Kids in Cafes

andekwarhola

TSMGUY wrote: »

You know what, all of the losers and misanthropists with grudges against the young seem to gather en masse on this subforum so I'll just stop posting on AH altogether. No doubt you guys will continue to insult me even after I leave this thread, feck it. I won't disturb your dailymail groupthink sessions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w1TzLR2tYc

JayRoc

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And that there is one of the reasons why many believe it's not a great place for kids. Cos alcohol tends to flow, and understandably. I myself don't really like the whole parents on drink (or worse, one looking glum cos they can't and who'll want to go when the kids tire) and kids running and skidding up and down the dance floor. We wanted our guests to get a night out and leave the kids, so it was more a social event than a chore or to be endured - as, let's face it, so many weddings really are for the guests.

I'm kinda confused as to why someone would even need to explicitly state that a wedding is adults only.... presumably the guest list/invitations speak for themself.

Surely no one is going to just turn up bringing along someone that hadn't been invited. Regardless of how old the uninvited person is, I have a hard time understanding how someone could just rock up to a wedding expecting an extra place to be set without any notice.

Or is it just that parents get thick when they see that little Jimmy's name isn't on the invite?

Elliott S

Deleted User wrote: »

We wanted our guests to get a night out and leave the kids, so it was more a social event than a chore or to be endured

Heh, the absence of kids won't completely alleviate this! :pac:

Elliott S

Elliott S wrote: »

Heh, the absence of kids won't completely alleviate this! :pac:

Well that's true. Think I had something like 11 or 12 weddings in 1 year about 3 years back. If that wasn't bad enough, it involved at least 3 stags in Dingle. The joys of weddings in the SW.

goz83

Deleted User wrote: »

And that there is one of the reasons why many believe it's not a great place for kids. Cos alcohol tends to flow, and understandably. I myself don't really like the whole parents on drink (or worse, one looking glum cos they can't and who'll want to go when the kids tire) and kids running and skidding up and down the dance floor. We wanted our guests to get a night out and leave the kids, so it was more a social event than a chore or to be endured - as, let's face it, so many weddings really are for the guests.

That's what planning is all about my friend. I had one child at the time with another on the way. My kid had a great time. He was 4 at the time and the videos prove he was lovin' it until he fell asleep. The OH wasn't drinking and let's just say it was a communal effort watching the kids and making sure they had fun too. After 9, the kids were collected by their sitters (wouldn't be right keeping them after that time) and people could then let the alcohol flow. We didn't have the wedding in the middle of nowhere either, making this possible and at a party of around 70, it still didn't cost 20 grand. Some people put more planning into the colour of the flowers to be used than what should be important.

andekwarhola

Personally, I liked my immediate child relatives being at my wedding.

Irish weddings seems to be turning into pretentious, micromanaged focus groupings instead of convivial family gatherings. That said, I don't have a lot of child nieces and nephews.

One thing I do find a bit weird though, is normal guests (as in not close family of the couple) wanting to bring their small kids (assuming they have babysitters). Would you not want to just let your hair down without them?

OldNotWIse

TSMGUY wrote: »

Oh pull the other one, you saw her sneer at me for being "unemployed" and the minute I posted a reply that showed even a modicum of self-esteem I'm branded the haughty one. Your bias couldn't be clearer. I have a great deal of decorum and I'd hope someone your age wouldn't see an unemployed person as lesser. I make no apologies for having self-respect.

Is that what you call looking down on someone because she operates a beauty salon? We can only hope that life will take you down a peg or two. Be sure to PM us all when you enter the real world

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Whatever, people can look down on my job all they like but I can say at 27, I'm not working because I NEED the money. I am working because what I do is something I really enjoy, I really love and I'm really good at. Incidentally, it has absolutely nothing to do with my degree that i attended 3rd level education for for 4 years after leaving school. So I'm not sure what exactly what it is about my career I should be embarrassed about.


That aside, I'm not getting why people think child free weddings are the bride and groom having notions (pretentious micromanaged affairs) I'm 27 and was never brought to weddings as a child so it's certainly not a new thing

namloc1980

Kids at weddings are grand. No problem. Much easier to deal with than the drunken adults who inevitably make idiots of themselves on these occasions.

lawred2

We would never choose to bring our kids to a wedding - too much hassle. Wouldn't enjoy the day. We have been almost obliged to bring them to a couple of family weddings and they haven't been great days for the kids or ourselves.

It would be our preference to get Granny to look after the kids for the day. Everyone has fun then. The kids love a day with granny.

However I would think it the work of a dipsh!t to explicitly forbid people to bring their kids to a wedding.

Some people might not have Granny or a ready made babysitter to help them out. If you're prepared to put the hand out for wedding gifts, you should be prepared to accept that many grown ups tend to have families.

OldNotWIse

lawred2 wrote: »

We would never choose to bring our kids to a wedding - too much hassle. Wouldn't enjoy the day. We have been almost obliged to bring them to a couple of family weddings and they haven't been great days for the kids or ourselves.

It would be our preference to get Granny to look after the kids for the day. Everyone has fun then. The kids love a day with granny.

However I would think it the work of a dipsh!t to explicitly forbid people to bring their kids to a wedding.

Some people might not have Granny or a ready made babysitter to help them out. If you're prepared to put the hand out for wedding gifts, you should be prepared to accept that many grown ups tend to have families.

I don't think accepting wedding gifts obliges the bride and groom to have children at their wedding if that is not what they both want.

MeatTwoVeg

LexieOnRale wrote:

So I'm not sure what exactly what it is about my career I should be embarrassed about.

The fact that your humble-bragging and thanks-whoring is so obvious perhaps?

Penny Tration

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Whatever, people can look down on my job all they like but I can say at 27, I'm not working because I NEED the money. I am working because what I do is something I really enjoy, I really love and I'm really good at. Incidentally, it has absolutely nothing to do with my degree that i attended 3rd level education for for 4 years after leaving school. So I'm not sure what exactly what it is about my career I should be embarrassed about.


That aside, I'm not getting why people think child free weddings are the bride and groom having notions (pretentious micromanaged affairs) I'm 27 and was never brought to weddings as a child so it's certainly not a new thing

I don't really understand, regardless of you liking your job or not, how managing a team of people providing a service is a bad thing. I mean, isn't that what most company managers do? My dad is one of the higher up managers in a huge international company. He's still the same as you - managing a team of people who provide a service. Only difference is the pay and the specific service provided.


You love you job and tbh that's all that really matters. My mate adores his work as a barman - good for him. I enjoy working in retail, I also enjoyed teaching acting to (shock horror!) children. Who cares? At least you're not too fussy to work, or have notions of grandeur preventing you from even looking for work :pac:

lawred2

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I don't think accepting wedding gifts obliges the bride and groom to have children at their wedding if that is not what they both want.

Did I say oblige?

Nobody is obliged to do anything.

But I personally wouldn't find a conditional invite as being particularly friendly or cordial...

kunst nugget

lawred2 wrote: »

Did I say oblige?

Nobody is obliged to do anything.

But I personally wouldn't find a conditional invite as being particularly friendly or cordial...

All invites are conditional. If I get an invite for me and the missus, I don't assume that it means me, the missus and the children just as I don't assume that it means me, the missus, our parents, the dog and however else I fancy inviting.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

How is it a conditional invite?

Mary and John request the honour of your presense on X date at X location.
Your mother, father, and children aren't included on it. Why take offence over some names missing but not other names

lawred2

LexieOnRale wrote: »

How is it a conditional invite?

Mary and John request the honour of your presense on X date at X location.
Your mother, father, and children aren't included on it. Why take offence over some names missing but not other names

that's beyond stupid

in almost all cases your parents are not in your care

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

lawred2 wrote: »

that's beyond stupid

in almost all cases your parents are not in your care

And your children are not owed an obligatory invitation to an event they're not wanted at, just because you feel like they should be asked

lawred2

LexieOnRale wrote: »

And your children are not owed an obligatory invitation to an event they're not wanted at, just because you feel like they should be asked

Well you see this is where me and you differ...

I don't see it as extending a specific invitation to a child; I see it as saying to someone whom I would like the presence of at our wedding that whatever it takes for them to be at our wedding is fine by us. If that means, due to their own circumstances that they have to bring their children then so be it. The reality is that most will find a way to attend without their children. But it's not always 100% practicable or realisable.

You come across as a bit of a misery guts who has little faith in anyone but yourself if you don't mind me saying. No offence or anything.

kunst nugget

lawred2 wrote: »

Well you see this is where me and you differ...

I don't see it as extending a specific invitation to a child; I see it as saying to someone whom I would like the presence of at our wedding that whatever it takes for them to be at our wedding is fine by us. If that means, due to their own circumstances that they have to bring their children then so be it. The reality is that most will find a way to attend without their children. But it's not always 100% practicable or realisable.

You come across as a bit of a misery guts who has little faith in anyone but yourself if you don't mind me saying. No offence or anything.

Unless the names of our children are specifically mentioned on the invite I take it that they are not invited. If it turned out we couldn't get someone to look after our children (which hasn't happened yet) then I would tell them we would be unable to attend and tell them the reason why. If they wanted to extend the invitation then that's great but I wouldn't push to have my children invited.

Penny Tration

lawred2 wrote: »

Well you see this is where me and you differ...

I don't see it as extending a specific invitation to a child; I see it as saying to someone whom I would like the presence of at our wedding that whatever it takes for them to be at our wedding is fine by us. If that means, due to their own circumstances that they have to bring their children then so be it. The reality is that most will find a way to attend without their children. But it's not always 100% practicable or realisable.

You come across as a bit of a misery guts who has little faith in anyone but yourself if you don't mind me saying. No offence or anything.

That's not even close to what a wedding invite means. A wedding invite means 'We'd like the people named on the invitation to attend, if they can.' It certainly doesn't mean 'Feel free to have us pay for your three uninvited children.'

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Oh no offence taken at all, don't worry. You can be sure if I'm paying for a wedding, and putting a lot of thought into absolutely everything that will make it special, I have no problem putting my own wishes first and foremost.
If I'm paying for my dress, a venue and a meal, I'll choose who I want there, down to exact numbers. If I don't want over tired children on sugar crashes, I make no apologies for it. After all, it's OUR day, well only be doing it once and it'll be the day I want.

If that doesn't suit people they can decline the invitation.

lawred2

kunst nugget wrote: »

Unless the names of our children are specifically mentioned on the invite I take it that they are not invited. If it turned out we couldn't get someone to look after our children (which hasn't happened yet) then I would tell them we would be unable to attend and tell them the reason why. If they wanted to extend the invitation then that's great but I wouldn't push to have my children invited.

That's fair enough. Personally I wouldn't see it as anyone pushing anything. I don't really think that you and me are that far apart on this.

Friend of mine is getting married in October. We would have been going without kids because ultimately we like to have the day away. The fiance has explicitly stated that kids are not welcome. Fine. Whatever, that's what she wants. We were going anyway because he's my friend. Doesn't come across too well though. To me that is.

Obviously some on here would give her the standing ovation.

lawred2

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Oh no offence taken at all, don't worry. You can be sure if I'm paying for a wedding, and putting a lot of thought into absolutely everything that will make it special, I have no problem putting my own wishes first and foremost.
If I'm paying for my dress, a venue and a meal, I'll choose who I want there, down to exact numbers. If I don't want over tired children on sugar crashes, I make no apologies for it. After all, it's OUR day, well only be doing it once and it'll be the day I want.

If that doesn't suit people they can decline the invitation.

Great. Hope you have a nice day when the time comes.

Sue Pa Key Pa

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Whatever, people can look down on my job all they like but I can say at 27, I'm not working because I NEED the money. I am working because what I do is something I really enjoy, I really love and I'm really good at.

Whatever a person's career is, that is something to admire and be extremely envious of. Well done

anewme

lawred2 wrote: »

Well you see this is where me and you differ...

I don't see it as extending a specific invitation to a child; I see it as saying to someone whom I would like the presence of at our wedding that whatever it takes for them to be at our wedding is fine by us. If that means, due to their own circumstances that they have to bring their children then so be it. The reality is that most will find a way to attend without their children. But it's not always 100% practicable or realisable.

You come across as a bit of a misery guts who has little faith in anyone but yourself if you don't mind me saying. No offence or anything.

I really can't see at all how you could read that in any way into an invite sent to specific people. If your children are not named on an invite, then they are clearly not invited and should not just turn up.

To label someone a misery guts because they don't want children at their wedding is unfair. i'd think the opposite, I'd be fuming if someone turned up uninvited, now that's just pure cheek.

I've been to weddings both where children were (and were not) invited. I did not think less of either party for their choice, just that is what the Bridal Couple want and their wishes should come before entitlement of any guest. Its really just about respecting the wishes of the couple getting wed.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Thanks very much

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Don't be too hard on someone name calling someone miseryguts. It's sort of childish and just a sign someone needs more adult company.

lawred2

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Don't be too hard on someone name calling someone miseryguts. It's sort of childish and just a sign someone needs more adult company.

aw shucks

average_runner

Have two kids, 3 and 5 years old.

A wedding is no place for kids, kids shouldn't be watching people getting drunk and making idiots of themselves.