Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

You know what hasn't changed in the world? Brides sharing control and decision making of the wedding plans.

With rare exception, the brides are stuck in 1950s traditional wedding planning roles that exclude the groom's family's input in very sexist ways.

Until that has caught up with modern times, the bride's family should 100% bear the financial responsibility for the wedding.

Anonymous wrote:Pur kids are 21 and 23, and we have $50k earmarked for each of their weddings, one boy one girl

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

You know what hasn't changed in the world? Brides sharing control and decision making of the wedding plans.

With rare exception, the brides are stuck in 1950s traditional wedding planning roles that exclude the groom's family's input in very sexist ways.

Until that has caught up with modern times, the bride's family should 100% bear the financial responsibility for the wedding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

Yeah, team boy mom.

When the bride is willing to relinquish all or half of the decision making to the groom and future mother in law, then your post would make sense.

But weddings are planned almost 100% by the bride, even today, down to the shoes the groom wears, and approval of or guidelines for the dress that the mother in law wears.

A wedding is one of those things where the old adage of if you are going to expect money from someone, then get ready to earn the money in the form of their (often unwelcome) opinions

Unless a bride is willing to let the groom's side be involved in decision-making and planning, then weddings should continue to follow the traditional route of the bride's side paying for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

Yeah, team boy mom.

When the bride is willing to relinquish all or half of the decision making to the groom and future mother in law, then your post would make sense.

But weddings are planned almost 100% by the bride, even today, down to the shoes the groom wears, and approval of or guidelines for the dress that the mother in law wears.

A wedding is one of those things where the old adage of if you are going to expect money from someone, then get ready to earn the money in the form of their (often unwelcome) opinions

Unless a bride is willing to let the groom's side be involved in decision-making and planning, then weddings should continue to follow the traditional route of the bride's side paying for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My oldest is only 15, and a boy, but if/when he gets married, I work contribute whatever they need if the bride’s parents aren’t paying or we’d do rehearsal/honeymoon. DH and I were able to fund our $100k wedding 20 years ago, and I’d want something at least as nice for them.

You expect the women’s family to pay?! Why? Because it’s tradition? It’s only tradition because historically women didn’t work or receive an education. Now that’s not the case. Don’t continue your sexist way of thinking when the world has changed.

Anonymous wrote:Teen boys.

If they don't have a destination wedding, we will pay for a very nice honeymoon of their choosing within a generous budget.

Obviously, having 2 boys, we will have zero say in the matter since the bride usually gets what she wants in every wedding detail.

We find destination weddings to be so tacky, gauche, shallow and selfish.

Destination weddings inconvenience all of the guests in a very expensive way. Destination weddings:

- make less affluent friends and family have to either go into credit card debt to attend the wedding to support the bride and groom, or skip the wedding of a loved one because they can't afford to attend

- require guests to use all their precious vacation time on an expensive multi thousands of dollar trip that they did not pick out for themselves or choose the budget for

- forces guests to pay for your dream wedding in an underhanded tacky way

- results in poorer loved ones, friends and families feeling embarrased and unwanted if they cant afford to jaunt off to a resort in the carribean

- are a huge imposition for loved ones with children

- are soooo difficult for elderly family members like grandparents.

- the bride and groom end up with all their inlaws in tow on their honeymoon


For these reasons and more, we would be really embarrased if our kids have a destination wedding that requires such imposition on guests and loved ones, just to get your guests to pay for your wedding and so you can get fancy beach photos for social media.

If they choose poorly and end up with a bride that insists on a destination wedding, we will zip our mouths, smile politely, gush about how pretty the beach photos will be, and pay for a block of rooms for the family on our side who are able to attend, to lessen their financial burden, but we will not pay for a honeymoon.