Forum menu
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.