Wedding Invite to Husband Only

[MiniOneFree]

A wedding invite arrived by post today, we were expecting it and excited to open it.

Only my husband's name is on the front.

On the back it says 'this invite is just for the guest(s) named.

It's the reception only from 6pm, at a hotel, so not the actual ceremony.

This couple (let's call them Amy and John) came to our wedding in 2022. John is an old school friend of my husband's. They are in touch all the time. I met Amy at our wedding, she seemed friendly but as with weddings I didn't get to talk to her much. She made a comment which I do remember about my husband punching above his weight, which not only offended my husband but also we felt was a bit weird and rude as was in front of a group of around ten people who all laughed.

I want my husband to go to the wedding, if he wants, but would rather he didn't, but I don't want to stop him.

However he says he will decline and tell John we are away. However I want him to be honest and say he's not going as I've not been invited.

I think it's completely astonishing and I can't help but take it personally.

Is excluding wives and husbands a thing now ( like not including children) ?

Is it understandable to be so upset about this or AIBU?

Agreed. A wedding is about the marriage celebration of the couple getting married that day. That's it. And in that context, what the day is about and its 'theme' (if any) is specific to that particular couple.

Okay, so for legal reasons a marriage ceremony is a public declaration. But a wedding is hardly a general social commentary on marriage as an institution. It's a couple's party. They're really not the big deal some people make them out to be.

So what's the purpose of getting married then?

I can't speak for others, but I got married as it's the cheapest, most effective way to protect my interests. It's a legal contract. I'd have preferred a civil partnership but they didn't exist 25 years ago so marriage was the best option

Various innit, might include

• tax
• legal rights
• inheritance
• visa
• religious belief
• just like the sound of 'husband' more than 'boyfriend'

The question though isn't what the purpose of getting married though it's what's the purpose of a wedding celebration. Which is I guess:

• excuse for a party
• show off that you managed to bag a hotty
• cultural or religious tradition
• want everyone you love and like to know and be happy that you're in love

Ever thought of taking up a hobby?

I love how everyone is claiming that weddings and marriages are nothing to do with love and partnership and all about tax and inheritance.

Tbf, all you need to do is state this on the wedding invitation there would be no need to cull guests. 😁

BIL openly got married for financial reasons, so pension rights could be conferred on death. So did simple registry office with 2 witnesses.

No guests were harmed and I'd hope 25 years of marriage would suffice to evidence my love for dh but my love would exist without the marriage. Marriage is a legal contract. It's not proof of love. Nor is the guest list.

If you're having a biggish wedding it is highly unlikely that the bride and/or groom will know everyone there. And especially if parents are paying for any of it. In my experience there will be family friends of the parents, there might be more distant family or people from overseas who may not have seen family for years because they can't afford to keep coming over but want to make the effort for a special occasion. There will be plus ones who may never have been seen before by anyone else there. I doubt the groom in this case has had anything much to do with the guest list.

A wedding and a marriage are two different things. To me, the second one matters. The first, not particularly.

Then again, I’ve been asked what the point is of getting married when I use my own family name.

I expect that if you don’t know, you don’t know.

Well I know that when I got married i was under the impression that it was about love and partnership but my eyes have been opened by this thread. It is either a purely financial or legal rubber stamping exercise or an opportunity for a party, according to previous posters.

So apparently no, I don't know.

No sensible person thinks it is proof of love. It is widely considered to be a public declaration of love.

Not my experience, (I married over 30 years ago) and definitely not the experience of any of the next generation of my family who have got married in the last 5 years.

I, nor my dc, nor dn, had anyone at our weddings we didn't know.
Nor unknown plus ones.
Nor, at any of the weddings, was the groom a passive bystander with no voice.

Yeah I agree with this. It's two people telling people they know that they really love each other. There are other benefits too. I don't see how that leads anyone to think it's a celebration of other people's marriages (whatever state they're in, however much you know or don't know them) though.

Completely agree OP, it is just plain rude to not invite spouses. We wouldn’t have dreamed of not inviting the spouse or significant other (by which I mean longstanding partner, not just a plus one to whoever you happen to be dating - albeit not really an issue when we got married as I don’t think that status applied to any of our guests). So there were friends of my DH’s at our wedding whose spouse I had never met before but of course they were invited. If you don’t have enough room, you make the cut accordingly, but as much as anything it’s about consideration for your guests. I know people harp on about oh it’s the bride and groom’s choice, sure but whilst it might be the most important event ever for them, it’s obviously not for everyone else. That’s not to say it’s not enjoyable for the guests - I bloody love a wedding - but it does also generally require the guests to travel, make travel and sometimes accommodation arrangements, go to a degree of expense, and sometimes sort childcare. It’s just common sense and good manners to recognise that it’s more enjoyable and easier logistically for your guests if their partners are invited too. Nothing to do with independence/joined at the hip etc. it’s just rude and inconsiderate to not invite you - especially as you say the groom is one of your DH’s oldest friends.

I’m amazed at how many people are outraged and entitled that spouses must be invited
your not joined at the hip I’ve been to a few where people didn’t invite spouses or plus ones absolutely no drama
everyone was in the same boat already knew each other had a blast . You didn’t have to spend the whole night entertaining or making sure your other half was ok because they didn’t know anyone
more to the point why an earth would you want to go to a wedding of someone you barely know

it’s plain rude to expect an invite by default

from the bride and groom you can invite more people you actually know rather than hangers on you’ve never met

So surely more reason to invite people who are interested in it? Not someone's wife who I've seen once in 4 years and doesn't like me much!

If you are inviting only one of a couple it is very rude!

I can't follow how you have come to this conclusion at all.

I'm not sure what's unclear. We invited people who gave enough of a shit about dh and I to actually spend time with us. It's not complicated.

That just seemed like a random thing to state following a discussion about weddings being about love.

If people are having a big wedding - say 100 people or quite possibly more - it is most unlikely that they see all of them very often or know all of them well or their partners. If they do, well they can't have very busy lives. But that isn't a reason to snub anyone's partner. And while of course it may not be felt necessary to offer everyone a plus-one-type invitation, a wedding isn't a singles event and it is customary to invite partners. I think that much is obvious. I can quite understand why the OP feels upset at being excluded and why the husband doesn't want to go on his own. If it was just one of the husband's friends down the pub who she had never met she may well feel differently.

I never accept reception only invitations. And I would expect every invitation to include a spouse or a plus one. It’s not on to make friends feel like second class citizens but use them just to bump up numbers at the evening do.

Get over yourself
For example we invited our work colleagues to our night do only nothing to do with being 2nd class citizens it was that depth of friendship
I’ve gone to plenty of evening only weddings never deem myself that important or entitled that it’s the full lot or nothing

Given the cost of weddings, I very much doubt they want to “bump up the numbers”. Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just not invite them at all?