big, splashy" weddings for decades - at least decades before Anglo North Americans did.  My mom's friend was SHOCKED that I didn't have three dress changes (only one and no Chinese dress) nor did I wear a Chinese bride's bracelet.  I wasn't given much gold, either.  Why?  Because I hate accessories.  And at 5'2" and a size 0, I'd look ridiculous!

If I had gone with the tradition on my father's side, my wedding would have lasted at least 4 days (the cheap version) and have requested at least 12 outfits, if we were playing it low key. And of course, counting extended family, about 400 guests just on my paternal side.

On my mother's side, the wedding would have been one day only. Get family, extended optional, feed them a fantastic meal, collect your gift and voilà!

My hubby's side was the weirdest: in his culture the bride has to pretend to be kidnapped by the groom....???

Yeah, we went with the simplest one, one day wedding, just close friends and relatives, but now I'm thinking that the big hoopla could have been much more fun,as the marriage didn't last anyhow   

[PRgal]

5 minutes ago, NutMeg said:

If I had gone with the tradition on my father's side, my wedding would have lasted at least 4 days (the cheap version) and have requested at least 12 outfits, if we were playing it low key. And of course, counting extended family, about 400 guests just on my paternal side.

On my mother's side, the wedding would have been one day only. Get family, extended optional, feed them a fantastic meal, collect your gift and voilà!

My hubby's side was the weirdest: in his culture the bride has to pretend to be kidnapped by the groom....???

Yeah, we went with the simplest one, one day wedding, just close friends and relatives, but now I'm thinking that the big hoopla could have been much more fun,as the marriage didn't last anyhow   

Indian?

[NutMeg]

3 minutes ago, PRgal said:

Indian?

Nope. Moroccan.

[NutMeg]

1 hour ago, harrie said:

I don't know about unseemly or unattractive, but depending on the complexity, cut and possibly weight of one's wedding dress, who wants to haul around in that thing for hours?  You might as well be comfortable and enjoy yourself at your own wedding reception.  (But red -- you Jezebel!)

Red is  the color to have in Chinese culture!

[Zola]

On the subject of weddings, I would dearly love a fancy white wedding at a church. But of course being lesbian does create some awkward problems of its own, not least: do we both wear gowns? do we both need engagement rings? who gives us away? Can we change the marriage vows so we're not pronounced "wife and wife"? Will we need two bridesmaids? etc.

It has the potential to be quite a complicated affair trying to realign/reorganise the protocols of a traditional white wedding twixt a straight couple, for our own needs. But above all else I  really really hope to see a photo or two of my future companion and myself standing outside the church dressed in our gowns and enjoying the day with all and sundry.  

[DeLurker]

7 hours ago, Zola said:

But above all else I  really really hope to see a photo or two of my future companion and myself standing outside the church dressed in our gowns and enjoying the day with all and sundry.  

I hope that happens too - if that is what you and your future companion want.  I don't think adhering to conventional traditions should constrain a ceremony between two people who are committing to each other.

[Blergh]

Zola,

 Unless one has decided that one's companion's other attributes make their quirks and annoyances worth enduring (and vice versa re the companion) , I would advise against planning any kind of wedding just yet!

 

That said; however, since bonds between two folks of the same gender being considered having legal rights is unconventional in itself, I would suggest that that would give you and whoever you choose to spend the rest of your life with the options of being unconventional re the ceremony commemorating this . Lily Tomlin once claimed that she and her longtime companion Jane Wagner would don chicken costumes for the ceremony but I'm not sure they went through with this when they actually got married. Perhaps you and whomever you should decide to wed could ask the officiator to pronounce the two of you ' loving, official companions'.

 

Oh, to keep this ontopic, I much prefer the term 'companion' to 'partner' re folks living together who have not gotten married. I mean, the former sounds more dedicated and intimate, IMO.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Blergh
period

[Quof]

When some one says "partner", I wonder:  Are they lawyers? or gay? or cowboys?

[PRgal]

10 hours ago, Zola said:

On the subject of weddings, I would dearly love a fancy white wedding at a church. But of course being lesbian does create some awkward problems of its own, not least: do we both wear gowns? do we both need engagement rings? who gives us away? Can we change the marriage vows so we're not pronounced "wife and wife"? Will we need two bridesmaids? etc.

It has the potential to be quite a complicated affair trying to realign/reorganise the protocols of a traditional white wedding twixt a straight couple, for our own needs. But above all else I  really really hope to see a photo or two of my future companion and myself standing outside the church dressed in our gowns and enjoying the day with all and sundry.  

I've seen female same-sex weddings where both the brides wear white gowns.  And people can be pronounced whatever they want to be pronounced and even have mixed wedding parties (I've been to a couple of heterosexual weddings where they had "bridesmen" and "groomswomen").  As for who gives you away - again, do whatever you want.  Both my parents walked me down the aisle.  

[peacheslatour]

We did away with the "husband" and "wife" and were just pronounced married.

[TattleTeeny]

On 2/7/2018 at 5:42 PM, peacheslatour said:

Hey, I wanted to wear a red dress at the wedding itself but my DH vetoed that. Funnily enough years later he said he regretted it and said it would actually have been cool.

If it happens, I'm going full-on leopard, man. 

Also, none of my family or friends would feel snubbed if I had a cash bar, invited guests or not. Guess I'm lucky, if tacky, haha!

[backformore]

20 hours ago, Zola said:

On the subject of weddings, I would dearly love a fancy white wedding at a church. But of course being lesbian does create some awkward problems of its own, not least: do we both wear gowns? do we both need engagement rings? who gives us away? Can we change the marriage vows so we're not pronounced "wife and wife"? Will we need two bridesmaids? etc.

It has the potential to be quite a complicated affair trying to realign/reorganise the protocols of a traditional white wedding twixt a straight couple, for our own needs. But above all else I  really really hope to see a photo or two of my future companion and myself standing outside the church dressed in our gowns and enjoying the day with all and sundry.  

You wear what you want - if it's two brides in bride dresses, fine. if one of you wants to wear a tux, or a pantsuit, do that.  "Giving away" a bride is a dated concept, just have whomever you want walk you down the aisle - or walk yourselves.   The wedding vows can be whatever you want, I vote for being pronounced "married."  Bridesmaids?  How about just "attendants" - male or female, just whatever best friends or siblings the two of you have.  No need to match them up in male/female partners, just do what you want.  

Think about it - two women getting married is going to be somewhat unconventional.  So you get to choose what traditions you like and which ones you don't.  I bet you can find photos online of various LGBTQ weddings.    huffpost 2017 weddings

Edited February 9, 2018 by backformore

[Bastet]

9 minutes ago, backformore said:

"Giving away" a bride is a dated concept, just have whomever you want walk you down the aisle - or walk yourselves.

Yes.  I remember when a cousin had both her parents walk her down the aisle about 30 years ago (I was a "guestbook attendant," whatever the fuck that is, but there were two of us, and our moms made our dresses to coordinate with the color [pink, ugh - think Steel Magnolia's Shelby for the resulting look]), it was A Thing among many for her to have bucked tradition by having both parents accompany her. 

Fast forward to when the friends of my generation who married (all of my close friends rejected marriage - like really does attract like, it seems - but I experienced some second-tier friends' weddings) did so, and most brides, offended by the "giving away" concept, opted to either walk down the aisle alone or with their spouse-to-be, and all but one of the few who were accompanied had both parents escort them (and omitted any "who gives this woman ..." verbiage, and had the groom escorted down the aisle by his parents, too).

[Zola]

Thanks everyone, for the good advice.  Even though same-sex marriages have been legal in England since 2013, but it is still quite difficult to get married in a Church of England church, which still opposes the concept of gay marriage (but will accept blessings!) But perhaps over time the Anglican church here will finally get its act together and relent. 

And I love the word "companion" over partner, or even wife, to be honest. Although I would still need to find out what is written on marriage certificates when it comes to titles (not overly keen on "Mrs" or "Ms").

But anyway, am not quite ready for marriage just yet, but wedding gowns & marriage rings do make me yearn for things to happen sooner rather than later.

[Maharincess]

On 2/6/2018 at 2:51 PM, bilgistic said:

Recently, I read an opinion somewhere that compared to child abuse some religious teaching like I was brought up in. (Not all religion is that way.) In the hellfire-and-brimstone Southern Baptist church I was raised in in the 1970s and 1980s, it was a constant message of "if you don't give yourself to God, you will burn in Hell" or "if you commit this sin, you will burn in Hell". And the ever-present "the rapture is coming, so be prepared; you don't want to be left behind. You don't know who of your friends and family will be left behind."

That is TERRIFYING for a child. There are horrifying movies that we were made to watch during "lock-ins" (highly supervised youth slumber parties, usually held at a rec center). The movies show post-apocalyptic scenes and fiery hellscapes with people screaming in agony, and are supposed to scare you to come to Jesus.

All any of this did was terrify me, give me nightmares, make me question everything, and ultimately turn me off organized religion forever.

The family members of mine who are most religious are the most judgmental and unforgiving. There's no way of thinking other than their own, and no room for trying to understand others' situation.

Anyway! @Maharincess, how is your "niece" doing?

She's doing well. Scared to death because she's very close to having the baby and her asshole parents still won't speak to her. 

[bilgistic]

I'm so sorry for her. Her parents are very ignorant and will perhaps come to regret their behavior in time. Not only are they missing out on their child's life, they will now be missing out on their grandchild's life.

I'm so glad she has you.

[backformore]

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:51 PM, bilgistic said:

The family members of mine who are most religious are the most judgmental and unforgiving. There's no way of thinking other than their own, and no room for trying to understand others' situation.

Isn't it weird?  My family is like that.  the ones who go to church on Sunday, or at least the ones who always bring it up in conversation, NEVER let you forget that they go to church, are the ones who are mean, spiteful, put others down, criticize, etc.  

[DeLurker]

9 hours ago, Maharincess said:

She's doing well. Scared to death because she's very close to having the baby and her asshole parents still won't speak to her. 

Right now her hormones are turbo charged and it is doubtful that her parents would say anything that would make her feel better.  It is very sad for her, but if they can't put aside their hate long enough to realize the hurt and damage they have done to their child, they are pathetic.

Right now she needs a Mama bear to be there for her, and that is you!

[Mindthinkr]

@Zola Belated Happy Birthday 

Weddings-Do what you want to do, not what others expect of you (well, as much as you can without offending family). In the end it’s your memory and you don’t want to have regrets, or should haves. As a guest I could care less if it’s a full or cash bar (even no bar). I’m there to watch people I care about begin a happy new chapter together. 

@Maharincess Please let us know when she’s had a safe delivery. I’ll send good wish papers into the sky for her and her newborn. 

[TattleTeeny]

Oh, this peeve: bubbles in the carpet! Of course they can't be sort of off in a corner somewhere that even painfully observant me could ignore for the most part. Nope--they're right in the open spaces! And they lead me down a path to an even more terrifying peeve: having them restretched. Just the idea of having to move EVERYTHING out of the way--basically dismantling the entire downstairs--is stressing me right out. I don't even care about the expense*--it's more how will I deal with two cats during such a clusterfuck?! And what if I can't get it back the way it was?! Oh my goodness, yuck!

* However, I laugh at this too; I mean, how privileged of a peeve is this? Am I a big diva? Maybe, but the whole disorder of it all legitimately causes me mild anguish!

[Mindthinkr]

@TattleTeeny Ha, I completely understand! I just stayed in a Historic Hotel and their carpet had those wrinkles. I was scared to death to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night lest I trip and fall. 

If yours is only downstairs, could you convince your kitties to just stay upstairs? Yes, I’d hate the hassle of having to dismantle my house to get it redone too. Good pet peeve. 

[TattleTeeny]

To be honest, the cats will probably hide out under the bed until they carpet guys get to the BR. They can go upstairs but there's no way to keep them there--though, again, they might voluntarily stay out of the way.

We have a smallish space and a lot of stuff. And I'm...particular. I don't mind what others would call "clutter"--cool tchotchkes, the BF's vintage spinning comic-book rack, 65 tons of books. But what's not cumbersome and heavy is small and delicate and treasured. It's like the work and chaos of packing to move...while staying in the same place!

That said, I am lucky. Not that many years ago, I had no choice but to live with the gnarly old carpet that came with whatever apartment I could afford. And even then, moving my one secondhand couch (as opposed to the set I bought new when I bought this place) would be no problem...provided it didn't fall apart in the process, haha!

Edited February 10, 2018 by TattleTeeny

[Mindthinkr]

11 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

To be honest, the cats will probably hide out under the bed

That’s what mine do when someone comes into the house that they don’t know. 

Having moved myself this past year I totally understand what you are talking about. Good luck with it all.