Wedding list: They have asked for money

patchwork_cat

Loopy - it was the way it is phrased - personally I think a wedding isn't a wedding without children and I would trust that my friends would care enough for me to control their children, but it was the phrasing.

shellsuit

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Why is it rude? People spend a fortune on a wedding and they don't want a screaming baby ruining the ceremony or a rake of kids running about at the reception....I totally get it - and I'm a parent!!!!

The money thing...I guess it's just a sign of the times...if you have been living together do you really need a bale of towels or a new toaster? They are being honest...we don't have a wedding list as we have our home decked out but we wouldn't mind a hand with the honeymoon costs. There's plenty weddings where people give vouchers for gifts as the couple already co-habit...this is just a more 'advanced' side of it

It's rude because it doesn't say that children are not invited/welcome (which would be fine, it's simple and clear and straight to the point), it says it was your choice to have kids and it is our choice to not have them so leave them with granny and grandad.

What if they dont have a granny or grandad?

What if they do but granny and grandad are working that day and can't have the kids?

It's not what it means, it's how it has been said.

lostinrates

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Why is it rude? People spend a fortune on a wedding and they don't want a screaming baby ruining the ceremony or a rake of kids running about at the reception....I totally get it - and I'm a parent!!!!

The money thing...I guess it's just a sign of the times...if you have been living together do you really need a bale of towels or a new toaster? They are being honest...we don't have a wedding list as we have our home decked out but we wouldn't mind a hand with the honeymoon costs. There's plenty weddings where people give vouchers for gifts as the couple already co-habit...this is just a more 'advanced' side of it

Its not the request it is the way it is phrased.

Loopy_Girl

I don't see anything wrong with it to be honest....but then a spade is a spade with me and I appreciate honesty.

I remember my friend got married and we were watching the video back and she had tears down her face cos all you could hear throughout the whole cermony was a baby crying in the background

And from a personal point of view I don't think children should be around adults when alcohol is being consumed...and then there's the risk of mucky hands on a nice white dress...the cake getting knocked over:eek: the list is endless!!!!

Again a personal point of view but I think weddings are a grown up affair...and in case anyone asks then yes of course I would have my daughter at my wedding if I got married....but I wouldn't be wanting all my mates to being their broods along!!!!!:rotfl::rotfl:

shellsuit

I should have said that we're not having children to the wedding. (Apart from my own 3 and a cousins 8 month old baby, see below)

The only reason is cost and space. We're having close friends and family, which are grandparents and auntys and uncles.

No cousins, because I have 42 of them (!) and they all have children. (Apart from 1 cousin who lives in Kent because she has to travel so far, so her, her hubby and the baby are coming for the whole day)

BUT everyone including children are invited to the evening, if the parents want to bring them.

So I don't have to explain to anyone that children are not invited, because the people who are invited to the ceremony are all adults who have adult children.

winnie81

WOW :eek: How unbelievably rude :mad: and thats just the comment about kids :eek::mad::eek::mad: Generally hubby and I leave kids with grandparents for weddings and even if we've been asked not to bring them its never been put like that!! There are many ways to politely request an adult only event as well as ways to request money/gift cards as gifts but that is shocking.

As for that special request for paying off there honeymoon :rotfl::T:rotfl: NOT A CHANCE :rotfl: Still laughing at that one! Hubby and I didn't have a honeymoon as we couldn't afford it and hell would've frozen over before we asked our family and friends to fund it :mad:

Personally if we received such a self-centred, selfish and impolite invitation they would be told where to shove it! There are ways to ask for things and that really isn't one of them.

A wedding is supposed to be a warm and loving day shared with those you care about sharing in your choice to spend the rest of your life with the one you love - that invitation wording screams "Please arrive and provide money towards our overly outlandish honeymoon we couldn't afford otherwise" I would not be going I'm afraid.

If you do go I would still take a wrapped gift of something like photo frame etc and print off this thread and include it in the card :rotfl:

winnie81 <--- flabbergasted at the rudeness of people

elliebobs

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Why is it rude? People spend a fortune on a wedding and they don't want a screaming baby ruining the ceremony or a rake of kids running about at the reception....I totally get it - and I'm a parent!!!!

The money thing...I guess it's just a sign of the times...if you have been living together do you really need a bale of towels or a new toaster? They are being honest...we don't have a wedding list as we have our home decked out but we wouldn't mind a hand with the honeymoon costs. There's plenty weddings where people give vouchers for gifts as the couple already co-habit...this is just a more 'advanced' side of it

I totally understand why someone wouldn't want someone else's little 'darling' at their big day but the wording was sooo rude. I've been to weddings (and other formal engagements) where children have been specifically excluded but it was done in such a way so as not to cause offence.

I would bypass the event personally. However I do feel that a gift of £20 - £30 is generous enough.

Loopy_Girl

shellsuit wrote: »

It's rude because it doesn't say that children are not invited/welcome (which would be fine, it's simple and clear and straight to the point), it says it was your choice to have kids and it is our choice to not have them so leave them with granny and grandad.

What if they dont have a granny or grandad?

What if they do but granny and grandad are working that day and can't have the kids?

It's not what it means, it's how it has been said.

Well I think it's obvious that they mean it doesn't HAVE to be nana and grandad (and anyone that thinks otherwise is just splitting hairs)...personally I think it sounds like they tried to think of the best way to phrase it without a blunt 'no kids'....they clearly don't have kids and so therefore can't see how some parents could get humpty with that.

Who knows, in years to come when they have had kids they may look back and cringe!!!!:rotfl:

Loopy_Girl

shellsuit wrote: »

I should have said that we're not having children to the wedding. (Apart from my own 3 and a cousins 8 month old baby, see below)

The only reason is cost and space. We're having close friends and family, which are grandparents and auntys and uncles.

No cousins, because I have 42 of them (!) and they all have children. (Apart from 1 cousin who lives in Kent because she has to travel so far, so her, her hubby and the baby are coming for the whole day)

BUT everyone including children are invited to the evening, if the parents want to bring them.

So I don't have to explain to anyone that children are not invited, because the people who are invited to the ceremony are all adults who have adult children.

Good lord:eek: 42 cousins!!!!!!:rotfl:

Errata

Have to say, if I recieved an invite like that I'd take it as a subtle indication that i wasn't expected to attend. Which I wouldn't as I'd probably be very busy washing my hair