Wedding guest "dress code" question (from a bride-to-be)

[J-rap]

Nearly every wedding invitation I've received in the past 5 years or so has included a dress code request. The one we just attended had "black tie requested" on it. DH didn't feel like wearing his tux so we went in cocktail.

 

You must be in one of those "circles" then!  ha   :)  No offense meant, of course!  In all the weddings I've ever been to, I've never received one with a dress code requirement.

 

ETA:  Maybe it depends on what part of the country you live in.

Edited May 1, 2017 by J-rap

[Catwoman]

Most women know to throw on a cardigan/jacket/shawl for the ceremony part if they're wearing a cocktail dress to a wedding.

I have never seen anyone add any extra clothing to their cocktail dresses or gowns at a church wedding. :) Maybe it depends on the religious denomination or it's a regional thing or something.

 

Many brides and bridesmaids wear strapless dresses and they don't cover their shoulders during the ceremony. I don't see why the guests would feel obligated to cover up.

[Murphy101]

It is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear. It is up to the guests to know that an evening church wedding is more formal than an afternoon-at-the-park wedding. So the short answer is that your friend should not indicate on the wedding invitation what her guests should wear.

 

Your friend might be able to find a copy of Judith Martin's wedding etiquette book at either the library or a bookstore.

That's just not true. I've seen black tie outdoor weddings and blue jeans evening church weddings. The level of formality of the event is set by the design and atmosphere set up by the couple planning the wedding. The only way anyone would know that is if the couple is polite enough to inform them beforehand.

[Bootsie]

 

 

She was asking about a "dress code" or guidelines for the guests' attire, trying to decide between "cocktail attire" and "dressy casual." As a guest, I appreciate being given some guidance on  what to wear and would always do my best to dress as the wedding couple requests.  But also as a guest, I feel that "dressy casual" gives a broader range of options. But before I tell her that, I am wondering what others have to say.  On the other hand, I think the venue also dictates the wedding attire to some degree, and I don't think they have their venue yet.  

 

 

So does the bride-to-be have a certain attire that she is wanting guests to wear and she is asking what wording she should use to convey that?

 

Or, is the bride-to-be asking advice as to what she should suggest guests should wear?  In other words, is she asking advice regarding how formal the event and attire should be?

[Guest]

That's just not true. I've seen black tie outdoor weddings and blue jeans evening church weddings. The level of formality of the event is set by the design and atmosphere set up by the couple planning the wedding. The only way anyone would know that is if the couple is polite enough to inform them beforehand.

See, this is my feeling. Unless it's a wedding of someone very close to me, I'm probably not going to know specifically how the couple plans the wedding to thematically be. My nephew wore jeans in his own country/western style wedding; all his groomsmen had them, too. I wouldn't have necessarily been able to figure that out just because the "venue" was outdoors in the middle of God's Country.

 

I just don't think people are as tuned into those strict guidelines there once was of this time of day means this, that time of day means something else, etc.

[Carol in Cal.]

I see people leaving church in jeans all the time.   I'm assuming they had them on inside the church, too.  I wouldn't know for sure, though. ;)

 

I actually sometimes bring jeans to church and change after the service before heading somewhere else.  I've never seen anyone else do that, though.

[Carol in Cal.]

I have never seen anyone add any extra clothing to their cocktail dresses or gowns at a church wedding. :) Maybe it depends on the religious denomination or it's a regional thing or something.

 

Many brides and bridesmaids wear strapless dresses and they don't cover their shoulders during the ceremony. I don't see why the guests would feel obligated to cover up.

 

I have done this for a Bat Mitzvah.  It is not my tradition, and I was advised to do so.  The denomination was Reconstructionist, so, not as conservative as Orthodox, but I was wearing a sleeveless dress and added a shawl for the ceremony (but not the reception).

 

When DD was confirmed, after tons of fruitless searching I concluded that the only dress that was even remotely attractive and acceptable was a strapless but not lowcut one.  So we added a bolero for the ceremony. 

 

This is not really all that uncommon.

 

[Pam in CT]

A friend of mine is planning her wedding and asked me my opinion on something.  I am a lot older than her, and kind of out of touch with current wedding etiquette/styles, so...  I'm asking for opinions here.

 

She was asking about a "dress code" or guidelines for the guests' attire, trying to decide between "cocktail attire" and "dressy casual." As a guest, I appreciate being given some guidance on  what to wear and would always do my best to dress as the wedding couple requests.  But also as a guest, I feel that "dressy casual" gives a broader range of options. But before I tell her that, I am wondering what others have to say.  On the other hand, I think the venue also dictates the wedding attire to some degree, and I don't think they have their venue yet.  

 

I would not insert my opinion without being asked. But since she did ask, I want to be thoughtful about it and not necessarily tell her what I prefer for myself personally, but think more generally about all the wedding guests.  

 

Thoughts?  This is not a JAWM, even though I gave my opinion.  I'm not looking for backup.  

 

 

I can't remember ever seeing "dressy casual."  If I did, I think I'd translate it as a sundress for women, blazer & white pants for men -- is that what the bride is going for?

 

One of my cousins got married on a beach; unsurprisingly they sprecified "beach attire."  People ranged from linen sheath dresses / white trousers to Hawaiian shirts and surfer shorts; practically everyone was either barefoot or in flip-flops of varying styles.  It was quite fun... if that's what the bridal couple wants.  

 

One super-fun afternoon wedding I remember called for Garden Party Dress; many women wore HATS; it was awesome.  

 

Mostly we see no guidance at all (= dress +/- for women depending on time of day; blazer / suit for men depending on time of day), or "cocktail attire" (= fancier dress for women/ suit for men) or "black tie" (shoot me in the head).  The absolute positive WORST is "black tie optional" -- that, I loathe.  

[Pam in CT]

re covering shoulders / sleeveless dresses for religious ceremony:

 

I have never seen anyone add any extra clothing to their cocktail dresses or gowns at a church wedding. :) Maybe it depends on the religious denomination or it's a regional thing or something.

Many brides and bridesmaids wear strapless dresses and they don't cover their shoulders during the ceremony. I don't see why the guests would feel obligated to cover up.

 

I have done this for a Bat Mitzvah.  It is not my tradition, and I was advised to do so.  The denomination was Reconstructionist, so, not as conservative as Orthodox, but I was wearing a sleeveless dress and added a shawl for the ceremony (but not the reception).

 

When DD was confirmed, after tons of fruitless searching I concluded that the only dress that was even remotely attractive and acceptable was a strapless but not lowcut one.  So we added a bolero for the ceremony. 

 

This is not really all that uncommon.
 

 

Yes, this is pretty common for Jewish services, even the more progressive strands -- a jacket / bolero / shrug sweater is basically expected over anything sleeveless in most synagogue services, while a sleeveless dress would be fine at a Reform / Reconstructionist / Conservative party (best to keep the bolero on if it's Orthodox). 

Edited May 1, 2017 by Pam in CT

[J-rap]

Personally, I am overjoyed with guidance given as part of the invitation packet. One of my nephews got married on a farm and the wedding party was in jeans and cowboy boots; the ladies had short dresses and denim jackets. Seating was on haybales. I most definitely wanted that information so I didn't show up in a formal gown and 4" heels. Another nephew had an outdoor wedding and the fiancé included information advising against high heels/stilettos, only because that would be miserable, trying to walk around on soft ground in heels.

 

That bride also had information about gifts, as they were bound for a long-term sailing trip and standard houseware gifts would be totally useless to them. (Ha! This is not how she phrased it! 😊) I know The Rules say you don't include info pertaining to gifts in the invitation. I don't care what the etiquette books say. I want enough information so that I can make the most appropriate decision.

 

I think for a wedding like this that's more unusual and might even be uncomfortable in dressy clothes, it's fine and even helpful to say something like "very casual dress encouraged!" or any other tips that would help them be comfortable.  But that's more about comfort rather than a dress code requirement.

[Guest]

I actually sometimes bring jeans to church and change after the service before heading somewhere else. I've never seen anyone else do that, though.

Back inthe day... I never wore jeans to church. I live in jeans but not at church. That said, when my lovely BIL Csmeto visit, he didn't want to go to church because all he had was jeans. I wore my jeans with him. :0)

[Ellie]

Miss Manners* disagrees with you and instead suggests that the couple-to-be should do their guests a favour and be rather specific in the wording of a dress code.   Perhaps the OP's friend should pick up her more recent book.

 

 

 

* AKA Judith Martin

 

She says:

 

“Black tie,’’ “jacket and tie,’’ and, in the case of public accommodations, “no flip-flops’’ lack joie de vivre, but they make up for it in intelligibility.

 

<snip>

 

If all this is too much for you when issuing invitations, there is no requirement to specify a dress code. The smart (though confused) guest will call and ask, and you may then discuss it at as great length as you feel up to. At least it will take less time than trying to parse the differences between “cocktail attire,’’ “smart casual,’’ “tea party dress,’’ “country club wear’’ and “after-five attire.’’

 

 

 

I have all of Miss Manners' books, BTW. :-)

[Audrey]

It is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear. It is up to the guests to know that an evening church wedding is more formal than an afternoon-at-the-park wedding. So the short answer is that your friend should not indicate on the wedding invitation what her guests should wear. 

 

Your friend might be able to find a copy of Judith Martin's wedding etiquette book at either the library or a bookstore.

 

 

She says:

 

“Black tie,’’ “jacket and tie,’’ and, in the case of public accommodations, “no flip-flops’’ lack joie de vivre, but they make up for it in intelligibility.

 

< snip>

 

If all this is too much for you when issuing invitations, there is no requirement to specify a dress code. The smart (though confused) guest will call and ask, and you may then discuss it at as great length as you feel up to. At least it will take less time than trying to parse the differences between “cocktail attire,’’ “smart casual,’’ “tea party dress,’’ “country club wear’’ and “after-five attire.’’

 

I have all of Miss Manners' books, BTW. :-)

 

Mmhmm...  have you read them?  "there is no requirement to specify" is vastly different from your supposition that "It is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear."

 

Just saying... :) 

[scoutingmom]

This. The only dress code I've ever seen mentioned for any type of reception is Black Tie.

Recently went to one that was "Black Tie" and we honestly would not have gone because of that but it was family. We could not do black tie..... turns out that it most people were not in black tie

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

[momacacia]

Here we go! Emily Post will tell us all what to wear when. Hopefully the wedding guests can Google.

 

http://emilypost.com/advice/attire-guide-dress-codes-from-casual-to-white-tie/

[Guest]

See, I don't know what church clothes are. I would think it was ok to wear jeans to church.

At my current church, jeans are the uniform. Even the pastor wears jeans.

 

Oh, and big shiny belt buckles. And dusty boots. And chaps. Yes, chaps. 'Cuz people ride their horses to our church, yes they do. But they do remove their cowboy hats. Everyone knows you don't wear your hat in church.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Kinsa

[marbel]

So does the bride-to-be have a certain attire that she is wanting guests to wear and she is asking what wording she should use to convey that?

 

Or, is the bride-to-be asking advice as to what she should suggest guests should wear?  In other words, is she asking advice regarding how formal the event and attire should be?

 

A little more detail...

 

Short answers:  no to the first question, yes to the second and third. 

 

The bride is a  young woman with no mom and a dad who is paying for the wedding but declines to give advice (and wouldn't know how to advise on clothing anyway). So she is trying to figure things out on her own. She sees me as a sort of mother figure.  But I am also pretty clueless (yeah, I know you all already picked up on that) and am of minimal help.

 

Teasing some things out from her, she doesn't know just what she wants.  Her wedding will be in a church and the reception at a catering hall with a nice outdoor area available. ETA:When I wrote my OP I didn't know she had chosen a venue.  She asked me about dress codes because she has seen them on invitations and so she feels she needs to do so as well.   Also she wants her guests to be comfortable; she's very concerned with making things easy for the guests.  So I think that's why she started with the dress guidelines - because she's thinking first of the guests, then about what she wants in terms of atmosphere, level of formality based on that.  Does that make sense?   (I mean, does that make sense as far as what she is doing, not does that make sense in terms of smart wedding planning.)  

 

I'm encouraging her to ask some of her friends who got married recently what they did.  To think about weddings she attended and felt comfortable at, and go from there.

 

ETA: Around here, people do wear jeans to church, and shorts with flip flops, and nice dresses and suits, and everything in between.  But if someone says "wear church clothes'  people take that to mean a dress or nice trousers/skirt and blouse for women, slacks and sport coat or suit and tie for men.   So for some people, it would be dressier than what they personally might wear to church on any given Sunday

Edited May 1, 2017 by marbel

[Guest]

A little more detail...

 

Short answers: no to the first question, yes to the second and third.

 

The bride is a young woman with no mom and a dad who is paying for the wedding but declines to give advice (and wouldn't know how to advise on clothing anyway). So she is trying to figure things out on her own. She sees me as a sort of mother figure. But I am also pretty clueless (yeah, I know you all already picked up on that) and am of minimal help.

 

Teasing some things out from her, she doesn't know just what she wants. Her wedding will be in a church and the reception at a catering hall with a nice outdoor area available. She asked me about dress codes because she has seen them on invitations and so she feels she needs to do so as well. Also she wants her guests to be comfortable; she's very concerned with making things easy for the guests. So I think that's why she started with the dress guidelines - because she's thinking first of the guests, then about what she wants in terms of atmosphere, level of formality based on that. Does that make sense? (I mean, does that make sense as far as what she is doing, not does that make sense in terms of smart wedding planning.)

 

I'm encouraging her to ask some of her friends who got married recently what they did. To think about weddings she attended and felt comfortable at, and go from there.

 

ETA: Around here, people do wear jeans to church, and shorts with flip flops, and nice dresses and suits, and everything in between. But if someone says "wear church clothes' people take that to mean a dress or nice trousers/skirt and blouse for women, slacks and sport coat or suit and tie for men. So for some people, it would be dressier than what they personally might wear to church on any given Sunday

I think it's terrific that she is so thoughtful about the comfort of the guests. Some brides are such bridezillas. Given the fact that her guests' comfort is her concern, she probably would be fine saying "business/church attire". It sounds like she won't be scandalized if someone shows up in a pair of jeans, should that happen.

 

FWIW, yes, there are lots of churches with very casual clothing considered acceptable; my own church is like this, but I still think most people are not so dumb that they can't figure out "church attire" means nicer and neater than average.

[winterbaby]

If she's primarily concerned about her guests' comfort, and won't be upset if someone errs on the side of too casual, I'm almost inclined to say don't say anything and let them infer from the nature of the venue. But if she feels her guests would be more comfortable with something spelled out because that's what's usually done in your area, I would lean towards "church attire." After all the ceremony is going to be in a church. Unless they've been living under a rock I think even people from the shorts and flip flops type churches understand that not every church is that way... most people IME try to go a bit dressier (or at least more decent) when a guest in someone else's house of worship, but also understand that it's not about trying for glamour. So it might be a good idea to hone in on the "church" aspect for phrasing the dress code.

[mom@shiloh]

Given the venue, I also like the term "business/church attire".  I think it's lovely that she's concerned with her guests comfort.  

 

For two of our children's weddings, I did make sure to be very specific about venue because people need to know that they will be tromping through a hayfield and sitting on straw bales or taking a short hike through the woods and sitting on wooden benches.  It's no fun to be surprised and uncomfortable through an entire wedding and reception. 

[Bluegoat]

A little more detail...

 

Short answers:  no to the first question, yes to the second and third. 

 

The bride is a  young woman with no mom and a dad who is paying for the wedding but declines to give advice (and wouldn't know how to advise on clothing anyway). So she is trying to figure things out on her own. She sees me as a sort of mother figure.  But I am also pretty clueless (yeah, I know you all already picked up on that) and am of minimal help.

 

Teasing some things out from her, she doesn't know just what she wants.  Her wedding will be in a church and the reception at a catering hall with a nice outdoor area available. ETA:When I wrote my OP I didn't know she had chosen a venue.  She asked me about dress codes because she has seen them on invitations and so she feels she needs to do so as well.   Also she wants her guests to be comfortable; she's very concerned with making things easy for the guests.  So I think that's why she started with the dress guidelines - because she's thinking first of the guests, then about what she wants in terms of atmosphere, level of formality based on that.  Does that make sense?   (I mean, does that make sense as far as what she is doing, not does that make sense in terms of smart wedding planning.)  

 

I'm encouraging her to ask some of her friends who got married recently what they did.  To think about weddings she attended and felt comfortable at, and go from there.

 

ETA: Around here, people do wear jeans to church, and shorts with flip flops, and nice dresses and suits, and everything in between.  But if someone says "wear church clothes'  people take that to mean a dress or nice trousers/skirt and blouse for women, slacks and sport coat or suit and tie for men.   So for some people, it would be dressier than what they personally might wear to church on any given Sunday

 

If this is what she wants, I would suggest she doesn't really need to specify formality.  Most people will dress up, in terms of what they have, for a wedding, so she'll get the dressed up versions of the people she invites.  It sounds like that would be fine.

 

It's more important, I think, to specify formality when it's likely to be different than what the guests might be used to expecting, for example she was having something very fancy. 

[Bluegoat]

She says:

 

 

 

I have all of Miss Manners' books, BTW. :-)

 

What?  That doesn't say it is rude.

 

What would be rude is not saying anything on the invitation and having someone show up at a white tie affair wearing business casual and feeling embarrassed. 

 

Given that most people don't have a separate wedding and reception invitation, that doesn't leave many options for indicating.

[winterbaby]

OT but my quibble with traditional etiquette a la Miss Manners is that unless you are routinely dealing with highly affluent people or something you can cause as much misunderstanding, if not more, by acting according to some unstated code the people around you may not actually be keyed into, than by just winging it. Like... if there was really one true way things are done you wouldn't have to ask Miss Manners what it is.

[Ellie]

Mmhmm...  have you read them?  "there is no requirement to specify" is vastly different from your supposition that "It is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear."

 

Just saying... :)

 

Of course. And there are other discussions in the books which would lead me to say that it is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear, even if you did not find that exact phrase in your Internet search.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Ellie

[HTRMom]

This bridal party in tuxes, guests in khakis thing is a pet peeve of mine! Everyone should wear the same thing. And nobody should (in my particular obviously nonuniversal opinion) wear anything except coat and tie to any wedding unless requested.

 

I would suggest that she choose between "coat and tie" or "shirt and khakis," depending on her preference. It's customary to specify what men will wear as it's simple, and women extrapolate from that what they should wear.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bluegoat]

OT but my quibble with traditional etiquette a la Miss Manners is that unless you are routinely dealing with highly affluent people or something you can cause as much misunderstanding, if not more, by acting according to some unstated code the people around you may not actually be keyed into, than by just winging it. Like... if there was really one true way things are done you wouldn't have to ask Miss Manners what it is.

 

Yes, but you know I think that mixing of groups may have made it more necessary than it was before.

 

People probably had a good idea what those in their social group expected them to wear to a wedding.  Most wouldn't have ever needed to specify something like black tie, people, including the bride and groom, wore their Sunday dress.  People who wore very formal clothes were the same ones who dressed for dinner.

 

People knew what class of people they belonged to and what the expectations were, or if they were stepping out of that, they knew they needed to find out.

 

At the moment, business casual is about as dressy as many people get, so that seems to be the most common default for events like weddings.

[kroe1]

Sorry, I have not read the other responses.

 

Time of day, venue, and word of mouth dictates wedding attire. No need for anything printed on the invitation unless one is on the extreme, i.e. "swim attire" to a beach wedding since normally that would be just casual, or "formal" to an early evening wedding. Sounds like she needs a wedding etiquette book which would be nice for you to grab for her as an early wedding present.

[Bluegoat]

I would also not characterize this kind of indication as "telling people what to wear."  Because, you aren't.  Nor is it really a dress code, unless you plan to police the door.

 

What you are doing is indicating the formality of the reception. 

[winterbaby]

Yes, but you know I think that mixing of groups may have made it more necessary than it was before.

 

People probably had a good idea what those in their social group expected them to wear to a wedding.  Most wouldn't have ever needed to specify something like black tie, people, including the bride and groom, wore their Sunday dress.  People who wore very formal clothes were the same ones who dressed for dinner.

 

People knew what class of people they belonged to and what the expectations were, or if they were stepping out of that, they knew they needed to find out.

 

At the moment, business casual is about as dressy as many people get, so that seems to be the most common default for events like weddings.

 

I see what you mean but I was responding more to the idea that one needs to obey what a book says, rather than to the suggestion itself. In her community, they're used to seeing dress code indications, so it's clearly not the case that giving one would be regarded as rude to people in that community. She already knows what her community norm is for the whether to say anything part; she's just having trouble deciding what to say. A lot of the "etiquette" I've heard over the years tends to a sort of "don't say anything, it should go without saying" idea in various situations. But how are people supposed to know your silence means "I'm relying on you to follow an unspoken code" rather than "anything goes"? If you have to look it up in a book yourself, it might be wise to question whether these are really things everyone knows. I don't think the book solves the problem you're talking about because if people are socially mixed to the point where it's not clear what rules hold, why assume they agree to all follow a certain book? Where does the book get its authority?

 

Those books often prescribe behavior that would be received as pretentious in my circles, which while not rich include some highly educated and sensitive people. Role-playing as classier than one actually is can be way more tacky than some of these supposed faux pas.

[vonfirmath]

PNW....dressy/casual will have at least one person in jeans and fleece. Someone in long shorts. Someone in a ball or outdoor cap. And likely someone in yoga pants and a tunic.

 

Coctail attire....most people will dress up, but quite likely to have the same as above too. Or, some people won't attend because they don't have/want to buy cocktail clothes.

 

I would go with the minimum the bride would feel comfortable with. Is she really wants people to dress up, cocktail would be the most accommodating.

 

If she wants people to just be themselves and include the most people...dressy casual would be common in the PNW.

 

I got married in the PNW. Mid-afternoon wedding. No dress code on the invitation. I know I had guests in slacks -- and other than noticing. It did not bother me. It was my wedding, not theirs, know?  My husband wore a tux and I had a really dressy wedding dress (similar to one on Lord of the Rings movie, as that was where I got my inspiration from). The little boys wore vests with matching handkerchiefs in their pockets. The groomsmen and fathers of the bride dressed up in black suits with, again, handkerchiefs in their pockets to match the colors of the weddings. The girls wore long-armed custom-made dresses. Beyond that? I don't remember. I know one of my friends intended to go out and get a dress for the wedding, but got too busy with preparations and her own work and so just wore pants to the wedding (Slacks I think, not jeans. But I didn't really notice). But I mostly don't mind. After all, the thing keeping her busy was MY wedding -- not hers! :)  Though I was surprised to discover she owned no dresses or skirts because, well. she went to church every week and I'd never even noticed!

[Guest]

OT but my quibble with traditional etiquette a la Miss Manners is that unless you are routinely dealing with highly affluent people or something you can cause as much misunderstanding, if not more, by acting according to some unstated code the people around you may not actually be keyed into, than by just winging it. Like... if there was really one true way things are done you wouldn't have to ask Miss Manners what it is.

ITA. I was just telling someone about a situation like this. It was a wedding held in the early afternoon. *I* know that the etiquette for this time of day indicates not having a full meal, however, clearly many people were hungry, particularly if they traveled a ways for the wedding. The food was offered at small stations with appetizer-sized plates, but people piled the tiny plates with food, went back multiple times, and exhausted the food supply early. 😱. The take-away for me is this: people (at least in this region) come to wedding receptions expecting to EAT, so either plan to serve enough food for meals, or explicitly denote that it is a "Cake and punch reception."

 

This is why I think it is better to let people know what to expect than to *hope* they are cultured enough or wise enough to ask the Hive ;), or self-directed enough to find out from an authority. Just say what you need them to know. I never understood why that is somehow more gauche (in the invitation) than just hoping they cotton on.

[Murphy101]

See, this is my feeling. Unless it's a wedding of someone very close to me, I'm probably not going to know specifically how the couple plans the wedding to thematically be. My nephew wore jeans in his own country/western style wedding; all his groomsmen had them, too. I wouldn't have necessarily been able to figure that out just because the "venue" was outdoors in the middle of God's Country.

 

I just don't think people are as tuned into those strict guidelines there once was of this time of day means this, that time of day means something else, etc.

I'm not sure they ever were and they for sure have not been in at least 25 years bc it was the same issue when I got married back then.

 

Case in point, when we picked our invitation stationary, we were then shown various acceptable wording for what would go on it, and almost all included how to place attire and or age restrictions. There were accepted formats for how to word if either or both the bride and groom didn't have parents to put on the invitation, wording for someone else (not parents or bride/groom) hosting the wedding celebration and so forth.

 

Hence my invitations didn't mention either parents, just dh and I.

 

And also stated:

 

Black tie

No children, childcare not provided.

 

It was a small but formal church wedding in a small rural church at 2 in the afternoon followed by a simple punch and cake reception.

 

The wedding atmosphere and expectations are set by the couple getting married. The purpose of etiquette is to make people feel comfortable *by letting them know what is appropriate and expected of them.*.

 

And that's not even getting into various religious expectations and the blending of two families, possibly with very different attitudes and customs.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Murphy101

[LucyStoner]

PNW....dressy/casual will have at least one person in jeans and fleece. Someone in long shorts. Someone in a ball or outdoor cap. And likely someone in yoga pants and a tunic.

 

Coctail attire....most people will dress up, but quite likely to have the same as above too. Or, some people won't attend because they don't have/want to buy cocktail clothes.

 

I would go with the minimum the bride would feel comfortable with. Is she really wants people to dress up, cocktail would be the most accommodating.

 

If she wants people to just be themselves and include the most people...dressy casual would be common in the PNW.

In the PNW, people will show up in jeans and garden clogs even if it is a black tie affair. Fewer people than if the invite said "cocktail" or "dressy casual" but there is always that one guy. You know the one. :p

[Audrey]

In the PNW, people will show up in jeans and garden clogs even if it is a black tie affair. Fewer people than if the invite said "cocktail" or "dressy casual" but there is always that one guy. You know the one. :p

 

 

I think that guy lives everywhere.  :laugh: 

[Bluegoat]

I see what you mean but I was responding more to the idea that one needs to obey what a book says, rather than to the suggestion itself. In her community, they're used to seeing dress code indications, so it's clearly not the case that giving one would be regarded as rude to people in that community. She already knows what her community norm is for the whether to say anything part; she's just having trouble deciding what to say. A lot of the "etiquette" I've heard over the years tends to a sort of "don't say anything, it should go without saying" idea in various situations. But how are people supposed to know your silence means "I'm relying on you to follow an unspoken code" rather than "anything goes"? If you have to look it up in a book yourself, it might be wise to question whether these are really things everyone knows. I don't think the book solves the problem you're talking about because if people are socially mixed to the point where it's not clear what rules hold, why assume they agree to all follow a certain book? Where does the book get its authority?

 

Those books often prescribe behavior that would be received as pretentious in my circles, which while not rich include some highly educated and sensitive people. Role-playing as classier than one actually is can be way more tacky than some of these supposed faux pas.

 

Yes, I think local custom is often the best approach.

 

Though, in this case it may be that people are giving direction on the wedding invitations just because they always have.  Would people really be confused if it wasn't there?  Would the bride care what they wore anyway?

 

A lot of those kinds of etiquette experts and books aren't actually as "traditional" as people think.  They came out after a lot of social changes including people moving more, travel becoming easier, and class barriers being broken down.  So, they were helpful in telling people what to do or expect when they could no longer be sure of the old systems, but at the same time they tended to be aspirational - they tried to universalize what would have been an upper class approach rather than, say, a working class one.

 

I can see why that could easily come across as tacky, as you say it seems like it's pretending to be something you aren't. But by the same logic, the bride and groom wearing an afternoon tux and a ball-gown while the guests all wear Sunday best would be tacky too, as that was another aspirational addition.

[HS Mom in NC]

 church attire

 

 

This is a useless term here as a dress code.  Out West, in evangelical circles, this can mean dresses, heels, pressed shirts, ties and dress pants at a small minority of churches or it can mean kackis and polos, shorts, t-shirts and jeans at the majority of churches.

 

But I think cocktail attire is probably clearly understood across the nation.

 

I have never received a wedding invitation with anything other than "back tie optional" on it and those are rare cases.  Usually there's no dress code mentioned.

[HS Mom in NC]

This bridal party in tuxes, guests in khakis thing is a pet peeve of mine! Everyone should wear the same thing. And nobody should (in my particular obviously nonuniversal opinion) wear anything except coat and tie to any wedding unless requested.

 

I would suggest that she choose between "coat and tie" or "shirt and khakis," depending on her preference. It's customary to specify what men will wear as it's simple, and women extrapolate from that what they should wear.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Most men in AZ under the age of 60 don't own suit coats.

 

At the last 5 weddings I attended or saw photos of online, the groom and groomsmen were not wearing suit coats when they got married.  (Two on the last two weekends, one in AZ, one in KY.) They wear button down colored dress shirts, vests, ties and dress pants. 

 

Other weddings included the groomsmen in tux jackets, black jeans and cowboy boots. One of those brides wore a white denim dress and white cowgirl boots.

[winterbaby]

I can see why that could easily come across as tacky, as you say it seems like it's pretending to be something you aren't. But by the same logic, the bride and groom wearing an afternoon tux and a ball-gown while the guests all wear Sunday best would be tacky too, as that was another aspirational addition.

I see what you mean, but trying to choreograph one's entire social circle into acting like we're all of a higher class than we actually are, in various ways - basically using your wedding to LARP as rich -  seems like a more aggressive form of aspirational tackiness than just splurging on an outfit for the most important public occasion of your life. I think by this point, the wedding party being better-dressed than the guests is a legitimate cultural tradition and not just a degenerate form of some other tradition. And in the past - or even in the present, in less-privileged communities - a lot of times the bride being in a more basic "just a nice dress" would be accompanied by a commensurate step down for the guests, wearing whatever they happened to have, down to working men's clothes and housewives' frocks. It doesn't make a lot of sense for everyone who shows up to the wedding to have the same investment in what they're wearing as the people getting married. I don't buy that it's somehow gauche for a woman to be the best-dressed woman at her own wedding, in fact I think it's pretty universally regarded as unthinkable for others to come anywhere near competing with her. Even when the prince got married, their female guests wore suits and such - of very fine and high style, to be sure, but nowhere near the bride's gown in pomp and formality. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're describing.

[HTRMom]

Most men in AZ under the age of 60 don't own suit coats.

 

At the last 5 weddings I attended or saw photos of online, the groom and groomsmen were not wearing suit coats when they got married. (Two on the last two weekends, one in AZ, one in KY.) They wear button down colored dress shirts, vests, ties and dress pants.

 

Other weddings included the groomsmen in tux jackets, black jeans and cowboy boots. One of those brides wore a white denim dress and white cowgirl boots.

I'm totally fine with nobody wearing suits if nobody owns suits! That's perfect. I much prefer that over the groom in a rented tuxedo while his friends are in khaki pants. I do think it's strange that most men there don't own a suit or even a sport coat, but just "huh. That's different," not "wow, you all are so wrong!" :) I do think a vest would be inappropriate without a suit coat at a formal occasion, but again, it's only cultural custom that decides.

 

And if marrying in boots makes you happy, go with it!

[Bluegoat]

I see what you mean, but trying to choreograph one's entire social circle into acting like we're all of a higher class than we actually are, in various ways - basically using your wedding to LARP as rich -  seems like a more aggressive form of aspirational tackiness than just splurging on an outfit for the most important public occasion of your life. I think by this point, the wedding party being better-dressed than the guests is a legitimate cultural tradition and not just a degenerate form of some other tradition. And in the past - or even in the present, in less-privileged communities - a lot of times the bride being in a more basic "just a nice dress" would be accompanied by a commensurate step down for the guests, wearing whatever they happened to have, down to working men's clothes and housewives' frocks. It doesn't make a lot of sense for everyone who shows up to the wedding to have the same investment in what they're wearing as the people getting married. I don't buy that it's somehow gauche for a woman to be the best-dressed woman at her own wedding, in fact I think it's pretty universally regarded as unthinkable for others to come anywhere near competing with her. Even when the prince got married, their female guests wore suits and such - of very fine and high style, to be sure, but nowhere near the bride's gown in pomp and formality. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're describing.

 

No, I think you are right - the wedding dress has become a thing in itself, more and more over the 20th century.  I think maybe the white dress idea accounts for that somewhat, since it's already something most people will only wear once.  The alternate, among the middle and working classes, seemed to be a new dress that would then become your "best" dress.

 

It's usually easier to see the level of formality in the men's clothing, since that tends to be so much more conventional, and IIRC you could clearly see that at the royal wedding - everyone was at a similar level to the groom's party, and the female guests wwere dressed to the same level as the men.

 

---- Ha!  I googled for some photos out of curiosity, and I came upon the dress code for attendees - men were required to wear military dress, a morning coat, or lounge suit (jacket and tie, essentially.)

[Bluegoat]

Most men in AZ under the age of 60 don't own suit coats.

 

At the last 5 weddings I attended or saw photos of online, the groom and groomsmen were not wearing suit coats when they got married.  (Two on the last two weekends, one in AZ, one in KY.) They wear button down colored dress shirts, vests, ties and dress pants. 

 

Other weddings included the groomsmen in tux jackets, black jeans and cowboy boots. One of those brides wore a white denim dress and white cowgirl boots.

 

That seems odd to me.  The point of a vest was to add extra warmth to a suit!

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Of course. And there are other discussions in the books which would lead me to say that it is not polite for the happy couple to tell the guests what to wear, even if you did not find that exact phrase in your Internet search.

That doesn't sound very definitive.

[winterbaby]

That seems odd to me.  The point of a vest was to add extra warmth to a suit!

 

It gets SO hot down there though, if you haven't been you might not believe it. I have a vague impression that just shirts and vests is a Western thing going way back, though I might have gotten that idea from movies.

 

Also bolo ties. Because you don't need extra fabric wrapped around your neck in those conditions. Though I think those have gone out of style in favor of just no tie at all.

 

[Crimson Wife]

Most men in AZ under the age of 60 don't own suit coats.

 

I find that hard to believe. California is casual but most guys own at least one suit for job interviews, and formal events like weddings, funerals, First Communions, etc.

[FaithManor]

This is a useless term here as a dress code. Out West, in evangelical circles, this can mean dresses, heels, pressed shirts, ties and dress pants at a small minority of churches or it can mean kackis and polos, shorts, t-shirts and jeans at the majority of churches.

 

But I think cocktail attire is probably clearly understood across the nation.

 

 

Not to mention a huge number of adults do not attend church, many raised in homes that were not church going so this gives no frame of reference for many.

[Plink]

Is "dressy casual" a common term?  I've never heard of it before.  

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I find that hard to believe. California is casual but most guys own at least one suit for job interviews, and formal events like weddings, funerals, First Communions, etc.

 

Across the population as a whole you likely would be surprised.  DH wears suits almost daily but others in his organization (all professional degrees) who don't need one often do not own one at all.  Maybe a sport coat but not a suit.

[Frances]

I'm trying to figure out why anyone cares what a guest at their wedding wears? Not snarky, just curious. But I had a pretty casual upbringing so that does color my viewpoint.

Even after reading all of the replies, I still don't get it. We didn't even tell our bridesmaids and groomsmen what to wear, just left it up to them. I don't recall there being any issues with how anyone was dressed, either guests or the wedding party. I've never ever received a wedding invitation with any sort of dress code. The only thing that even comes close is for one of the weddings where my husband was a groomsmen the couple said the rehearsal dinner would be casual and jeans were fine.

[HTRMom]

There's definitely a culture in America in which wedding attire is insignificant. My family comes from that culture. (Particularly, baptists in Oklahoma.) There's also a culture in which wearing the wrong thing is a significant faux pas not quickly forgotten. And lots of levels in between. What's so hard to understand about that?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crimson Wife]

Across the population as a whole you likely would be surprised.  DH wears suits almost daily but others in his organization (all professional degrees) who don't need one often do not own one at all.  Maybe a sport coat but not a suit.

 

What do they wear to job interviews? Office dress codes have relaxed a LOT lately, but a dark suit is still the norm for interviews. My DH wears khakis and a button-down shirt (no tie) every day in his job but when he was interviewing for a position in a different department recently he still wore his suit.