PSA: Serve Alcohol at Your Wedding

The "Im having a dry wedding because my guests don't drink" excuse that is used on many of these dry wedding posts is lame. I don't believe it. I think it is a poor excuse to be cheap.

I am also over all of these dry wedding posts. Sadly new users cant even search for them if they wanted to because they are always hidden.

I've only been to one dry wedding. It was in the early afternoon, it was kind of boring...and we all went to the bar afterwards.

Yessss!! Make it work! Whether you have to cut your guest list or cut somewhere else, have alcohol for your guests!

@Celia - I just busted out laughing!

Wow... I like a drink as much as the next gal, and I didn't have a dry wedding, but I'm glad my loved ones care more about me than the free open bar. If you'd ditch a wedding because there's no free booze, you probably shouldn't be there in the first place. Feel free to spend the money you would have spent on a gift on a big bottle of vodka instead.

I disagree. People do not NEED alcohol to have fun. If a couple chooses to have a dry wedding, they have every right to do so. They can and should invite the people they want to share their joy with. If someone on their guest list can't have a good time without alcohol, then they can decline to attend.

@Lauren R ... I love that image on your post!!!!!!!!!!! It's now on my FB page!

.... my personal FB page. AHAHAHHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think it's an issue of people attending. 99% of people will still attend your dry wedding, but don't expect it to turn into a huge party that you (might) want. People are dressing up and going out for an evening, chances are they are expecting alcohol. It doesn't matter if it's an evening date, a friend's birthday, or someone's wedding- they will want (at least) a glass of wine/beer.

@olivebranch our venue does the food and beverage package separately, we decided in premium open bar so it includes more brand names and are paying $32 a head for 5 hours of open bar

I actually find this thread to be quite annoying. I plan to have an open bar at my wedding, but I don't think there's anything wrong with anyone choosing to have a dry wedding. People are NOT entitled to get drunk at your wedding. They're not entitled to alcohol. They don't have to come or they don't have to stay, but to suggest that a host is doing something wrong by having a dry wedding is utterly absurd. Do you go to someone's house and demand they serve you what you want to eat or drink?

Haha spazzy! You always say the best things, at the right time. *high five*

Elizabeth- I think I understand where you are coming from, but hear me out please. 1. I started this thread half-joking because there have been sooooooo many posts about dry weddings and cash bars recently. So it was a little bit of a tongue-in-cheek post and I'm sorry if you disagree with me. 2. I see weddings as a social event. When hosting a social event, food and refreshments (typically alcohol) are provided by the host. Would you invite people to your home and make them pay for the beer in your fridge? I highly doubt it. When you throw a birthday party, do you usually have alcohol? Probably (unless you don't drink). And if you are hosting a holiday dinner, will you pick up a few bottles of wine for your guests to enjoy? I'm pretty sure most people would. So while you're right that no one is "entitled to alcohol," you forget that it is a common courtesy to provide it. And I completely agree that "people are not entitled to get drunk at your wedding," which is why you have a certified bartender who knows to stop serving people before they reach that limit. What I'm trying to say is, you're throwing a party to celebrate a huge change in your life and people will want to celebrate. And adults (typically) celebrate with alcohol.

Brittany -- I'm so glad you asked about the true crime book (I'd much rather talk about my writing career than repeat what I've said 200 times about alcohol and weddings -- although I'll repeat my opinion for the 201st time in this post). Here goes...I wrote a book entitled, "Behind the Words: A Logical and Satirical Guide to the Impossible Defense of Jodi Arias". I'm not sure if you're familiar with the Jodi Arias/Travis Alexander trial. It was a seven year ordeal from the murder to the conviction (and Arias and her attorneys used every trick in the book to drag this thing on and on). Arias was a disturbed young woman (and now, a convicted, first degree murderer) from a nondescript, rather rural town on the border of California and Oregon. She was an odd child, an odd teenager, and she lived a life of laziness and unfulfilled goals. Rather than earning a good life on her own, Arias preferred finding men who could give her the lifestyle she desperately wanted -- the waitress who had exchanged her apron for a career as a painter/photographer with money and a home studio that allowed her to work at her own pace and on her own schedule. She had a horrendous financial background, few friends, a contentious relationship with her parents, dropped out of high school in the eleventh grade, bounced from job to job (she was a server who even worked at the rather luxurious Ventana Inn and Spa, a 200 plus acre luxury resort in Big Sur, California. At one point, she even handled their wedding planning. It's a gorgeous venue and a resort I'd love to stay at). After a continuous pattern of romantic crash and burns (even living in a tent with one man), at the age of 26, she met 29 year old Travis Alexander, an Arizona based insurance salesman who owned a large, immaculate home and drove a BMW. He was a top executive, and she was someone who expressed a deep interest in working as an independent contractor with the company he worked for (she was given a brochure and a DVD about the amazing life she could live if she became an associate with this company -- side note: the company has changed its name since the murder). The info was given to her by an unrelated, third party while she was working at a California Pizza Kitchen restaurant. The opening line that naturally grabbed her interest was, "Where will you be in five years? I'll be retired. Interested?" This company took insurance premiums from clients that allowed them to retain an attorney at no charge if they ever needed one. On her first foray into his world at the MGM Grand (at an expensive, bi-annual, rah-rah, fist bump convention), she, an absolute nobody with this company, was able to secure a coveted invitation to the highly respected banquet hosted for people like him -- Executive Directors -- the top earners. How? According to her, this stranger named Travis who approached her in the lobby prior to the banquet, called her an hour before the banquet and asked her to be his date. She had to borrow a formal gown from one of his friends to attend. He, a devout Mormon, began an intensely sexual relationship with Arias (and the book does get into the highly detailed sex and the highly explicit nude photographs of Arias that were displayed before the world on a Jumbotron-- only because it was probably 50% of her testimony. It's quite graphic stuff, so If that bothers you, it's not the book for you). However, being devout, he felt guilty about what he was doing -- but apparently, not enough. He failed over and over, but he never intended to marry her (something she didn't realize despite the later emails and texts that make his eventual dislike for her crystal clear. She thought being baptized into the LDS faith would secure her place as his wife. It didn't). When every effort to keep him failed, she became a stalker (although she claims to have been the one who left him). The story is unbelievable -- sex, stalking, religion, theft, computer hacking, writing threatening letters with a religious tone to his new girlfriend, property damage, hiding outside his house while peering into his window while he kisses another woman, chasing after his car (on foot) when he exited his house with a new girlfriend, allegations of abuse and pedophilia, and, of course, premeditated murder. On June 4, 2008. having been rejected by Travis for the last time, she walked into his bathroom after he got in the shower, pulled out her camera, and began shooting photos of Travis. These photos, about eight of them, show the last three or four minutes of his life. She was angry that he was leaving the next day for a vacation in Cancun -- a vacation he wouldn't invite her to attend. In fact, he was going with another woman -- a Mormon virgin. After Arias stopped taking photos, she pulled out a knife and stabbed him 29 times (severing his voice box and a major artery in his heart). He tried in vain to crawl away, but she overpowered him and sliced his throat from ear to ear -- almost decapitating him. Then, she dragged him back to the shower, shoved his naked, bloody, and wet body into the stall, and shot him in the head. She left him in that shower stall, ran to rental car, and headed to Utah to meet her newest love interest -- another Mormon man who was an up and comer in the same company that Travis worked for. She was engaging in heavy foreplay with him less than 24 hours after she slaughtered Travis and shoved his corpse into a shower tall (at trial, this new lover admitted that he stopped the sexual activity because he liked her and wanted to maintain his respect for her). After that, she drove her rental car back to northern California. She claims she remembers nothing about the murder and reported that she "came to" at the Hoover Dam and realized something bad had happened because her hand was bleeding. However, she knew she was expected in Utah to meet this new man, and she claimed at trial that she didn't know Travis was dead until she received "confirmation" the next week from one of his friends in Arizona. Travis wasn't discovered for nine days, and his poor, aged dog, a black pug named Napoleon, was locked downstairs all of that time. Arias, who had the nerve to attend his memorial service, even tried to override his will and retain custody of Napoleon, the dog. Ultimately, it went to Travis' prior fiancee -- as per his written wishes. At first she denied having anything to do with the murder. Then, she claimed that she was there when he was killed, but said it was like a "hit" and she was almost killed, but the gun jammed after one of the killers put it to her head and pulled the trigger. Finally, she said, she convinced the two masked murderers to let her go if she promised not to tell anyone what she saw. She said she ran out of the house and never called 911 or the police -- she even suspected, she claimed, that Travis might have survived the attack. Then, when a photograph of her feet dragging his bleeding body back to his bathroom was discovered on the memory card of camera she ran through a wash cycle in an attempt to destroy, she eventually admitted to the killing. However she claimed he was beating her and that she had no memory of the killing at all -- until her sentencing in June, 2015. During her trial, she claimed that she dropped his camera while she was shooting her interpretation of "a Calvin Klein-like shoot that looked so cool because of the water from the shower". She claim he cursed at her when she dropped his new camera on the bathroom floor, emerged from the shower, and then, naked, wet, and on a tile floor, was able to lift her up and throw her down in a full body slam. She got up immediately (yeah, sure) ran to his closet, climbed his shelving unit and got his gun. That didn't stop him, but she was able to escape again, pick up the knife they used to cut the ropes after they were done with their bondage sex games, and that's all she remembers. It wasn't until her sentencing after her second penalty phase trial (the first one ended in a hung jury) that she finally addressed the court and the devastated siblings of Travis Alexander. She told them she did remember slicing his throat -- contrary to what she told both juries. She was sentenced to life in prison w/o the possibility of parole. Her trial will remain one of the most astounding on record. My books (which were originally one volume that became far too large to publish under one cover) focus on the circus of her direct examination (for those of us who love true crime, nothing is better than the defendant actually taking the stand). For eight days, she sat on the witness stand with her attorney. What she said was unbelievable. My books cover the exact transcripts of that examination from the first minute to the last (with a whole lot of my commentary thrown in). My Wordpress blog covers the prosecutor's cross examination in installments right now -- and not to brag, but in five months, I've amassed over 25,000 individual views on that blog site. The books, in terms of sales, has blown my mind. I thought I'd sell 30 of them. As of today, I've sold thousands of them, and it's opened doors I would have never had the courage to knock on. I'm afraid to put up a link to the Amazon page because I don't want to be accused of advertising. However, if you search "Behind the Words amazon.com" or add Kim A. Whittemore to that search (or just search, "Behind the Words" on FB, you'll get a taste of my writing style. If you get to the amazon page, you'll be able to read 74 reviews on Volume 1 and 34 reviews on Volume 2. The reviews are 4.7/5.0 and 4.8/5.0

Now, back to booze at weddings. I, for one, have never said I'd "ditch" a wedding because it was dry (and quite a few of the other ladies have said they'd attend, but they'd leave early). Cash bars are different. They are offensive, and that's a wedding I'm likely to leave pretty early unless I absolutely love the company and they outshine the fact that I'm paying for something at a wedding (it IS improper hosting, Kimi. You don't set up a station that serves food or drink at a party -- let alone a wedding -- and then tell your guests that they can partake -- IF they pay for it. I do not understand why otherwise intelligent people just can't or won't grasp that concept. Well, maybe I can, but you won't like my suspicions. Anyway, why not just sell the appetizers while you're at it?). So, for those of you deriding posters who believe that a guest should just decline your wedding invitation if they want to have a few complimentary drinks at your party, why not stop with the defensive attitude and accept the opinion of the majority of wedding guests. If every guest who preferred a few complimentary drinks stayed home because they weren't available or they had to pay for them, your bravado would be seriously cut down to size if the guests who felt that way actually stayed home. You'd be crying for a year because more than half of your guests stayed home if they took your advice seriously. Secondly, suggesting that a guest who isn't thrilled with your dry wedding or cash bar use the money they would have spent on your gift to buy a big bottle of vodka for a home drunk is absurd. That's an emotional response, not a logical one. A social drinker isn't going to be cracking open a big bottle of 80 proof unless they're getting together with a bunch of their friends on a Friday or Saturday night. A glass of wine while soaking in a tub with scented candles and soft music playing? Sure. Four to six liquor based drinks while hanging out at home? Not so much.

And while we're on this topic, what gives any bride (dry, cash bar, drink ticket, wine/beer, or fully open bar) the right to get bent out of shape because a guest won't stay at their wedding all night?

People leave early for a variety of reasons, and you don't get to judge those reasons (and if you're going to judge them and stamp them with "should have declined", have the courage of your convictions and give them back their gifts). First of all, are you not hearing what many people are saying? They are saying that they won't hang around for four to six hours drinking coffee and soda at your wedding reception. Why? Because that's not a party -- it's something they do everyday when they go out for lunch (but it's limited to an hour or an hour and a half). A majority of adults don't want to sit in a club environment for that long while drinking coffee, water, sweet tea, and soda. Why do they get a demerit for that? Nobody even sits in an upscale restaurant for that long -- no matter how nice the atmosphere, how great the service, or how delicious the food. Dance clubs have bars for a reason. Many are saying that dry weddings become a little dull after two or three hours. Why is that the fault of the guests? Why does that truth irritate the hell out of brides who won't host a few glasses of wine? Is there something wrong with these guests -- something AA might cure, perhaps (that's the implication and again, it's absurd)? What is wrong with a guest taking the time to dress and drive to witness your ceremony, your spotlight dances, your speeches, and to watch your video or slide show? Why are they required to hang out for hours after dinner? Why is an hour after dinner not enough? The time they've invested isn't ten minutes -- it's hours. Have your dry weddings, but don't insult people because they don't hang around long enough to participate in your sparkler/grand exit. Be thankful they came. Be thankful they paid for gas, tolls, and a gift. It is completely rude to get upset because your guests aren't inclined to stay until lights out (especially when the reason they're yawning and looking at their watches is based on a choice you made). Frankly, no bride has the right to get pissed off at any guest who attends their wedding, behaves themselves, congratulates the couple, and leaves a gift. It doesn't matter if they're leaving early because they're catching an early plane the next morning, leaving early because they've got two kids under the age of four at home, leaving early to finish work that needs their attention, or whether they've just had enough of the low party vibe. It's not your business to judge any of those reasons. Honestly, none of you have ever whispered in your SO's ear, "Let's get out of here and go home" because you were bored with the party you were attending? Boredom is not a crime. Have your dry wedding. It's not an etiquette failure, but accept the fact that human nature is human nature. You will likely have an early departure of guests. Have your cash wedding and it is an etiquette failure.

Centerpiece- I am slightly familiar with the case (my mom was obsessed when it was going on), but your books sound amazing. Especially since you have all of the transcripts! I am definitely going to check them out. Ohh! Maybe they will be a good Christmas gift for my mom! Thanks for all the info. Congratulations on all of your success!

We had wine at the luncheon following the ceremony (and instructions to the restaurant to provide any other alcohol people asked for, at our expense). And we had an open bar at the at-home reception. But I'm still mystified why alcohol seems to have become a necessity for a wedding.

Let's look at it this way: Meet The Wolffs talks about her open bar being $32 a head. I've seen people talking about having their dinners be under $30 a head. So if you skipped the open bar, you could go from $30 a head to $62 a head. All your guests would enjoy the upgraded food. Only some of your guests would enjoy the alcohol. (Some guests don't drink, some are too young to drink, and some have to be designated drivers and not drink.) So why spend the money on something only some of your guests would enjoy, rather than on something all of your guests would enjoy?

I'm with you on the cash bar, if you can't afford alcohol, go dry. What I take exception with is the idea that someone should cut their guest list for the sake of the bar, or that it makes you a bad host to not have one. The bottle of vodka comment is definitely directed at those people, not people who would maybe just not stay as long because there wasn't as much going on. We had alcohol at our (afternoon) wedding, but we didn't have dancing, and I didn't expect people to stay for 6 hours just sitting in chairs talking. On the other hand, maybe because I'm older and more settled than a lot of first time brides, I'm perfectly capable of enjoying myself at a party with good people and good food and no alcohol. I just did it a few nights ago and had a great time. Would I have enjoyed a glass of wine had we gotten around to pouring it? Absolutely! The answer to that is rarely no. I'm drinking a glass of wine right now. I love wine. Did I feel like it was a totally lame party and stare at my watch until it was time to go home because there wasn't alcohol? Not a bit. I like my friends. I enjoy spending time with them. If you leave early because there's not a ton happening or because you have to get home to your kids or you have a headache or something, that's just life. If you sit there staring at your watch waiting til it's polite to leave because you can't get a vodka tonic, I stand by not wanting you there. That's not a friend. That's not someone who loves me, who wants to celebrate with me. We limited our wedding to people who we loved for a reason. If you don't love us enough to genuinely want to see us get married and break bread with us afterwards, stay home.

I made a lot of budget decisions with my wedding, and it's difficult. Even with careful saving, not everyone has an extra couple grand to spend on alcohol. I was able to offer it because we had a small, low key wedding at home. If we'd paid for a venue, paid for a DJ, paid for all the other crap that the wedding industry and judgmental strangers think a wedding needs, the alcohol would have been cut. We all have to pick our priorities, and we're not all lucky enough to be able to pay for everything, especially in expensive cities. Even with careful saving, money is a finite resource for many of us. It's easy to fall into the trap of making a big deal about your wedding fitting some perfect mold, but really, it's one day. Make sure your food is good. Make sure your officiant is good. Make sure your future spouse is good. Five years down the road, nobody gives a crap about the rest.

I think your mom will love them, Brittany. Just ask her what her opinion of Kirk Nurmi is. The more she scowls, the more she'll like them (also, tell her that Juan Martinez, the absolutely amazing prosecutor on this case is releasing a book in January called, "Convicted". It contains unreleased information about Arias -- the type of stuff that never made it to trial because it was deemed "too prejudicial". His book isn't even for sale yet, but it's already an Amazon best seller (based on early orders). I think she'll loved that one as well (I can't wait to read it). Nurmi, Arias' creepy public defender attorney (who pulled strings to secure a paycheck of $225/hour to work exclusively for Arias for years -- something that's unheard of for a PD), usually specializes in getting pedophiles set free (he brags about it on his website), also wrote two books. One is about his weight loss journey (he was really quite grotesque) and the latest one is about being trapped defending Jodi Arias. I won't buy anything he wrote. He was disgusting in the courtroom. I have never seen a dead man on trial, and that's what Nurmi did.

And I would expect a vegetarian couple to have a vegetarian wedding. If they feel it's immoral to eat meat themselves, why the hell would they be ok buying it for 100 people? That's completely absurd. I would expect them to put some effort into finding vegetarian foods that are filling and approachable for omnivores, rather than serving raw quinoa and quorn smoothies or something, but really, who can't survive one meal without meat?

Nobody really wants to "survive" a wedding, Lindsay. When I go to a wedding, it's a significant expense. I'm expecting good food and good cocktails, and in return, I'll have a wonderful time at your wedding (and I'll give you a very generous gift. Hell, I'll give you that same generous gift if there's nothing to drink, but I'm not hanging out for hours and hours. If I leave early, that's my absolute right, and I don't owe anyone an explanation, let alone an apology. If I leave early because my opinion of the party isn't what the bride thinks it should be, she'll never know that. I attended the ceremony. The reception? That's a thank you to me and the others who attended the wedding. If I'm done being thanked after 2.5 hours, it's nobody's business but mine).

There are, apparently, more than a few alcohol-phobic or budget constrained brides who seem pretty pissed off that "surviving" a wedding is the way that social drinkers get through a lengthy dry or cash bar reception. Frankly, it's none of their business if a guest is bored and leaves early. Some of these brides don't want anyone going home early or even expressing private disappointment over a party without the lightest of cocktails -- wine. So, I'm not sure the vegetarian bride would like the idea of anyone "surviving" her wedding either. I'd eat her vegetarian meal, but I'll be starving two hours later. I'll probably be hungry enough to call it a night and catch a drive thru. Sorry, but you can't mandate the secret thoughts of your guests that lead to perfectly polite goodbyes just because you chose to think inside your own personal box when planning the reception. Remember, nobody says anything to the couple about what they didn't appreciate, but they have every right to not appreciate how they were hosted.

I've been to weddings of devout Christians who won't even drink wine, yet they hosted it for their guests, Why? Because they decided to invite people outside of their immediate universe, and while they understood that those people had vastly different beliefs, they overrode their dogma and offered their guests what would appeal to them. If you're a vegetarian and plan on inviting a large group of people to your wedding who are not vegetarians, can you not offer them the same option that a meat eating host offers a vegetarian guest (i.e., something they will enjoy)? If you can't, you can't; but don't get upset because the meat eater is genuinely hungry and wants to get dinner.

We can just go around and around on this subject. I have no desire to get into the vegetarian issue beyond saying it is not ridiculous to treat meat eaters the same way meat eaters treat vegetarians. Every bride has the right to do what she wants, but she also has the responsibility to accept and respect the reactions of her guests.

Love this post! The area I live in cash bars are kind of standard but I hate going to weddings where the only thing hosted is beer. Or they host beer and wine and the wine runs out at 9. You have to remember most people are bringing you a gift that probably cost more than you are spending on their food & drinks. Currently torn between two venues. One has no rental fee and the food is reasonably priced but you have to get all the alcohol through them. The other lets you stock your own bar but there is a rental fee and the food is considerably more.