(Closed) Help! Is it rude to include where we’re registered on a reception card?

posted 9 years ago in Etiquette
Post # 32
Member
1596 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

I’ve never received an invitation that did NOT include where the couple is registered.

Isn’t the point of registering so that people know where to buy the couple the things they want/need? 

I’m not really sure I understand the idea of “yes we’re accepting/expecting gifts like any other wedding/pregnancy/birthday/life event but let’s be discreet and not say it out loud.”

Not hatin. Just sayin.

Seems overly formal to me to act as though gifts aren’t part of a wedding. 

Post # 33
Member
3355 posts
Sugar bee

View original reply
@PamelaBrit:  I take if you are so inclined to be a very bold “hint” that if you weren’t thinking of it, you’d better start. 

Guests will almost always give a gift, and hinting at it in anyway just can’t be polite, IMO.

I always take this board as a typical smattering of most people’s guest lists.  There will be people who wouldn’t care if the happy couple wrote “I don’t want crap, gimme money, money, money!!!!!!!!”, there would be guests in the middle, and there will be guests who will be upset/feel slighted by any mention of gifts.  I don’t see the sense in being anything but above reporach on the etiquette front.  I like to have the ‘experts” and years of proper manners on my side.  But if people don’t mind that some of there guests will be the ones who feel slighted then that is their right.

Post # 34
Member
256 posts
Helper bee

Every wedding, birthday, baby shower, bridal shower I’ve ever been invited too here in SUnny California has always had regestry information. I think it’s different depending on what part of the US you live in

 

Edit: I would be more insulted if someone called me to tell me the regestry information or bourhgt it up in casual conversation. To me that seems pushy. I always default to gift cards at Target or Nordstom is no information is given. Everyone shops there. Who doesn’t need $75 at target?

Post # 35
Member
236 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

View original reply
@MissFlowerPot: Me too. Maybe its a Cali thing?

Post # 36
Member
5294 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: January 1993

Hey OP, I’m from the same area as you – and I know I rarely get an invite without registry info – and I much prefer they include it! I hate having to track it down or guess if they just want money.

And NO WAY was I going to just assume guests could call our mothers or family. That’s not their responsibility and they had their own busy schedules. But because some people can get pretty uptight about a little card, I’d stick with what people do in your area 🙂

Post # 37
Member
7898 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: March 2012 - Pelican Grand Beach Resort

View original reply
@MissFlowerPot:  Showers should have such information; weddings, not so much.

Post # 38
Member
574 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: January 2011

As a guest, I prefer having the registry info included.  I know it’s technically bad etiquette, but if you’re going to have a registry, I prefer to buy off of that.  If I’m going to spend money on you, I want to get you something that you actually want! 

It’s such a catch 22.  As a bride, you’re rude for assuming your guests will bring a gift in providing your registry information.  But, as a wedding guest, you’re rude for not bringing one since it’s assumed you will?  Talk about confusing!!

Post # 41
Member
1692 posts
Bumble bee

View original reply
@BetterSherm:  You are right that customs and standards vary with where you are from — not just regionally, but also “where you are from” socially and economically. North America frowns on the idea of class distinctions. Little American babies wear t-shirts stating “Future President of the U.S.A.” regardless of where they are born or their parents socio-economic status; and the only reason that little Canadian babies don’t wear t-shirts stating “Future Prime Minister” is that, frankly, we just want more than that for our children 😉

But the truth is, that families with inherited money also have superior educational opportunities, political and economic contacts, and influential family connections. There’s a tendency for the so-called “upper” classes to remain in control. In feudal societies, of course, there was no entry at all of serfs and peasants into the “upper” class, so their different manners and customs were irrelevant — “rude” and “poor” were synonymous. In post-revolutionary societies — whether the industrial, American, or French revolutions — differences in manners were one of the ways that “upstart” lower-class entrepeneurs were kept out of “polite” society. One result was a wave of democratizing etiquette books, intended to decode the secret languate of upper-class manners and demolish that artificial barrier. In particular in the United States, largely to the credit of the divine maligned Emily who stands so often falsely accused of upper-class snobbery, a “standard” etiquette evolved that was NOT about maintaining class distinctions, but that acted specifically to hide all class distinctions.

View original reply
@PamelaBrit:  You do not need to hark back to the nineteen-teens to find a time when email, “destination” weddings, and wedding websites were non existent. There may have been the occasional wedding website in the nineteen-nineties but that would have been an early experiment: these ideas are largely creations of the twenty-first century. And that means that many of your guests: the aunts and uncles, grandparents, older cousins and former teachers, are perfectly comfortable and see the sense in the underlying principles of good manners. The “upper” class do not have a monopoly on self-respect and the idea that they can provide for themselves. The modern availability of the internet — and search engines — means that folk can find  registry more easily, not less, even if they don’t know your parents. The fact that couples socialize in different circles makes it more desireable that they follow standard etiquette rather than regional socio-economically distinct manners and customs.

Times change, fashion changes, gender roles have changed; but self-serving materialism still looks self-serving. I agree with you, if a couple is making a registry entirely for the purpose of getting gifts, and moreso if they are trying to control their guests’ choice, and even moreso if they are trying to convert gifts to money, then they are already being self-serving and materialistic. But the solution isn’t to throw in the towel and revel in the greed: it’s to challenge the registry infrastructure as it has come to exist, and aim for something higher.

Post # 42
Member
236 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

View original reply
@aspasia475:  if a couple is making a registry entirely for the purpose of getting gifts, and moreso if they are trying to control their guests’ choice, and even moreso if they are trying to convert gifts to money, then they are already being self-serving and materialistic. But the solution isn’t to throw in the towel and revel in the greed: it’s to challenge the registry infrastructure as it has come to exist, and aim for something higher.

Amen to the underlined! I think of it like this; If I throw myself a birthday party I don’t expect or even ask the invited guests to bring gifts. I mostly want their company at the celebration. However I anticipate that, as the invited generally will try to bring some token, someone might ask me what I want for my birthday.  If this happens I may hem and haw and tll them that I would appreciate whatever-which is true.  If the person really wants me to be honest, I might let them know of something I would like to have. But I would NOT expect that they gift what I ask. That would be self-serving and materialistic. I would graciously accept any gift and the thought behind it.  

And, I like what you said about challenging the infrastructure and aiming for something higher.  What do you think that higher form is? I know couples that have opted out of receiving gifts all together and have registered for charities.  Some guests( generally the elder crowd) still found that rude

Post # 43
Member
256 posts
Helper bee

View original reply
@aspasia475:  Wow, that’s spirited. But again it’s all about where you are in the USA. I’ve never heard an elderly person in my area balk at regestry information in a wedding invitation. Here it’s not rude. There’s nothing self-serving about regestering for gifts and offering the information. If I state that it’s cash gifts only or “only regestry gifts please” then yes, that’s a bit materialistic.

Post # 44
Member
1713 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2012

View original reply
@aspasia475:  its so true we do want better for our kids than being the head of a country lol. You definitely have me a good laugh which was well needed.

I think it is rude but a separate card with the website statting it has additional info is ideal (my 85 year old relatives use email and Facebook and skype, older guests is not a good reason to not use a wedding website). Also if you’ve already had a shower the info should be common knowledge of where your registered.

Post # 45
Member
1512 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

Well, from what I understand, you let whoever is throwing your shower know where you are registered, and they include it on the inviation to that. You invite everyone to the shower, and they’ll see it that way. If you, for whatever reason, don’t invite everyone who’s invited to the wedding to your shower [though you should], they would have to use word of mouth, or bring something they felt was appropriate. If you’re not having a shower, just use word of mouth.

Post # 46
Member
5988 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: May 2010

i know people say its rude but im pretty sure every invite we’ve received has had a registry card and ive never thought twice about it

The topic ‘Help! Is it rude to include where we’re registered on a reception card?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors