Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

Original poster

to think that 3 day weddings aren't always self indulgent?

22 replies

yetanotherstatistic · 04/07/2013 22:22

I have noticed that there seems to be a general feeling that 3 day weddings are loathed and considered hopelessly "me, me, me".

My own wedding was a 3 day event and I thought I'd been thoughtful not self indulgent . Most people were driving a long way from all over the UK to get there (another black mark I know but wherever we had got married would have been difficult for some guests), For this reason there were no stag/hen dos so that guests weren't forking out twice. We just said we would be in a pub the night before the wedding so we could welcome friends and family and relax before the big day. The day after the wedding we hosted a BBQ at lunchtime so that people could get a meal (at our expense) before setting off for home because of the distances they were travelling, plus there was more time to make sure we had had a decent chat with everyone who had put themselves out to come. Children were invited.

All of it was entirely optional and very casual. Lots of people came to the BBQ and it went on far longer than we had expected. It was lovely to sit back and watch all the different groups of family and friends catching up.

So MN jury - was I deluding myself that I was being thoughtful?

OP posts:

badguider · 04/07/2013 22:25

I agree with you - we did a whole weekend as many people were travelling a long way. I lived in london for years but am from and had moved back to scotland before the wedding and my husband is scottish too so that's where we married. My friends from London mainly had young families and didn't have to come but we organised affordable accommodation and invited them all for the whole weekend within relatively easy reach of an airport and train station and they all came and had a great time.
To invite them for just a few hours seemed more selfish imo.

PrincessFiorimonde · 04/07/2013 22:27

I think that all sounds very thoughtful, especially as children were invited (I'm assuming to the wedding as well as to the BBQ the next day?). If I'd been travelling any distance to a wedding, it would have been very nice to have the option to make the most of the time there among friends and family.

Original poster

yetanotherstatistic · 04/07/2013 22:34

The ceremony itself was very small but there were children there. The main bit was in a village hall with big play area so the children were able to let off steam whenever they needed to.

OP posts:

PrincessOfChina · 04/07/2013 22:36

Not at all. Bloody good fun generally IMO.

chunkythighs · 04/07/2013 22:39

I think it depends on how they are promoted. A Gala event where people are clearly informed that there is no expectation that people attend a three day gala is different to a demand to book a weekend in a draughty castle in northern Scotland where guests are not allowed to book accommodation for less than two nights.

Most weddings like this are somewhere in the middle of the two extremes.

This comes from a woman who sees a wedding invite on the doormat the same way that most people see a final demand letter coming through the door.

(Not sure if I should mention that my guests had to take a stay in my wedding country for a week- but I refused to send invites to anyone 'cos I didn't want anyone to feel like they should have to come).

HooverFairy · 04/07/2013 22:44

I don't think it's the length of the event, it's how the guests are treated. You've made thoughtful provisions for your guests and haven't made demands so no. You weren't being unreasonable or self indulgent.

Still18atheart · 04/07/2013 22:46

I'm with op on this.

My own immediate family is very spread out throughout the uk. Everywhere from john o groats to lands end and every in between thing. Let alone my future hypothetical husbands family too.

Also growing up i lived in rural cornwall and this is where I would like my wedding to be in a country church in which I went to harvest festival and christmas services growing. I know this is a massive no in Mums net world. As it would a wedding miles from anyway.

CloudsAndTrees · 04/07/2013 22:50

Our wedding wasn't planned to be a three day thing, but when you have guests travelling to be there then it turns into one anyway. Lots of our guests stayed in our wedding hotel that we were in for three days, and we all enjoyed the time together. The guests that were more local were just there on the wedding day and some just for breakfast the next morning.

lessonsintightropes · 04/07/2013 22:52

I went to a wedding just like this - pretty small - in a v rural area with guests from the UK and abroad. It was lovely to meet other guests before the wedding itself, we had a lovely hike in the morning and it was great to relive the wedding the day after before a very long drive. We thought it was super thoughtful and really enjoyed it. It was all optional obviously and the B&G just asked for a very small (£7.50 each) contribution to the buffet the night before. Catering on the day and the day after were very generous. Really thoughtful and lovely. Sounds like yours was just the same and I'm sure your guests loved it.

LRDLearningDomHome · 04/07/2013 22:53

It wouldn't have occurred to me to call that a three day wedding. It sounds nice.

Grumpla · 04/07/2013 22:54

My sister had a weekend wedding, it was really lovely! I got to meet loads of their friends and her wife's relatives, there was a real sense of families coming together.

AuntieStella · 04/07/2013 22:56

I agree with OP.

Because a typical one is an eve of wedding dinner for the wedding party (often Friday), the actual ceremony/reception on the Saturday, then a Sunday brunch before everyone heads off.

MammaTJ · 04/07/2013 22:57

Sounds good, my only bone of contention, where was my invite? You bridezilla, you!!

Snazzywaitingforsummer · 04/07/2013 22:58

That all sounds fine - as chunky has said, the problem arises when all these components are mandatory and brides and/or grooms throw a hissy fit at the idea that you might not be in rapt attendance at each and every part of the programme.

Me and my DH did a similar thing: had a meal out the evening before for anyone who'd already arrived, and got food in the day after the wedding for anyone who wanted to stay a bit longer and chat with us. No obligation to do any of these things, nor to pay at a level people didn't like or couldn't afford.

nooka · 04/07/2013 23:18

I agree, what you are describing is not a three day wedding. It's a normal (nice) sort of wedding set up, with optional low key extras for people who would like them. sounds like lots of people enjoyed it, which fundamentally gives you your answer anyway :)

Original poster

yetanotherstatistic · 05/07/2013 07:28

Thankyou for the reassurance that I didn't get it horribly wrong. I am surprised that no one has criticised it given how strong feelings seemed to be about them in general recently.

OP posts:

cory · 05/07/2013 08:13

We had one, kindly funded by my parents.

(And before you ask, it wasn't my idea to have a wedding on this scale- I would have been happy with a church hall/basic buffet type of thing- but it comforted my mother to organise it (I was emigrating) and dh and I were happy to let her have what she wanted and enjoy ourselves.)

I don't think it was selfish, lots of our guests were travelling and there was no compulsion. We had 1 day of sightseeing in the area, 1 day of more relaxed entertainment and then the wedding itself. Guests sorted out their own accommodation (big city, varied price range to choose from) but everything else was paid for them, including drinks at the wedding. Small children (and big children) made welcome, childminders engaged who stayed near the wedding party but had a separate room where tired children could curl up, colouring books and other entertainment provided. I think people enjoyed themselves.

No hen or expensive stag do.

minouminou · 05/07/2013 08:14

Sounds like a hoot!
We went to a week-long wedding a few years back.....lovely break all round, the groom and groom (yes....) organised everything, all we had to do was turn up with DS.

Oriunda · 05/07/2013 08:39

We had a 2/3 day wedding because 70% of the guests were from overseas. We paid for transport to and from airports, put them up in a hotel for 2 nights at our expense (cultural obligation in DH country) and Dh and I hosted/paid for friday night welcome dinners for the men and women respectively. While we were doing photos they had a tour guide escort them through the City showing them the sights. The day after the wedding we travelled back on the minibuses with them to airport and a few stayed on at our flat.

Everyone had a great time. Oh, children were welcome too (but most elected to leave at home).

Triumphoveradversity · 05/07/2013 10:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PrincessFiorimonde · 05/07/2013 12:02

OP, no one's criticised you here* because your celebrations were sadly lacking the elements of compulsion and threat-of-tantrum-if-you-don't-comply that mark the Wedding Nightmare.
This also goes for others here who've had similar weddings. All of you should have played up tried harder if you'd wanted to qualify for that badge of horror honour.

*unless this turns out to be a most unfortunate xpost!

Original poster

yetanotherstatistic · 06/07/2013 11:09

Damn - that's where I went wrong

OP posts:

Flip