Are we wrong for not allowing the kids to attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.


But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Then delight in them at home. They're not invited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.


But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Then delight in them at home. They're not invited.

NP. Why is everyone attacking this PP for having an opinion. She literally said "But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want."

[Anonymous]

Elope. Save money and frustration.

[Anonymous]

I have a 2 and 4yo and would likely not be able to attend a wedding to which they were not invited. I would not be offended if the bride and groom preferred no kids and would just send them good wishes and a nice present. I would also not be offended if I showed up to discover a 12yo had been invited/allowed to attend. Obviously a tween is different than toddlers, and even more so if the 12yo is a relative and I’m just a friend.

Whatever you do is fine, OP. If people want to be offended that’s their problem. Congratulations and I hope you have a perfect day!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.


But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Then delight in them at home. They're not invited.

NP. Why is everyone attacking this PP for having an opinion. She literally said "But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want."

Because the underlying meaning of the PP appears to be condescension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Oh I’m so sorry to hear you’ll miss it, let’s catch up when we’re back from the honeymoon!”

No skin off your nose. Ignore anyone who wants to torpedo your plans.

Don't be surprised if they don't want to catch up! But, like others say you won't care about these relatives so you won't miss them, right? Come back when your kid is 12. I get the young children but, the 12 year old would behave!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.


But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Then delight in them at home. They're not invited.

NP. Why is everyone attacking this PP for having an opinion. She literally said "But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want."

Because the underlying meaning of the PP appears to be condescension.

dp I didn't read that at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.

But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Tell me more about the bolded. If a couple's child tragically dies are they supposed to crank out a replacement child? If a couple has infertility issues and can't have kids should they get divorced? What if a couple doesn't want kids but needs to get married to get the other's health insurance - is that okay? What if a couple gets married and THEN changes their minds and they don't want kids after all - do they have to go ahead and have some or should they just get a hasty divorce?

The people who say the only point of getting married is to have kids don't like their spouses and would rather be divorced.

OK, so what's your explanation for some form of marriage cross-culturally existing in every society? I mean, it seems kind of funny that this is basically a universal human institution, isn't it?

Yes, but marriage is not longer solely for procreation. Many people marry because they meet someone, fall in love and want to spend their lives together. Many also want kids. But it isn't the sole point of marriage. It might be some people's sole point, but that isn't universally the sole point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from a culture that welcomes kids at weddings, even small ones. The entire point of getting married is to have kids, otherwise you could just live together for ever without getting married. Kids are a cute delight, and everyone's happy to see them. They are a symbol of hope and guiding light into the future.


But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want.

Then delight in them at home. They're not invited.

NP. Why is everyone attacking this PP for having an opinion. She literally said "But you're the bride and you can invite whoever you want."

Because the underlying meaning of the PP appears to be condescension.

dp I didn't read that at all

It's a version of You do you. Which generally is condescending. "You're wrong, but hey, you do you."

[Anonymous]

We just had a thread of the PP who was upset when they attended the No Kids wedding and there were some family kids there.

There is no win here. You have the people who want their kids to come and others who understand that not everyone wants kids there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you invite people with kids you invite the kids.

*snort* No, you don't. Op has said this occasion isn't suitable for children. If somebody can't leave their kids home for a few hours, stay home.

Op, stand firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elope. Save money and frustration.

YES!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can do whatever you want but that doesn’t mean there aren’t consequences to these decisions. If it’s more important to you to keep it kids only, then do so but it may impact your relationship with your family and only you know if that’s worth it.

Or family could realize the day isn't about them or their kids.

[Anonymous]

I honestly think that not inviting a 12 year old family member is bordering on insane.

[Anonymous]

You all are crazy. How do you even attend a wedding and enjoy it with kids? I have 3 and they’d run me ragged. The youngest is 2. I would have to spend my entire night catering to them while everyone else enjoys themselves (like I do on every darn holiday where relatives demand a command performance). But this is dcum- maybe you all travel with Nannies nonstop. My kids also like to be in bed at 7:30.

I’m thrilled when I can hire a babysitter and enjoy a rare night out. And if you think other family members would help- they wouldn’t. It would be the opposite- they’d feed my kids sugar and soda and amp them up.