Anonymous wrote:My AC is getting married in a few months. No kid is being excluded. It is a pretty large wedding. We expect some normal chaos.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a great example of internalized misogyny. Why are so many of you assuming it is the bride that, unilaterally, decided it would be a child-free wedding? Even if it were the bride's suggestion, it's a decision the couple made.

How can so many of you get to the age you have and STILL not recognize that what you prefer is not someone else's preference, what you can afford, someone else can't or what you believeva wedding constitutes (or should be) isn't shared by everyone?

Calling brides narcissists because a wedding is child-free is just sour grapes and doesn't reflect well on you. I sincerely hope those who do don't consider themselves feminists because you really aren't respecting choice.

Please... do you really think men are driving most wedding plans? I'm a NP, but many in the U.S. have totally lost the thread on weddings. They were traditionally a celebration (and a witness by members of their community of their covenant) with friends and family. Now they are viewed as a performance where your guests are "extras" who must dress, behave and gift according to your instructions. Excluding children is a choice, but not one that reflects well on the couple. If kids are "inappropriate" in your formal venue, think about another setting. If kids are "too expensive" to feed, then think about a different type of reception. If you all plan to be too drunk to have kids in the same room, think about your self control and ideas of "fun".

It doesn't matter who's 'driving' the plans. It is THEIR wedding and THEIR choice. Don't lay all this on one person. If one of them wanted kids in attendance, there would be kids.

I have to wonder what kind of family/friends you have that dictate how their guests "dress, behave and gift". DH and I have large families of origin and go to a LOT of weddings. I've never seen anything other than the usual "black tie optional" kind of notation. No one has ever dictated dress, behavior or gifts. Maybe you need a different circle.

You seem to think, in the past, weddings were all pretty much the same. That's not true. Check out what Sharon Kabel (link below) found in her research on the topic. It's only since some people have become so kid-centric that there's been outrage/disparagement when their snowflakes aren't invited. There has never been one right way to have a wedding. If the choices a couple makes about their wedding don't work for you, politely decline.

https://sharonkabel.com/post/childfree-weddings/

I was looking at a wedding website for a sports celebrity. They had a page with colors they want people to wear with color swatch examples. I guess they don't want people wearing fire engine red or canary yellow in the background of photos for instagram. It's also weird to make these websites public where random people like me can read them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a great example of internalized misogyny. Why are so many of you assuming it is the bride that, unilaterally, decided it would be a child-free wedding? Even if it were the bride's suggestion, it's a decision the couple made.

How can so many of you get to the age you have and STILL not recognize that what you prefer is not someone else's preference, what you can afford, someone else can't or what you believeva wedding constitutes (or should be) isn't shared by everyone?

Calling brides narcissists because a wedding is child-free is just sour grapes and doesn't reflect well on you. I sincerely hope those who do don't consider themselves feminists because you really aren't respecting choice.

Please... do you really think men are driving most wedding plans? I'm a NP, but many in the U.S. have totally lost the thread on weddings. They were traditionally a celebration (and a witness by members of their community of their covenant) with friends and family. Now they are viewed as a performance where your guests are "extras" who must dress, behave and gift according to your instructions. Excluding children is a choice, but not one that reflects well on the couple. If kids are "inappropriate" in your formal venue, think about another setting. If kids are "too expensive" to feed, then think about a different type of reception. If you all plan to be too drunk to have kids in the same room, think about your self control and ideas of "fun".

It doesn't matter who's 'driving' the plans. It is THEIR wedding and THEIR choice. Don't lay all this on one person. If one of them wanted kids in attendance, there would be kids.

I have to wonder what kind of family/friends you have that dictate how their guests "dress, behave and gift". DH and I have large families of origin and go to a LOT of weddings. I've never seen anything other than the usual "black tie optional" kind of notation. No one has ever dictated dress, behavior or gifts. Maybe you need a different circle.

You seem to think, in the past, weddings were all pretty much the same. That's not true. Check out what Sharon Kabel (link below) found in her research on the topic. It's only since some people have become so kid-centric that there's been outrage/disparagement when their snowflakes aren't invited. There has never been one right way to have a wedding. If the choices a couple makes about their wedding don't work for you, politely decline.

https://sharonkabel.com/post/childfree-weddings/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a great example of internalized misogyny. Why are so many of you assuming it is the bride that, unilaterally, decided it would be a child-free wedding? Even if it were the bride's suggestion, it's a decision the couple made.

How can so many of you get to the age you have and STILL not recognize that what you prefer is not someone else's preference, what you can afford, someone else can't or what you believeva wedding constitutes (or should be) isn't shared by everyone?

Calling brides narcissists because a wedding is child-free is just sour grapes and doesn't reflect well on you. I sincerely hope those who do don't consider themselves feminists because you really aren't respecting choice.

Please... do you really think men are driving most wedding plans? I'm a NP, but many in the U.S. have totally lost the thread on weddings. They were traditionally a celebration (and a witness by members of their community of their covenant) with friends and family. Now they are viewed as a performance where your guests are "extras" who must dress, behave and gift according to your instructions. Excluding children is a choice, but not one that reflects well on the couple. If kids are "inappropriate" in your formal venue, think about another setting. If kids are "too expensive" to feed, then think about a different type of reception. If you all plan to be too drunk to have kids in the same room, think about your self control and ideas of "fun".

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a great example of internalized misogyny. Why are so many of you assuming it is the bride that, unilaterally, decided it would be a child-free wedding? Even if it were the bride's suggestion, it's a decision the couple made.

How can so many of you get to the age you have and STILL not recognize that what you prefer is not someone else's preference, what you can afford, someone else can't or what you believeva wedding constitutes (or should be) isn't shared by everyone?

Calling brides narcissists because a wedding is child-free is just sour grapes and doesn't reflect well on you. I sincerely hope those who do don't consider themselves feminists because you really aren't respecting choice.

Anonymous wrote:Its really shocking and rude to not invite members of the wedding party to the reception! Like I can't even get over that. Wow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sympathies. I can beat you! Dh and I are both in a wedding. Our kids are flower girls. And they aren’t invited to the wedding. Our baby isn’t invited at all. It’s insanity trying to figure this out. We basically have a series of babysitters working long hours. And the baby is headed hours away to grandparents. It kills me that they’re invited to the rehearsal but not the rehearsal dinner. Don’t they realize how impossible this is for parents? The reason they aren’t invited to the reception is cost and because everyone has kids, which I get. But our girls are pretty devastated at not getting to go. I sit then down before every meeting and forbid them from mentioning it at all. We aren’t local to the wedding.

I too had a childfree wedding but we also didn’t know any kids. Our flower girl did come.

My spouse and I would not accommodate this. Just say no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its really shocking and rude to not invite members of the wedding party to the reception! Like I can't even get over that. Wow.

I think it totally depends on context. We once travelled to a family wedding and our three year old was in the wedding, we also had a six month old in tow. I think the reception was in the evening and the three year old flower girl did not attend. Never occurred to me to be upset or offended. It would have been way too much for her and for me. I think we used sitters through the hotel for both children. All worked out fine.

Anonymous wrote:Its really shocking and rude to not invite members of the wedding party to the reception! Like I can't even get over that. Wow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other people’s childfree weddings are really expensive.

Are you just talking about babysitting costs? Most expensive wedding I went to was a family wedding were children were welcome. One of the moms, the SIL to the groom, broke down in tears after she somehow became the de facto babysitter for all the kids there.

Unless the wedding is in your hometown it’s much more than babysitting costs.

People really don’t look after moms at most gatherings. If you see someone with a little kid notice if they themselves are eating. Usually not. And no one catches on.