A wedding guest recently found herself questioning whether she had been wrong to leave a reception after the bride and groom turned the celebration into an exhausting road trip across Los Angeles.
The ceremony ended around noon, and the guests were given an address for the reception. With roughly 75 to 100 people attending, everyone headed to the first location expecting to spend the afternoon there.
The first restaurant served salads and a chicken or fish meal. Once everyone had finished eating, the bride and groom stood up and announced that the guests should follow them to another location about 12 miles away.
The guest assumed the next destination would finally be the main reception venue, perhaps with a dance floor, speeches and music.
Instead, everyone arrived at another restaurant, where another meal was served. This time, it was Mexican food.
After the second meal, the couple once again asked everyone to get back in their cars and follow them to another location.
The next destination was about eight miles farther away and took the group into downtown Los Angeles.
By then, it was around 4 p.m. The temperature was close to 100°F, and the guests had already spent a considerable amount of time sitting in traffic.
The guest had also paid $12 for valet parking at the first restaurant and $18 at the second.
Some of the other guests were visibly irritated, but most continued along with the couple’s plans.
At the third restaurant, everyone was served dessert.
Once again, after they finished eating, the bride and groom made another announcement.
There was one more location.
This time, the destination was approximately 30 miles away.
The guest was already nearly 60 miles from home. It was around 7 p.m., and she had spent practically the entire day driving between different locations, sitting in traffic and getting in and out of the heat.
She had also already spent another $20 on parking at the third restaurant.
At that point, she decided she had reached her limit.
She congratulated the newlyweds, wished them well and went home.
Later, she discovered that the fourth location was where the actual party was supposed to take place. There was an open bar and a dance floor waiting for the guests.
That discovery left her wondering whether she had made the wrong decision.
Perhaps she should have driven the additional 30 miles, paid another $18 for valet parking and stayed for the part of the wedding where everyone could finally celebrate.
But after such a long day, she knew she would probably have been exhausted by the time she arrived.
She imagined herself sitting in a chair, fanning herself and trying to recover rather than actually enjoying the party.
What bothered her most was that the unusual schedule hadn’t apparently been communicated clearly ahead of time.
If guests had known that the wedding reception involved four different locations and more than 30 additional miles of driving, they could have prepared for it. Instead, each new destination was announced after everyone had already arrived at the previous one.
With 75 to 100 guests, the guest felt that was particularly inconsiderate.
She also couldn’t help thinking about the transportation and safety issues involved. Everyone was expected to drive themselves through Los Angeles traffic from one location to another, despite the fact that alcohol was apparently going to be available at the final venue.
If the couple wanted to create a multi-location wedding experience, arranging a shuttle or party bus could have made the day much easier for everyone.
The guest later learned that almost half of the attendees eventually went home rather than continuing to the final venue.
That made her feel slightly less guilty about leaving, but she still wondered whether she should have simply pushed through.
She understood that the bride and groom wanted their wedding to be different and memorable. However, she felt there was a difference between creating a unique celebration and making guests spend almost an entire day driving around Los Angeles.
By the time she left, she wasn’t angry with the couple. She was simply exhausted.
Others argued that the entire itinerary should have been disclosed in advance. Guests could then have decided whether they were comfortable with the amount of driving, parking costs and time involved.
Several commenters said they would have left much earlier.
Another commenter questioned why the couple had chosen to make their guests pay separate valet fees at each restaurant instead of organizing the entire reception at one venue.
Ultimately, most Redditors agreed that the guest was NTA.
The bride and groom were entitled to design their wedding however they wanted, but their guests weren’t obligated to participate in every part of the itinerary.
After hours of driving, multiple meals, several parking fees, heavy Los Angeles traffic and nearly 100-degree heat, the guest had every right to decide that she’d had enough.
The final destination may have been the real party, but getting there shouldn’t have felt like completing an endurance challenge.
In the end, leaving wasn’t an insult to the newlyweds. She had already spent most of her day showing up, celebrating with them and following their unusual itinerary.
Sometimes, a guest doesn’t leave because they don’t care about the wedding.
Sometimes, they leave because they’ve simply run out of energy.
