Spinoff– why is it rude to attend the reception and not the ceremony?????

posted 2 years ago in Etiquette
Post # 2
Member
900 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: February 2014

I can see your line of reasoning but the event itself is that two people are getting married.  You’re supposed to want to witness that and they want you to witness that which is why you were invited.  Otherwise it looks like you’re only there for the free food.  My mother was invited to a wedding where it took her an hour to get to the ceremony and they had a FOUR HOUR gap so she drove home and then drove another 30 min to attend the reception.  Apparently a ton of people skipped the reception.   

  • This reply was modified 2 years, 4 months ago by  FleeSircus.
Post # 3
Member
6525 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: September 2013

californiabride2013:  the most important part of a wedding is the actual ceremony. I had a 2 hr gap between my ceremony and reception but my wedding was local so a lot of people went home to change OR went to the reception hall and hung out at the lounge. Its pretty common in my area to have gaps, so people don’t really get upset. <br /><br />I think it would be rude to attend just the reception because I get the impression that they only came for the free food and drink and some dancing. 

Post # 4
Member
385 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: February 2015

It’s way ruder to not attend the ceremony than to not attend the reception (that is, provided you tell the couple you can’t make the reception, so they don’t pay for your plate). If you’re invited to a wedding, but you don’t go to the wedding, you just go to the afterparty? I don’t think I have to explain why that’s rude. 😉
So yes, if you can only make one or the other, go to the ceremony, and make sure the couple knows you can’t make the reception before they have to turn in their headcount to the caterer. But try to make the whole thing.

Post # 6
Member
462 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: September 2014

It gives the impression that you don’t care about the important part (the actual ceremony where the couple gets married) and just want to show up for the free food/drinks/party. The reception is a celebration of the ceremony, so if you’re not attending the ceremony, it is rude to just show up for the reception.

If you can only attend one, you should attend the ceremony.

Post # 7
Member
208 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2014

Agreed with PP that the ceremony is the actual event and the most important part. If you can only go to one, it should be the ceremony.

My opinion on this could be skewed, though, because I know so many people who hate weddings and thus only show up for the party. I also coordinate weddings and see a ton of people who just can’t bother to get ready on time and only attend the reception. Both of those are so rude to me.

But even in the case of a gap like you mentioned, the part you should be shooting for is the ceremony if you can only make one event.

ETA: A lot of bees also feel that the reception is a thank you for attending the ceremony (I don’t personally feel this way), so that logic would definitely make it rude. Accepting a thank you gift for something you didn’t do isn’t cool.

  • This reply was modified 2 years, 4 months ago by  mcp8011.
Post # 8
Member
479 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: August 2014

The ceremony is the main event of the day, so if someone can only attend one thing it should be the ceremony so they can witness the union of the couple.  I would be really offended if my guests skipped the ceremony and came to the reception only.  The main point of throwing a reception is to thank people for coming to see the ceremony!  That said, if a guest can only attend the ceremony they should let the couple know so they have an accurate head count for the reception. (I do know that in some cultures it is common to have different invite lists for the ceremony and reception so obviously that is different.)

Post # 10
Member
6525 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: September 2013

californiabride2013:  When I was planning my wedding, I planned it as best as I could to also make sure my guests were not going to be inconveinced. There was a 2 hr gap but by the time we got done with the receiving line, guests really only had 1 hour to waste. My church and reception hall were within 1 mile of eachtother, so it wasn’t too terrible. 

I think anything more than 2 hours, is a bit much. I think having to drive over an hour to the reception is crazy. Personally, I would suck it up and do it just because I would feel bad if I went to only the reception. 

Post # 11
Member
743 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2014 - Our Backyard/Steakhouse

if a bride and groom have been rude enough to tell me to sit around for a few hours and ‘figure out’ something to do while they go off for 3+hrs and do who knows what then you’re damn right I’m not attending both halves of an event.  I’m going to attend whichever one is most convenient for me.

 

Post # 12
Member
900 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: February 2014

LDay1983:  So then, it’s really about you?

Post # 13
Member
208 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2014

LDay1983:  Given your die-hard belief in the rules of etiquette, I’m surprised you think that one etiquette faux-pas excuses another. Also, traditional etiquette allows for gaps between ceremony and reception.

Post # 15
Member
844 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2015

I’m a UK bee, and here it’s totally normal to have a lot more people invited to the evening only. So yeah, personally I don’t think it’s rude at all. But it really depends on what’s the norm for your social circle. 

Leave a comment


Sent weekly. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Find Amazing Vendors