[Closed] Families and weddings

Well, yes and no. It's a day when two people can be as selfish as they choose. Whether they actually choose to is another matter.

It's interesting that this is generally the prevailing view these days, though it hasn't been for long - at my parents and inlaws weddings in the 60s/70s they had almost no say in organising it. Selfishness would've been well out of the question.

Perhaps as the burden for organising (and paying for) weddings has shifted, with the increasing age of the participants and all, so has the idea of 'whose day it is'?

not sniping, just musing...

(edit)

personally i think The Wedding Industry is responsible for a lot of the crap around weddings. Now you aren't allowed to have a big family party, you have to Create Your Perfect Day and look like the pictures in the magazines and look good on Instagram and whatnot. It's pernicious. People are encouraged to buy into this huge amount of marketing guff and, IMO, forget what the point of it is. My cousin had a pianist and fire-eater at her wedding. FFS!

[quote=doris5000 ]My cousin had a pianist and fire-eater at her wedding. FFS!

I'm not keen on big weddings (though have never had one and probably never will, so who am I to judge?) but when else are you likely to get the excuse to have a fire eater?

I'm not keen on big weddings (though have never had one and probably never will, so who am I to judge?) but when else are you likely to get the excuse to have a fire eater?

ha! fair point!

Have been to plenty of "no children" weddings where ther's been children there that were the exception to the rule - close family, too young to stay with others, old enough to act mature....

Ours was a "no children" wedding in exactly this form and it worked out to be a great friends and family party! We did not state on the invite in a blanket way that it was "no children" though, as this would have been a contradiction. We just made the invites out to the parents and included/excluded kids names where appropriate. However plenty of consultation went on beforehand with those who's kids weren't going to be invited and therefore might struggle to attend. E.g. those with very young babies, where exceptions were made. Most were glad for a night away from the kids!

I think the rule should be that 'no children weddings' should belong to couples who are 'not allowed' children in future.... 😉

having musicians playing inbetween the ceremony and the meal makes for a nice atmosphere - it's bought me a couple of bikes and a new saxophone ! but it's true that a lot of it is rubbish, it's all the unimportant things like table decorations that (invariably) get brides stressed out

to say no kids at the last minute which effectively is being disincluded from a wedding is really rude, I'm not surprised the OPs wife is upset

[quote=matt_outandabout ]I think the rule should be that 'no children weddings' should belong to couples who are 'not allowed' children in future....

There does seem something a little strange about banning kids from a ceremony the original point of which was to form a basis for generating them.

The only people causing issues at weddings I have been to have certainly not been children.

I actually hate weddings, can't quite put my finger on it but the entire thought of putting pressure on friends and family to spend a fortune (stags, hens, etc) because of something I want to do doesn't sit well.

I can't help thinking a big white wedding that costs tens of thousands of pounds is just a big attention seeking cringe fest.

And as for my friends who have had the whole religious element included and gone with a church wedding, well it's laughable really, they are about as religious as Mr S fry.

too busy for a stag do, so I've not had much chance to chat about the details beforehand - and whenever the wedding subject came up he always said something like "she's organising it, I'm just paying for it.

Yep rubbish timing about the 'no kids' think - although I do understand when people don't want them at the wedding; as long as it's all mentioned well up front it enables parents to actually have some time together without having to worry about the kids, feeding them and keeping them occupied
however
a 10 week old baby doesn't take much more than a request to 'shifty them out of the church/whatever if they start screaming during the ceremony'

I think the rule should be that 'no children weddings' should belong to couples who are 'not allowed' children in future

I think the rule should be that 'no children weddings' should belong to couples who are 'not allowed' children in future....

I'd guess that most people who want a 'no kids' wedding would be perfectly happy with that arrangement.

There does seem something a little strange about banning kids from a ceremony the original point of which was to form a basis for generating them.

Long live Queen Victoria!

The wedding is not just about the bride and groom, and it isn't just their day. That's part of the narcissistic self-mythologising selfie culture of today. If it was, they would just be in a registry office with two witnesses.

It is about their relationship with their friends and relatives and society. This isn't just a dinner party after a hard week where you want to avoid the sprogs. It's a celebration of their future and their place as a couple in the guests lives.
But yes, they can be as selfish as they want, but should know the harm they've done and hurt they've caused

No harm done at ours and yes we were selfish as I said in my earlier post we had a no kids rule for the daytime they came in the evening and when your paying over 20k out of your own pocket you can do what you like. It is upto the bride and groom and in no way should they be made to feel bad about what THEY want on THEIR day!

I am genuinely impressed by people's tolerance in respect to meeting other people's "wishes" I would have told him to go and **** himself and would never have put my wife or kids in that situation after all they are my family...

I had no kids rule at my wedding, only had two friends with kids. It was a selfish reason I wont lie, but basically, we wanted our friends to get a sitter for the night, spend the evening having drinks with us and relax without having to look after a kid.

Mrhoppy on here was one of the friends, the reason to him was just that we don't like his child!

No kids rule was superb

The 'no kids' thing is fine by me - when we got married a long time ago we did the same because we had no closely related kids, no friends with kids and it kept the numbers down. As it was a couple of kids did come to the wedding because their parents had tied the trip in with a family holiday so obviously we couldn't expect them to be left behind.

It's the facts that they're his only niece and nephew, that the younger one is a tiny baby which meant my wife (who I've been with since my brother was at school) was inevitably excluded, that the wedding is overseas (merely a 9 hour journey because we're close to the airport at one end) and that they only told us the 'no kids' rule just over a week before we flew out!

If nothing else I'd just like to know why???

Ours was a "no children" wedding in exactly this form and it worked out to be a great friends and family party! We did not state on the invite in a blanket way that it was "no children" though, as this would have been a contradiction. We just made the invites out to the parents and included/excluded kids names where appropriate. However plenty of consultation went on beforehand with those who's kids weren't going to be invited and therefore might struggle to attend. E.g. those with very young babies, where exceptions were made. Most were glad for a night away from the kids!

WE did this but some close family have young children who were invited. Inviting every body else's children would have made the whole thing more expensive or meant that others could not come in our case.

We had a "no kids" wedding. Most parents seemed to love the excuse to have a night away from the little darlings. In the end a couple of kids were there (notified in advance) the biggest problem was one of them putting in a huge number of laps on the pumptrack!

Mrhoppy on here was one of the friends, the reason to him was just that we don't like his child!

It's alright he says you're stinky.

I've been to both, and I fully understand why people want to do either. And to be honest I'm not too bothered either way but 9 days notice is crap and overseas as well would have had me not turning up.