Just wait until they have kids.....

[prufrock]

We have been invited to a wedding soon. It's one of dh's best mates (actually the guy he was with when I first met him, who I thought was really cute) They have specified no kids. Now that's fine, we did the same but he's the last one of our group to get married, so now all of us have kids so it makes it a bit more difficult and the wedding is down near Devon, and they, and all their friends come from London, so it's not like we can just go for the afternoon/evening.
But we'd sorted it out, that dd will go to MIL's and ds (who will only be 4 months and bf) will come with us and we would get a babysitter to look after him. So I called to say that was what we were doing, and would it be OK if ds comes to the church (timing/location will make it difficult for feeds otherwise) AND THEY SAID NO!

Now I can totally understand them not wanting toddlers running about, and I can understand them not wanting to have to pay for meals for children, but saying no to a 4 month old baby being at the bloody church!
Now I don't know what to do. If I leave ds at the hotel for the service it will mean being away for one of his main feeds, and he's not brilliant at taking bottles, and if he doesn't feed well at 11.30 he won't sleep properly at lunch and so will be grumpy baby for the babysitter for the rest of the afternoon. Plus it means an extra 3-4 hours babysitting at £9 an hour, which when we are already paying £210 for the hotel, and petrol to get there, and outfits and presents and £81 babysitting for the afternoon/evening..... you get the picture.

just wondered if anyone else thought getting a smaller present was justifiable if you were just invited to the evening do rather than main do (or is that just me being subconsciously bitter and twisted about not being invited to ceremony I usually spend between £20 and £30 on pressies.

I didn't have kids at my wedding....didn't have any guests as a matter of fact as got married abroad.

Slightly off subject but when I got married there were certainly a good number of parishioners who came to the church and with their children. And the tradition there was for the local children to lay ropes across the road when the cars left after the ceremony and the bridal couple and their guests threw money out of the car windows at each rope which the kids would then lower to let you past (there were about five ropes at our wedding) This was in Laugharne in Wales I don't know whether it happens elsewhere. It was great to feel a part of the community.

well i don't agree with meanbean's post and feel insulted by it, frankly. i don't think wanting a traditional wedding is mutually exclusive with generosity, hospitality, or "love, laughter and sharing", or congruent with selfishness, narcissism and being a dupe of the industry. what an arrogant and supercilious post.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that everyone who has ever got married is a wedding-crazed zombie with an out of control ego. Just that that is what the wedding industry makes a lot of otherwise rational people into. It's the idea of it being your day, the one day when you can behave exactly as you want, no matter how selfish or unreasonable. I just don't think there is any time in your life when it should be socially acceptable to behave with the selfishness I've seen some people display about weddings, except perhaps on your deathbed!

(I'm particularly attuned to this atm because a friend of mine (I'll call her X) who is engaged to be married next year, has just been told by another engaged "friend" (whom I'll call bride from hell - BFH for short) that she can't possibly move to the town X was thinking of going to, as BFH has already moved there and doesn't want X to get married in the church there as BFH found the church and doesn't want X to have the same venue as her. So X can't buy a house in the area she likes and can afford, purely and simply because BFH's wedding is more important than anything else in the whole wide world. Normally, BFH is a really nice, reasonable person, who has simply been overtaken by the wedding mania and lost all sense of proportion. Which is what I think this "their day" culture encourages. And it's simply disgusting.)

meanbean - I'm gasping with amazment at BFH !!

Iota, I know - and yet normally, BFH is honestly a really nice, normal, lovely person. It's like her whole being has been infiltrated by some kind of evil spirit...

Meanbean, as you say, you weren't attacking everyone that has got married in traditional style, with all the trimmings.

I do think you are right though about the negative effect of the wedding "industry".

It's happened with so many celebrations - driven by commercial enterprise. Look at Christmas for goodness sake.

Many of us are whipped up into a frenzy of "I've simply got to have that AND that AND that" - we can lose sight of what is important.

I went to a wedding last month. It was in a really beautiful hotel and no expense was spared. When I came away, I had huge difficulty remembering anything about the ceremony itself. It was SO short, perhaps 4 minutes.

I'm not advocating huge long ceremonies, but it seemed like a nuisance bit of admin that had to be got out of the way so everyone could get on with the important business of drinking and scoffing our faces, ensuring the hotel made a huge profit. The balance was all wrong. I felt very sad because it was my brother I was watching getting married.

My sister got married earlier in the year in a registry office and far much more time was spent on the ceremony. It was really moving.

mean bean, I know where you are coming from. My brother had the hump (and nearly didnt come to our wedding) because we DARE to have our wedding in the same year as his.
Our wedding was not about 'being the best, most flash, expensive', just about me and dh making our personal declaration. so be honest I didnt give and stuff and certainly didnt move my wedding forward a year (which was suggested!) We only did it when we did because I was pregnant (oppss).

Haven't had time to read all posts but get the gist of most of them. When I got married (in a civil ceremony) we specified no kids and this stemmed from the behaviour of dh's nephew who was 4 at the time and running wild. We'd been to several family parties on the run up to the wedding and he got really hyped up and behaved appallingly but neither of his parents got involved with disciplining him or trying to channel his energies more positively. We knew that this would happen if he came to the wedding and that dh's parents would feel obliged to step in if he misbehaved and we didn't want that: we wanted them to relax and enjoy themselves so we stated no kids.
I have to say that several of our mates with kids were quite disappointed and I know full well that they would have made sure their kids weren't running wild but we felt we had to have a 'blanket' rule for everyone.
Since having dd I feel much more relaxed about the whole issue but it does wind me up when parents don't respect the views of the couple who are getting married and let their kids run about screaming during vows and speeches, etc. I love excited, happy well-behaved kids at weddings, sorry if that sounds a bit old-fashioned. The best weddings we've been to have had either a children's room to keep the kids from getting bored or parents who take responsibility for their kids' behaviour.
We all know that brides can develop into Bridezillas and that also, one day they'll look back and see that none of the fussing counted for much!
BTW I do think the whole banning the breast-feeding baby thing is OTT.

To my mind at least (and I am no wedding expert) I don't think a traditional wedding is necessarily the same as a wedding with all the modern frills. Taking wickedwaterwitch's example, since when have £5.00 favour bags been intrinsic to a tradidional wedding? I took meanbeans post to mean she was anti big modern weddings, products of the wedding business, rather than anti all traditional weddings. Does that make sense?

Where's Prufrock gone? Have the worms that have been released from the can wiggled though to her? This thread's a bit like my Visa bill. Everytime I look at it, it's got bigger.

I'm quite happy to have invitations specifying no kids, and I respect the views of the couple, but they have to accept that some people will decline the invite on those terms.

We offended some friends by doing this, but at the time our children were very young, and it was quite impractical for us to go. But later this year we are really looking forward to going to an adults only wedding, and dumping our kids elsewhere!

I honestly don't know where I stand on the 'grand weddings': We definitely had a 'budget' wedding but it was a fab day. Friends of ours still remember it as a particularly special day, and it was nearly 14 years ago, so I think it's pretty amazing they can remember anything at all about it! My brother got married 3 weeks ago, and that was a very grand do - no expense spared: but it was fabulous. We really enjoyed ourselves, and it was the best wedding we've been to since our own! When I sit down and think about the figures involved, yes it is almost obscene, almost makes me feel sick. But they are pretty loaded, and it was what they wanted - so why not?

goodness I didn't take meanbean's post to mean she was anti-traditional weddings or even flash weddings. I've been to some great flash weddings (and some not so great ones). Ours was pretty traditional anyway. I took it to mean that she was objecting to all the stuff I referred to as "up your own arse" stuff. Weddings can be big and flash and traditional without everyone disappearing up their own backsides.

Now I'm waiting to see what happens with the next wedding - now that ds1's problems have become shall we say apparent.... If anyone dares to invite ds2 but not ds1 they'll be losing a friend. (OTOH I'm not going to let him have an auti tantrum in the aisle and if it was a non-family wedding would be only too happy to dump him off with my parents for the day/weekend- and that goes for ds2 and number 3 as well).

We have a family christening coming up - and we're not sure we're going to be going - well not sure I'm going to be going with the kids- dh will. Think it might be too much for ds1.....

I?m not anti big modern weddings with £5 favours per guest and matching flowers, curtains and granny outfits if that's what people want - it's their money, it's up to them how they spend it. But I have a problem with it, when those things start to become more important than showing some consideration and respect to the friends and family you want to support you on your wedding day and throughout your marriage.

I?m really sorry if anyone who had a big wedding feels I was attacking them personally, that?s not at all what I was trying to do. I know that if a couple pay for something, they should be able to have things the way they want, but it?s very sad if that?s taken to mean the right to treat their friends and relatives with no consideration and in some cases, (particularly where elderly relatives are concerned) with outright unkindness. And I?m sorry, but I think the wedding industry deliberately encourages that lack of perspective.

Sorry, I should stop going on about this now, shouldn?t I! I realise I?m beginning to sound as obsessive as any Bridezilla (LOL moomin!) Will shut up ? Prufrock, hope you sort it so everyone?s happy!

MeanBean - why doesn't your friend just move there anyway!! Is everyone really scared of the other girl?
Twiglett - we never give presents to people whose weddings we don't attend!

message withdrawn

have to admit i never send a gift unless we actually attend the wedding - am relieved it's not just me!

well, if it were a very close friend, we would... but that has never happened.

Nope, no attendance = no gift unless very close. Same as children's parties.

This happened to us too with dd - she was six weeks old and bf - so we just rang the groom and said we'd need to bring her but had organised childcare for ds1. I think he felt he couldn't say no as we said we'd not be able to come otherwise. And of course, we'd have taken her out at the first murmur, but as it was there was no need. Also another family turned up with their 12 week old and we ended up at the same table and had a great day (all bf-ing together!)
Wouldn't have gone if they were insistant though. (And wouldn't have worried about a gift either)!

When sil got married, they specified no kids. Fair enough, their wedding. Unfortunately, that meant that the only grandchildren in sil's family (ie my babies) were excluded. It was touch-and-go whether dh and I would be able to go because we couldn't find babysitting. It's not easy to find babysitting for a 3yo and 1yo from before lunchtime until late at night! So we intended to get a room at the hotel where they were getting married, the children would have to be present at the wedding itself, but then we would take them off for supper and put them to bed, so that they wouldn't be at the reception. It would make attending the wedding cost us about £300 not including present and outfits, but sil is dh's only sibling.

They said that was unacceptable. 'You should put your family first' was what they said - to which dh repied 'My children are my family'. We just couldn't believe their attitude! Some of her dh's family couldn't attend for the same reason - or wouldn't, we don't know, but we know that sil's mil was bitterly disappointed.

Fortunately my sister took a day off work to babysit. But when we confirmed that we were coming to the wedding, they made a fuss - they had assumed we wouldn't come! Now they had to rearrange the seating and it would make problems with the hotel. As if!

I can accept that some people don't want children at their wedding. But if it means that guests cannot come, especially if those guests are important to them (or close family! ) then I believe they are making a mistake.

You know, this thread has made me question my own wedding that Im planning at the moment!

I fear I may be becoming a bridezilla!

I am having kids - not an open invitation to all guests kids but there are lots of kids in my life that are special to me and it wouldnt feel right without.

For everyone else I wont be naming children on the invitations but will talk to them directly about how they feel about the kids coming - I wouldnt DREAM of banning a breast fed baby from the ceremony.

"you should put your family first" good grief pretty candles- and what are you and the kids? Lodgers? Unbe-bloody- leivable.

I can understand if people don't invite children to wedding receptions to keep the cost down but still can't understand poor prufrocks situation!
We only had a small wedding but still had a children's party table complete with balloons and party bags - all colour co-ordinated, and a bouncy castle in the grounds - the owners of the hotel (which was, I might add, quite posh) thought it was a fantastic idea