Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think not inviting close relatives of any age is a dumb idea. Family is family, not matter the age and a wedding (to me) is an important family event. I can understand not inviting all the kids of your current friends or less close relations, because not all weddings are for kids.

But some people get so blinded by "NO KIDS" they alienate their sister for life over a 12 year old's attendance. It's silly.

And some people are so entitled that they cannot follow rules. If my own siblings or my spouses siblings want a wedding with only 12+ and they choose not to make an exception for my under 12 kids, I simply either choose to not attend or chose to attend and let my kids have a fun time at home with friends or a baby sitter. It's their wedding so they get to pick who attends, and if they prefer an adult reception, so be it.

If your sibling is alienated by that, then perhaps you are better off not having them around.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are South Asian and of course had kids at our wedding. But my cousin's kid wailed throughout my ceremony and my cousin didn't have the sense to take the kid outside of the hall. Years later, that same cousin's other kid almost ruined a couple's first dance bc the parents couldn't be bothered to keep their kid away from the dance floor for a few minutes.

This is to say, I understand why people exclude kids from weddings. It's not about the kids, it's about the entitled/clueless parents of said kids that don't remove their kid or correct their behavior.

See, a lot of people would find it really cute that a kid occupies the dance floor during the first dance. If I were the bride, I would love it and cherish those pics. Sadly, no kid came up to us during the dance, but I do have hilarious pics of kid shenanigans during other parts of my wedding - they're the best! I'm French, had my wedding in a castle in France, and all the kids were running around, petting the horses of the horse-drawn carriage (under supervision), running into the garden or the fields... it was carefree and exactly what I thought should happen.

The root of the problem is a fundamental difference in how certain adults view the presence of children, who naturally understand the world differently from adults. Childhood is so short and precious. Most of the world understands that this is a time to be understanding of their needs, not try to straight-jacket them into unnecessary decorum. The decorum gets learned every day. My kids are now young adults and teens. They and their cousins have absorbed all the required mannerisms to be courteous adults. They are none of the worse for being invited to weddings and being allowed to express themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why people who leave their kids all the time to go to work, other parties, the gym, etc, get so worked up against this.

I had no kids OTHER than family at my wedding. I did invite related kids. I am glad they were there. But I don't feel like it's offensive if relatives don't invite my kids.

Because they want to show off their kids to family/friends who don't see them all the time - whether they will admit to this reason or not.

It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when the desire to bring your kids to a family wedding is viewed as some kind of weird or selfish abberation.

Anonymous wrote:We are South Asian and of course had kids at our wedding. But my cousin's kid wailed throughout my ceremony and my cousin didn't have the sense to take the kid outside of the hall. Years later, that same cousin's other kid almost ruined a couple's first dance bc the parents couldn't be bothered to keep their kid away from the dance floor for a few minutes.

This is to say, I understand why people exclude kids from weddings. It's not about the kids, it's about the entitled/clueless parents of said kids that don't remove their kid or correct their behavior.

Anonymous wrote:Are these people also fine with guests decline because their kids are not invited. The ppl getting married can do whatever they want but if that's the prevailing attitude then same goes for guests even close family. Attend if it suits you or don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think not inviting close relatives of any age is a dumb idea. Family is family, not matter the age and a wedding (to me) is an important family event. I can understand not inviting all the kids of your current friends or less close relations, because not all weddings are for kids.

But some people get so blinded by "NO KIDS" they alienate their sister for life over a 12 year old's attendance. It's silly.

It's a pity that the sister in the OP's example chooses to let one event ruin her relationship with her brother and his family, all because she wanted to be an exception to what every other guest was asked to do. But she had to be Very Special!

The sister is the one choosing to feel alienated here.

Anonymous wrote:I think not inviting close relatives of any age is a dumb idea. Family is family, not matter the age and a wedding (to me) is an important family event. I can understand not inviting all the kids of your current friends or less close relations, because not all weddings are for kids.

But some people get so blinded by "NO KIDS" they alienate their sister for life over a 12 year old's attendance. It's silly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are South Asian and of course had kids at our wedding. But my cousin's kid wailed throughout my ceremony and my cousin didn't have the sense to take the kid outside of the hall. Years later, that same cousin's other kid almost ruined a couple's first dance bc the parents couldn't be bothered to keep their kid away from the dance floor for a few minutes.

This is to say, I understand why people exclude kids from weddings. It's not about the kids, it's about the entitled/clueless parents of said kids that don't remove their kid or correct their behavior.

See, a lot of people would find it really cute that a kid occupies the dance floor during the first dance. If I were the bride, I would love it and cherish those pics. Sadly, no kid came up to us during the dance, but I do have hilarious pics of kid shenanigans during other parts of my wedding - they're the best! I'm French, had my wedding in a castle in France, and all the kids were running around, petting the horses of the horse-drawn carriage (under supervision), running into the garden or the fields... it was carefree and exactly what I thought should happen.

The root of the problem is a fundamental difference in how certain adults view the presence of children, who naturally understand the world differently from adults. Childhood is so short and precious. Most of the world understands that this is a time to be understanding of their needs, not try to straight-jacket them into unnecessary decorum. The decorum gets learned every day. My kids are now young adults and teens. They and their cousins have absorbed all the required mannerisms to be courteous adults. They are none of the worse for being invited to weddings and being allowed to express themselves.

This isn’t cute. At all. Why would you think its cure for kids to upstage the couple for the first dance? The kids can slide on their knees the next 30 songs.

and herein lies the delusion. You’re not famous - nobody wants to see your first dance as if you were on Broadway. There is no “upstaging” unless you are impossibly self-centered.

NP. So your kids are soooooooo adorable and unique that they deserve a spotlight 24/7 at any place and time, to the point where they should dance with a bride and groom? And YOU want to talk about "self-centered"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are South Asian and of course had kids at our wedding. But my cousin's kid wailed throughout my ceremony and my cousin didn't have the sense to take the kid outside of the hall. Years later, that same cousin's other kid almost ruined a couple's first dance bc the parents couldn't be bothered to keep their kid away from the dance floor for a few minutes.

This is to say, I understand why people exclude kids from weddings. It's not about the kids, it's about the entitled/clueless parents of said kids that don't remove their kid or correct their behavior.

See, a lot of people would find it really cute that a kid occupies the dance floor during the first dance. If I were the bride, I would love it and cherish those pics. Sadly, no kid came up to us during the dance, but I do have hilarious pics of kid shenanigans during other parts of my wedding - they're the best! I'm French, had my wedding in a castle in France, and all the kids were running around, petting the horses of the horse-drawn carriage (under supervision), running into the garden or the fields... it was carefree and exactly what I thought should happen.

The root of the problem is a fundamental difference in how certain adults view the presence of children, who naturally understand the world differently from adults. Childhood is so short and precious. Most of the world understands that this is a time to be understanding of their needs, not try to straight-jacket them into unnecessary decorum. The decorum gets learned every day. My kids are now young adults and teens. They and their cousins have absorbed all the required mannerisms to be courteous adults. They are none of the worse for being invited to weddings and being allowed to express themselves.

This isn’t cute. At all. Why would you think its cure for kids to upstage the couple for the first dance? The kids can slide on their knees the next 30 songs.

and herein lies the delusion. You’re not famous - nobody wants to see your first dance as if you were on Broadway. There is no “upstaging” unless you are impossibly self-centered.

But they don't want to see your kids either. The bride and groom paid for the party. It's their party. Your kids are tolerated at best. If you want your kid on the stage performing, send them to dance class where there is a recital.

why would you invite people you’re so hostile towards? Seriously. why make such a big deal if it’s just “a party”?

I think there are some reasonable points here made about worsening discipline, the expense of hosting your mom’s coworker’s kids, etc. But some people don’t quite seem to get that the reason people make an effort and sometimes go to great cost to attend weddings is because they are more than just “a party.”

Why would you go to a wedding if you begrudge the couple their first dance? How self centered are you?

Anonymous wrote:I think uninviting a 12 year old niece is ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:I think not inviting close relatives of any age is a dumb idea. Family is family, not matter the age and a wedding (to me) is an important family event. I can understand not inviting all the kids of your current friends or less close relations, because not all weddings are for kids.

But some people get so blinded by "NO KIDS" they alienate their sister for life over a 12 year old's attendance. It's silly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't affect you if other people have different feelings or responses. You don't need to understand it.

I had kids at my wedding. I've been to weddings with and without my kids. I RSVP according to what works for my family. But I don't care if other people care about this. Not my problem.

This. But part of that is don't blame people for not coming if their kids aren't invited

Anonymous wrote:I think is often driven my venue rules around alcohol, as well. Our venue had a rule that, if we wanted wine served with dinner, if there was even one guest under 21 then we had to pay 2k for additional servers to pour wine with dinner. If everyone was over 21 then they'd just put bottles on the table for guests to serve serve.

My sisters were under 21 and of course they needed to be included so we opted not to have wine service and keep the bar open so people had to go get their own drinks, but it wasn't ideal.