Bride and groom raise eyebrows over major mistake on wedding invitation: 'We're doing WHAT at 3:30pm?'
Couple Theresa and Jason sent out their invitations detailing the schedule - from the 3pm ceremony to the 5.30pm dinner reception, followed by 'party time' starting at 6.30pm.
'Welcome to our unplugged wedding. We invite you to be fully present with us during our ceremony. With this in mind, please - pretty please - turn off your cell phones and cameras at the 3pm ceremony,' the invitation read.
At 3.30pm, guests are invited to enjoy hors d'oeuvres, otherwise known as canapés, as the newlyweds are expected to personally greet them in the receiving line.
However, it seems an unfortunate auto-correct mishap was missed during the printing process - the invitation came out with 'Horse Ovaries' instead of hors d'oeuvres.
The turquoise wedding invitation was re-shared in a Wedding Shaming Facebook group, with many laughing hysterically at the typo.
'Just because it's unplugged doesn't mean you shouldn't Google how to spell "hors d'oeuvres",' one said.
'We're doing WHAT at 3:30pm?' another screamed.
'I'm sitting here crying laughing. I wouldn't have even GUESSED they meant hors d'oeuvres. I was like, "Damn Ye Olde Horse Ovaries - same place Mee Maw and Pop Pop got married",' one revealed.
'Horse ovaries, huh? Do you think they'll have vegetarian options?' another added.
Many poked fun at the couple for making such a big deal about their unplugged ceremony, yet forgetting to address 'Horse Ovaries'.
'Great explanation of the "no tech" ceremony... ZERO explanation of the HORSE OVARIES?' one joked.
'Is it a wedding or a vet convention,' another added.
'Everyone's talking about the typo, but no one blasting how the ovaries go on for two damn hours,' one pointed out.
Some confessed they didn't realise what was 'wrong' with the invitation until they took a closer look at the schedule.
'My brain skimmed quickly so at first I was like, "There's nothing wrong with this though, what's the problem?" And then I saw it,' one said.
'For a second I was confused why we were against unplugged ceremonies and then I saw the real problem,' another shared.
However, some were convinced the bride and groom purposely wrote 'horse ovaries' as an 'inside joke'.
'My boomer dad says this, but as a joke. This has to be on purpose right? RIGHT?!' one pointed out.
'I really just hope they were trying to be funny,' another said.
'I feel like I've seen this spelling before as a joke. Kind of like "bone-apple-teeth",' one added.
While one joked: 'When you trust AI to make your wedding invites.'
Meanwhile, many suggested you're better off writing 'appetisers' if you want to avoid making a similar mistake.
'Just use appetisers if you can't spell hors d'oeuvres,' one said.
'Appetisers works just fine if you don't know how to spell the French word,' another added, laughing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
WWE legend Nikki Bella suffers horror breast implant injury in Monday Night RAW blunder
WWE legend Nikki Bella revealed she injured her breast implant on RAW. Bella, 41, competed in an Eight Woman Tag Team Match a week ago that saw her teaming up with IYO SKY, Rhea Ripley, and Stephanie Vaquer and beating Women's World Champion Naomi, Chelsea Green, Alba Fyre, and Piper Niven. 4 4 4 4 But a spot went horribly wrong during that match as British grappler Niven delivered an Elbow Drop that reportedly dislodged the two-time women's champion's implant. Bella said on her Nikki and Brie podcast: "We were just out there talking I was just like, 'Oh my God, I'm having so much fun'. "I didn't want the match to end. I was in a little bit of pain, but I didn't want it to end'." Bella's twin sister and fellow WWE legend Brie asked: "I mean, your implant okay? I think it's stuck in your ribs, but…" The WWE Hall of Famer responded: "I think it is. I had to go to the doctor yesterday to get my t** looked at. "I was just telling Brie, I'm having conversations with my shirt off and I'm thinking in my head, like, 'I didn't think I'd be here today on my day off in New York City getting my boob looked at, knowing that my implant I think has moved'. " And I'm like, 'Alright, it has moved'. It's moved. It's okay. We're going to get it fixed one day. "I told the doctor, I go, 'Newly divorced, so the minute the boots are hung up, I'm going to come back to you and we're going to make these girls look real good, because these girls are going to get some action in the future and that can't look like that'." Bella was surprised to find out how much attention her wrestling injury got. The ex-Divas Champion added: "I literally had told Brie all of this in private and when she said it live about my implant, I was like, 'Are you kidding me?' Stunning WWE legend Nikki Bella reveals she's joined celebrity dating app as it 'gets lonely in hotel rooms' "Then yesterday it was everywhere about my implant. I keep getting text messages, I was just backstage and everyone kept coming up, like, 'Is it okay?' "I'll know later. I don't know yet if it exploded or not. It still seems intact. It's swollen, it hurts, but I think it might be fine. "I can't believe I'm loudly talking about this, but hey, it's 2025, whatever. Send well wishes to my fake boob, thank you."
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘Children are entering a hellscape': the terrifying film about grieving parents taking on social media giants
In 2020, Amy Neville found her 14-year-old son Alexander dead in his bedroom. He had taken what he thought was an oxycodone pill, bought – according to Neville – from a drug dealer he met on Snapchat. The pill was a fake, laced with fentanyl. Four years later, his mum stood up in the California high school where Alex would have been a student to warn other parents and teenagers about social media. 'We give our kids these smartphones. We let them have these apps. And that is the equivalent of dropping them off in the worst neighbourhood in our area.' Neville is featured alongside other bereaved parents in Can't Look Away, a terrifying new documentary about kids and social media directed by Matthew O'Neill and Perri Peltz, based on extensive investigative reporting by Bloomberg News journalist Olivia Carville. It follows American families who are filing lawsuits against social media companies and campaigning for stricter legislation; they are represented by the Social Media Victims Law Center, a crusading legal firm run Matthew Bergman, a lawyer so charismatic he could probably play himself in a Hollywood movie. The conversation around teenagers and social media has evolved beyond kids using their phones at the table. In his 2024 bestseller The Anxious Generation, Jonathan Haidt warned of the links between young people's mental health and smartphones. Last month, the technology secretary Peter Kyle apologised for the delay in legislation to keep children safe online. Australia plans to ban social media for under 16s from December. In Can't Look Away, the agony on parents' faces as they tell their stories, and relive the trauma, is hard to watch. Toney and Brandy Roberts filed a lawsuit against Meta over the death of their 14-year-old daughter Englyn in 2020; she killed herself after watching a video of a mock-hanging on Instagram. 'The social media companies know that our children are so vulnerable,' Brandy tells the camera. 'I feel that the only way that they're going to be forced to change is through a lawsuit. So that's why we're joining this fight.' When I talk to the film's directors before Can't Look Away's UK premiere, they do not mince their words. O'Neill says he previously had no idea how extreme the content that children are exposed to on social media is. 'It's so much more than just addiction, or screen time, or wasting time. What young people see is so different because of the algorithms. What they're being fed, what they can't look away from, this is not what they're searching for. Children are essentially entering into a hellscape that adults don't know about.' Algorithms decide what you see on social media, based in part on what you have previously liked or commented on, and how much time you've spent on other posts. If you linger on a piece of content, the algorithm will feed you more of the same. What that means is that teenagers don't have to actively search for harmful material for it to appear in their feed. A 13-year-old girl might look for healthy eating advice and end up down a rabbit hole of pro-anorexia content. 'It can very quickly turn very dark,' says O'Neill. Mason Edens was 16 when he broke up with his girlfriend; normal teenage stuff his mum Jennie DeSerio thought. In his heartache, Mason turned to TikTok, searching for phrases such as: 'My girlfriend broke up with me.' In the film, his mum plays one of the depressing videos that ended up in his feed. It shows a gun in a hand, then an image of blood splatter and the words: 'My hand. My head.' Mason killed himself in November 2022. Jennie doesn't believe that he'd ever searched for the term 'suicide' on TikTok. O'Neill says he was shocked by Mason's feed: 'This is not someone crying. It's not just sad music. It is an image of a gun going into a hand with the exhortation to blow your effing head off. That is not content that a product should be feeding to a child. I think we could all broadly agree on that as a society.' Is it possible, I ask, for the social media companies to filter out harmful content? 'If Meta knows what I want to buy before I buy it, there's no way they can't figure out how to make sure children aren't fed content that demonstrates how to die by suicide.' After screenings of Can't Look Away, the film-makers often ask the kids in the audience if they have ever watched a suicide on social media. 'Almost all the hands go up,' says co-director Peltz. In America, 95% of 13 to 17-year-olds use social media. In 2022, social media companies made an estimated $11bn from advertising directed to under 18s in the US. The longer kids are glued to it, the more billions the companies make, which means there is a huge incentive to design sticky algorithms, says Peltz. 'Why are they feeding children material that they can't look away from? Because it keeps children on their sites for as long as possible. And we know from whistleblowers that that is a business plan. This is not an accident. They are prioritising time on screen over safety.' The film features interviews with such whistleblowers, who say companies have been warned that their products harm children. Arturo Béjar held senior positions at Facebook and Instagram, and became increasingly alarmed by their parent company Meta's own research. In one poll, one in eight 13 to 15-year-olds said they had received an unwanted sexual advance on Instagram in the past week. Béjar emailed his concerns to Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg and other top executives. He says he never received a reply. Can't Look Away tells the heart-breaking story of Jordan DeMay, a popular, outgoing 17-year-old from Michigan who killed himself after being blackmailed in a sextortion scam. In March 2022, he received a message on Instagram from someone he thought was a girl his own age. After some flirting, Jordan sent her nude photographs. Immediately, the threats started: send money or we'll share the photos with your friends and family. Less than six hours after the first of these messages, Jordan was dead. Sextortion is one of the fastest growing cybercrimes. Peltz is keen to share with parents the advice she has picked up from several professionals about how to protect children. 'Talk to your child. Tell them, 'If this ever happens to you, do not be afraid to come to us.' It's very specific advice that can make a major difference.' Can't Look Away ends with some real-life courtroom drama in Los Angeles. Amy Neville, the woman whose son took the fake oxycodone pill, is the lead plaintiff in a case against Snapchat by parents whose children died or were injured after allegedly buying fentanyl-laced drugs. Their lawsuit claims that Snapchat's design makes it an ideal marketplace to sell illegal drugs, with its disappearing messages that make it difficult for police to trace illegal activity. Another feature is Quick Add, which suggests other users to add. Laura Marquez-Garrett is a lawyer at the Social Media Victims Law Center and explains how it works. '[A dealer will] just find one high school kid in your area. You add them, and then you add all their friends, and then you add their friends.' In a courtroom showdown, Snap Inc's defence relies on a piece of US legislation drafted before Zuckerberg hit puberty. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has for years acted as a shield (or a get-out-of-jail card, depending on your perspective) protecting social media companies from liability for user-generated content posted on their platforms. In court, Snap Inc's attorney describes the platform as a tech-service provider, like a phone company. You wouldn't sue a phone company if a drug deal was made over the phone. The back-and-forth between the lawyers and the judge is a gripping intellectual tennis match. Peltz tells me that parents often feel powerless. 'But this is not a blame-the-parents situation. Companies need to make the changes so that these sites are responsible and are safe for children to be on. Parents can't be expected to keep up with their children when it comes to digital advances. It's time for these companies to stop blaming parents.' As for teenagers, people can be judgmental, she says. 'I think it's human nature to say, 'Well my child wouldn't buy drugs online.' Or, 'My child couldn't be sextorted.' The answer is that we can all hope that our children won't do things like that. But children are children. We all know about the frontal cortex, that it doesn't get fully developed until your 20s. Children make mistakes. They should be allowed to make mistakes and not have to die as a result.' Can't Look Away: The Case Against Social Media is in UK cinemas and streaming on from 8 August In the UK, the youth suicide charity Papyrus can be contacted on 0800 068 4141 or email pat@ and in the UK and Ireland Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123, or email jo@ or jo@ In the US, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is at 988 or chat for support. You can also text HOME to 741741 to connect with a crisis text line counselor. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at
The Guardian
43 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘I can't get mad at anyone who tells me I'm a genius': original Naked Gun director softens response to reboot
David Zucker, who co-created the Police Squad! and Naked Gun franchises and directed the first two films starring Leslie Nielsen, has reacted to the warm critical reception and healthy box office takings of the reboot starring Liam Neeson. Zucker had previously expressed scepticism and even anger about the direction the new film appeared to be taking, and the decision by the studio not to include him in the process. But speaking to the Hollywood Reporter in the wake of strong ticket sales and robust reviews for the Akiva Schaffer reboot, Zucker appeared more conciliatory. 'People are liking it, which is great,' he said. 'I really like the director, and I just couldn't wish him more well. I texted him already, saying, 'I hear the reviews are great, and it's tracking well.' He was very happy to hear from me, and we'll probably get together later in the month when the smoke clears.' He continued: 'I'm excited about it because it just shows that there's a strong market for comedy in movie theatres, and spoof in particular.' Last year, the director was less enthusiastic, saying of the reboot: 'Paramount is just going ahead and doing it, they haven't involved me. They're just gonna do what they want, that's Hollywood.' Zucker and the franchise's other co-creators, including his brother Jerry Zucker, had previously pitched a fourth-instalment script focusing on the thirtysomething son of the main character Frank Drebin, but it was rejected by the studio. 'We were not excited about having the franchise given to other people,' he continued. 'They have not contacted me to make a cameo or be involved in the writing. Whether or not they're going to do a good job with it, this kind of spoof, I mean it's not rocket science, but it's not easy.' Earlier this year, Zucker reiterated his disapproval, saying he was 'not planning on seeing the Naked Gun remake'. 'I regret having seen the trailer for it,' he continued, before comparing the promo to a 2007 Brazilian pornographic film. 'It's like watching 2 Girls 1 Cup. I can't unsee it.' Despite his turnaround, Zucker reiterated his aversion to seeing the film to Hollywood Reporter, but said that the team behind it had reached out to him before its release. 'I'm not gonna see it, but I don't see any of the sequels that were of my material done by other people, and that's fine. I've told Akiva that I have no intention to see it,' he said. 'He actually invited me to come see an early cut of it, but I told him there's nothing I could do to help because it really isn't what I would have done. That's not to say that he didn't actually end up doing a good movie. But I don't think I could help with that.' Zucker added that producer Seth MacFarlane had phoned him shortly after the new script had been completed. 'He spent the first 10 minutes telling me how much he loved Airplane!, The Naked Gun and Top Secret!,' said Zucker. 'I can't get mad at anyone who will tell me what a genius I am. That was a good conversation. I was glad that Seth called, but I told him politely, 'Good luck, but I can't put my name on this.' [But] everything happens for a reason.' The new Naked Gun film stars Neeson as Frank Drebin Jr, alongside Pamela Anderson and Danny Huston. In his four-star review, the Guardian's Peter Bradshaw praised it as 'amiably ridiculous, refreshingly shallow, entirely pointless and guilelessly crass'.
