Is it rude to not have a maid of honor or wedding party?

I m planning a destination wedding, I have an appointment with a travel agent for a wedding next year. Possibly Belize, Mexico,The Bahamas or Jamaica. I understand that many won t be able to go due to the cost and will have a big party a few months later to invite everyone else. With the cost of coming to the wedding is it rude to not have anyone stand up? I know dresses are expensive and everything else that comes with it.


You're planning a wedding in the knowledge and expectation that most of the people who would be important to you can't attend. This in itself is a little rude... if you want your family and friends to attend, why not have a wedding at home, and honeymoon abroad?


No it is not rude. But you will need a witness or two to sign the marriage license. Your witnesses need not have any special titles, wear any particular attire or participate in the ceremony.

Mrs. Frankenstein

Not rude, just make sure you run it by your friends and be honest. I'm sure some of your friends are wondering if you're going to have anyone up there, so if you're not, best tell them sooner rather than later.


All you need are the legal required number of witnesses to sign the Marriage Certificate. You do not even need to know them, so it does not matter whether or not you have the traditional wedding attendants.


You will need two witnesses over the age of 18 to sign the marriage certificate as well as the legal officiate. So you need to have two people go with you.


This shouldn't be a problem. Your friends should understand that you don't want to impose a possibly unbearable expense on anyone.


The Wedding Industry might want people to believe that etiquette requires attendants, requires those attendants to buy/rent special clothing, to make this and that wedding related expenditure, but it's simply not so. While it is very usual for a wedding ceremony to include at least 2 attendants, it is not incorrect to omit this. I don't understand your plan. If you're going to give a party anyhow, why are you deferring the party for months instead of giving it soon after your ceremony? Why would you choose to exchange vows at your far-off honeymoon destination when you could exchange vows closer to home and THEN go to your honeymoon destination? Hotels give perks to couples who bring in a lot of hotel guests, but you are saying that you will NOT be bringing in many people. So why do this? There are people who care about you and would very much want to witness your wedding vows. Do you have some really good reason for wanting to take this pleasure away from them?


You should just ask your parents and/or a friend to be witnessess and then that be it. You don't have to have a wedding party, no. You don't even have to have invitations...

Ruby R

No it’s not rude at all it’s your wedding and if you would like to have a small ceremony it’s your decision and people should respect that


It's not rude at all, as long as you have witnesses.


It is rude to have a destination wedding, because it will mean many people who have waited your whole lives to be there won't be able to attend. Trips like this are for honeymoons. You don't need to have attendants, but you should seriously rethink the destination wedding thing. It's a manufactured idea the wedding industry thought up to sell more travel packages, and it hurts more people than you know.


The only rude thing is having a fake wedding after being married several months.


No it isn't. You have to organise witnesses, because essentially that's what they are to put it bluntly. Congrats by the way!!


Not rude at all.


Why would it be "rude" to make you r own choices? It's YOUR wedding.


That's not rude at all. This is YOUR day, and it should go the way YOU want it to.


I'd guess that if you contact a place that specializes in destination weddings, the venue will be able to provide you with officiant, photographer, champagne, and witnesses.


No not rude. Couples elope without a wedding party. This isn’t that much different. A wedding can be however you want it to be


No, this is fairly standard with destination weddings. At least you're not pouting that your friends aren't all willing to drop 20K just to be part of your fantasy event.


No .. it's not rude. Do it YOUR way.


It's not rude to not subject others to having to pay their way for your destination wedding. It's your wedding so if you dont want bridesmaids then thats fine.


No, but the MOH does do things at the wedding. Fix the dress, you need to pick a dress that would not need that. Hold the bride bouquet during the ceremony, a table or something. Sign the marriage license, well anyone at the ceremony could. Not having an MOH, just mean you need to plan ahead. My step mother had her MOH pick and wear a dress she wanted. She did not care of the color or anything, it was just an MOH. If you are more a relax bride you could have someone that is going to be your MOH, have her pick the dress she wants. If you are a bit more controlling, you may have a problem with that.


How on earth would it be "rude"? Nobody's required to have a bridal party, whether you're having a destination wedding or marrying in your hometown, whether the wedding is big or small. Bridesmaids and groomsmen are 100% optional. If you would really like to have a wedding party but feel bad about asking people to spend money on a dress/tux, then you could always ask them to participate but just ask them to find their own outfit in a specific color (or don't even assign a color) and then they just stand next to you at the ceremony. Since that's all a bridesmaid/groomsman "has" to do. That way they're not doing anything extra than they would as a normal guest. But, no, if you think it's best to forego a wedding party then by all means do not ask anyone. Anyone who thinks it's "rude" is out of their minds. Designate one or two adults at the ceremony to sign the marriage license as your official witnesses, and if you need assistance with your dress train or someone to hold the bouquet/rings then ask a guest if they wouldn't mind helping you out. Also, if you're already having a party at home so that everyone can be included, why not just make THAT the wedding and then do the destination trip as your honeymoon? Throwing two parties doesn't really make sense, especially if you're looking to make things simple and inexpensive for your loved ones. The only thing that's keeping the party from being a wedding is LITERALLY just an officiant with the marriage license.


The only difference between a destination wedding and an elopement is that you tell everyone when and where you are eloping to, and welcome them to join. Thus because its still technically an elopement, none of the wedding traditions exist..


No, it isn't rude. It may be shortsighted. You and your fiance will need someone to witness the wedding and sign the marriage certificate. You can have hotel staff do that. Instead of jumping the gun on this, why not ASK someone that you'd like to be with you whether or not they can afford to do it?


No. But it is rude to send invitations to a wedding nobody will be able to attend. Just send announcements once the deed is done.


Most places require two witnesses, so even if you do not have an actual maid of honor you need to have two people up there officially witnessing the proceedings.