DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Manners and Brimstone
HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Weddings
*****************************************************
#Post#: 39764--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: NFPwife Date: October 3, 2019, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree with Hmmm, the execution was off. My husband would be a
little irritated by this, honestly. First, he's a quality time
person so an invitation during "prime time" (I'm assuming this
is a weekend evening) that he was excluded from might irk him.
Second, inviting just one spouse of a married couple would annoy
him too. But, it's "irk" and "annoy" he wouldn't be so bent out
of shape about it as to write to an advice column. In the end,
he'd encourage me to go with my sister and have a nice evening,
but MOB wouldn't be his favorite person.
I further agree that the answer was for the MOB to contact SIL
to extend the plus one to LW's wife. The asking in front of him
added insult to injury. It was a third strike so to speak.
MOB didn't think before she spoke. She saw LW's wife and
thought, "Wouldn't it be great if...?" and spoke too soon. She
seems generous and enthusiastic while lacking a good filter, but
I suspect they know that about her.
#Post#: 39793--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: pierrotlunaire0 Date: October 3, 2019, 9:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought about this forum when I read this letter.
1. I feel MOB kind of overstepped bounds. What if relations
between the 2 sisters is a little strained right now due to an
unrelated issue? What if Sis had already asked someone else
altogether to fill in as her plus one?
2. I also feel that it might have been a little awkward for the
LW to stand there as his wife was invited and he was ignored.
3. Even though it was awkward for LW, I also think he is acting
put out. Okay, it happened, and you probably felt a little
embarrassed. But you sound childish in your letter.
#Post#: 39800--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: Aleko Date: October 4, 2019, 4:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]But the invited guest didn't decide on inviting the new
plus-one, the MOB did. Maybe the SIL didn't want to go with the
LW's wife. I have a lot of SIL's, and some are fun, some not so
much. I think that it should be left to the originally invited
person to pick her plus one.[/quote]
Not necessarily.
If the original invitation literally just said 'plus one',
meaning 'any random person you like to bring, even if it's a
casual date who we don't know from Adam', then yes, if the
guest's first choice cancels, logically they are entitled to
pick another random person. But very often in this kind of
discussion 'plus one' is used as a catch-all term for 'guests'
significant others, whatever their legal status'. If this was
the case here, and the invitation was actually sent to 'X and Y,
your steady boyfriend who we only vaguely know', then if it
turned out that Y couldn't make it, X would have been very wrong
indeed to take it on herself to choose a substitute herself.
We don't know (and most likely neither did the offended husband)
what the terms of the original invitation were. I agree that it
wasn't the MOB's business to choose a substitute - and for all
we know the bride promptly chewed her out for her well-meant
interference! But if the HC themselves had suggested it, I don't
see anything wrong with that, and the husband's indignation on
that count is uncalled-for.
#Post#: 39810--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: Soop Date: October 4, 2019, 8:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Anyone else have a DH/SO/partner that would be very, very happy
to not be invited. Mr. S would be saying 'go ahead, please, I'll
stay home and sleep'.
#Post#: 39822--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: TootsNYC Date: October 4, 2019, 11:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Aleko link=topic=1354.msg39800#msg39800
date=1570181737]
[quote]But the invited guest didn't decide on inviting the new
plus-one, the MOB did. Maybe the SIL didn't want to go with the
LW's wife. I have a lot of SIL's, and some are fun, some not so
much. I think that it should be left to the originally invited
person to pick her plus one.[/quote]
Not necessarily.
If the original invitation literally just said 'plus one',
meaning 'any random person you like to bring, even if it's a
casual date who we don't know from Adam', then yes, if the
guest's first choice cancels, logically they are entitled to
pick another random person. But very often in this kind of
discussion 'plus one' is used as a catch-all term for 'guests'
significant others, whatever their legal status'. If this was
the case here, and the invitation was actually sent to 'X and Y,
your steady boyfriend who we only vaguely know', then if it
turned out that Y couldn't make it, X would have been very wrong
indeed to take it on herself to choose a substitute herself.
[/quote]
I agree with this.
If you are invited with a spouse or partner, you don't get to
just decide to substitute someone.
And a host also gets to say, "Oh, if you would like to bring
your sister, that would be great." The host can restrict whom
you can extend their invitation to.
(Of course, saying "bring your sister" may just highlight that
the sister wasn't invited in the first place. But if the sister
wasn't expecting an invite, it might be OK. I'd be happy to be
included like that for my sister's friend's wedding. I know the
friend and care about her, but I'm not close the way my sister
is.)
#Post#: 39907--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: LifeOnPluto Date: October 5, 2019, 10:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm guessing MOB is close enough to SIL to know that she (SIL)
has a pretty good relationship with her sister (the LW's wife).
And it also sounds like MOB has met LW's wife on previous
occasions. If my assumptions are correct, I don't think it was a
big deal of MOB to invite LW's wife to the wedding as SIL's
'plus-one'. And I also think LW is being a kind of pill about it
all.
#Post#: 39948--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: Twik Date: October 7, 2019, 11:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Aleko link=topic=1354.msg39800#msg39800
date=1570181737]
[quote]But the invited guest didn't decide on inviting the new
plus-one, the MOB did. Maybe the SIL didn't want to go with the
LW's wife. I have a lot of SIL's, and some are fun, some not so
much. I think that it should be left to the originally invited
person to pick her plus one.[/quote]
Not necessarily.
If the original invitation literally just said 'plus one',
meaning 'any random person you like to bring, even if it's a
casual date who we don't know from Adam', then yes, if the
guest's first choice cancels, logically they are entitled to
pick another random person. But very often in this kind of
discussion 'plus one' is used as a catch-all term for 'guests'
significant others, whatever their legal status'. If this was
the case here, and the invitation was actually sent to 'X and Y,
your steady boyfriend who we only vaguely know', then if it
turned out that Y couldn't make it, X would have been very wrong
indeed to take it on herself to choose a substitute herself.
[/quote]
Well, Miss Manners doesn't agree with this. She says that if you
want specific people there, you invite them *by name.* So,
instead of giving your friend a "plus one" invitation, you
invite them with their partners, if you know they have any.
Using "Jenny + One" when you know that your friend Jenny has
been dating Jackie exclusively for a year is just being lazy.
She further said that if you do give a "+one" invitation to
anyone, you have abdicate *any* say in who your guest brings. If
you wanted them to bring a specific person, you should have told
them.
#Post#: 40016--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: jpcher Date: October 8, 2019, 6:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree. I always thought a +1 on an invitation meant that you
could bring whomever you wanted to bring.
If in a couple situation then the SO should be named along with
address on the envelope.
#Post#: 40020--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: STiG Date: October 8, 2019, 6:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Plus 1 allows you to bring whomever you like to the wedding, up
and until you RSVP with your plus 1's name. If you have already
given the happy couple your Plus 1's information, if they now
can't make the event, you don't get to just slide someone in
there without the happy couple's OK.
If one of the two specifically invited people in a couple can't
make it, the remaining person also isn't free to just add
someone without OKing it with the happy couple.
If it was either of these two scenarios, I think the MIL was OK
but should have let the invited sister know that it was fine to
bring the LW's wife as her guest, in place of her plus 1 that
can't attend.
If she was invited with a plus 1 and had not yet sent her RSVP,
even if they expected her to bring her long term boyfriend, they
can't object if she chooses to bring someone else.
Regardless of the circumstances, the LW is more than a bit full
of himself.
#Post#: 40038--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
By: Aleko Date: October 9, 2019, 4:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Well, Miss Manners doesn't agree with this.[/quote]
Actually she does, because she was saying the same thing as me!
As I said, we simply don't know - and almost certainly the
aggrieved husband didn't know either - whether his SIL's
invitation had identified her 'plus one' by name or not.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page