Accidental CC from wedding planner to couple reveals thriving English class snobbery

A couple in England have gone public with the news that a wedding planner at the Stoke Park country resort (used as a location in James Bond: Goldfinger) accidentally cc'ed them on an email where she advised her colleagues that they were not the "type of people that we would want" to get married at the hotel. The couple are presumably too petit-bourgeois for the resort: she's a drug counsellor, he's a Ministry of Defense engineer with an eyebrow piercing.


  1. We are an extremely welcoming and friendly hotel and we are inclusive of everyone. Everyone is welcome.

    Heh heh. Yeah, bullshit.

  2. “she’s a drug counsellor, he’s a Ministry of Defense engineer with an eyebrow piercing.”

    They fight crime.

        1. It’s funny to see all the Daily Mail commenters approving of the planner maintaining the venue’s high standards and disapproving of Pauline’s profession (adult TV model) twhile they read an article that exploits just how adult a model she is, in a newspaper reknowned for making the most of such prurient interests.

          How they managed to type their missives one handed is another matter.

  3. The English still think they have class? I thought all that went way when they elected Tony Blair as PM. If not that then certainly Oasis, Crikey!

    1.  They have been fighting a class war for centuries. However I think they may have forgotten what they’re fighting for.

  4. Time to get a couple with a good assortment of piercings and tattoos to show up, asking to do their wedding there. They’d want to discreetly film the reaction of the hostess.

    1. I do hope there’s still time before the wedding to take their reception elsewhere.  If I was on the receiving end of this, I would forfeit my deposit and have my reception at the landfill before I would ask my guests to attend a function there.  Ever again.

      EDIT: Oh good they did.

  5. get the full story, she also works for Red Light Central TV, where she encourages viewers to ring in to speak to her while partially clothed

      1. the proposed bride.    latest from bbc

        A wedding planner at a luxury hotel has been disciplined for describing a couple as not the “type of people that we would want” to get married there.

        Pauline Bailey and fiance Paul Carty had wanted to hold their wedding at Stoke Park, Buckinghamshire.

        But Miss Bailey said she had felt “crushed” after an email from wedding planner Michele Connelly was sent to her by mistake.

        The hotel said it had apologised and Ms Connelly had been disciplined.

    1. If that is true, who gives a shit?  

      I think you missed the point.  The point was NOT that these are two people of the proper class and breeding and so should have been allowed to have their wedding.  The point is that the wedding planner was a classist asshole snob.

      She could be a prostitute who works for hamburgers and Moxie, and her husband could be a star in gay porn whose shtick is interracial double penetration bukkaki gang bangs, and so long as they can pony up the money and follow whatever rules the club lays out, they should be able to have their damned wedding.

          1. No, the US really didn’t.  The point of the article was that this was the reminiscent of that very nasty classist hereditary society that used to rule England.  Americans can barely understand this concept.  We are talking about “class” divorced of money.  That isn’t the suggest that America doesn’t have some level of this, just that in the US, the all mighty dollar speaks far far louder than any other considerations.  

            Put another, way if a dude in a cow boy hat wanders into a fancy place and looks like he is going to spend, he is going to get treated like a rock star.  The US has some vague concept of old money in some very small circles, but for the most part, new money spends just as good as old money.  

            I suppose this is more virtuous than a hereditary society, but I probably would still live it on the back page of the welcome brochure.

  6. Who would want anything to do with a place run by such despicable UC twits?
    The couple is way better off getting married at city hall and having a lovely reception at a local pub. 

    1. Who would want anything to do with a place run by such despicable UC twits?

      Upper class? An hotelier in Stoke Poges?

      It’s hardly class war, more of a middle class squabble.

    2. This is sort of the point. Any class system only persists because people really really want to be part of the in crowd. People want to get married in a place like this, and so the place can impose whatever arbitrary rules they like.

      There is a real contradiction here. The reason the couple _want_ to get married so much here is because of the perceived exclusivity and luxury (at least that’s what the hotel seem to think). Maintaining such an air is a rational business decision.

  7. I wonder if it’s because she is almost half his age (27 vs 51). Some people get really freaked out over relationships where one half is young enough to be a child (not far off grandchild) of the other.
    Or maybe it’s because they’ve got a thing about people with similar names getting married : Paul and Pauline.

    1. I’ll grant you young enough to be his daughter but you might want to double check your math if you think she’s at all close to being young enough to be his granddaughter. You’d have to become a parent pretty young (and your child become a parent equally young) to have a grandchild only 24 years younger.

          1. It wasn’t the years that ruined it, it was us, we couldn’t solve some big problems, had to meet in secret (cultural lines). That was a huge barrier, we never managed to get over it.

  8. I fear the class war is more serious than this. Look at the economy – 1% thriving, 99% continuing the long decline. This wedding incident is mere tribalism. The hotel don’t like anyone who clashes with the decor. No goths, no metalheads, no rastas, no cutoffs, no jeans, no baseball hats, no sneakers, no orthodox jews, no track suits, no birkas, no cyclists, no obese people, no  children, and so on. The class war is about running the corporation that owns the government – not running the snooty hotel.

    1. Class (in this context) has nothing to do with money. You can be dirt-poor and upper class (Lady Caroline Minto), stinking rich and working class (Lord Alan Sugar).

  9. I’m going to a wedding at Stoke Park in December.  I am pretty sure I can persuade all the stag party attendees, at least, to wear earrings and Babestation name badges to the reception.

  10. Stoke Poges is part of the list of chores in the A40 roundabouts: Hoover Building, Polish War Memorial, Stoke Poges…

  11. Notice the hotel didn’t say why she was disciplined, just that she was…

    “In the future, do take care not to copy such emails to the couple in question. Also, good catch they weren’t the type for our establishment/”

  12. So the hotel don’t want their business…  It’s a tricky one. 

    If they were saying that they didn’t want the business because the customers were black, I would definitely have a problem.

    If they were saying that they didn’t want the business because the customers were gay, I would probably have a problem (I’m being honest. The religious rights of the owners vs human rights of the customers argument is something my head hasn’t settled as yet, but I’m leaning towards the human rights trumping religious rights).

    What if they were saying that they didn’t want the business because the customers were meat eaters, and this was a vegan establishment?  Is that OK?  How does that line up with the religious argument, above?

    They seem to be saying that they don’t want their business because they are ‘common’. Is that OK?  I’m asking because I really don’t know.

    1. Well, I don’t think so but then again, I’m quite common. ;-) They may have the right to discriminate based on class, but that doesn’t make it moral or cool or good for society. Having federal laws here which ban discrimination based on skin color does not mean people can’t be racist asshats–it just means that they have to abide by federal law regarding hiring, firing, and serving customers, etc.

      Incidentally, segregationist made the “it’s private property, so we can discriminate” argument in the heat of the civil rights movement. Rand Paul made that argument back last year, in fact. But, supremacy clause, so federal law baring discrimination of broadly described public spaces reins supreme.  Of course, this is the US, and the incident in question is Britain. I’m not as familiar with that ball of wax.  

      I dont’ think the vegan/meat-eater question comes into this at all.  I am quite free to go to a vegan restaurant and eat there, they just won’t serve me meat. If I go and demand a steak dinner and raise a stink about it when my steak is a tofued affair, they can throw me out, because I’m being an asshat.

      EDIT: Damn it! Now I need to go listen to Pulp’s Common People!

  13. “This is a working-class couple, from the deep end of the gene pool.  They are not sufficiently inbred for our taste.”

  14. Does this venue receive tax dollars? It did not seem that way from the article, so private property = private rules. Don’t like it? Boycott! Refuse to spend your dollars at this place. Already a member? Quit if you don’t agree with their policy.

    If we try to outlaw being a snobby, classless asshole, then the terrorists have won.

Comments are closed.