The Money Mustache Community
Around the Internet => Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy => Topic started by: remizidae on April 16, 2019, 04:49:19 PM
-
From a recent advice column:
Q. Wedding planning woes: My fiancée and I are getting married this summer and have a wedding budget of $30,000 for 175 guests, which is below average for our state (and we live in the largest metropolitan area). My father is a stingy multimillionaire who has refused to provide more than $7,500 because he thinks, on principle, that each parent should pay for a quarter of the wedding. My mom is a public servant who took an entry-level job following their divorce, and my fiancée’s parents are also in solidly middle-class jobs. My mom has found the money; my fiancée’s parents are still trying. We can afford to put in some money ourselves, but it would be a sizable chunk of the money we are saving to buy a home. [In other words: we can pay for it, but we don't want to!]
What do we do here? Should we disinvite people? Should we just cancel the wedding and elope? (We would lose about $5,000 in deposits.) Should we put in the money ourselves and refuse to do father-daughter things like walking down the aisle, first dance, etc.? I am really angry with my dad for his inflexibility and stinginess. I am also angry with myself and my fiancée for proceeding with a wedding the size we want (even though we have been fairly frugal in our other choices) when finances were unclear.
I call bullshit on the claim that a five-figure wedding is "below average" for any area. It's like those claims you sometimes see that "no one can live here on less than $100k"—people forget that poor people exist.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/04/cant-afford-wedding-advice.html?sid=5537d72b3b35d0a13a8bf64c&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=traffic&utm_source=newsletter&utm_content=DearPrudence
-
I'd be shocked if average prices of weddings aren't higher than $30k in some states.
But that's the trouble with averages. It only takes one $1M wedding to really screw them up.
-
Honestly, I also have a problem with the multimillionaire dad. It's not that he's not putting up more money - it's that he's expecting all three other parents to match his contribution.
-
Average doesn't necessarily denote the arithmetic mean!
THe median price is what we are after here.
Headline numbers put out by sites like www.theknot.com are heavily skewed by including only people that plan large weddings. Lost in the calculation are the huge number of people who's 'wedding' is going to the town hall and standing in front of a magistrate, and those who's ceremony is just a few people.
-
I'd be shocked if average prices of weddings aren't higher than $30k in some states.
But that's the trouble with averages. It only takes one $1M wedding to really screw them up.
Good point. The median hopefully is very different.
-
Honestly, I also have a problem with the multimillionaire dad. It's not that he's not putting up more money - it's that he's expecting all three other parents to match his contribution.
Exactly! It wasn't long ago that Father of the Bride traditionally paid the bulk of the costs, for him to feel the other parents who have lesser means should pay equally is stingy indeed. A $7,500 wedding celebration can be just fine, even for families with millionaires, but a millionaire who expects others to contribute equally to a $30,000 celebration is not.
At least the bride is also admitting that she is partly at fault for committing to expenses without a clear plan for how they would be paid for. I think bride and groom should pay for the wedding that they planned, booked, and invited people to. I don't think bride should cut traditional father-bride items from the celebration out of spite.
-
Exactly! It wasn't long ago that Father of the Bride traditionally paid the bulk of the costs, for him to feel the other parents who have lesser means should pay equally is stingy indeed. A $7,500 wedding celebration can be just fine, even for families with millionaires, but a millionaire who expects others to contribute equally to a $30,000 celebration is not.
At least the bride is also admitting that she is partly at fault for committing to expenses without a clear plan for how they would be paid for. I think bride and groom should pay for the wedding that they planned, booked, and invited people to. I don't think bride should cut traditional father-bride items from the celebration out of spite.
This tradition where the Father of the Bride pays for the wedding is not universal across cultures.
-
My issue isn't even with the fact that he "traditionally" would have paid and is instead "passing off" that duty. It's that he apparently said, "Okay, tell me your budget and we'll each pay a quarter of it" without ever consulting the other parents - and seems to want to strong-arm them into that arrangement by doing so. In my opinion, each person should assess what they are willing to contribute independently - and not in response to the bride's budget.
That's not to excuse the bride's part in the situation.
Tl;dr: He's within his rights to say "I will pay for a quarter of your wedding." He's not within his rights to say "Every parent should pay for a quarter of your wedding."
-
If he only wants to pay $7500, or $75, toward a wedding, I've got no problem with that. But the rationale that each parent should pay 1/4 seems strange, and I wonder if it isn't somehow an attempt to get at his Ex-wife. It's entirely unreasonable that he is attempting to essentially make commitments for other people. If the kids had planned a $60k wedding, would he have been willing to pay $15k?
OTOH, I think the bride is right to be upset with herself and her fiancee for planning a wedding, including putting down deposits, before actually figuring out how much they had to spend. It seems they assumed daddy would fork over whatever they asked for, and spent that imaginary money before letting daddy know of the expectation. And then they were disappointed.
I suspect they could still make significant cuts to the budget. That may or may not include walking away from the $5000 in deposits (sunk cost). Trimming that guest list would be a huge start. (Did they already send out invites? she mentions "disinvite" which suggests yes, but that generally happens shortly before the event.) Doing DIY modest decorating, holding the event at a time where a meal need not be served, etc.
And cutting the father from the wedding because he won't give them the money they demand? That's incredibly petty.
-
My issue isn't even with the fact that he "traditionally" would have paid and is instead "passing off" that duty. It's that he apparently said, "Okay, tell me your budget and we'll each pay a quarter of it" without ever consulting the other parents - and seems to want to strong-arm them into that arrangement by doing so. In my opinion, each person should assess what they are willing to contribute independently - and not in response to the bride's budget.
That's not to excuse the bride's part in the situation.
Tl;dr: He's within his rights to say "I will pay for a quarter of your wedding." He's not within his rights to say "Every parent should pay for a quarter of your wedding."
I mean, 95% or more of the blame here is on the engaged couple. How do you get far enough into the wedding planning process that you'd lose $5k worth of deposits without figuring out the small issue of paying for a $30k wedding?
The couple must have just assumed that the rich father was going to just pay for the whole thing to have gotten as far as they did without communication - which would almost assuredly be a valid reason why he was pissed off enough about the whole thing to say he only would pay for a quarter of it.
While it's possible the father was a complete ass about this for context not included, the story laid out in the article really puts almost all of the blame on the couple. And I suspect if the millionaire father was being an ass, the writer would have included that into their description. Instead of simply saying he was "stingy."
-
You're not wrong. It's always possible that the "each parent should pay a quarter" bit is her rationalization of his behavior, rather than anything he explicitly said. And my issue with his apparent volunteering of the other parents' money definitely also applies to the bride's volunteering of her father's money!
-
You're not wrong. It's always possible that the "each parent should pay a quarter" bit is her rationalization of his behavior, rather than anything he explicitly said. And my issue with his apparent volunteering of the other parents' money definitely also applies to the bride's volunteering of her father's money!
Why are people assuming it's the bride's father?
Isn't the phrase "fiancée" normally used for the bride-to-be (vs fiancé)? It's confusing to me to have language like that simultaneous to some of the references to father-daughter dances. Or perhaps both are women?
Anyways to your latter point, for all we know the other parents have been insistent on various things to be included in the wedding. For every father who has strong preferences about what happens in a wedding, there are many more mothers. It doesn't take very much imagination to see this having taken place too.
The language might be poor but the father is getting a lot worse rap here than I think he deserves. If he had posted his perspective in the "Relatives who just don't get it" thread there'd be a ton of empathy for him.
-
Why are people assuming it's the bride's father?
Well, the writer explicitly refers to father-daughter stuff, so yeah, I'd say she's a bride. She does use the feminine form of fiancée, so either she's marrying a woman or she doesn't know the gendered conventions around that word. I don't see how that's relevant.
I'm trying to acknowledge that we're getting the bride's filtered perspective here, and thus I might not be being fair to the father. I have no problem with the principle that he wants to pay for maximum a quarter of her wedding. I only take issue with the idea that he, or anyone, should expect the other parents to pay for the other 3/4s. They all have just as much right to pay zero as he does.
-
You're not wrong. It's always possible that the "each parent should pay a quarter" bit is her rationalization of his behavior, rather than anything he explicitly said. And my issue with his apparent volunteering of the other parents' money definitely also applies to the bride's volunteering of her father's money!
Why are people assuming it's the bride's father?
Isn't the phrase "fiancée" normally used for the bride-to-be (vs fiancé)? It's confusing to me to have language like that simultaneous to some of the references to father-daughter dances. Or perhaps both are women?
Yeah, I wonder why all the posters are jumping to the conclusion that the bride is the one writing in. The person said "fiancee," so if he's spelling that correctly and they are straight, he's a man. Of course, it's commonly misspelled.
Edit: now I see someone else pointed out the implication that the "father-daughter dance" would be with the LW, so I guess they are a lesbian couple (or bad at spelling).
-
Doesn't seem unreasonable to me for the millionaire Dad to only pay his 1/4 share of the wedding. I realize its family and a wedding but just because he amassed more wealth than the other parents doesn't obligate him to foot a larger share of the bill. The one exception I make to this is controlling parents who want to show off and invite everyone they know. If that's the case then let them pay for it.
But I also come from the perspective that modern American wedding has been mostly corrupted by the capitalist consumer driven machine. Why anyone outside of the 2% thinks its okay to spend well into 5 figures on a party to celebrate getting married blows my mind.
-
What do we do here?
Grow up, apologise to your father for calling him stingy and thank him for his contributions.
-
Honestly, I also have a problem with the multimillionaire dad. It's not that he's not putting up more money - it's that he's expecting all three other parents to match his contribution.
We don't know what he's expecting.
He might have just said that because there are 4 parents, he's only willing to put in a quarter. What the others put in is up to them.
We don't know.
What I *do* know, having a family with multiple very wealthy people, is that the wealthy people are often assumed to pick up the tab, so I can absolutely see the Bank of Dad putting a limit on his contribution that he thinks is fair.
It sounds very much like this person went ahead and planned everything and put down deposits assuming their father would pay, which is probably exactly why dad said "fuck no" to that and put a limit.
Assuming the story isn't just fabricated for the sake of going viral if course. I personally always assume these stories are fake.
-
I grew up in a culture where the bride's family would traditionally pay for the bulk of the wedding. The groom's parent's typically pay for the rehearsal dinner. So, probably the bride assumed that her side would pick up the tab. But you know what they say about assumptions; it is surprising to me that they got this far in plans without actually having a conversation about this? For some families wedding are a big deal and the wedding is almost more for the parents than the bride and groom. Obviously the father is of the mind this is an unnecessary expense.
I don't think it's fair the bride's father should expect everyone to split the tab evenly, I've never heard that being any kind of tradition or expectation. It's usually either the bride's family, or the couple themselves who fund it.
What should they do? Well
if a) this is the wedding party they wanted and planned go ahead and have it and pay for the rest themselves.
OR b) if they were only going to have that kind of wedding if someone ELSE is paying, cancel the wedding and plan something they are willing to afford.
-
First, the obvious: Please do not spend money you’ve set aside to buy a home to hold an extravagant, spite-driven wedding
Why is this obvious? Rant Alert! I have a problem with wedding, party and any other spending of any kind where it's "obvious" that if the spender was shelling out his/her own money, that person would make different choices.
Sir, what would you like for dinner?
That depends if Dad is paying. Dad?
Of course I'll pay, son.
In that case, I'll have the steak, the calamari appetizer, a glass of wine and a Caesar salad.
-
First, the obvious: Please do not spend money you’ve set aside to buy a home to hold an extravagant, spite-driven wedding
Why is this obvious? Rant Alert! I have a problem with wedding, party and any other spending of any kind where it's "obvious" that if the spender was shelling out his/her own money, that person would make different choices.
Sir, what would you like for dinner?
That depends if Dad is paying. Dad?
Of course I'll pay, son.
In that case, I'll have the steak, the calamari appetizer, a glass of wine and a Caesar salad.
Oh man, I would totally do this. In fact there were times I kicked myself when I went out ordered something small, and then someone else paid for the meal. I would have def ordered something bigger.
It DOES say she is mad at herself for planning this big wedding without knowing how it was going to be paid. She needs to look deep inside herself and figure out her priorities, is a big/expensive wedding, or saving for a house? I know I would pick the house. And seriously, if neither sets of parents care, just elope and have a big informal party with friends and family afterwards (grill out in a park or someone's yard).
-
First, the obvious: Please do not spend money you’ve set aside to buy a home to hold an extravagant, spite-driven wedding
Why is this obvious? Rant Alert! I have a problem with wedding, party and any other spending of any kind where it's "obvious" that if the spender was shelling out his/her own money, that person would make different choices.
Sir, what would you like for dinner?
That depends if Dad is paying. Dad?
Of course I'll pay, son.
In that case, I'll have the steak, the calamari appetizer, a glass of wine and a Caesar salad.
Oh man, I would totally do this. In fact there were times I kicked myself when I went out ordered something small, and then someone else paid for the meal. I would have def ordered something bigger.
It DOES say she is mad at herself for planning this big wedding without knowing how it was going to be paid. She needs to look deep inside herself and figure out her priorities, is a big/expensive wedding, or saving for a house? I know I would pick the house. And seriously, if neither sets of parents care, just elope and have a big informal party with friends and family afterwards (grill out in a park or someone's yard).
As someone who tends to do the inviting and the entertaining (and the paying, on the extremely rare occasions I entertain outside the home), I don't resent people ordering what they want because that's the entire point of restaurant dining. I do resent them maxing out the bill by ordering the most expensive item on the menu and multiple courses and then just picking at it. I'm also not a fan of people ordering extra to take home for friends and relatives. There's a fine line between a guest enjoying my hospitality and a guest taking advantage.
It appears to me that the family in the story has communication problems. The father of the letter writer is probably the only one who doesn't. I think that paying 1/4 of the wedding is completely reasonable: half should be paid by the happy couple given that they have the means to do so, and that leaves just 1/4 to be split among the other three parents if they are willing and able to contribute. If that's too burdensome, I agree with your solution: a smaller, quieter, and less fancy wedding is in order.
-
The "average for our state" comment was really weird.
I think the OP meant for it to suggest that she didn't consider her wedding extravagant. Would anyone who asked her dad for help funding a project start by saying that the budget for the project was "average for our state"?
I'd start by trying to figure out how to scale down the wedding to $18,000. If dad is committed to paying 1/4 of cost, then the couple still save $9,000 doing this.
-
...For some families wedding are a big deal and the wedding is almost more for the parents than the bride and groom. Obviously the father is of the mind this is an unnecessary expense.
Right. I have been a bride's father. It may be that the "multimillionaire" father has a different perspective on money, particularly if he made it himself. Money's the best: it's a residue of the best part of your thinking, of your labor, of what time you have been given, of what you could provide that others valued enough to pay for. I don't really give much of a shit about weddings, especially given some of the marriages that have resulted. I pay extra principal on my kids' home loans (once they qualify on their own to buy a house); I put money in Roths for those of the kids who can still contribute; I put money in 529s for the grandkids. It may be this father has preferred destinations for his money that don't include her ostentatious wedding, which she will think cheap but he defensible, if anyone were actually to ask "why?" It may be he thinks it likely she will be a better steward of her part of his money when she is old and death has taken him; which is certainly likely, given what use she wants to make of it now.
-
I think it's odd that Father offered to pay 25% rather than simply set a fixed amount that was his contribution. It sets up an odd dynamic with the parents of the fiancée.
-
I think it's odd that Father offered to pay 25% rather than simply set a fixed amount that was his contribution. It sets up an odd dynamic with the parents of the fiancée.
It could be a subtle reminder that marrying below your caste comes with a lot of financial compromises and you probably should think twice about doing it. It could also prevent them relying on him to bail out every self imposed problem.
-
For some families wedding are a big deal and the wedding is almost more for the parents than the bride and groom.
Oh, you've met my parents and in-laws. I'm an only child, my family does big weddings, and my MIL likes things done in a very certain way. I'm not sure she ever totally forgave us for not having professional engagement photos taken so that she could place one in the small-town newspaper.
If husband and could do things over again, we'd bring our immediate families and closest friends to a resort and have a small ceremony and dinner in a beautiful place. But our moms insisted on the big party and as they were paying for it, we didn't feel like we could argue much. I didn't win the "adults only" battle but did manage to talk my mom down from the standard 300-person evening dinner and DJ reception to a 160-person luncheon. I had to set a hard and fast limit on family to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and first cousins (that still left my family guest list at ~80). It was pretty, and I think all the guests had a good time. The cake was amazing. But we were exhausted and frazzled. That day was definitely for other people.
-
Exactly! It wasn't long ago that Father of the Bride traditionally paid the bulk of the costs, for him to feel the other parents who have lesser means should pay equally is stingy indeed. A $7,500 wedding celebration can be just fine, even for families with millionaires, but a millionaire who expects others to contribute equally to a $30,000 celebration is not.
At least the bride is also admitting that she is partly at fault for committing to expenses without a clear plan for how they would be paid for. I think bride and groom should pay for the wedding that they planned, booked, and invited people to. I don't think bride should cut traditional father-bride items from the celebration out of spite.
This tradition where the Father of the Bride pays for the wedding is not universal across cultures.
The tradition also includes asking for permission to marry and for the money before booking venues...
If you want to be traditional, great. But you can't ignore the traditions you dislike, such as asking for the money upfront. This is clearly a non-traditional wedding.
The modern day dilemna that the bride is faced with is because she ignored basic courtesy of asking before taking. She tried to be manipulative and continued on that path by suggesting she would skip a dance with the father because he did not pay for enough; the proper response to $7500 is thank you, not FU for not giving more.
The traditional Golden rule has never changed; the person with the gold makes the rules. If you want someones gold, you play by their rules. Forcing someone to play by your own rules and expecting them to pay is entitlement, in this case with blackmail thrown in.
She should apologize for her rude behaviour. Nowhere has she ever indicated she apologized for her boorish manners. She in fact one upped herself by suggesting blackmail instead of saying thank you for $7500! I suspect finding her manners and behaving like an adult would go a lot farther than blackmail. What kind of person accepts a gift of cash and behaves so terribly about it?
-
For some families wedding are a big deal and the wedding is almost more for the parents than the bride and groom.
Oh, you've met my parents and in-laws. I'm an only child, my family does big weddings, and my MIL likes things done in a very certain way. I'm not sure she ever totally forgave us for not having professional engagement photos taken so that she could place one in the small-town newspaper.
If husband and could do things over again, we'd bring our immediate families and closest friends to a resort and have a small ceremony and dinner in a beautiful place. But our moms insisted on the big party and as they were paying for it, we didn't feel like we could argue much. I didn't win the "adults only" battle but did manage to talk my mom down from the standard 300-person evening dinner and DJ reception to a 160-person luncheon. I had to set a hard and fast limit on family to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and first cousins (that still left my family guest list at ~80). It was pretty, and I think all the guests had a good time. The cake was amazing. But we were exhausted and frazzled. That day was definitely for other people.
The wedding is for the person footing the bill. As the recipient of the gift, the etiquette is to say thank you which I assume you did.
By all means try to have input, but theres only so much you can do with other peoples money. Over the years people have forgotten that you get what you pay for, including weddings. You didn't pay so you got someone elses idea of a wedding. Maybe it wasn't your dream, but it was a gift.
Complaining about something that you didn't pay for is extremely ill-mannered. That's why we still send out thank you cards for bread machines and blenders; just to be polite.
-
What do we do here?
Grow up, apologise to your father for calling him stingy and thank him for his contributions.
My thoughts exactly
-
For some families wedding are a big deal and the wedding is almost more for the parents than the bride and groom.
Oh, you've met my parents and in-laws. I'm an only child, my family does big weddings, and my MIL likes things done in a very certain way. I'm not sure she ever totally forgave us for not having professional engagement photos taken so that she could place one in the small-town newspaper.
If husband and could do things over again, we'd bring our immediate families and closest friends to a resort and have a small ceremony and dinner in a beautiful place. But our moms insisted on the big party and as they were paying for it, we didn't feel like we could argue much. I didn't win the "adults only" battle but did manage to talk my mom down from the standard 300-person evening dinner and DJ reception to a 160-person luncheon. I had to set a hard and fast limit on family to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and first cousins (that still left my family guest list at ~80). It was pretty, and I think all the guests had a good time. The cake was amazing. But we were exhausted and frazzled. That day was definitely for other people.
The wedding is for the person footing the bill. As the recipient of the gift, the etiquette is to say thank you which I assume you did.
By all means try to have input, but theres only so much you can do with other peoples money. Over the years people have forgotten that you get what you pay for, including weddings. You didn't pay so you got someone elses idea of a wedding. Maybe it wasn't your dream, but it was a gift.
Complaining about something that you didn't pay for is extremely ill-mannered. That's why we still send out thank you cards for bread machines and blenders; just to be polite.
Gee, thanks for the lecture. Yes, I did thank my parents because I was grateful for the gift and they raised me well. Assuming that someone is complaining because they muse that they would have chosen to do things differently if they were in control is rather rude.
-
Poor communication with lots of blame to go around. Considering her mom's situation she should not take any money from her and the in-laws should not be put on the spot. I would resent it.
-
I think we're missing the point here.
Our parents kicked in zero for our wedding, and my parents even said that since we were having a "destination wedding", they would get us a smaller present. And yet, there was no drama, because our parents didn't raise us to expect or rely on other people's money. We were grateful for their blessing and their presence and we had a great wedding.
-
https://www.supermoney.com/2017/07/how-much-does-the-average-wedding-cost-supermoney-guide-to-wedding-costs/
Average U.S. wedding cost in 2016: $26,720
Median cost: $14,399
When my wife and I were getting married, her father offered $10,000 and said anything we didn't use on the wedding was ours. We ended up pushing right up against that number and had a beautiful wedding, but we also could have just gone to the courthouse and pocketed it. It is an expense I don't regret, and I'm glad we had a "modest" budget, as it forced us to work on problem solving together.
-
The wedding is for the person footing the bill. As the recipient of the gift, the etiquette is to say thank you which I assume you did.
By all means try to have input, but theres only so much you can do with other peoples money. Over the years people have forgotten that you get what you pay for, including weddings. You didn't pay so you got someone elses idea of a wedding. Maybe it wasn't your dream, but it was a gift.
Complaining about something that you didn't pay for is extremely ill-mannered. That's why we still send out thank you cards for bread machines and blenders; just to be polite.
I'm not quite understanding this perspective, if the money is a gift why would the giver have authority over what receiver does with the gift? Once a gift is given, the giver has no control over what the recipient does with the gift, otherwise is it still considered a gift?
-
The wedding is for the person footing the bill. As the recipient of the gift, the etiquette is to say thank you which I assume you did.
By all means try to have input, but theres only so much you can do with other peoples money. Over the years people have forgotten that you get what you pay for, including weddings. You didn't pay so you got someone elses idea of a wedding. Maybe it wasn't your dream, but it was a gift.
Complaining about something that you didn't pay for is extremely ill-mannered. That's why we still send out thank you cards for bread machines and blenders; just to be polite.
I'm not quite understanding this perspective, if the money is a gift why would the giver have authority over what receiver does with the gift? Once a gift is given, the giver has no control over what the recipient does with the gift, otherwise is it still considered a gift?
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
-
The wedding is for the person footing the bill. As the recipient of the gift, the etiquette is to say thank you which I assume you did.
By all means try to have input, but theres only so much you can do with other peoples money. Over the years people have forgotten that you get what you pay for, including weddings. You didn't pay so you got someone elses idea of a wedding. Maybe it wasn't your dream, but it was a gift.
Complaining about something that you didn't pay for is extremely ill-mannered. That's why we still send out thank you cards for bread machines and blenders; just to be polite.
I'm not quite understanding this perspective, if the money is a gift why would the giver have authority over what receiver does with the gift? Once a gift is given, the giver has no control over what the recipient does with the gift, otherwise is it still considered a gift?
There's such a thing as a conditional gift. A gift made with the intent of helping the recipient do a particular thing is contingent on that thing being done in a way the giver regards as appropriate.
In the old tradition (not common to all cultures) in which the bride's parents paid for the wedding, they were actually responsible for planning and executing it also. The bride got to select a specific number of attendants, and perhaps pick the decoration colors and the dresses. Aside from that she simply wasn't involved with the wedding or the reception. The Golden Rule (as quoted above in this thread) was in full effect.
The wedding itself occurred in whatever church the bride's parents attended, and there wasn't always a reception. If the parents were rural landowners who could afford was a big picnic buffet followed by country dancing, that's what they had. If they were lucky enough to have a family estate, that's where the reception was held, in the ballroom, the basement, or the dining hall. If the bride wasn't happy because she wanted candles instead of flowers, tough luck.
The entire purpose of a wedding ceremony and reception is to present the newly wedded couple *as* a couple to the society they are now part of. The cost of doing that can be construed as a "gift", however it's not really a no-strings-attached gift any more than a gift of university tuition. There's an expectation that the funds be used for the intended purpose. Using family money to elope and put a down payment on the house, without inviting the person who provided that money, is insulting. It's about on par with a student who drops out of his or her classes and spends the tuition money on a fancy car. Acts like this do permanent damage to the relationship with the person who provided the resources.
-
My parents were married in 1968 at the age of 30, relatively late for that time. They were successful young professionals and had only widowed mothers of modest means at the time. So they paid for their own wedding.
Mom was deceased by the time I got married in 1998 at 28 but I'm sure she would have agreed with my dad's sentiment that he would pay for nothing of mine - no rehearsal dinner - nor would he pay for the weddings of my two sisters. His position was that you're grown-ups, not 18-year-olds leaving your parents farms circa 1940.
My old man also gave me a boat load of grief for letting my in-laws pay for my wedding. In hindsight, he was right. I could have - and should have - paid for it. If you let in-laws or parents pay for a wedding, they thus have big-time say over things such as how holidays are spent. My sisters got married at 34 and 39, respectively, letting groom's parents foot the bills, and I've seen how their MILs dictate how holiday time is spent and are generally domineering.
-
When my wife and I were getting married, her father offered $10,000 and said anything we didn't use on the wedding was ours. We ended up pushing right up against that number and had a beautiful wedding, but we also could have just gone to the courthouse and pocketed it. It is an expense I don't regret, and I'm glad we had a "modest" budget, as it forced us to work on problem solving together.
This is what we plan to do for each of our daughters. A gift of $X amount, no strings attached, to be used however they see fit. If they want to blow it all on a party, fine! Up to them and their fiancée to work it out, part of learning to adult together. If they want to exceed this amount that's also fine, but don't ask mom and dad for more and figure out how to fund the overage on your own. Or, do a courthouse wedding and pocket the cash, or spend it on the honeymoon. It's all good as far as I'm concerned.
-
SNIP
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
Thanks! I wasn't considering it from the perspective of the event itself being the gift rather than the money to fund the event. Conditional gifts, new concept to me, thanks TGS. All very interesting to think about.
-
My parents were married in 1968 at the age of 30, relatively late for that time. They were successful young professionals and had only widowed mothers of modest means at the time. So they paid for their own wedding.
Mom was deceased by the time I got married in 1998 at 28 but I'm sure she would have agreed with my dad's sentiment that he would pay for nothing of mine - no rehearsal dinner - nor would he pay for the weddings of my two sisters. His position was that you're grown-ups, not 18-year-olds leaving your parents farms circa 1940.
My old man also gave me a boat load of grief for letting my in-laws pay for my wedding. In hindsight, he was right. I could have - and should have - paid for it. If you let in-laws or parents pay for a wedding, they thus have big-time say over things such as how holidays are spent. My sisters got married at 34 and 39, respectively, letting groom's parents foot the bills, and I've seen how their MILs dictate how holiday time is spent and are generally domineering.
What? How so? First, I can't see a real relationship between paying for the wedding and Christmas plans. And second, even if someone tries to make that connection, someone is free to dismiss it. My MIL bought and arranged the flowers for our wedding and paid for the rehearsal dinner, as well as making the invitations. And if she told me how I had to spend Christmas, I'd laugh and make my own plans. Which I would also do if she financed the whole wedding, or had no involvement at all.
My parents paid for our wedding. It was expensive. They actually upgraded a few items to spend more (the one that comes to mind is upgrading the wine) because they were excited about a big celebration with those who were important to me (and many of whom to them as well). And they have never for one second used that to try and have a "say" over my, DH, or relationship, or our plans. And they never would. They also never really tried to influence our wedding choices. Footing the bill, to them, didn't mean they got to pick the location or veto my dress choices or anything of that nature. It didn't mean they dictated the guest list (though I sent them our list and asked them if there was anyone they wanted to add. I can't recall if they did, but if so, it couldn't have been more than a few people.) Of course, I tried to be respectful of their money and also to make them feel included in the process, since I knew that was important to them (and I'd have done that whether they were paying or not). But they gave willingly and without strings, and I accepted gratefully, and with thoughtfulness and appreciation.
I think ILs trying to dictate holiday time is going to happen regardless of wedding financing. If they are the type to do that, they are going to do it, even if the couple elopes in Vegas. I'm not sure why you tied that to who paid. I have friends whose parents paid for their wedding (and ILs paid nothing) and yet the ILs still try to dictate life choices and holiday decisions. I have friends who footed the bill themselves and still have ILs without boundaries and who think they have a say in the couple's holiday choices. It seems to me that this is a common phenomenon, and there is no correlation at all to wedding funding.
-
My old man also gave me a boat load of grief for letting my in-laws pay for my wedding. In hindsight, he was right. I could have - and should have - paid for it. If you let in-laws or parents pay for a wedding, they thus have big-time say over things such as how holidays are spent. My sisters got married at 34 and 39, respectively, letting groom's parents foot the bills, and I've seen how their MILs dictate how holiday time is spent and are generally domineering.
N'ah, that's called having boundary problems.
No MIL has any more power than the couple gives them, regardless of what cheques they may have written in the past.
The bigger question is why the hell all of the husband's involved are okay with their moms being domineering to their wives???
Not okay.
-
I do think the type of parents that pay for the wedding because they have high expectations of how it should happen are probably the same type of parents that throw tantrums over Christmas plans. That's why you should indeed put boundaries into place if your parents or in-laws are like that. (Not all parents are like that of course). I have one friend whose MIL took over the entire wedding planning and paid for it. They didn't like that but didn't set boundaries. She absolutely ruined the day like she ruins all special occasions in the family, but that's because everyone lets her. They could/should have said no and planned and paid for their own day. Other than that friend I haven't heard of anyone's parents paying the full wedding but it seems quite common that parents pay for specific items like the dress, the suit, the dinner, the champagne etc.
I think parents paying for their kid's wedding is pretty outdated. Back in the days the marriage would take place in the woman's parish church so it would make sense for the guests to celebrate at her parents' house, but most people didn't have big expensive weddings at a separate venue and with catering etc. It would be a modest affair. Plus people lived at home until marriage back then and often gave a large part of their wages to their parents or worked in the family business. These days people get married much later, have lived on their own, have degrees and careers and savings. I get that some parents want to give a gift, and that's fine, but just assuming they'll pay because it's the tradition is stupid. Even if your dad is rich.
-
SNIP
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
Thanks! I wasn't considering it from the perspective of the event itself being the gift rather than the money to fund the event. Conditional gifts, new concept to me, thanks TGS. All very interesting to think about.
I think that if ILs are paying for your wedding, they get a say. If you have a pot luck and ask your guests to bring food, then they have a say in what they bring. You can make requests. If you want exact control, then prepare the food yourself!
-
SNIP
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
Thanks! I wasn't considering it from the perspective of the event itself being the gift rather than the money to fund the event. Conditional gifts, new concept to me, thanks TGS. All very interesting to think about.
I think that if ILs are paying for your wedding, they get a say. If you have a pot luck and ask your guests to bring food, then they have a say in what they bring. You can make requests. If you want exact control, then prepare the food yourself!
A conditional gift generally shouldn't apply to after-the-fact behavior though. The person who pays for the wedding should have a say in terms of the guest list, the budget, and some of the tradeoffs, however they shouldn't be buying long-term control over the new couple. The influence should end when the wedding reception does.
-
SNIP
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
Thanks! I wasn't considering it from the perspective of the event itself being the gift rather than the money to fund the event. Conditional gifts, new concept to me, thanks TGS. All very interesting to think about.
I'm trying to think how many gifts I've received that were without conditions; its not many. The first condition is proper gratitude and then a certain level of appreciation. We consider that social customs, but if you fail to conduct the proper thanks you might not be getting a gift next year.
I've struggled with receiving gifts, I lack the ability to show appreciation at times. I've gone out of my way to ask people to stop giving me gifts, so that I'm not being rude after. I'd rather have nothing then; I don't want to be the spoiled kid who complains about a gift after. Now that I get very few gifts I'm able to appreciate each one more. With the few I get I'm an excellent receiver.
Christmas gift required being good, tooth fairy required you to exchange a tooth, halloween requires dressing up, a wedding requires you to yield control, a birthday requires proper gratitude etc. It all seems like normal behaviour but everything had a conditon that was just considered part of the tradition. Not all conditions are onerous, some are fun unless you really loved your baby teeth or hate dressing up.
-
SNIP
I phrased this poorly, I'll try again.
the gift is the wedding, not cash. @DadJokes had a cash gift and it was phrased that way. I think you sensed that, by saying If the gift...theres a wide spectrum here but in general most people are either gifted cash or gifted a wedding (typically phrased as the parents paid for it).
A wedding is an agreed upon gift that both parties will have input on and compromise until they find an acceptable arrangement. If no compromise is achieved the couple will elope or fund their own wedding. Once the gift has been freely accepted, much like any gift, its presumed that further compromise is unnecessary and no further changes will be placed. It is also presumed that the receiver won't complain, call the father stingy or blackmail for more.
In practice, this means that parents and children will discuss the wedding and they will design something both find acceptable. If its unnacceptable, it is the responsibilty of everyone to voice it. Its tough on a parent if the children elope after its all paid for, its tough on the children if they get a wedding they didn't want.
In the article, she didn't like the gift and complained.
Thanks! I wasn't considering it from the perspective of the event itself being the gift rather than the money to fund the event. Conditional gifts, new concept to me, thanks TGS. All very interesting to think about.
I'm trying to think how many gifts I've received that were without conditions; its not many. The first condition is proper gratitude and then a certain level of appreciation. We consider that social customs, but if you fail to conduct the proper thanks you might not be getting a gift next year.
I've struggled with receiving gifts, I lack the ability to show appreciation at times. I've gone out of my way to ask people to stop giving me gifts, so that I'm not being rude after. I'd rather have nothing then; I don't want to be the spoiled kid who complains about a gift after. Now that I get very few gifts I'm able to appreciate each one more. With the few I get I'm an excellent receiver.
Christmas gift required being good, tooth fairy required you to exchange a tooth, halloween requires dressing up, a wedding requires you to yield control, a birthday requires proper gratitude etc. It all seems like normal behaviour but everything had a conditon that was just considered part of the tradition. Not all conditions are onerous, some are fun unless you really loved your baby teeth or hate dressing up.
Gift exchange is part of the social contract and depends a lot on location and culture. Reciprocity in a material form is not the only way a social contract can be expressed.
-
A conditional gift generally shouldn't apply to after-the-fact behavior though. The person who pays for the wedding should have a say in terms of the guest list, the budget, and some of the tradeoffs, however they shouldn't be buying long-term control over the new couple. The influence should end when the wedding reception does.
Oh, absolutely. A wedding and a marriage are two different things. A wedding is an event and if you pay for an event, you have some influence. A marriage is between two people.
I think some people confuse “paying for the wedding” and “receiving a cash gift”. You can’t count on cash gifts and shouldn’t plan your wedding around anticipating a large amount.
Although I admit it may be unclear as to which you are receiving. Fungibility of money and all that. I would be weary / clarify and pre-wedding gifts.
-
I will leave this here https://www.bustle.com/articles/16919-how-to-plan-a-wedding-in-one-week-without-losing-your-mind .
-
I read Prudence's advice (the bride's question was to her). It's reasonably sound but she forgot something really important.
Dear Bride,
Get your head out of your overly entitled ass. The world does not owe you the bridal spectacle you desire. Your parents and prospective in-laws do not owe you anything at this point -- you are supposed to be an adult and pay your own way in life. You should be thoroughly ashamed of your behavior.
Dear Fiancee',
It is now time for second thoughts. If your bride-to-be does not learn how to be a better person after this spectacular failure as a human being, you will be better off marrying someone else. Marriage to a self-entitled ass is not fun, alimony and child support is even less so.
-
I had a friend of my ex-wife spend 25k on her wedding back in the 90's. At the wedding I commented that I gave the marriage 5 years. Of course my ex was appalled. But I could tell that anyone who wanted a ridiculous wedding would have a ridiculous marriage. Especially since they couldn't afford it.
-
If you can't afford to pay for your own wedding, you can't afford a wedding. No reason why daddy should pay in this day and age.
-
Honestly, I also have a problem with the multimillionaire dad. It's not that he's not putting up more money - it's that he's expecting all three other parents to match his contribution.
Exactly! It wasn't long ago that Father of the Bride traditionally paid the bulk of the costs, for him to feel the other parents who have lesser means should pay equally is stingy indeed. A $7,500 wedding celebration can be just fine, even for families with millionaires, but a millionaire who expects others to contribute equally to a $30,000 celebration is not.
At least the bride is also admitting that she is partly at fault for committing to expenses without a clear plan for how they would be paid for. I think bride and groom should pay for the wedding that they planned, booked, and invited people to. I don't think bride should cut traditional father-bride items from the celebration out of spite.
I don't think the multimillionaire father is being unreasonable at all. To even agree to pay for 1/4, or any at all, of a wedding is a generous thing to do, and should not be questioned. No one is obliged to pay for your wedding, except yourself.
The couple in question are ingrates, entitled, and are trying to live a lifestyle above their means. They are buying into the wedding industry's marketing.
I would be incredibly appalled if I let my partner's parents pay anything for our wedding. She would be too. Our wedding is something we (she and I) will pay for ourselves. We have no expectation of anyone else paying. We have no expectation of receiving anything in return. Any other approach (where there is an expectation of others paying for your own party) is stupid and irresponsible.
If you can't afford to throw a party, then don't. Simple manners/etiquette.
Most of the weddings I've been to cost $30,000 - $40,000. I'm not kidding. I know how much weddings cost because I've been doing early planning for my own. It's ridiculous. My partner and I have budgeted $20,000 for ours. I've had a few friends earnestly ask me why my budget is so low. I just say that I don't feel comfortable spending more on something that's meant to be an intimate celebration and not an instagram show-off piece.
-
Want a fancy wedding? Pay for it yourself...it's really that simple. I hate the traditional expectations of family involvement in paying for a wedding. If money is offered freely and without further obligation, that is one thing..but to have the expectation that parents will pay just has never made sense to me. I will likely be in my mid 30s when I get married, and I know for a fact that my parents would not pitch in. And I would never ask.
This is obviously just my personal opinion, and I am in no way trying to offend anyone who got money from their parents for their wedding, etc...but I have just never understood why I would make a life choice, I would make a commitment of marriage to someone, and then ask my parents for money to throw a party. It would make me really uncomfortable to involve my parents financially in my life like that. Thankfully my parents agree (might be the only thing we agree on, haha) and have no expectation that I will ever be having a traditional wedding.
-
On the other hand, my wife's parents offered to pay for most everything and chose to spend $15k for a fancy affair. I kept telling them that I appreciated it but I wouldn't spend that money myself. It was nice though.
-
I hate how expensive weddings have become.
There was a sort of horror wedding story but it didn't really involve money. Though I guess it sort of did. My ex-step sibling wanted to get married in this boat house they had partied at while in college. The boat house was a really cool venue. It was big and more of a boat house night club than a "boat house". It was on an inlet, a marsh, and the scenery was gorgeous.
So the venue owner would rent out to partiers for like $1,000 for a night. But when the owner found out it was a wedding, jacked the price to like $7-8,000. The owner did not clean the place as he had promised and didn't do anything he'd promised.
He knew my extended family and friends would clean up and prepare everything because this was THE wedding venue!!!11 and he had everyone over a barrel.
I hate the idea that weddings need to be super expensive to be nice. I want to get married at the court house and then have a small ceremony at a nice restaurant for maybe 30-50 people and cost less than $5,000. That'd be great to me. Because, statistically (plus with the demands of my job), my marriage will probably end in divorce.
Now.... now... I do know a guy (who was bad with money, he had like over $1,000/month in car payments and made less than I did and I would never have done anything that crazy) who DID go to the court house and get a marriage certificate and then go out to lunch or dinner with just him and his new wife. That was a prudent financial move... and I think she made him get rid of his expensive car and motorcycle.
-
Want a fancy wedding? Pay for it yourself...it's really that simple. I hate the traditional expectations of family involvement in paying for a wedding. If money is offered freely and without further obligation, that is one thing..but to have the expectation that parents will pay just has never made sense to me. I will likely be in my mid 30s when I get married, and I know for a fact that my parents would not pitch in. And I would never ask.
This is obviously just my personal opinion, and I am in no way trying to offend anyone who got money from their parents for their wedding, etc...but I have just never understood why I would make a life choice, I would make a commitment of marriage to someone, and then ask my parents for money to throw a party. It would make me really uncomfortable to involve my parents financially in my life like that. Thankfully my parents agree (might be the only thing we agree on, haha) and have no expectation that I will ever be having a traditional wedding.
It is a tradition in some families. When my nephew got married it was at a fancy club, full wedding party, formalwear, etc, while I know my nephew didn't care about that kind of stuff. But her family had been saving for her wedding and that was the way it was going to happen. It actually was nice to be part of it and officially celebrate, meet the other side of the family.
Since every family is different, it is good NOT to make assumptions, and simply ask ones parents hey if I got married, do you have any preferences? i eloped, and I thought I was doing my parents a favor. I hurt their feelings both that there wasn't a formal party they could invite family to and that they weren't asked/told ahead of time. In retrospect it was a faux pas the way I did it.
-
Want a fancy wedding? Pay for it yourself...it's really that simple. I hate the traditional expectations of family involvement in paying for a wedding. If money is offered freely and without further obligation, that is one thing..but to have the expectation that parents will pay just has never made sense to me. I will likely be in my mid 30s when I get married, and I know for a fact that my parents would not pitch in. And I would never ask.
This is obviously just my personal opinion, and I am in no way trying to offend anyone who got money from their parents for their wedding, etc...but I have just never understood why I would make a life choice, I would make a commitment of marriage to someone, and then ask my parents for money to throw a party. It would make me really uncomfortable to involve my parents financially in my life like that. Thankfully my parents agree (might be the only thing we agree on, haha) and have no expectation that I will ever be having a traditional wedding.
It is a tradition in some families. When my nephew got married it was at a fancy club, full wedding party, formalwear, etc, while I know my nephew didn't care about that kind of stuff. But her family had been saving for her wedding and that was the way it was going to happen. It actually was nice to be part of it and officially celebrate, meet the other side of the family.
Since every family is different, it is good NOT to make assumptions, and simply ask ones parents hey if I got married, do you have any preferences? i eloped, and I thought I was doing my parents a favor. I hurt their feelings both that there wasn't a formal party they could invite family to and that they weren't asked/told ahead of time. In retrospect it was a faux pas the way I did it.
This is pretty much my thinking, too. I'd never assume that parents or anyone else would pay for a wedding, and yet I instinctively knew mine would I'd have been 100% fine if they hadn't, but it would have been a surprise. They love entertaining and hosting large parties. It doesn't mean I expected it, or that I asked them to throw a party. Shortly after we got engaged, they brought it up.
They hosted a phenomenal party that was really special to all of us. They still talk about it; my mom still says it was one of the most special nights of her life. And yet they weren't pushy about it and let us make our decisions (though of course we kept what we knew would be important or special to them in mind). It was a family celebration, marking the extending of our family, and felt very much like that.
-
Want a fancy wedding? Pay for it yourself...it's really that simple. I hate the traditional expectations of family involvement in paying for a wedding. If money is offered freely and without further obligation, that is one thing..but to have the expectation that parents will pay just has never made sense to me. I will likely be in my mid 30s when I get married, and I know for a fact that my parents would not pitch in. And I would never ask.
This is obviously just my personal opinion, and I am in no way trying to offend anyone who got money from their parents for their wedding, etc...but I have just never understood why I would make a life choice, I would make a commitment of marriage to someone, and then ask my parents for money to throw a party. It would make me really uncomfortable to involve my parents financially in my life like that. Thankfully my parents agree (might be the only thing we agree on, haha) and have no expectation that I will ever be having a traditional wedding.
It is a tradition in some families. When my nephew got married it was at a fancy club, full wedding party, formalwear, etc, while I know my nephew didn't care about that kind of stuff. But her family had been saving for her wedding and that was the way it was going to happen. It actually was nice to be part of it and officially celebrate, meet the other side of the family.
Since every family is different, it is good NOT to make assumptions, and simply ask ones parents hey if I got married, do you have any preferences? i eloped, and I thought I was doing my parents a favor. I hurt their feelings both that there wasn't a formal party they could invite family to and that they weren't asked/told ahead of time. In retrospect it was a faux pas the way I did it.
This is pretty much my thinking, too. I'd never assume that parents or anyone else would pay for a wedding, and yet I instinctively knew mine would I'd have been 100% fine if they hadn't, but it would have been a surprise. They love entertaining and hosting large parties. It doesn't mean I expected it, or that I asked them to throw a party. Shortly after we got engaged, they brought it up.
They hosted a phenomenal party that was really special to all of us. They still talk about it; my mom still says it was one of the most special nights of her life. And yet they weren't pushy about it and let us make our decisions (though of course we kept what we knew would be important or special to them in mind). It was a family celebration, marking the extending of our family, and felt very much like that.
Like I said in my post, it really is just my personal opinion. Likely the kind of upbringing I had, as well as the amount of involvement my parents choose to have in my life as an adult (very little) has helped create that opinion. I just can't wrap my head around my parents being offended if I just got eloped, or them choosing to contribute to a big wedding party should I choose to do that. They just aren't those type of people, and we don't have that kind of relationship, never had even when I was a younger kid. They are pretty hands off. I do understand it is different for every family, but I don't think it should be an obligation or expectation. Just my opinion.
-
If you can't afford to pay for your own wedding, you can't afford a wedding. No reason why daddy should pay in this day and age.
Bingo. That's my feeling. Those average and median wedding cost figures posted earlier are ridiculous.
-
I hate how expensive weddings have become.
There was a sort of horror wedding story but it didn't really involve money. Though I guess it sort of did. My ex-step sibling wanted to get married in this boat house they had partied at while in college. The boat house was a really cool venue. It was big and more of a boat house night club than a "boat house". It was on an inlet, a marsh, and the scenery was gorgeous.
So the venue owner would rent out to partiers for like $1,000 for a night. But when the owner found out it was a wedding, jacked the price to like $7-8,000. The owner did not clean the place as he had promised and didn't do anything he'd promised.
He knew my extended family and friends would clean up and prepare everything because this was THE wedding venue!!!11 and he had everyone over a barrel.
I hate the idea that weddings need to be super expensive to be nice. I want to get married at the court house and then have a small ceremony at a nice restaurant for maybe 30-50 people and cost less than $5,000. That'd be great to me. Because, statistically (plus with the demands of my job), my marriage will probably end in divorce.
Bfive55, you must work in a field with intense hours and lots of travel? Are you perhaps a professional athlete or a fighter pilot?
As a member of this community, I would encourage you to learn more about various risk factors that make divorce more likely and do what you can to mitigate them. Having a successful marriage can be a powerful force for reaching the FIRE lifestyle that we all are trying to build.
-
Let's be clear: They don't "have a budget of 30k." They have a target they want to spend. Big difference here...
-
^Yep!
And $30K is just ridiculous.
-
If you can't afford to pay for your own wedding, you can't afford a wedding. No reason why daddy should pay in this day and age.
Bingo. That's my feeling. Those average and median wedding cost figures posted earlier are ridiculous.
As someone who mostly self-funded our own wedding, I was deeply grateful for every bit of help that was provided by various parents and relatives. None gave us anything close to $7500. We planned it according to the cash on hand, as should be the basis of any brand new financial partnership (with benefits).
-
My parents were married in 1968 at the age of 30, relatively late for that time. They were successful young professionals and had only widowed mothers of modest means at the time. So they paid for their own wedding.
Mom was deceased by the time I got married in 1998 at 28 but I'm sure she would have agreed with my dad's sentiment that he would pay for nothing of mine - no rehearsal dinner - nor would he pay for the weddings of my two sisters. His position was that you're grown-ups, not 18-year-olds leaving your parents farms circa 1940.
My old man also gave me a boat load of grief for letting my in-laws pay for my wedding. In hindsight, he was right. I could have - and should have - paid for it. If you let in-laws or parents pay for a wedding, they thus have big-time say over things such as how holidays are spent. My sisters got married at 34 and 39, respectively, letting groom's parents foot the bills, and I've seen how their MILs dictate how holiday time is spent and are generally domineering.
My in-laws paid (and offered) nothing for our wedding, but tried to guilt us into having it somewhere convenient for them and their extended families; they have spent the past 15 years making demands about holidays and visits, and acting like paying guests when they visit us, so I’m not sure if the connection works the way you think it does.
-
In general I am opposed to linking unconnected things (payment for wedding, family time for a particular holiday six years later).
However, I do believe that family relationships include an obligation to arrange for time with the family for important holidays. Things are always more complicated after a wedding (similarly for a divorce/re-marriage) because now two sides of a joined family must compete for time with each other.
It's interesting to me that two different customers are changing in different directions: it's becoming much more common for parents to supply funds for buying a home at the same time as it's becoming less common for parents to pay for the wedding.
-
In general I am opposed to linking unconnected things (payment for wedding, family time for a particular holiday six years later).
However, I do believe that family relationships include an obligation to arrange for time with the family for important holidays. Things are always more complicated after a wedding (similarly for a divorce/re-marriage) because now two sides of a joined family must compete for time with each other.
It's interesting to me that two different customers are changing in different directions: it's becoming much more common for parents to supply funds for buying a home at the same time as it's becoming less common for parents to pay for the wedding.
Honestly I think it depends on the family. My ex parents in laws, the grandparents were involved in planning the wedding and also contributed for a downpayment on the first house. The big difference was, wedding was a cake and punch affair at the church, so it was possible to do both.
-
My in-laws paid (and offered) nothing for our wedding, but tried to guilt us into having it somewhere convenient for them and their extended families; they have spent the past 15 years making demands about holidays and visits, and acting like paying guests when they visit us, so I’m not sure if the connection works the way you think it does.
Wow - we may be related to some of the same people. For me the in-laws are the easy side of the equation... Similar personalities at work though...
-
My in-laws paid (and offered) nothing for our wedding, but tried to guilt us into having it somewhere convenient for them and their extended families; they have spent the past 15 years making demands about holidays and visits, and acting like paying guests when they visit us, so I’m not sure if the connection works the way you think it does.
Wow - we may be related to some of the same people. For me the in-laws are the easy side of the equation... Similar personalities at work though...
I'm sure I've talked about a friend before. Back in the 1990s, I had a coworker who had married right after college. It was Thanksgiving, and I asked him if he was going home. He and his wife were from the same town.
He said "nope, and never again on a holiday".
Well, why?
On their wedding weekend, the two sets of parents (this couple were HS sweethearts), competed for their time. So, for example, the bride's family wanted to have breakfast with the couple the morning after the wedding, before they left on their honeymoon (leaving the next morning was common back then). Fine, no problem. But then, after breakfast, the couple drove to the groom's parents' house to say goodbye.
The bride's family pitched a fucking fit because WE WEREN'T THE LAST PEOPLE TO SEE YOU BEFORE YOU LEFT. (Rest assured, the groom's parents were as bad.)
The funniest thing about all of this - decades later, thanks to Facebook, I reconnected with this guy. Where's he living? With his wife and kids in Europe. And had been there for years. She's a lawyer, he's a SAHD, and they almost never see their families.
-
Great story.
For years we felt compelled to try to visit with both sides of the family when we went to that town. It was always sub-optimal. It was REALLY important for us to see both sets of parents (their perspective, and DW and I are both "pleasers") but seldom did anyone ever make the short jaunt to our town to spend a long day (or overnight) with us.
Sitting around visiting can happen in either zip code... So can sharing meals. And watching TV. And watching the kids play.
DW and I have made some quiet vows about being more flexible and giving of our time when our kids are grown. Maybe this is a boomer generation problem.
-
In general I am opposed to linking unconnected things (payment for wedding, family time for a particular holiday six years later).
However, I do believe that family relationships include an obligation to arrange for time with the family for important holidays. Things are always more complicated after a wedding (similarly for a divorce/re-marriage) because now two sides of a joined family must compete for time with each other.
It's interesting to me that two different customers are changing in different directions: it's becoming much more common for parents to supply funds for buying a home at the same time as it's becoming less common for parents to pay for the wedding.
That may also have to do with homes getting very expensive relative to income (where I live the average home now costs 8 x the average yearly wage). With the institution of marriage becoming less of a thing and divorce more common, I guess many parents would rather see their children investing in property, that will continue to have value even if the child would divorce, rather than an expensive wedding.
Also, back in the days when the bride's parents traditionally paid for the wedding, that usually meant coffee and cake at home or the church hall, not the big expensive parties you see these days. Brides would sew their own dresses with their mums. This kind of wedding is rare now.
-
Also, back in the days when the bride's parents traditionally paid for the wedding, that usually meant coffee and cake at home or the church hall, not the big expensive parties you see these days. Brides would sew their own dresses with their mums. This kind of wedding is rare now.
We paid for our daughters' weddings, not back in the day but within the last five years, and they were indeed rather like the old-fashioned kind that you refer to. One daughter modified my dress to wear, the others bought $100 dresses from a charity shop, two of them wore my veil (which was also my mother's). No-one mandated the clothes for their attendants, flowers came from Costco and the farmer's market, etc. They were fairly big parties, about 150 people because we have large extended families, and they were more than coffee and cake because we feel very strongly that if people are travelling to celebrate with you, hospitality demands that you feed them a meal... but even combined they didn't come remotely close to $30k. They were very happy occasions, everyone had fun, and no-one went into debt.
Of course, it's probably not a coincidence that our frugally-brought-up daughters married men who are not interested in conspicuous consumption.
-
Joe, trust me that is not a boomer thing. It’s the world revolves around me syndrome. We never put pressure on our kids and are glad when we see them. When they were younger we always bought their plane ticket to see us. We also travel to visit them. Putting demands on adult children is the best way to not see much of them.
-
Joe, trust me that is not a boomer thing. It’s the world revolves around me syndrome. We never put pressure on our kids and are glad when we see them. When they were younger we always bought their plane ticket to see us. We also travel to visit them. Putting demands on adult children is the best way to not see much of them.
We have a great relationship with our son and his wife and kids. When he was in school and we were working full time, he came to visit us most of the time. When we were all working full time, we swapped off about 50-50. Now that we're retired, we'll visit them more. But when my wife and daughter were both on crutches or wheelchairs, he came to visit to help me make changes around the house to make it more wheelchair friendly. When we visit for the holidays, we usually get together the weekend before or after the big holiday. That way, it's easier for them to get together with his wife's family. His wife has lots of siblings so it's harder for them to all get together at the same time.
-
I mean, 95% or more of the blame here is on the engaged couple. How do you get far enough into the wedding planning process that you'd lose $5k worth of deposits without figuring out the small issue of paying for a $30k wedding?
When I was applying to colleges, my parents never really sat down with me and discussed how much they could contribute. They had a vague line of "if you really want to go to X college, we will make it work". I found out during my freshman year of college that "making it work" involved me taking on quite a bit of loan debt and I started to panic about how I would pay it back. I was also miserable at my dream (expensive) college so transferred to a cheaper state school. Somewhere during my sophomore year my dad suddenly told me that he felt a reasonable contribution from him each year was $5k. Which is certainly generous, but is no way going to make a $30-35k/yr college "work". So basically, my parents encouraged me to apply to all these expensive colleges with no real idea how to pay for it, reassured me that things would "work", then kind of flaked (relative to their original assurances). Ultimately I finished college with about $15k in debt that I would not have had if I had gone straight to the state school.
When my husband and I decided to get married, we eloped at the courthouse with no family because I couldn't deal with the idea of planning a wedding with my parents getting involved. We briefly promised to have a party/reception afterwards and I had to quickly put the kibosh on it because guess what, my parents were talking about me needing to do all sorts of things that were going to drive up the cost, assuring me that "we'll help pay for it, don't worry about money" and being incredibly vague about what exactly they would cover or what their budget was.
Ultimately we had a small religious ceremony a few months later with just my immediate family. My husband and I paid for all the things that were important to me (namely, a donation to the church and getting a nice studio portrait of ourselves afterwards). My parents paid for some massive floral arrangement even after I explicitly told my mom I didn't want the flowers and found them kind of sad/wasteful ever since I had worked in the back of a grocery store and spent a couple of weeks over Christmas unpacking flowers that had been flown in from South America. My parents also then insisted on paying for a big dinner out at a restaurant of their choice, which was quite nice but which I also did not care that much about. So basically, my parents didn't particularly listen to me and didn't really help out with the expenses related to anything that was important to ME. Mom actually also freaked out as we were walking into the church about whether or not I had made a donation, telling me that "You HAVE do to that" and implying that I had either forgotten or was too cheap to make a donation. So ultimately, I actually wound up paying for something that was important to HER.
All of that is to say, if your parents are like my parents, I can see how you can get quite far into wedding planning without really knowing who is paying for what and while also having a strong impression that your parents are going to kick in a lot more than they eventually do.
In fairness to my parents, I was the first child to attend college and also the first to get married, so they didn't have a lot of experience of what the actual costs might be themselves, which I suspect partially explains their behavior. Still, I am the one who got burned.
-
Honestly, I also have a problem with the multimillionaire dad. It's not that he's not putting up more money - it's that he's expecting all three other parents to match his contribution.
Kind of easy to understand why he's not still married to your mom. :(