Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see both sides.

My dds were actually IN the wedding as flower girls and still weren't allowed to attend the reception. They were older too, well behaved, and super excited for the bride. Mostly they just like all the romantic, princess things. They definitely left the wedding crying. Bride didn't want kids ruining the reception vibe.

That is very rude!

PP here. My dds were very, very close to the bride. They saw her multiple times a month, helped her choose the cake, dress and were so excited. It is what it is. I actually think the bride didn't even think about their feelings. I get it, weddings are a lot of work and there's a lot of other things to think about.

Why are you making excuses for what looks like rather horrifying narcissism?

Being a bride doesn’t mean you get to stomp all over everyone’s feelings.

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:I think it brings up a lot of complicated feelings. Weddings have always been traditionally family event with two families coming together and a new family starting. But a few years ago, there was a change to make everything perfect, Instagram worthy and aspirational so out with imperfect kids. I also think it goes hand-in-hand with parents, not parenting their kids which is a huge incentive to not have kids at a wedding.

Personally, I would rather have kids at my wedding, then have a perfect wedding, and I would definitely rather be inclusive of kids than lose and alienate family members.

Likewise family members should understand when a couple chooses to only have an adult only ceremony and not break relationships because they can’t bring their kids

The bigger shift is the couple paying for the wedding. If mom is paying, the grand kids and nieces and nephews are part of the deal because wedding have traditionally been family reunions

My wedding had a set limit of people. Sorry second cousins who I have minimal relationship with, I want to have some of my friends at the wedding I'm paying for.

Kids plates also weren't significantly discounted. I wasn't really feeling dropping $100+ for a kid that I'm not close to to attend. Not to mention the venue has finite space.

You paid, you decide. If I'm paying, I'm seeing my grandkids

Anonymous wrote:I think in situations where a guest’s presence is, more or less, demanded/expected (usually close family)- the wedding couple/host should take those guests’ children into consideration. Mostly relevant to those who are traveling out of town. The kids should either be invited to the wedding or should be provided significant help with arranging local childcare ahead of time. But again- this really applies only to close family- so a small number of guests.

Yes I’d be upset if one of our siblings planned an out of town wedding, which we would be obligated to attend, and then did not want kids present at any wedding events & also provided no help with arrangements for the kids. Fortunately this has not happened.

For friends, distant family, colleagues etc? No kids is fine, and we would never expect our kids to be invited (even if other kids are there- ones who are close with the bride and groom). We would either get a sitter & enjoy a nice night out without the kids, only one of us would attend (whoever’s friend/relative it is), or we’d send our regrets/best wishes with a nice gift.

I agree with this 100%.

I married into a large family. My DH's siblings' kids were all invited to our wedding.

But that was the cutoff. His cousins' kids? No way ... there were dozens of them! And we were 30 when we got married, so a bunch of our friends had had a kid by that time ... those kids were also not invited.

We had a couple of friends who couldn't come due to new babies, but that is fine! I also respect the flexibility of just one partner attending.

I had a child free wedding (In BC, so 19+) and it was wonderful. We had a few declines, and a few people asked my MIL to ask us to bring their kids, but we said no. I don't automatically think that someone having a child free wedding is selfish or entitled or not spending money on their guests. We were 26, paid for the wedding ourselves, and really prioritized guest experience at the event (it was a full weekend+ with some cultural elements). Not all events are meant for children, and that is ok. Not all people want to go to places/events without their kids, and that is ok too. I would never begrudge someone for having the event THEY want if that differs from my opinions on how they should do it.

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:

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.”

Paying for kids reception seats is insane.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We had a "no kids" wedding and looking back, regret it. It's a family celebration and everyone should be included.

But yeah, I wanted it to be a grown-up affair (e.g., open bar, live band). I didn't understand the kid thing. We offered on-site babysitting, which we thought was super thoughtful, but parents of young ones did not like that option at all.

As it turned out, we had several teenagers come and probably irritated the parents of very young children.

I got married in my early 30s and we did no kids other than nieces/nephews because almost all of my friends and several of DH's friends had kids. If we invited kids and everyone brought them it would have been like 175 adults and 50 kids, mostly toddlers/preschoolers. Looking back, I am sure several would have chosen not to bring their kids. The reception was until 11:30 pm if I recall correctly. If I had to do it again, I'd include them. But to my knowledge nobody was angry with me about it. Who knows though.

I think it’s pretty defensible invite only related kids, as long as you realize it is a huge ask for parents of young kids to attend without them.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had an evening wedding, adults only. Way before instagram. I was paying, so didn't want rando kids. We provided babysitting. It wasn't a problem for anyone as far as I know. My sister got mad because "her kids love weddings and they are well behaved". It was really her DH who wanted them there because he can't converse with adults and uses the kids as a crutch. He ended up in the bar watching the ballgame the whole reception anyway.

Nieces and nephews are different. If any of our sisters didn't invite our kids, I likely would not show up and it would start a war in our families. It's such a show of disrespect. We only have one sister each though. I think people expect nieces and nephews to be invited even when no other kids are.

Bigotry and intolerance are worth breaking up a family over; parties are not. Your priorities are out of whack. Imagine how you would feel getting the phone call that one of your sisters had died, and you had wasted time and emotions and squandered the gifts of family and sisterhood over a party. A party.

I think the sister is the one who is squandering the gifts of family. What kind of monster wouldn't invite their nieces and nephews? My kids are very close to their aunts and would be incredibly hurt to be excluded.

It's a party. At the end of the day. If you want a family reunion, plan one and pay for one. People get mad because they want freebie or low-cost family reunion on someone else's dime with someone else's logistical efforts.

if that’s truly how you feel - why do you think people are coming to your wedding?

Anonymous wrote:I think in situations where a guest’s presence is, more or less, demanded/expected (usually close family)- the wedding couple/host should take those guests’ children into consideration. Mostly relevant to those who are traveling out of town. The kids should either be invited to the wedding or should be provided significant help with arranging local childcare ahead of time. But again- this really applies only to close family- so a small number of guests.

Yes I’d be upset if one of our siblings planned an out of town wedding, which we would be obligated to attend, and then did not want kids present at any wedding events & also provided no help with arrangements for the kids. Fortunately this has not happened.

For friends, distant family, colleagues etc? No kids is fine, and we would never expect our kids to be invited (even if other kids are there- ones who are close with the bride and groom). We would either get a sitter & enjoy a nice night out without the kids, only one of us would attend (whoever’s friend/relative it is), or we’d send our regrets/best wishes with a nice gift.

I think it’s very good to be considerate, but does not need to extend to an invitation necessarily. For each of my cousins weddings, their mom (my aunt) gave my siblings and I, all of whom have little kids, an extra couple months’ notice to book accommodations and make our plans, and she offered assistance in confirming babysitting for the night of. This gave us a little extra time to make the logistics work and I found a good sized Airbnb that would accommodate my and my siblings children, very close to the venue. The extra notice helped me find an Airbnb with all my preferred characteristics, like cribs, free cancellation, fenced in, etc. We then found two babysitters who could come to the Airbnb and watch all the children. I thought this was thoughtful and led to a great outcome for everyone involved.

I think in situations where a guest’s presence is, more or less, demanded/expected (usually close family)- the wedding couple/host should take those guests’ children into consideration. Mostly relevant to those who are traveling out of town. The kids should either be invited to the wedding or should be provided significant help with arranging local childcare ahead of time. But again- this really applies only to close family- so a small number of guests.

Yes I’d be upset if one of our siblings planned an out of town wedding, which we would be obligated to attend, and then did not want kids present at any wedding events & also provided no help with arrangements for the kids. Fortunately this has not happened.

For friends, distant family, colleagues etc? No kids is fine, and we would never expect our kids to be invited (even if other kids are there- ones who are close with the bride and groom). We would either get a sitter & enjoy a nice night out without the kids, only one of us would attend (whoever’s friend/relative it is), or we’d send our regrets/best wishes with a nice gift.

I had a no kids wedding almost 20 years ago, as did all of my friends who married around the same time frame, as did my cousins before me, and even friends and relatives who got married long after we already had kids. So I hardly think this is a new concept or because of instagram.

For us to have invited kids, the closest in relation to my side would have been my mother’s first cousin’s daughter’s children who were 3 and 1 at the time of the wedding. There were none on my husband’s side at all, no matter how convoluted of a connection. And none of our friends had children then either.

Over the years we’ve either attended as a couple if we could get sitters, one of us has attended solo, or we haven’t gone, which I think only happened once for a destination wedding at an international adults only resort, where we had no one who could keep our children for a long weekend and sending one of us solo would have been a huge $$ burden since you pay for dual occupancy at those places.

I also recall when the first wave of my mom’s first cousins’ children were getting married and my sibling and I were sub 10 years old, we were not invited and were left with sitters. My parents even went to Ireland to a wedding of one of my mom’s first cousins (not a destination wedding) when I was 12 and we were left home with a relative on the other side of the family. I didn’t attend a wedding until I was nearly 18.