Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

We "took RSVPs" to let out of town guests know about the wedding, but anyone who wanted to come was free to do so. We had a few people show up without RSVPing.

So you don’t do RSVPs for your children’s birthday parties? Yes or no. This is a yes or no question.

What do you mean? We invite people. Sometimes they respond, sometimes they don't, but we don't insist on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

We "took RSVPs" to let out of town guests know about the wedding, but anyone who wanted to come was free to do so. We had a few people show up without RSVPing.

So no caterer, huh? Interesting. Are you the one who had food catered by church mee-maws?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

We "took RSVPs" to let out of town guests know about the wedding, but anyone who wanted to come was free to do so. We had a few people show up without RSVPing.

So you don’t do RSVPs for your children’s birthday parties? Yes or no. This is a yes or no question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

We "took RSVPs" to let out of town guests know about the wedding, but anyone who wanted to come was free to do so. We had a few people show up without RSVPing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

We "took RSVPs" to let out of town guests know about the wedding, but anyone who wanted to come was free to do so. We had a few people show up without RSVPing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, so you didn’t take RSVPs for your wedding, and you don’t take RSVPs for your kids’ birthday parties? Got it. Because those days are not special and your would-be guests owe you no response, no attention, and no communication. If you expect them to, you are a narcissist. Your kid is not special on his birthday, it would be narcissistic of him to think he is. Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is what YOU think a wedding is. It's not a universal belief, and it's a narcissistic one. It's about ME or US, not the community or the family.

The alternative is perhaps considered old fashioned, but it wasn't that long ago that brides and grooms did effectively no planning for their weddings. Weddings were set by family and local traditions. That's how my wedding was.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re on page 51 on this thread, so you don’t really get to talk about “going through life” any which way. You’re here, babe.

I get to talk about whatever I want. Who died and made you thread monitor?

Stay mad! You are so mad you got called out for pretending family is evvvvverything, but you plan no reunions or trips or events to see them. Then you get put out because you can’t get a freebie reunion on someone else’s dime, on the backs of their efforts and planning.

Exactly.

Sock puppet.

Nope. PP actually has support from other people.

But carry on.

And you continue seething.

Sweetheart, you, and your little cadre of angry mommies, are the ones seething here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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:Person who keeps responding rapid-fire to several posts in a row: Go touch grass. Nobody is taking your child-free wedding from you. Some people will judge you the worse for it. Others won’t care. That is called life. People disagree. You will have to accept that, but you will be the better for it when you do. Go outside and take a deep breath, and walk away. I think at the rate you are going, you are going to give yourself a coronary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No… you are of a different, more lonely generation. Sad.

I read this thread and I see why zoomers are so lonely and depressed. It is sad.

It's kind of sad you think you're being entertaining or teaching lessons or whatever it is you think you're doing here.

See your therapists.

It's a discussion if you don't want to discuss, see yourself out.

Is your name Jeff? No? Then zip it and take a seat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re on page 51 on this thread, so you don’t really get to talk about “going through life” any which way. You’re here, babe.

I get to talk about whatever I want. Who died and made you thread monitor?

Stay mad! You are so mad you got called out for pretending family is evvvvverything, but you plan no reunions or trips or events to see them. Then you get put out because you can’t get a freebie reunion on someone else’s dime, on the backs of their efforts and planning.

Exactly.

Sock puppet.

Nope. PP actually has support from other people.

But carry on.

And you continue seething.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Been around kids lately? They will probably all be on their devices ignoring each other. Not playing Red River like you remember in the days of yore.

NP. My kids aren’t allowed to have devices at dinners or events, so no, they aren’t on devices during wedding receptions and family reunions and dinners and play dates. We aren’t rude, and my kids do play games and have a childhood.

That’s fine but you know many parents don’t share that philosophy. So your kids won’t have anyone to talk to and will be begging you to leave.

Maybe your family has different rules and allows children to behave this way, which is why you think it would happen, but this is not what has taken place at family weddings I’ve attended.

Sure, sure. Every time I got out to dinner I see large family groups and the kids are always glued to their phones, not interacting.

That’s what happens when you “go out to dinner” at the Olive Garden. I go to nice places where there are only adults. I also don’t “go out to dinner” at 6 p.m.