URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Bad Manners and Brimstone
  HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Weddings
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 40052--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
       By: Hmmm Date: October 9, 2019, 9:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Aleko link=topic=1354.msg40038#msg40038
       date=1570612592]
       [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.
       [/quote]
       I believe what Twik was stating is use of "Ms Sharon Stone &
       Guest" is not appropriate per Miss Manners on formal
       invitations. All guests should be invited by name. If you have a
       single guest and want to allow them to invite a partner, you
       contact them and ask whom you should include on the guest list
       and obtain that person's address. I know this rule well because
       my DH was forced by his mom (I stayed out of the argument)  to
       contact about 10 frat brothers to find out if they wanted to
       bring a date and if they did, the name of the date.  He was not
       pleased. But it also kept down the random stranger at our
       wedding. We had seen a couple of these guys meet a girl one
       weekend and drag her to a wedding the next and then we'd never
       see her again. If the guy didn't know the name of his "date" 8
       weeks before the event, you can be pretty sure it's not a
       committed relationship.
       #Post#: 40165--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
       By: TootsNYC Date: October 10, 2019, 4:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=jpcher link=topic=1354.msg40016#msg40016
       date=1570576499]
       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.
       [/quote]
       I agree, though often in conversation about the issue, people
       will use the term "plus-one" to mean "allowed to bring a date"
       even if that is restricted to a specific person, just because
       it's shorter.
       but if the name is on the invite, then you don't get to switch
       (and if you know the person you should put it on).
       #Post#: 40178--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Sister invited to accompany sister - Carolyn Hax Oct. 1
       By: Aleko Date: October 11, 2019, 2:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       My point was that "plus-one" quite often gets used to refer to
       what one might call secondary guests: the people you aren't
       close enough to to invite in their own right, but are being
       invited because they are married or otherwise attached to people
       who you are close to.
       As in: suppose I were getting married and was inviting all my
       first cousins along with their spouses, live-in partners, steady
       boy/girlfriends - some of whom I know very well, some only a
       bit, and others who I only know by name. I'd put these people's
       names on the invitations - I'm old-school enough never to send
       invitations to "you and a guest" - but when discussing numbers,
       working out the table plans, and stuff like that, I'd say things
       like "We could put my cousins and their plus-ones on table 4
       along with yours' and just using that phrase certainly wouldn't
       imply that if my cousin Sukey's husband couldn't come she was at
       liberty to decide to bring someone else!
       So we don't know, and from the published letter it's very
       possible the aggrieved writer didn't know either, how the
       invitation was worded and whether his SIL had the right to
       choose a substitute guest for herself or not. So that whole line
       of discussion is a red herring.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page