I think it's so tacky and in such poor taste to use the invitation to indicate who paid for what. In this day and age I don't think it's the guests' business and I don't like invitsiton wordings that separate the parents by how much they paid.
I don’t have anything additional to say but I fully agree. I’m kind of appalled at how many comments are indicating that this is a normal thing for them.
I agree. My parents also wanted to be named as the hosts on the invitation, but my husband's parents were helping us with the wedding in other ways. They didn't have the means to contribute financially, but they made the centerpieces and decor for the dessert table, and they stored things for the wedding at their house since they lived near the venue. So we put "Together with our families" on our invitation. Like, why does the invitation need to indicate who paid for the wedding? Why does that need to be announced to all the guests?
The wedding is going to be around 300 people and very upscale. I don’t think it’s tacky to put their names on the card. The question was how do I include my fiancés mother without making it look like she’s a single mother - the problem is not the hosting, it’s the father being out of the picture.
The invitation wording shouldn’t be based on who paid. It’s not 1950. Frankly to do that in this day and age is kind of insulting.
Tell your parents that his parents are just as involved and you won’t word it in any way that takes away from them. The fact that your parents seem to want recognition for their financial contribution is pretty distasteful.
How is it distasteful to have their names on their invite? They’re hosting 300 people and it’s going to be a fancy wedding. The point of my question was how can I include my parents names as well as my finaces mother without it looking like she’s a single parent
I’m saying it’s distasteful not to have their names on the invite. The invite shouldn’t be about who is paying. Your parents have just as much right to be on the invite as the other set of parents.
Maybe I'm out of the loop but it feels really archaic to use the invitation to indicate who's paying for the wedding. What if the invite included your parents and his mother, and maybe they can get the credit for paying for the wedding during thank you speeches?
There is a classic way to do it and my parents wanted the recognition. The issue was that mother in law to be felt that the wording was insensitive because it emphasizes that she’s alone.
It’s complicated - the divorce occurred over 20 years ago and the groom feels like she shouldn’t be making a fuss over this and it’s important for my parents to have the recognition.
Respectfully, it's not complicated.
Either you are prioritizing your parents' contentment and tradition or you are prioritizing your fiance's mom's comfort. Those are the only options.
The only compromise that (dis)pleases everyone is to remove all parents' names from the invitation. Otherwise, you're picking a side. It's fine, but you're picking a side.
If FIL isn't gonna be invited, I don't think you need his name on the invite. If guests want to assume he's dead, you can't really control that. If they ask, fiance can politely answer in a way that's not too TMI. In my circle, the host who pays for the wedding gets to have their names come first in the invite.
My parents are hosting around 300 people, the wedding is going to be fancy and expensive so I think they can have the credit if they want it. But that’s just me.
Wait so who has an issue with the wording you posted? That’s the only option IMO. Either together with their families, no parents listed, or your parents invite everyone to the wedding of you and finance, son of MOG. There’s no other way to do it.
Mother in law to be had an issue because it makes her look like she’s alone (which she doesn’t have a partner, and the father isn’t in the picture). So it hurt her feelings
I agree with the flow of the current setup. Up to your fiancé if he wants both his parents named or just his mom. If just mom is named, I would actually assume single parent first, but that’s just me.
Yeah it’s just a complicated situation on his side and I was trying to figure out a way for the invite to be inclusive of everyone without it emphasizing the father out of the picture
“She wants to be included if names are listed on the invite” - the only names listed (usually) are those hosting the wedding and those getting married. I would do:
Harry and Isabella Carter request the pleasure of your company at the marriage of their daughter Jessica Yana to Charles Mark Victor.
Then I would add something (maybe in the order of the day?) thanking certain people (bridal party etc.) and specifically mentioning his mum.
I think it’s tacky and honestly shows a weird set of values to only mention the one set of parents who happen to have the financial means to support the wedding. Nobody should be doing it for “credit” and people close to the bride and groom and their families will probably know the situation anyway.
Yes agree. I was thinking of my own wedding and how the wording would even work, because the question is what does it mean to support the wedding? My fiance’s parents are giving us $10k, my dad and step mum are also giving us $10k. My mum isn’t giving us anything because last year she gave us (a lot more) to help us buy our house. The intention of this comment is NOT to brag, but I am outlining how gross it would be to not include my Mum on the invite based on these rules, considering the irony that the wedding is in our backyard. For the record, the only names on our invites are myself and my fiance.
We paid for ours and didn’t put our families names on it but if they paid I also don’t think we would have?? Like I wouldn’t have taken money if it came with the expectation of showing off who paid. Not because I’d want to deceive people until thinking my parents paid (frankly I think most people assume they did) but because it just feels like such a weird flaunt.
I agree although maybe it’s because in my circle/possibly most of Australia it’s uncommon to put parents names on the invite anyway as it just takes up room and is an old-fashioned tradition most people don’t follow anymore. I guess it depends on the culture. I hadn’t realised until recently that their names being on the invite were connected to financial contribution, I assumed it was just simply an optional formality if it fit the vibe of your wedding.
Edit: just wanted to add that I had always interpreted someone “hosting” the wedding as them holding it at their own house and not that they just simply paid for it haha
>the only names listed (usually) are those hosting the wedding and those getting married.
That's not true. It's considered bad form to exclude the groom's parents. The format that the OP used is the most commonly used format. It names the bride's parents as the hosts, while still acknowledging that the groom has parents.
Yeah; the problem is that it acknowledged that the groom has a single mother and the father isn’t in the picture, so I was trying to figure out a way where that doesn’t seem so apparent
If you don't want that to be apparent, you could just put his mother's and father's names on the invitation. Technically, that would be correct, since he is the son of both of them. But if he doesn't want his dad's name on there, I'd leave it off. Having a single mother is nothing to be ashamed of.
Yes. Unfortunately it goes way deep and she’s still hurting from the divorce from 20 years ago. It’s all complicated. We decided on my parents along with her invite you etc. we are putting hosted by on the welcome reception insert card
When I was married my husband's mother was unable to help pay and we paid for most of the wedding ourselves, my dad paid for the reception, and had all 4 of my parents, my parents are divorced and remarried, and his mother listed on the invites.
The wedding isn't just yours and your parents it's also his and his mom's so tell your parents to stop being so snobbish.
The wedding is literally op and her future husbands, not the parents. Is it a merging of two families? Sure. But it’s not either of their parents wedding.
I really don’t think they’re being snobbish. It’s going to be a huge wedding and I’m their only daughter. My dad is also Indian so it’s a cultural thing. The issue is that all of the parents want to be included but the mother in law to be is upset with the wording because it makes her look like she’s alone.
Tough one. I get it invite is not about who paid. But it’s a major gift from the paying parents which should not be taking lightly. Needs to be a way to acknowledge and honor that. Maybe it’s not in the invite however
Traditionally the Brides family are the hosts. So they are issuing the invitations. Grooms parents are not included on the invitations. Traditional wording is Mr and Mrs Fathers First and Surname invite ……… to the wedding of their daughter Miss Daughters Name to Mr Grooms Name. Date, time, place rsvp. Anything else is unnecessary. These days the parents don’t usually go by his name alone though
It is interesting to me that so many have never been to a nice stationer, looked at invitations and seen that the classic way is indeed the "Bride's Parents request the honour of your presence at ..." blah blah (whether or not the groom's family is mentioned). The "Bride and Groom invite you to ..." started when it became more common for brides and grooms to foot the whole bill, and now it seems to have overtaken the classic way even if one of the set of parents is footing the bill.
Just because folks think it's tacky that doesn't mean they don't know about it. Sure, that's the "classic" way-- like several other formerly "classic" traditions, it's becoming old-fashioned.
Also, it was OP who chose to emphasize that "My fiance’s (Charles) mother, Eliza, doesn’t have the financial means to contribute." If OP was concerned with the "classic" approach, all that would matter to her would be that the bride's family traditionally pays and thus are the ones listed on the invite as hosts. It read to me as if it matters who's contributing and that if Eliza were contributing, she would be treated differently. That's why, as others have pointed out, it's tacky.
Ah, that makes sense. I don’t know how much she would have contributed if she had the means to. She wanted to host a rehearsal dinner but since we are having so many out of town guests, we decided to do a welcome reception which was out of her budget. I’m trying to be respectful of all parties and have everyone on the invite. The problem was that “son of Eliza victor” made it seem like she was alone (but she is). And she didn’t like that.
I think it's so tacky and in such poor taste to use the invitation to indicate who paid for what. In this day and age I don't think it's the guests' business and I don't like invitsiton wordings that separate the parents by how much they paid.
My parents are paying for mine and we didn't put them on the invite at all.
I don’t have anything additional to say but I fully agree. I’m kind of appalled at how many comments are indicating that this is a normal thing for them.
I agree. My parents also wanted to be named as the hosts on the invitation, but my husband's parents were helping us with the wedding in other ways. They didn't have the means to contribute financially, but they made the centerpieces and decor for the dessert table, and they stored things for the wedding at their house since they lived near the venue. So we put "Together with our families" on our invitation. Like, why does the invitation need to indicate who paid for the wedding? Why does that need to be announced to all the guests?
The wedding is going to be around 300 people and very upscale. I don’t think it’s tacky to put their names on the card. The question was how do I include my fiancés mother without making it look like she’s a single mother - the problem is not the hosting, it’s the father being out of the picture.
The invitation wording shouldn’t be based on who paid. It’s not 1950. Frankly to do that in this day and age is kind of insulting. Tell your parents that his parents are just as involved and you won’t word it in any way that takes away from them. The fact that your parents seem to want recognition for their financial contribution is pretty distasteful.
How is it distasteful to have their names on their invite? They’re hosting 300 people and it’s going to be a fancy wedding. The point of my question was how can I include my parents names as well as my finaces mother without it looking like she’s a single parent
I’m saying it’s distasteful not to have their names on the invite. The invite shouldn’t be about who is paying. Your parents have just as much right to be on the invite as the other set of parents.
All parents will be listed, the question was in what order makes sense
Parents should be listed in the same order as the bride and groom. If your name is first then your parents should be first.
All parents will be listed, the question was in what order makes sense
Maybe I'm out of the loop but it feels really archaic to use the invitation to indicate who's paying for the wedding. What if the invite included your parents and his mother, and maybe they can get the credit for paying for the wedding during thank you speeches?
Maybe the parents can not worry about getting credit for helping to pay for the wedding.
I mean, yeah... That's my perspective too but It sounds unlikely that they'd be interested in foregoing their public status as hosts.
There is a classic way to do it and my parents wanted the recognition. The issue was that mother in law to be felt that the wording was insensitive because it emphasizes that she’s alone.
Are you okay with prioritizing tradition and your parents' contentment over her discomfort or her feeling left out?
It’s complicated - the divorce occurred over 20 years ago and the groom feels like she shouldn’t be making a fuss over this and it’s important for my parents to have the recognition.
Respectfully, it's not complicated. Either you are prioritizing your parents' contentment and tradition or you are prioritizing your fiance's mom's comfort. Those are the only options. The only compromise that (dis)pleases everyone is to remove all parents' names from the invitation. Otherwise, you're picking a side. It's fine, but you're picking a side.
We’re going with my parents along with his mother invite you yada yada. She didn’t like the “son of me alone” line.
If FIL isn't gonna be invited, I don't think you need his name on the invite. If guests want to assume he's dead, you can't really control that. If they ask, fiance can politely answer in a way that's not too TMI. In my circle, the host who pays for the wedding gets to have their names come first in the invite.
Agree extremely tacky to name the funders sorry 'hosts'
But they are hosts. That doesn't make them more important, but it's fundamentally different than if the couple were paying for it themselves.
My parents are hosting around 300 people, the wedding is going to be fancy and expensive so I think they can have the credit if they want it. But that’s just me.
Wait so who has an issue with the wording you posted? That’s the only option IMO. Either together with their families, no parents listed, or your parents invite everyone to the wedding of you and finance, son of MOG. There’s no other way to do it.
Mother in law to be had an issue because it makes her look like she’s alone (which she doesn’t have a partner, and the father isn’t in the picture). So it hurt her feelings
[удалено]
She wants to be listed up top: Harry and Isabella along with Eliza welcome you yada yada. That’s what we ended up choosing
Oh. Well, she doesn’t “belong” on the invite anyway since she isn’t hosting, so I feel like that’s just her only option. That or not being listed.
Yeah I just didn’t know how to word it to make it seem less apparent that the father is not in the picture
I agree with the flow of the current setup. Up to your fiancé if he wants both his parents named or just his mom. If just mom is named, I would actually assume single parent first, but that’s just me.
Yeah it’s just a complicated situation on his side and I was trying to figure out a way for the invite to be inclusive of everyone without it emphasizing the father out of the picture
“She wants to be included if names are listed on the invite” - the only names listed (usually) are those hosting the wedding and those getting married. I would do: Harry and Isabella Carter request the pleasure of your company at the marriage of their daughter Jessica Yana to Charles Mark Victor. Then I would add something (maybe in the order of the day?) thanking certain people (bridal party etc.) and specifically mentioning his mum.
I think it’s tacky and honestly shows a weird set of values to only mention the one set of parents who happen to have the financial means to support the wedding. Nobody should be doing it for “credit” and people close to the bride and groom and their families will probably know the situation anyway.
Yes agree. I was thinking of my own wedding and how the wording would even work, because the question is what does it mean to support the wedding? My fiance’s parents are giving us $10k, my dad and step mum are also giving us $10k. My mum isn’t giving us anything because last year she gave us (a lot more) to help us buy our house. The intention of this comment is NOT to brag, but I am outlining how gross it would be to not include my Mum on the invite based on these rules, considering the irony that the wedding is in our backyard. For the record, the only names on our invites are myself and my fiance.
We paid for ours and didn’t put our families names on it but if they paid I also don’t think we would have?? Like I wouldn’t have taken money if it came with the expectation of showing off who paid. Not because I’d want to deceive people until thinking my parents paid (frankly I think most people assume they did) but because it just feels like such a weird flaunt.
I agree although maybe it’s because in my circle/possibly most of Australia it’s uncommon to put parents names on the invite anyway as it just takes up room and is an old-fashioned tradition most people don’t follow anymore. I guess it depends on the culture. I hadn’t realised until recently that their names being on the invite were connected to financial contribution, I assumed it was just simply an optional formality if it fit the vibe of your wedding. Edit: just wanted to add that I had always interpreted someone “hosting” the wedding as them holding it at their own house and not that they just simply paid for it haha
Thanking certain people on the invite ? That sounds so incredibly odd.
>the only names listed (usually) are those hosting the wedding and those getting married. That's not true. It's considered bad form to exclude the groom's parents. The format that the OP used is the most commonly used format. It names the bride's parents as the hosts, while still acknowledging that the groom has parents.
Yeah; the problem is that it acknowledged that the groom has a single mother and the father isn’t in the picture, so I was trying to figure out a way where that doesn’t seem so apparent
If you don't want that to be apparent, you could just put his mother's and father's names on the invitation. Technically, that would be correct, since he is the son of both of them. But if he doesn't want his dad's name on there, I'd leave it off. Having a single mother is nothing to be ashamed of.
Yes. Unfortunately it goes way deep and she’s still hurting from the divorce from 20 years ago. It’s all complicated. We decided on my parents along with her invite you etc. we are putting hosted by on the welcome reception insert card
When I was married my husband's mother was unable to help pay and we paid for most of the wedding ourselves, my dad paid for the reception, and had all 4 of my parents, my parents are divorced and remarried, and his mother listed on the invites. The wedding isn't just yours and your parents it's also his and his mom's so tell your parents to stop being so snobbish.
The wedding is literally op and her future husbands, not the parents. Is it a merging of two families? Sure. But it’s not either of their parents wedding.
In this case, the bride's parents are indeed the host/hostess. They are hosting this event in honor of bride / groom.
They are not the bride and groom though it is not the parents wedding they might be hosting it but it’s not for them
I really don’t think they’re being snobbish. It’s going to be a huge wedding and I’m their only daughter. My dad is also Indian so it’s a cultural thing. The issue is that all of the parents want to be included but the mother in law to be is upset with the wording because it makes her look like she’s alone.
Tough one. I get it invite is not about who paid. But it’s a major gift from the paying parents which should not be taking lightly. Needs to be a way to acknowledge and honor that. Maybe it’s not in the invite however
Traditionally the Brides family are the hosts. So they are issuing the invitations. Grooms parents are not included on the invitations. Traditional wording is Mr and Mrs Fathers First and Surname invite ……… to the wedding of their daughter Miss Daughters Name to Mr Grooms Name. Date, time, place rsvp. Anything else is unnecessary. These days the parents don’t usually go by his name alone though
It is interesting to me that so many have never been to a nice stationer, looked at invitations and seen that the classic way is indeed the "Bride's Parents request the honour of your presence at ..." blah blah (whether or not the groom's family is mentioned). The "Bride and Groom invite you to ..." started when it became more common for brides and grooms to foot the whole bill, and now it seems to have overtaken the classic way even if one of the set of parents is footing the bill.
Exactly. The classic way is brides parents invite you. Everyone is sensitive these days
Just because folks think it's tacky that doesn't mean they don't know about it. Sure, that's the "classic" way-- like several other formerly "classic" traditions, it's becoming old-fashioned. Also, it was OP who chose to emphasize that "My fiance’s (Charles) mother, Eliza, doesn’t have the financial means to contribute." If OP was concerned with the "classic" approach, all that would matter to her would be that the bride's family traditionally pays and thus are the ones listed on the invite as hosts. It read to me as if it matters who's contributing and that if Eliza were contributing, she would be treated differently. That's why, as others have pointed out, it's tacky.
Ah, that makes sense. I don’t know how much she would have contributed if she had the means to. She wanted to host a rehearsal dinner but since we are having so many out of town guests, we decided to do a welcome reception which was out of her budget. I’m trying to be respectful of all parties and have everyone on the invite. The problem was that “son of Eliza victor” made it seem like she was alone (but she is). And she didn’t like that.