Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Odd. I read this thread exactly the opposite. Funny how people can have such opposite experiences in reading. I am fine with child free weddings, by the way, but have to say that in this thread the worst behavior and posts are coming from child free brides.
Anonymous wrote:My SIL had a no kids allowed destination wedding at a $1000/night resort that was hours away from an airport. We had a 2 year old and had never left him overnight and no childcare options. SIL tried to paint this as an amazing opportunity to take a child free 'vacation' (all her close friends also had kids) but we didn't end up going so her only sibling wasn't there.
Your husband didn’t go alone? When it’s a sibling and your only sibling and your child is 2 and the other parent can manage for a few days solo, not going is pretty aggressive. Did you encourage him to go? Did his sister go to your wedding?
DP but neither DH nor I would have encouraged or nagged the other person to go. 1K a night and a bunch of PTO to fly to a destination wedding
w/ o spouse and kids would be a no go for us at that time in our life. It’s insanely rude to assume your guests are going to sacrifice their family vacation time and budget because you want a destination wedding. If you want a destination wedding by all means have one but the obligations to attend completely change when you choose this path.
How much pto do you need for 1 night? You are just making excuses to be upset because they didn't invite your precious little toddler.
We’ve been told over and over that all brides (excuse me, 99.9%) are perfectly happy and never, ever rude when someone declines to attend their wedding for any reason whatsoever. But you seem to be very upset that someone chose not to use PTO to go to your wedding here. Oh dear. I guess you are a special one.
DP
It's not upsetting people decline the invitation. It's upsetting people making up disingenuous excuses for doing so.
Why lie about PTO and babysitters? Just say you are declining an invitation to an event that does not accommodate you in the special way you want to be accommodated. Babysitters and PTO is a passive aggressive protest, nothing more.
If you truly didn’t care, you would not care what reason was given for the decline. The fact is that you are upset that someone chose not to attend your wedding, and lashing out.
The position in this thread from child free wedding brides over and over is that they don’t care if anyone declines for any reason, but you are clearly showing you care a great deal. This is of course a common reaction from bridezillas in real life but we are apparently supposed to pretend otherwise here on DCUM, like some sort of mass delusion about narcissist brides must be preserved. You just accidentally let the mask slip, that’s all.
I'm not expressing this as a child free wedding bride. I'm expressing this as someone reading this nonsense.
Sure, riiiiight.
Nobody who isn’t a child free bride having a temper tantrum cares why someone politely declines a wedding. You are upset not only that people decline, but why they politely decline. That’s crazy behavior, sorry.
You sound like a lunatic.
Oh dear. You are big mad that we see your temper tantrum because someone declined to go to your childfree wedding.
What adult talks like you? You sound like a tantruming 13-year-old.
When did I say you did? I was simply having a laugh at the ridiculousness of everyone on here who has said thus and thus is acceptable and this or that is not. As if anyone owes anyone else an excuse, a reason, a justification that needs to be “accepted.” I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend. Oh well. I don’t care if someone doesn’t understand or like my decisions.
But as I said, there is clearly a market for this type of reply card. Money to be made, people!
You quoted me so I assumed you were implying as much.
But that's the thing. Nobody is saying the invitee owes anyone an excuse. At least nowhere near the extent we see the other side dictating what is and is not acceptable in terns of people planning their own wedding.
People are saying couples owe it to family, society, and 12 year olds with dreams of attending a wedding to invite children to weddings.
I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend.
Then that is silly. Nobody should be telling you that you owe them attendance, or that you owe them a wedding with children invited.
That's not precisely what I was trying to say about five pages ago, fwiw. I think weddings used to be bonding experiences for young cousins when I was growing up. Losing that because people want nicer Instagram pictures to post, if that's really why this generation is doing it, is really to bad from my perspective. I have some great memories of those times. It's a shame to me that young people aren't valuing those experiences for kids to hang out together. If that's what you want, I can arrange for babysitting or not according to how much I value you in the family tbh. It does inform my opinion of you and makes me think maybe you're caught up more with appearances and more inclined to make the event all about you instead about the larger family. You're allowed to think me some sort of judgemental oldster, but I'm allowed to make that judgement of your selfishness etc, also.
Hey oldster, what was the average cost of those weddings back in the 70s/80s that you are referring to? Oh, that’s right, a fraction of what a wedding costs today. You sound as dim as the Boomers who go on and on about how they own a home (they bought for $85,000) and they just don’t understand why young people can’t afford a home these days, they’re probably poor because they buy Starbucks. Weddings are astronomically pricier these days, so no, not everyone and their kids can be invited.
Well we did our wedding 30+ years ago at a church. Since we had to pay ourselves and were young and poor, we also held the reception at the church fellowship hall. Hired a church member who ran a catering business to provide the food, and donated to the church to have several of the "women of the church" help with serving the food.
Since it was at a church, there was no dancing, alcohol, etc. It was a 2 hour luncheon/cut the cake and we were done. Then we paid the janitor fee.
So our wedding, including the rehearsal dinner (also at the church fellowship hall, so no alcohol yet again) was about $4K total for 120 people.
But most people are not willing to do that type of wedding and reception
But it can still be done for under $8K
I don’t know anyone who has had that kind of wedding, and I sure would rather get a sitter and go to a fun wedding with alcohol and good food and dancing.
But the point is that some of the wedding expenses these days are over the top because the couple wants amazing photos. The venue has to look amazing, for the photos. The food has to look amazing, for the photos. But It doesn’t really need to be that expensive to be fun. We got married fifteen years ago for about $18K for ~150 people with an open bar, dancing (just a DJ not a band) and it was lovely. A friend’s wedding that happened before us cost $40K with a live band the bride loved very much and a choice of three desserts. Great, if you can afford it! Both weddings allowed kids.
No work friend thinks your invitation includes their kids and no work friend with a live brain will bring their kids to your wedding. I have never gone to a wedding where I saw kids at the work friend table. Someone raised that as a strawman earlier and it’s laughable. Nobody does this unless you work with complete idiots. Similarly, no work friend will be offended if you spell out for them that their kids are not invited. They know the drill.
The point of inviting kids is so that the kids can hang out together and get to know one another, and have family experiences together. Because weddings are about family, and not just about you.
So invite kids or don’t, your choice. We’ll just secretly judge you.
I had kids at my wedding, which was 11 years ago, so calm down. That said, it was fun and worthwhile for people to travel to, not some church basement lame-fest.
Sounds like what you are describing is a *family reunion.* Why are you so cheap? If family is actually important to you, you’ll plan and pay for a family reunion. My family does that every few years, so do my ILs. You can rent a beach house if you want people to pay their own way. Why are you so cheap as to expect brides and grooms to foot the bill so you can have a freebie family reunion?
Oh wait, talk is cheap and you don’t value family so much that you hold reunions; if it was a priority, you would host reunions. And you don’t. You piggyback on other people’s weddings. (And funerals, from the sound of you.)
I can’t imagine going through life with such a weird and hostile outlook, foaming and frothing at everything.
Yeah, that was a bizarrely unhinged post. What a miserable person that PP is. I am not even sure if she’s on the pro- or anti-kid weddings side (I’m just skimming posts), I was just struck by what a horrifically miserable person she must be. Whatever side she’s on, I would say the other side is better.
Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Yep. Pretty much.
100%. They keep lashing out at everyone in these made up scenarios and calling people bridezillas as if most of the people here haven't already been married years. This isn't some retro version of The Knot.
+1. Its pretty obvious the ones married before 2010 are the ones still using the term “bridezilla.”
Someone suggested “gaping narcissist” earlier and I’m good with that. It’s gender neutral too, so also covers grooms.
When did I say you did? I was simply having a laugh at the ridiculousness of everyone on here who has said thus and thus is acceptable and this or that is not. As if anyone owes anyone else an excuse, a reason, a justification that needs to be “accepted.” I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend. Oh well. I don’t care if someone doesn’t understand or like my decisions.
But as I said, there is clearly a market for this type of reply card. Money to be made, people!
You quoted me so I assumed you were implying as much.
But that's the thing. Nobody is saying the invitee owes anyone an excuse. At least nowhere near the extent we see the other side dictating what is and is not acceptable in terns of people planning their own wedding.
People are saying couples owe it to family, society, and 12 year olds with dreams of attending a wedding to invite children to weddings.
I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend.
Then that is silly. Nobody should be telling you that you owe them attendance, or that you owe them a wedding with children invited.
That's not precisely what I was trying to say about five pages ago, fwiw. I think weddings used to be bonding experiences for young cousins when I was growing up. Losing that because people want nicer Instagram pictures to post, if that's really why this generation is doing it, is really to bad from my perspective. I have some great memories of those times. It's a shame to me that young people aren't valuing those experiences for kids to hang out together. If that's what you want, I can arrange for babysitting or not according to how much I value you in the family tbh. It does inform my opinion of you and makes me think maybe you're caught up more with appearances and more inclined to make the event all about you instead about the larger family. You're allowed to think me some sort of judgemental oldster, but I'm allowed to make that judgement of your selfishness etc, also.
Hey oldster, what was the average cost of those weddings back in the 70s/80s that you are referring to? Oh, that’s right, a fraction of what a wedding costs today. You sound as dim as the Boomers who go on and on about how they own a home (they bought for $85,000) and they just don’t understand why young people can’t afford a home these days, they’re probably poor because they buy Starbucks. Weddings are astronomically pricier these days, so no, not everyone and their kids can be invited.
Well we did our wedding 30+ years ago at a church. Since we had to pay ourselves and were young and poor, we also held the reception at the church fellowship hall. Hired a church member who ran a catering business to provide the food, and donated to the church to have several of the "women of the church" help with serving the food.
Since it was at a church, there was no dancing, alcohol, etc. It was a 2 hour luncheon/cut the cake and we were done. Then we paid the janitor fee.
So our wedding, including the rehearsal dinner (also at the church fellowship hall, so no alcohol yet again) was about $4K total for 120 people.
But most people are not willing to do that type of wedding and reception
But it can still be done for under $8K
I don’t know anyone who has had that kind of wedding, and I sure would rather get a sitter and go to a fun wedding with alcohol and good food and dancing.
But the point is that some of the wedding expenses these days are over the top because the couple wants amazing photos. The venue has to look amazing, for the photos. The food has to look amazing, for the photos. But It doesn’t really need to be that expensive to be fun. We got married fifteen years ago for about $18K for ~150 people with an open bar, dancing (just a DJ not a band) and it was lovely. A friend’s wedding that happened before us cost $40K with a live band the bride loved very much and a choice of three desserts. Great, if you can afford it! Both weddings allowed kids.
No work friend thinks your invitation includes their kids and no work friend with a live brain will bring their kids to your wedding. I have never gone to a wedding where I saw kids at the work friend table. Someone raised that as a strawman earlier and it’s laughable. Nobody does this unless you work with complete idiots. Similarly, no work friend will be offended if you spell out for them that their kids are not invited. They know the drill.
The point of inviting kids is so that the kids can hang out together and get to know one another, and have family experiences together. Because weddings are about family, and not just about you.
So invite kids or don’t, your choice. We’ll just secretly judge you.
I had kids at my wedding, which was 11 years ago, so calm down. That said, it was fun and worthwhile for people to travel to, not some church basement lame-fest.
Sounds like what you are describing is a *family reunion.* Why are you so cheap? If family is actually important to you, you’ll plan and pay for a family reunion. My family does that every few years, so do my ILs. You can rent a beach house if you want people to pay their own way. Why are you so cheap as to expect brides and grooms to foot the bill so you can have a freebie family reunion?
Oh wait, talk is cheap and you don’t value family so much that you hold reunions; if it was a priority, you would host reunions. And you don’t. You piggyback on other people’s weddings. (And funerals, from the sound of you.)
I am PP you are responding to, and I guess I AM too cheap to pay for a family reunion, because weddings do mostly still perform this function for us and I need to save the money for my teenagers going to college. So, sick burn I guess?
My point above is that weddings can cost different amounts and your costs will range depending on what you value. If your wedding is so fancy and expensive that having kids at it would ruin the experience for you, you are valuing different things than my extended family does. You can do that, that’s your choice. I will just judge you a bit. Not sure why some of you are so mad at me for that. These are your choices so you should be happy to stand by them.
It’s a little funny to me because the bride and groom are most likely childless when making these decisions and yet also the likeliest people in the room to experience schadenfreude over the exclusion of kids because chances are they are the likeliest people in the room to be having kids in a few years. So, the folks who were anti children for their OWN wedding will then often get to experience exclusionary kid policies for the next eighteen years, which seems only fitting to me. If they could have just exercised their imagination a bit, they might have seen why inviting kids might be nice and ultimately beneficial for them. It’s always funny to get the baby shower invite of someone who had a child free wedding two years later, like clockwork. Wait so NOW you value children? Okay my dude.
(I actually do have some great memories from being at wakes when I was a kid, before services started off in a side room, while my cousins and I all grappled in our heads with the very dead body in the room next door. That sort of thing brought us together in a weird way. Family, man.)
So, is holding a full reunion-level bash for people too expensive, or not expensive? It's too much for you to pay for, so you want the Zoomer kids to expand their celebration and take the hit for you?
Not inviting kids seems to be more of a new trend that people are choosing because … reasons. Traditionally, kids are generally invited to weddings, so inviting them isn’t really an “expansion” — rather, NOT inviting kids is a new cut and a change to how families got together in the past. If newlyweds want to cut kids out of their wedding events, that’s largely a change from what used to happen and a change to many family dynamics where kids were a natural, accepted part of the celebration. Which is what people are remarking on.
I don’t think it’s a trend. I had a no kid wedding twenty years ago and it wasn’t uncommon then.
Anonymous wrote:My husband and I are both the youngest of large families, and our kids are the youngest cousins on both sides. Several of our nieces and nephews have gotten married and had "adult only" weddings and our kids were the only first cousins excluded. (They are not babies-- they are 11 and 14.)
When my husband and I were both single we spent tons of time going to all our niblings' recitals, sporting events, plays, etc-- and now that we have kids, do you think our sibs show up for our kids in the same way? Nope.
To then have our kids cast aside at a family wedding is just another hurtful slight. It stings.
Soooo dramatic. How very unsurprising that this person uses the nauseating baby talk slang “niblings.”
Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Odd. I read this thread exactly the opposite. Funny how people can have such opposite experiences in reading. I am fine with child free weddings, by the way, but have to say that in this thread the worst behavior and posts are coming from child free brides.
Your reading comprehension is laughably poor.
Nah. You are just too emotional and worked up to see the accuracy of the observation.
Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Yep. Pretty much.
100%. They keep lashing out at everyone in these made up scenarios and calling people bridezillas as if most of the people here haven't already been married years. This isn't some retro version of The Knot.
+1. Its pretty obvious the ones married before 2010 are the ones still using the term “bridezilla.”
Someone suggested “gaping narcissist” earlier and I’m good with that. It’s gender neutral too, so also covers grooms.
The narcissists are the angry parents.
Thinking your wedding is a special day all about you is inherently narcissistic. You might think that narcissism is justified, but it's a simple fact that having a party to celebrate yourself where you prioritize what you want is self centered.
Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Yep. Pretty much.
100%. They keep lashing out at everyone in these made up scenarios and calling people bridezillas as if most of the people here haven't already been married years. This isn't some retro version of The Knot.
+1. Its pretty obvious the ones married before 2010 are the ones still using the term “bridezilla.”
Someone suggested “gaping narcissist” earlier and I’m good with that. It’s gender neutral too, so also covers grooms.
The narcissists are the angry parents.
Thinking your wedding is a special day all about you is inherently narcissistic. You might think that narcissism is justified, but it's a simple fact that having a party to celebrate yourself where you prioritize what you want is self centered.
Well, that is literally what a wedding is. It's about a couple joining together for a life together. And shockingly (to only you, not anyone else) is that why yes, it is about the bride and groom and what they envision for their wedding day. When you get married, you also get to choose what you want for your day. Same for everyone else.
Anonymous wrote:My SIL had a no kids allowed destination wedding at a $1000/night resort that was hours away from an airport. We had a 2 year old and had never left him overnight and no childcare options. SIL tried to paint this as an amazing opportunity to take a child free 'vacation' (all her close friends also had kids) but we didn't end up going so her only sibling wasn't there.
Your husband didn’t go alone? When it’s a sibling and your only sibling and your child is 2 and the other parent can manage for a few days solo, not going is pretty aggressive. Did you encourage him to go? Did his sister go to your wedding?
DP but neither DH nor I would have encouraged or nagged the other person to go. 1K a night and a bunch of PTO to fly to a destination wedding
w/ o spouse and kids would be a no go for us at that time in our life. It’s insanely rude to assume your guests are going to sacrifice their family vacation time and budget because you want a destination wedding. If you want a destination wedding by all means have one but the obligations to attend completely change when you choose this path.
How much pto do you need for 1 night? You are just making excuses to be upset because they didn't invite your precious little toddler.
We’ve been told over and over that all brides (excuse me, 99.9%) are perfectly happy and never, ever rude when someone declines to attend their wedding for any reason whatsoever. But you seem to be very upset that someone chose not to use PTO to go to your wedding here. Oh dear. I guess you are a special one.
DP
It's not upsetting people decline the invitation. It's upsetting people making up disingenuous excuses for doing so.
Why lie about PTO and babysitters? Just say you are declining an invitation to an event that does not accommodate you in the special way you want to be accommodated. Babysitters and PTO is a passive aggressive protest, nothing more.
Isn’t that…any event anyone ever declines?
I’m declining your MLM party because it doesn’t accommodate my special wish not to be sold Mary Kay products.
I’m declining your happy hour because it doesn’t accommodate my special wish not to be around your odious boyfriend.
And I’m declining your wedding because it doesn’t accommodate my wish not to spend an extra $200 on you.
I don’t see why the latter is any different than the former two?
We are in agreement. You just said the reasons you are declining by providing examples. We agree.
So why is it “disingenuous and passive aggressive” to say no to your wedding? Is it disingenuous and passive aggressive to decline your other invites that don’t suit me?
That's not what I wrote. "[People] making up disingenuous excuses" is what I wrote. It's not disingenuous and passive aggressive to decline an invitation to a child-free wedding. Commenters on these topics often will exaggerate the effort needed to attend a child-free wedding. If you can't attend for whatever reason or don't want to, that's fine.
So many people have latched on to that statement about disingenuous excuses. People are literally cancelling families over others choosing a child-free wedding. But yeah lets take me to task for criticizing people whom I believe are basing excuses on exaggerated circumstances.
NP. Ohhh noooo, did people “latch on” to words you wrote?
Yes. Several people are obsessing over it. I'm beginning to think it means there's more truth to it.
Keep backtracking and deflecting! You’re like a reality star who blames “the edit” for the audience not liking their words and behavior.
You sincerely, sincerely need therapy. Make your predictable adolescent retort. I don’t care. But your level of perseveration is psychologically unhealthy.
When did I say you did? I was simply having a laugh at the ridiculousness of everyone on here who has said thus and thus is acceptable and this or that is not. As if anyone owes anyone else an excuse, a reason, a justification that needs to be “accepted.” I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend. Oh well. I don’t care if someone doesn’t understand or like my decisions.
But as I said, there is clearly a market for this type of reply card. Money to be made, people!
You quoted me so I assumed you were implying as much.
But that's the thing. Nobody is saying the invitee owes anyone an excuse. At least nowhere near the extent we see the other side dictating what is and is not acceptable in terns of people planning their own wedding.
People are saying couples owe it to family, society, and 12 year olds with dreams of attending a wedding to invite children to weddings.
I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend.
Then that is silly. Nobody should be telling you that you owe them attendance, or that you owe them a wedding with children invited.
That's not precisely what I was trying to say about five pages ago, fwiw. I think weddings used to be bonding experiences for young cousins when I was growing up. Losing that because people want nicer Instagram pictures to post, if that's really why this generation is doing it, is really to bad from my perspective. I have some great memories of those times. It's a shame to me that young people aren't valuing those experiences for kids to hang out together. If that's what you want, I can arrange for babysitting or not according to how much I value you in the family tbh. It does inform my opinion of you and makes me think maybe you're caught up more with appearances and more inclined to make the event all about you instead about the larger family. You're allowed to think me some sort of judgemental oldster, but I'm allowed to make that judgement of your selfishness etc, also.
Hey oldster, what was the average cost of those weddings back in the 70s/80s that you are referring to? Oh, that’s right, a fraction of what a wedding costs today. You sound as dim as the Boomers who go on and on about how they own a home (they bought for $85,000) and they just don’t understand why young people can’t afford a home these days, they’re probably poor because they buy Starbucks. Weddings are astronomically pricier these days, so no, not everyone and their kids can be invited.
Well we did our wedding 30+ years ago at a church. Since we had to pay ourselves and were young and poor, we also held the reception at the church fellowship hall. Hired a church member who ran a catering business to provide the food, and donated to the church to have several of the "women of the church" help with serving the food.
Since it was at a church, there was no dancing, alcohol, etc. It was a 2 hour luncheon/cut the cake and we were done. Then we paid the janitor fee.
So our wedding, including the rehearsal dinner (also at the church fellowship hall, so no alcohol yet again) was about $4K total for 120 people.
But most people are not willing to do that type of wedding and reception
But it can still be done for under $8K
I don’t know anyone who has had that kind of wedding, and I sure would rather get a sitter and go to a fun wedding with alcohol and good food and dancing.
But the point is that some of the wedding expenses these days are over the top because the couple wants amazing photos. The venue has to look amazing, for the photos. The food has to look amazing, for the photos. But It doesn’t really need to be that expensive to be fun. We got married fifteen years ago for about $18K for ~150 people with an open bar, dancing (just a DJ not a band) and it was lovely. A friend’s wedding that happened before us cost $40K with a live band the bride loved very much and a choice of three desserts. Great, if you can afford it! Both weddings allowed kids.
No work friend thinks your invitation includes their kids and no work friend with a live brain will bring their kids to your wedding. I have never gone to a wedding where I saw kids at the work friend table. Someone raised that as a strawman earlier and it’s laughable. Nobody does this unless you work with complete idiots. Similarly, no work friend will be offended if you spell out for them that their kids are not invited. They know the drill.
The point of inviting kids is so that the kids can hang out together and get to know one another, and have family experiences together. Because weddings are about family, and not just about you.
So invite kids or don’t, your choice. We’ll just secretly judge you.
It’s cute that you think it matters that you “secretly judge” anyone. You just aren’t that important.
When did I say you did? I was simply having a laugh at the ridiculousness of everyone on here who has said thus and thus is acceptable and this or that is not. As if anyone owes anyone else an excuse, a reason, a justification that needs to be “accepted.” I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend. Oh well. I don’t care if someone doesn’t understand or like my decisions.
But as I said, there is clearly a market for this type of reply card. Money to be made, people!
You quoted me so I assumed you were implying as much.
But that's the thing. Nobody is saying the invitee owes anyone an excuse. At least nowhere near the extent we see the other side dictating what is and is not acceptable in terns of people planning their own wedding.
People are saying couples owe it to family, society, and 12 year olds with dreams of attending a wedding to invite children to weddings.
I’ve turned down invitations and I’ve learned that some people were upset I did not attend.
Then that is silly. Nobody should be telling you that you owe them attendance, or that you owe them a wedding with children invited.
That's not precisely what I was trying to say about five pages ago, fwiw. I think weddings used to be bonding experiences for young cousins when I was growing up. Losing that because people want nicer Instagram pictures to post, if that's really why this generation is doing it, is really to bad from my perspective. I have some great memories of those times. It's a shame to me that young people aren't valuing those experiences for kids to hang out together. If that's what you want, I can arrange for babysitting or not according to how much I value you in the family tbh. It does inform my opinion of you and makes me think maybe you're caught up more with appearances and more inclined to make the event all about you instead about the larger family. You're allowed to think me some sort of judgemental oldster, but I'm allowed to make that judgement of your selfishness etc, also.
Hey oldster, what was the average cost of those weddings back in the 70s/80s that you are referring to? Oh, that’s right, a fraction of what a wedding costs today. You sound as dim as the Boomers who go on and on about how they own a home (they bought for $85,000) and they just don’t understand why young people can’t afford a home these days, they’re probably poor because they buy Starbucks. Weddings are astronomically pricier these days, so no, not everyone and their kids can be invited.
Well we did our wedding 30+ years ago at a church. Since we had to pay ourselves and were young and poor, we also held the reception at the church fellowship hall. Hired a church member who ran a catering business to provide the food, and donated to the church to have several of the "women of the church" help with serving the food.
Since it was at a church, there was no dancing, alcohol, etc. It was a 2 hour luncheon/cut the cake and we were done. Then we paid the janitor fee.
So our wedding, including the rehearsal dinner (also at the church fellowship hall, so no alcohol yet again) was about $4K total for 120 people.
But most people are not willing to do that type of wedding and reception
But it can still be done for under $8K
I don’t know anyone who has had that kind of wedding, and I sure would rather get a sitter and go to a fun wedding with alcohol and good food and dancing.
But the point is that some of the wedding expenses these days are over the top because the couple wants amazing photos. The venue has to look amazing, for the photos. The food has to look amazing, for the photos. But It doesn’t really need to be that expensive to be fun. We got married fifteen years ago for about $18K for ~150 people with an open bar, dancing (just a DJ not a band) and it was lovely. A friend’s wedding that happened before us cost $40K with a live band the bride loved very much and a choice of three desserts. Great, if you can afford it! Both weddings allowed kids.
No work friend thinks your invitation includes their kids and no work friend with a live brain will bring their kids to your wedding. I have never gone to a wedding where I saw kids at the work friend table. Someone raised that as a strawman earlier and it’s laughable. Nobody does this unless you work with complete idiots. Similarly, no work friend will be offended if you spell out for them that their kids are not invited. They know the drill.
The point of inviting kids is so that the kids can hang out together and get to know one another, and have family experiences together. Because weddings are about family, and not just about you.
So invite kids or don’t, your choice. We’ll just secretly judge you.
And you are an A$$hole for "secretly judging". There are plenty of other opportunities to gather with family. You can even do it the day after the wedding (minus the couple) or the day before. But the actual wedding and reception is up to the bride/groom whom are most likely playing for the wedding themselves.
That would be pretty funny if the people whose kids weren't invited all got together with the extended family the day before with kids and then skipped the wedding. Bet that would be much more fun than the wedding.
Anonymous wrote:So besides a few people saying they know/heard of a bridezilla complaining they didn't attend their wedding, almost exclusively all the hate on this thread is coming from parents who hate childfree weddings. Nonstop insults, insinuating they are mentally ill or bad people, yikes. It really makes the parents pushing for their children to be included look entitled, petty and rude.
Yep. Pretty much.
100%. They keep lashing out at everyone in these made up scenarios and calling people bridezillas as if most of the people here haven't already been married years. This isn't some retro version of The Knot.
+1. Its pretty obvious the ones married before 2010 are the ones still using the term “bridezilla.”
Someone suggested “gaping narcissist” earlier and I’m good with that. It’s gender neutral too, so also covers grooms.
The narcissists are the angry parents.
Thinking your wedding is a special day all about you is inherently narcissistic. You might think that narcissism is justified, but it's a simple fact that having a party to celebrate yourself where you prioritize what you want is self centered.
DP. Okay, sure, but it's better than wanting a party and expecting other people to pay for it, when they already said they don't want to.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
