Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that "no ring, no bring" rule should not extend to long-term partners

152 replies

silvercuckoo · 02/01/2019 00:04

Asking just out of idle interest, following a discussion with an old friend at the NYE party.
She's in a loving and committed relationship with her partner for around five or six years now, they have a young child, live together in a jointly owned property, run a business together. They are not officially married, and (I just guess, from knowing her and her views on the topic) have no intention to marry.

However, she was not invited to her DP's mother's wedding ceremony because she is not officially a "wife" or a "fiancée". She is a bit Hmm as she always thought that they are getting along well, and now it somehow feels she's not good enough (even though she's not into weddings herself). MIL insists it is just a balancing exercise of "drawing a line somewhere", and that they will be happy to see her at the evening reception.

I heard of the "no ring, no bring" rule, but I have never thought it applied to firmly established couples. In your opinion - ok or not ok?

OP posts:
RicStar · 02/01/2019 09:29

Op hasn't answered if she / her friend is sure it is not just a very small i.e. a couple of witnesses / direct family only wedding - this would make it reasonable imo. Otherwise it seems very odd.

Rimmss · 02/01/2019 09:30

Where I live we've got a different rule: you always invite "a guest plus one" to weddings. What the OP described is actively aggressive behaviour. Can you imagine a couple living together for a few years, and one of them getting rady for a family event: "Sorry, you're not invited, kiss kiss, don't wait for me"?

Littletabbyocelot · 02/01/2019 09:31

It can't be that traditional - long term, acknowledged unmarried partnerships are a relatively new thing. My mum and MIL both married in haste as the only acceptable way to leave home (reflecting their parents values rather than their own). To me 'no ring, no bring' is simply out of step with modern values.

I also think the MIL is being rude by effectively saying she places no value on her relationship with DIL as an individual. Surely a successful in law relationship depends on acting like family? 'You are nothing to me but my son's plus one' is going to have a long-term impact on their relationship

Original poster
silvercuckoo · 02/01/2019 09:31

I think the lack of invite is unfair in this scenario, but you did say that you think your friend has no plans to ever marry, is that part of some strong-held belief against marriagr?
A strong belief yes, but she's polite enough not to shout about it. She attended my own wedding as a maid of honour, and was absolutely lovely. I know about it because we are friends for much longer than we weren't (since primary school), so all contentious topics were discussed several times. She was married before in her early twenties, and got divorced within two years due to her then-husband's constant cheating. My marriage did not work out either Grin.

OP posts:
Juells · 02/01/2019 09:32

Not sure if this is real, but if it is it's just a way for the MiL to snub the friend. I'd be NC after a snub like that :(

Beebumble2 · 02/01/2019 09:33

I have never heard of the no ring thing. But it could explain why a close family member issued invites to only part of our family, splitting it in two.
None of us went, so they missed out on the £££s money wedding present they asked for.

As MNs say ‘it’s an invite, not a command to attend’.

Original poster
silvercuckoo · 02/01/2019 09:35

Op hasn't answered if she / her friend is sure it is not just a very small i.e. a couple of witnesses / direct family only wedding - this would make it reasonable imo.
I don't know actually. Given that there were formal invitations sent well in advance, I'd assume at least a medium sized event? But then I am tone deaf when it comes to etiquette.

OP posts:
Racecardriver · 02/01/2019 09:39

I would assume that they just wanted to keep it as small as possible. It’s an easy way to draw a line. Quite frankly if your friend feels the need to have her relationship gratified or recognised by others that’s what marriage is for. If she chose not to marry to protect her own interests then she can hardly expect her relationship to be held to the same standard as those who do marry.

Juells · 02/01/2019 09:41

If she chose not to marry to protect her own interests then she can hardly expect her relationship to be held to the same standard as those who do marry.

🤣

It's an easy line to draw, excluding your son's long-term partner and grandchild. That rule was drawn up specifically to exclude her, or I'm a Dutch uncle.

SheWoreBlueVelvet · 02/01/2019 09:44

Stupid rule for normal weddings as what’s the point of plus ones then?
Most people watch numbers for financial reasons but the ceremony itself is the all inclusive bit.
Loads of ways to do a wedding ( especially a second wedding) that don’t involve huge expense but mean you don’t alienate guests.

merrymouse · 02/01/2019 09:48

I think 'drawing a line' that excludes the mother of your grandchild who is in a long term stable relationship with your son is beyond bonkers.

Assuming no bad feeling, the only reason I can think of for not inviting her would be if they were treating the wedding as a simple legal ceremony and weren't inviting anybody except necessary witnesses.

This really isn't in the same league as not inviting cousin Cheryl's new boyfriend because they aren't married.

merrymouse · 02/01/2019 09:51

Quite frankly if your friend feels the need to have her relationship gratified or recognised by others that’s what marriage is for.

I really think that when your child buys a house and has a child with their partner you have to accept that they are in a serious relationship. Confused.

jay55 · 02/01/2019 09:52

Wonder how Mil would have felt of her son had got married and not invited her long term partner.

1hello2hello · 02/01/2019 09:54

I think no ring, no bring is totally acceptable for work colleagues where you've barely met the partner, but in a family relationship like this I'd view it as a deliberate insult (unless it's only the couple plus one witness each).

Eliza9917 · 02/01/2019 10:05

My family have just turned down an invitation to a wedding reception 2 hrs away. This is a family members wedding too.

One sister is married. They were both invited. Other 2 sisters have been in relationships for over 10yrs. One has children. I've been with DP for 4 yrs and we're engaged. None of our partners were invited.

All invitations were politely declined.

I'm not driving 2 hrs, possibly staying over, while DP sits in the hotel room so I can attend a reception, not even the full wedding. It would be a different matter if we were invited to the ceremony. Even without staying over that means I'd need to drive 2hrs there, not drink, then drive 2hrs home. So the bride is 6 guests down for her evening reception because she didn't invite partners. If we were both invited we'd have booked a hotel and got cabs so we could drink. She said its down to catering but how tight must you be to be stingy over an evening buffet?

The thing is, the bride here asked my sister if her fiance could come as a plus 1. Her sister asked if her partner & kids could come. She rejigged it so they could just to be told a few days after it was too late to change the numbers that none of them could go.

We were very tempted to say we were going and then not turn up but we didn't.

brizzledrizzle · 02/01/2019 10:08

It was certainly a common rule in the past when it was a judgement on how serious the couple were as people didn't want people at weddings (and in the photos) who were going to be history soon but times have changed and it's no longer a case of marriage is the only way of demonstrating a serious, committed relationship. It does seem quite outdated nowadays.

PeapodBurgundy · 02/01/2019 10:21

If the OP's friend and her "MIL" didn't get along this wold be the perfect Get Out of Jail Free card to not ever do anything relating to this woman that she didn't want to do ever again --would LOVE my "MIL" to give me such a wonderful get out clause. Just seems very odd when you said they usually have a good relationship.

veggiepigsinpastryblankets · 02/01/2019 10:40

Marriage "means something" to me too hence getting married myself, but that didn't mean I randomly disinvited several good friends from my wedding just because they hadn't quite reached that poi themselves Hmm

During the many years DH and I were living in sin together but not married, one of his friends met someone, married her, bought a house, had 2 kids, and got divorced (second time for him too), so I find the longevity argument a bit spurious.

Winebottle · 02/01/2019 10:43

It is probably an outdated rule given the rise in cohabitation and it could be applied more flexibly.

However, if you want to be treated as married couple, get married.

formerbabe · 02/01/2019 10:45

I thought the 'no ring, no bring' thing was just to avoid someone dragging last night's tinder date along with them Grin

The situation in the op is awful.

brizzledrizzle · 02/01/2019 11:01

I thought the 'no ring, no bring' thing was just to avoid someone dragging last night's tinder date along with them grin

Or Grindr date - could be embarrassing if it's the first the family knew of their preferences.

KC225 · 02/01/2019 11:07

Tinklylittlelaugh How horrible for you to have to sit at the back, alone and grieving for someone you dearly loved just because you were not married to a family member. I am so glad the Uncle recognised his true 'loved ones' and left you and your DP his money.

Habadabadoo · 02/01/2019 11:26

Horrid.
When is the wedding?
I would recommend your friend book her wedding first (or just pretend then pretend cancel when it suits her!) and not invite MIL partner! *

  • I wouldn't really be brave enough to do this Grin
Happypie · 02/01/2019 11:45

I think the MIL is being unkind but I also find it odd that so many people think that people should have the full benefits and status of marriage, when they cannot be bothered to get married.

DarlingNikita · 02/01/2019 11:48

Disgusting and deliberately rude.

Everyone has the right to decide who they invite to their wedding. Indeed. However, deciding who to invite based on whether they're married (as opposed to, say, closeness to the family) is not on. Why must this 'line' be drawn at her?

I've been with my DP for over 20 years. I'd be very fucked off if I was invited to a wedding and he excluded because of this rule.