or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › No Babies/Children Rule Weddings?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No Babies/Children Rule Weddings? - Page 7

post #121 of 154
In my tradition, children are the reason for the wedding....so the rule is that children are invited.

Different traditions have different rules, but it's not unsurprising that someone would be upset that they are effectively excluded from the celebration by a rule that a babe in arms would not be allowed to attend.
post #122 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammieg View Post
Firstly i did not call her for my own good, her husband asked me too as it was causing him real friction at home.
What kind of person asks a friend to call his wife and get involved in their marital discussions? So strange.

I don't understand how this is still an issue for you. You issued an invitation, they have declined. The only action I would take in your situation is to put their names on the "no" side of the RSVP list, and get on with planning the other details of the wedding (or letting your ILs plan them, as the case may be).
post #123 of 154
Hammieg, your friends were out of line to argue with you about the terms of the invitation - you put down a simple rule for your wedding, it's reasonable for people to ask if you are willing to make an exception, it's not reasonable for them to argue with you about it. So there's that.

Weddings are always going to inspire one or two people to be unreasonable. You kind of just have to shrug and deal.

But from there - really? You have *no* choice? None? You would, if it was up to you, let these people come, it's just your in-laws rule... well, this would be why we may think you're being a doormat here. This is your choice too, your decision, man up and admit that you're making it.
post #124 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammieg View Post
now he's effectively saying i can't come to the wedding!
The thing is, that's exactly what you're doing. A mother and a young infant are a unit. It's like you invited her, but told her she couldn't bring her left hand. You asked her husband to do you a favor by being in your wedding, and then told him his wife couldn't come. Some babies absolutely cannot be separated from their mothers at that age, especially if they are breastfeeding.
post #125 of 154
Also, I think you were out of line to call and try to convince his wife to change her mind, regardless of what your friend asked you to do (he was out of line to ask, and you were also out of line to do it). I suspect at this point she's feeling pretty ganged up on.

Also, you say
Quote:
i have 2 good children and want to have children
So you have children? Are they going to be at the wedding?

You absoloutely have a choice in this. You are deciding the baby (and therefore the mother) aren't welcome. That's fine - you can do that. But don't pretend you aren't choosing that - take some responsibility here.
post #126 of 154
Part of being a bride is getting the wedding you want.

Part of being a mama is missing some weddings and other functions because of your children.
post #127 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammieg View Post
Everyone for your input it has been most enlightening for me but also sad that several of you have misread the situation entirely.

Firstly i did not call her for my own good, her husband asked me too as it was causing him real friction at home. So i had not hassled them one bit and spent the entire conversation telling the reasons behind the decision we had come to. Not once did i ask her what her problem was i why she didn't want to come so please stop having a pop at me.

Secondly i should add that it was her that got so worked up that other friends were telling me she was saying things like - i can't believe he lived with us for 4 months when he was between properties and now he's effectively saying i can't come to the wedding! (i did live with them it's true 3 years ago but i was paying full market rent so it was not just a favour they benefitted too, i would also like to add wat has it got to do with the no babies rule at my wedding)

I can't explain everything but please read the question and don't go off at tangents as some of you are crucifying me and you don't even know me. Can i also say that i'm not some child hating doormat, i have 2 good children and want to have children but that has got nothing to do with this i just have no choice on this.
First...I think it was a mistake to call her. Having you call his wife makes no sense at all. At some point, he has to decide for himself if he's going or not. The fact that he asked you to call his wife sounds really, really strange to me. This sounds like a messed up situation, all around. I'd be insanely furious if dh got his friend to call me in this situation...and it probably wouldn't make me any more kindly disposed to you or to the situation (or to my dh, for that matter).

Secondly, we're posting based on what you have said about the situation. Your tone about your friend's wife was very dismissive. Your tone about your in-laws is that of a helpless victim. If that's not the case, I'm sorry for misinterpreting, but that's the way it comes across.

Thirdly, I didn't take the "lived with us" thing as meaning "he owes us". I took it as hurt feelings that you lived in their home for four months, but she's being excluded from this. I don't know how long ago that was, but I can see it stinging a bit...especially for someone with a 4 month old baby at home. That can be a really tough time, emotionally, for a lot of reasons...and one of those reasons is that many people end up feeling very isolated from "real" life. (I like that, but many people don't.) I suspect she's feeling irrelevant and invisible and her feelings are hurt. (As an aside...if you had lived with me, and then made sure to tell people that you paid "full market rent", so I "benefitted", as well, I'd be annoyed. People in my space is a huge deal to me, and getting rent wouldn't offset that much. You also don't mention if you ate meals with them, etc. Full market rent can still be a great deal, if it's a boarding type of situation.)

Fourth. Yes - you do have a choice. You've made it. You've chosen to go along with the "no children" rule, and also chosen not to make an exception for babes in arms, which effectively excludes your friend's wife. That's fine. To each their own. But, own it. Seriously.

Oh, and one little point. If you're spending 45 minutes telling your friend's wife the reasons for the decision you have come to, where does "I have no choice" come in. It doesn't take 45 minutes to say, "my future in-laws are calling the shots, and that's the rule they've made".
post #128 of 154
Hammieg: Alot of people are giving you a hard time because of the choice your in laws are making and "how it will set the tone for the rest of your life with your bride."

Let me tell you....I feel for you! I got married a little over a year ago and my parents paid for my wedding, and pretty much planned the whole thing because they paid for it. Although we didn't have the same issue as you, there were many other aspects to our wedding that I didn't have much of a say over because they were paying for the event and disagreeing would have caused so much strife that it would have ruinned our day. Also-my husband and I rolled with it because I love my parents, no matter how crazy and controlling they are and my husband loves me....and my crazy parents come as part of that package deal! I have no advice regarding your situation but I just wanted to sympathize because not many people are doing that here!!!
post #129 of 154
In my circles, weddings aren't the big $50,000 shindigs that they are in many parts of the counry.

We tend to get married during the day, at a church. Receptions are in the fellowship hall of the church. No drinking, no dancing. The buffet tends to be heavy finger foods. We have punch. The reception lasts maybe 2 hours, from start to finish. Cake, nuts. People do funny things to the couple's car, we throw birdseed at them as they leave, and they are off to the honeymoon.

These weddings tend to have a fair amount of kids around.

That said, my first cousin was married 2 years ago in a typical wedding for our circles. His bride didn't want my 8 month old baby there. I ended up leaving him at home, with Daddy, though I agonized over the choice for several weeks.

And, I still think that bride is borderline crazy for insisting on no children. She's having her first baby this year. We'll see how she changes.
post #130 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse View Post
I suspect at this point she's feeling pretty ganged up on..
:
I can't even imagine how I'd feel at this point, if I were the friend's wife. (Admittedly, I think I'd be more than happy at that point to send my husband off to the wedding, but I'd probably be thinking, "please don't come back"...although maybe not. I'm not that rational on some fronts in those first few months.)
post #131 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyMommy2 View Post
Part of being a bride is getting the wedding you want.

Part of being a mama is missing some weddings and other functions because of your children.
If you put "in my tradition" in front of that, cool.

But in other traditions, part of being a bride is joining two families with the hope of nurturing children in them. Part of being a bride is honoring the community you are a part of and participating in generations old traditions, not just getting "the wedding you want."

In other traditions, part of being a mama is getting your choice of seats since you are responsible for the well being of the next generation.
post #132 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse View Post
The thing is, that's exactly what you're doing. A mother and a young infant are a unit. It's like you invited her, but told her she couldn't bring her left hand. You asked her husband to do you a favor by being in your wedding, and then told him his wife couldn't come. Some babies absolutely cannot be separated from their mothers at that age, especially if they are breastfeeding.
This is exactly what you need to understand...

By not inviting an infant, you are not inviting the mom, at that age they are inseparable... It is true that some women don't mind leaving their children at such a young age, and I honestly do not understand how or why they would do that, because for me and the the women in my circle we would never fathom leaving such a small baby even for an hour or two, it is just not done.

You need to accept that their lack of presence is a direct consequence of your choice to follow your IL's rules. You say that you have no choice then accept they have no choice either.
post #133 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuildJenn View Post
Also, parents (me included) often sort of readjust to what "quiet" means. A cooing baby is music to a parent's ears but not always to everyone else. I think there was another discussion on this topic where someone mentioned you could hear her baby poo, and I laughed because that was SO TRUE of my son and I could just see that happening in the middle of a moment in a ceremony designed to be quiet and reflective. Wouldn't that be great on the DVD.
And a softly snoring baby is incredibly loud, if it's at a concert or a church service!

Quote:
But OP, it doesn't let you out of the basic obligations and courtesies of friendship, which is to permit a gracious regret - well, graciously. Invite another friend instead and treasure the one who's refused, because this is probably the man who is going to drive over to sit with you and your first child in the ER when you need him to, if you know what I mean.
:
post #134 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammieg View Post
Firstly i did not call her for my own good, her husband asked me too as it was causing him real friction at home.

...

Secondly i should add that it was her that got so worked up that other friends were telling me she was saying things

...

i have 2 good children and want to have children but that has got nothing to do with this i just have no choice on this.


You can't have kids at your wedding (even though you have kids) because your in laws won't "LET" you.

Your buddy needs YOU to talk to his wife for him and you agree to do it.

Your friends feel a need to tattle back to you when this woman vents about being excluded.

This is all starting to have a very 10th grade feel to it.

Grown people get to make their own choices. You made yours, they made theirs, why does this require ongoing drama?
post #135 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
Any time you send an invitation that excludes family members, you risk getting turned down by the entire family. If they don't want to be divided on your terms, even for an afternoon, that's absolutely their prerogative. The wife won't come without the baby. That's her prerogative, and the details of her feeding, childcare, etc. arrangements are none of your business. She hasn't got to justify it to you. The husband isn't coming without the wife. Even if she has no good reason (and she probably does) and she really is a controlling shrew (we have no reason to think that she is, other than that you, a man with no experience of marriage, have chosen to put that spin on it), that's STILL none of your business. You don't get to pry into other people's relationships to try to persuade them to put you above their own spouse, even for an afternoon.

Between that, and the thing with the in-laws and their money, I think you have a lot to learn about marriage.

Let me break it down for you:

Wife trumps buddies.

Baby trumps buddies.

Wife plus baby, vs. buddies? Fuggedaboutit.

Husband trumps parents AND their precious money. (I'm sorry, in what book of high class English etiquette is it written that they get to be vulgarly controlling?) You got yourself a ticking time bomb, right there. Good luck.

Word.
post #136 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyMommy2 View Post
Part of being a bride is getting the wedding you want.

Part of being a mama is missing some weddings and other functions because of your children.
As a personal philosophy, I agree with this. But, why make an issue over this situation, OP? If he doesn't come, you will still have a great time and probably not even miss him. There is a lot going on at a wedding, especially if it's yours. I had a child free wedding and loved it, but clearly they aren't for everyone and some people will be silly and mean about it, there is no need to be silly and mean back. You, as the bride, are entitled to plan your wedding however you want, but the members of the wedding party are not here on the planet solely to participate in your wedding; they have lives, too. If doesn't work for them, it doesn't work.
If it were me, and it was doable, I would encourage my DH to go and have fun. If it were a bad time for him to be away, for whatever reason, I'd ask him to bow out and I'm sure that he would do it. We wouldn't owe anyone an explanation. Who knows why his wife might not want him to go, thats their business. That's the way marriage works, as you'll see in time.
post #137 of 154
My husband's friend had a baby-free wedding and we decided it wasn't worth the hassle to attend. DH didn't want to go alone, and neither of us were interested in getting a sitter. He told my husband that he wished we had come, and that others brought their kids anyway, and it just wasn't a big deal. He said his wife only noticed when they posted the photos. She was upset her wishes weren't respected, but this was after the fact.
post #138 of 154
Thread Starter 

Sorry...

For the confusion i meant godchildren! i do not have kids yet!

Also once and for all finally i have never tried to convince her to come, she was hurt so as a nice person i took the time to explain the reasoning, it took 45 minutes as she just didn't understand it. Some of you are right it is wrong that i should call her but then she was and still is unable to be reasoned with so that is the way it's going to be.

Ok i had a choice to go along with their request or to go along with their request. In every other aspect of the planning they have not made any rules this is it so really are they they bad i think not. Most people have a limit on numbers, married or engaged couples only etc etc...i genuinely think we have been very lucky in what we have been allowed to do. No amount of discussion on the choice issue is going to change that.
post #139 of 154
Count me among those who wonder how it took you 45 minutes to explain your reasons if "in laws and traditional etiquette" are the only reasons you've got. Especially since it sounds like you don't even understand the reasons behind the etiquette in question.

The babes-in-arms exception is standard practice, even in the most formal venues, due to the nature of the various stages of child development. I have a three year old right now that I can't even go into McDonald's with because of her rambunctiousness; but when she was six months old or so, I dined quite comfortably with her in some of my city's finest establishments, and nobody raised an eyebrow. Furthermore, the extreme dependency of an infant means that there can be no social expectation on the mother to leave it for any length of time. The fact that other mothers are willing to leave their babies - or even the fact that the mother herself, on her own initiative, does so in other situations - does not license the inviter to demand that she do so for their particular event. That would be an invasion of privacy and of their right to make their own family arrangements. (Let alone 45 minute phone calls to underscore the demand!)

In a nutshell: by disinviting the baby, you explicitly disinvited the mother herself, even if you yourself were too ignorant of etiquette to realize it at the time. That's just how the rules of etiquette around babes-in-arms work. And needless to say, to invite one member of a married couple but not the other is just about the rudest thing you can do - in most circles, quite enough to end a friendship.

IOW you had already completely stepped in it even before you went for the gold medal in tackiness and inconsideration by getting on the phone to have it out with her. And all in the name of "etiquette"! Priceless. :

Look... presumably you came to our community to get our perspective. Ask an honest question, get an honest answer. If you feel you're getting slammed, it's only because from our perspective, you are truly out of line. You seem to have wanted us to say "oh yeah, I would never do that! our husbands do as they please! she must be some kind of shrew" and you are, somewhat understandably, frustrated to hear very much the opposite.

Also bear in mind that besides being mothers, most of us are further along in the life cycle than you, and much more familiar with how these things work in general even aside from a mother's particular perspective. Indeed, many of us are closer to being the ones hosting the major family events (if not quite weddings, at least bar mitzvahs and confirmations, major holiday gatherings, etc.) than to being the young people for whom they're hosted. This may be part of why we are so unsympathetic to the appeals to your in-laws' supposed authority - as parents, we know firsthand just what kind of unsavory attitude it takes to set such arbitrary limits, and you don't look very big for going along with it. Of course, it's your own choice not to cross them if you don't want to. But you have to take responsibility for that choice, and not spread the burden of it onto third parties. "I'd love to have you, but her parents are calling the shots" won't buy you any sympathy, and not coincidentally, it also violates etiquette by airing dirty laundry. You can't have it both ways; if you're going to follow your in-laws' rules of "etiquette" (which, as I've noted, differ substantially from standard formal etiquette), then your friend and his wife are more than entitled to follow the rule of standard etiquette which is that they are under no obligation to accept exclusionary invitations.

Etiquette is supposed to be about helping people relate to each other more comfortably, you know.
post #140 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammieg View Post
For the confusion i meant godchildren! i do not have kids yet!

Also once and for all finally i have never tried to convince her to come, she was hurt so as a nice person i took the time to explain the reasoning, it took 45 minutes as she just didn't understand it. Some of you are right it is wrong that i should call her but then she was and still is unable to be reasoned with so that is the way it's going to be.

Ok i had a choice to go along with their request or to go along with their request. In every other aspect of the planning they have not made any rules this is it so really are they they bad i think not. Most people have a limit on numbers, married or engaged couples only etc etc...i genuinely think we have been very lucky in what we have been allowed to do. No amount of discussion on the choice issue is going to change that.
The bit I bolded seems really odd to me. You feel lucky you have been "allowed" do do things for your own wedding? You don't think it is you and your partner who should be "allowing" things?

This whole situation seems a bit strange.

You are right, most people getting married have limits on things, but they are generally limits imposed by them. And that is entirely their perogative; everyone should have the wedding they wish.

In your case, it sounds like you are having the wedding your future in laws wish, when really it shouldn't be about them at all.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › No Babies/Children Rule Weddings?