What annoys me about the invitation is that it really wasn't an invitation. It was an announcement that she and her live-in boyfriend are getting married in Mexico. It mentioned 'food, friends and lots of tequila.' The word 'family' seemed to be purposefully missing.
I realize that destination weddings are the 'in thing,' but really, why go through the facade of 'inviting' people that you know won't attend? Because seriously, none of the grandparents are physically able to travel that far and the rest of the extended family is just like us - we all have kids in school/college. Like we are going to drop everything next fall to fly down to Mexico for the weekend? Not to mention the cost of passports, plane tickets and hotel room. In my eyes, this is just a party in Mexico with friends who can afford to go. If they really were interested in having family celebrate with them, why not get married down there and after the honeymoon, have a reception back here? It smells of laziness and avoidance to me. Why not just call it what it is? A request for a wedding gift and nothing else!
I am smiling (not least at the cake-topper with which you illustrate your post; I have no doubt that it is real, and intended utterly without irony. . .)
ReplyDeleteYou touch on a couple of my pet peeves here, B. Our neice - the daughter of Jen's brother and his long-since-estranged first wife - recently 'invited' us to a destination wedding in Florida. In October, during the school year. . . Yeah, sorry, we can't come. But they did have 'back home' reception for all the 'little people' a month later. When Jen and I and such of our kids as could come arrived, the bride was very happy to see us, because she wanted us to have the honor of staying late to take down, while she and her buds partied elsewhere. . . I am not making this up. . .
And I know that, socially speaking, it's hardly unusual anymore, but weddings between folks who've been living together for two years just irk the hell out of me. There is no 'beginning', no 'consummation', or anything like that. No newlyweds hurrying off for some quiet intimacy on their wedding night - the couple are partying till dawn, along with everybody else. 'Cuz, you know, the sex is no big deal - why would it be?
But then, no doubt I'm showing my age. . .
I like the cake topper too!
ReplyDeleteI'm not into the whole destination wedding thing. My wedding was in my Wife's church that she grew up going to. Went to their Catholic school. And so on. It meant a lot to her.
Getting married on a beach, on a mountain, or in Vegas wouldn't have done it for her. Sure it would have been nice, but not as meaningful.
As to your niece, this reeks of present grubbing. (With a touch of, yes, we have to invite them, they are family after all.)
Craig - Isn't that the most tacky cake topper ever? I read a survey recently that reported that only 40% of newlyweds have sex on their wedding night. Sad.
ReplyDeleteRuss - Husband thinks it was more of an attempt to say, "Well, we invited them to our wedding, but they didn't come."
UPDATE: When I checked their resort wedding site, double occupancy STARTED at $400 per PERSON/night. Not kidding. But it did include your booze!
The starting room costs is one-fifth of what my total wedding budget was back in the old days! I wouldn't even send a card with money for a relationship like this, having no contact with the bride for years. Save the $3.95 plus postage for a card and put it toward a vacation fund for your own family!
ReplyDeletegood grief, i can't imagine being a young couple who can afford to have a LARGE destination wedding. if ya wanna run of and elope in mexico have at it but expecting everyone else to run off...get real.
ReplyDeleteOur Daughter planned her wedding out of the country somewhere, heck I don't even remember where now but to make a long story short after discussions with her Mom the Elvis wedding in Vegas was planned and a family gathering right here where Family could attend, it was a lot of fun and I think she was happier sharing her day rather than missing everyone who showed up.
ReplyDelete"A request for a wedding gift and nothing else!" I feel the same way on invitations like this.
I have to disagree with Craig about weddings after a couple has been living together. It's not my place to make an assessment about just how much sex a couple can have before they are no longer allowed to hold a celebration of their marriage. I'm a little more cynical about gifts for subsequent marriages, even if they remain chaste until the wedding night. (It's kind of like expecting blow-out baby showers for your second child.) And that 40% figure you cite is tragic - I had lived my my husband-to-be a year before we married but the wedding night was still very special and exciting.
ReplyDeleteAs for the invitation, it's looks like a gift request and I ignore gift requests.
FADKOG - It's our silver anniversary this year, so I will save the money for our own trip.
ReplyDeleteLime - I wasn't surprised because the girl has always been rather spoiled and thinks that the USA is provincial. Whatever!
Jimmy - I don't have a problem with someone wanting to get married elsewhere. It's the acting as though cost is no object for the rest of us that kills me.
Agent - I believe the no-sex-wedding-night statistic was more of a too stressed/tired/drunk from having a Bridezilla wedding than from a 'sex is old hat' standpoint. I think weddings have gotten out of hand, but so have first communions and graduation parties too.
Eh, big whoop. That's what the woodstove is for: free BTUs from useless junk mail. :-)
ReplyDeleteFolks like that are punchlines around here, we strive to give 'em no more power than that. We don't always succeed but that's another story, family peace and alla that.
I've long believed there should be 2 classes of marriage: 'Married', which covers this sort of casual thingy and other less stringent unions (you know, no rules-just-right), and 'hitched' for the more traditional and intentional till-death-do-us-part, committed until cold deal.
And yeah, the no-sex on wedding night? More common than you'd believe. I think 40% is low. That's not to say the NO sexual activity occurs, rather that the concept of consummation in the traditional sense does not occur.
Like I've said before, it's amazing the things you learn when you try to assist struggling marriages. And, you know, I could be the 40% club president. But don't pass that on ....
well if they sent you a request for a wedding gift it might appear rude. They do not seem like that kind of people ;)
ReplyDeleteHi!
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to stop by and say thank you for dropping by my blog. It was so nice meeting you!
"If they really were interested in having family celebrate with them, why not get married down there and after the honeymoon, have a reception back here?"
I sooooooo have to chime in with you on that. I mean how many people can afford to FLY somewhere and pay for a hotel room???
"Why not just call it what it is? A request for a wedding gift and nothing else!"
Exactly!
And I agree with you, weddings have gotten WAY out of hand.
Xavier - You make getting 'hitched' sound like so much fun!
ReplyDeleteJK - You always have a unique outlook on life and people! Love it.
Ron - Thanks for stopping by my place too :)
Oh it is, getting hitched is the second-highest category of my three levels of commitment bliss. Some would argue it;s the best of both worlds.
ReplyDelete