# Damn wedding weenie! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 25, 2004, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937 "2004-04-25T18:04:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/41 "2004-04-26T11:09:33Z")
Wha? Somehow I managed to reply this thread even though I wasn’t reading it at the time. How the hell does that happen? ---
**Author:** ![htns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ba8739/32.png) [@htns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/htns)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/42 "2004-04-26T12:40:36Z")
> [@CairaJade](#): > > Sorry dude, the “weenie” is right here. Whomever is stated on the invitation is invited (inner envelope for proper formal invitations). Not named on the invitation, not invited. It’s been my understanding that spouses/lifemates are always implicitly invited. Is that right, or am I wrong? ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/43 "2004-04-26T13:02:33Z")
htns, I think that if someone important enough to be a guest at your wedding has a spouse or life partner that you would know that person’s name, and put it on the invitation. I believe it would be a breach of etiquette to leave such an important person off the invite. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/44 "2004-04-26T13:17:29Z")
You may do things differently over the other side of the pond, but when it came to our wedding, we _specifically_ didn’t want kids there. Firstly, it was an ‘adult’ ceremony: lots of drinking and smoking and general carrying on. Secondly, we didn’t want kids running around shrieking etc. during the service and the speeches. That may be prejudicial, but fuck it, we were paying an absolute fortune for the day, and we wanted it _as we wanted it_. But thirdly, and more importantly, we were on a limited budget. A kid’s meal was €20 per head. If we allowed one child, we’d have had to allow them all. Given that there were 100 guests, that might mean an extra 10 or 20 meals - up to an extra €400. So we specified on the invitation that children weren’t welcome. Half the guests were travelling from Engand to Ireland, so this would mean a huge inconvenience for some of them who were parents. I was sorry that it did, but tough titties. Them’s the rules we set. In the end, one couple didn’t come because of our ruling (as well as other factors), and one couple brought their baby despite our request not to. ---
**Author:** ![Sauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Sauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauron)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/45 "2004-04-26T13:51:58Z")
Whether **Jonathan Chance** should have known about the no-kids rule is somewhat debatable. What _isn’t_ debatable, at least in my mind, is the apparent attitude of the groom-to-be in this scenario. The groom-to-be is asking his friend to be a part of this special day. Fair enough. However, he’s apparently being a snot about **JC** ’s ability to attend. **JC** obviously has a situation that will make it difficult, at best, to attend the wedding. Rather than being understanding about that, the groom-to-be is apparently taking it for granted that **JC** would just be willing to drop everything in his life and make herculean efforts to come to the wedding. If the groom-to-be doesn’t want kids at the wedding, no big deal. However, he should understand that such a restriction could very well prevent folks who are 400 miles away from attending the wedding. Getting huffy about that flies in the face of etiquette. He can’t hide behind etiquette one moment (“You should’ve known the way the invitation was addressed that your child couldn’t come”) and then begrudgingly make “concessions” about child attendance the next. Sure, **JC** made a mistake in interpreting the invitation. But if the groom-to-be is as close a pal as he seems to feel he is, he should understand if the Chances can’t make the trip. ---
**Author:** ![jeevwoman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de053/32.png) [@jeevwoman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jeevwoman)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/46 "2004-04-26T14:08:54Z")
> [@CRich](#): > > On the other hand, if I had invited my friend from Ohio to come to my wedding, I wouldn’t be expecting him to leave behind his 4 year old. Since I’m his friend, I presumably know that there aren’t any handy grandparents. I would not expect them to hunt down a babysitter in an unfamiliar town. I’d think that the considerate thing to do would be to either have a young, dependable relative lined up to babysit for them during the wedding ceremony & reception, or to graciously make an exception in my friend’s case and invite them to bring their toddler along. > > After all, in general you’d be expected to arrange hotel accomodations for out-of-town guests who would be unfamiliar with the area–why would this be any different? Seems a little unreasonable to expect them to what?–ditch the kid back in Ohio with neighbors? or to have to hire the hotel pool boy to babysit? I agree with this. While the bride and groom may have a no kids rule for a very good reason (perhaps there are bratty cousns somewhere and they don’t want to invite them) they do also need to realize that for out-of-town guests, this may pose a problem. If it were me, I would have arranged a local babysitter for the out-of-towners. But then again, we DID invite kids to our wedding, so what do I know? And if the invitation didn’t say 'To The Chance Family" or “To Mr and Mrs Chance and Family,” then Baby Kate was not invited, but it is very confusing. In fact, we addressed our invites this way and people still were wondering if they could bring their kids. ---
**Author:** ![kung\_fu\_lola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f4b2a3/32.png) [@kung\_fu\_lola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kung_fu_lola)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/47 "2004-04-26T14:11:53Z")
> [@htns](#): > > It’s been my understanding that spouses/lifemates are always implicitly invited. Is that right, or am I wrong? You are technically wrong. Only those who are named on the invites are welcome to attend. However, it is extremely bad form to invite someone who is married or engaged and not invite their spouse/fiance(e). The onus is on the To Be Weds to address their invites properly. ---
**Author:** ![sunfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/96bed5/32.png) [@sunfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sunfish)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/48 "2004-04-26T14:20:01Z")
> [@htns](#): > > It’s been my understanding that spouses/lifemates are always implicitly invited. Is that right, or am I wrong? If you know a friend has a spouse or lifemate, it would be rude to leave their name off the invitation. IMHO it’s not a good idea to assume that any invitation implicitly includes someone else, especially if the reception is going to be at a restaurant or hall where seating is a factor. When my sister got married, all the single people invited were told that, owing to budgetary constraints, those people without serious SO’s were expected to come solo. Nearly everyone understood, but one guy decided to bring a guest anyway and there was a bit of embarrassment when he discovered that the seating plans were not designed to accommodate her. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/49 "2004-04-26T14:32:34Z")
> [@sunfish](#): > > IMHO it’s not a good idea to assume that any invitation implicitly includes someone else, especially if the reception is going to be at a restaurant or hall where seating is a factor. Indeed, I’m a groomsman at a friends wedding and recently received the invitation to the rehearsal dinner. I threw out the envelope (not the invite itself) and forgot to note for certain whether my fiance’s name was on it as well. Even though I was 99% sure she was invited, I asked. I figured, look a bit dumb now rather than looking VERY dumb the night of the rehearsal. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/50 "2004-04-26T16:09:45Z")
> [@Sauron](#): > > Whether **Jonathan Chance** should have known about the no-kids rule is somewhat debatable. What _isn’t_ debatable, at least in my mind, is the apparent attitude of the groom-to-be in this scenario. > > \ > > Getting huffy about that flies in the face of etiquette. And getting all bent out of shape because a stressed-out friend didn’t mask their annoyance to save his feelings is a childish response and a great way to lose a good friend. > [@](#): > > He can’t hide behind etiquette one moment (“You should’ve known the way the invitation was addressed that your child couldn’t come”) and then begrudgingly make “concessions” about child attendance the next. Huh? Of course he can make concessions in spite of his friend having been the one who was wrong about kids being included. That just doesn’t make any sense. Look, **Jonathan** misread the invitation. That onus is on him. And I’m not saying **Jonathan** wasn’t polite about it, but he also didn’t tell us _his_ side of the exchange, only charactarizing it as him ( **Jonathan** ) being “cheesed off” and them (he and the groom) “go[ing] back and forth for the last few days” about it, until the groom finally, huffingly says, “FINE, bring the kid.” He was probably exasperated at that point, at having to constantly defend his position and decision. If someone annoyed me “back and forth” over something that I’d already expressed quite clearly, I’m not so sure I wouldn’t have snapped at them, too. The bottom line is this – how important is this friendship and what actions will prolong it or kill it? Is it worth losing a good friend because of a miscommunication on your part and a snippy response on his? In my opinion, no. That’s not the way real friends behave. To err is human, to forgive divine. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/51 "2004-04-26T16:16:10Z")
I don’t see why it would be such a big deal to leave the kid at home for a day with a sitter. Why would having to get a sitter be so bad that you would not attend the wedding? Can’t your 4-year-old survive for 24 hours without you? When I was growing up, we were left with a sitter all the time when our parents went to adults-only events. We got to go to family weddings, but my parents never took us to their friends’ weddings. Why would you want to anyway? Can’t _you_ go 24 hours without your kid? Also, why do you think the groom was being huffy? Afterall, he made an exception for you, saying “if having Kate there is the only way we’ll attend then she can come.” This was very nice of him, it means you being there means so much to him that he would be willing to make an exception. Don’t let this ruin the friendship, which is what will happen if you don’t go. They have all the right in the world to not include children, and you should have known this. ---
**Author:** ![cheapbastardon38thstreet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cheapbastardon38thstreet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheapbastardon38thstreet)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/52 "2004-04-26T16:43:00Z")
Jonathan, you are being patronized by the groom. But here is the deal, you can drop Baby Kate off here. We have a fence around our yard and I will check up on her from time to time. I won’t ask for much in return, just a couple cartons of wine coolers if its gonna be a hot day. ---
**Author:** ![Geobabe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/geobabe/32/3908_2.png) [@Geobabe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Geobabe)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/53 "2004-04-26T16:49:43Z")
I don’t think parents should ever assume that their children are included on invitations, wedding or otherwise, if they’re not mentioned specifically. If you want to bring your child and aren’t certain, ASK. And please don’t get upset when they’re not included. It’s most likely not because they don’t like kids, it’s just that some folks like to have events every once in a while where there are no worries about watching the little ones. It’s OK to enjoy purely adult company sometimes and it’s not a personal slam against you or your child. ---
**Author:** ![carimwc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ac8455/32.png) [@carimwc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carimwc)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/54 "2004-04-26T16:51:34Z")
I refer you all to [Etiquette Hell](http://www.etiquettehell.com) and its [message board](http://forums.delphiforums.com/etiquettehell) for all your etiquette needs. Jonathan Chance was in the wrong for assuming that Baby Kate was invited. As many have said, only the names on the invite are guests-to-be. If there was no “and family”, that means children not included. Of course mix-ups do happen, as there was one wedding my parents were invited to- only their names- but they found out at the wedding that us kids were expected too. But general rule is only those named are invited. The bride and groom to be can put the request for no children on the invite but it is considered rather tacky to do so. The names on the invite should suffice. Extra guests mean extra stress and extra money usually, so it’s understandable that the groom/friend was a bit huffy. The bride and groom are under no obligation to provide child care for those parents who simply can’t find a sitter for their kids but it is nice to do. It is extra money they might not have though. They should also understand that some parents may not be able to make it because of the circumstance, and that is ok too. Longtime SOs, fiances, and spouses should be included on the invite. I received a wedding invite last year and I was rather hurt that I was the only one named, even though I was currently living with my boyfriend of 2 1/2 years at the time. I couldn’t attend due to us only having on car at the time, the 3 hour drive there, and him needing it for work, but him not being invited did play a tiny part of me not going. ---
**Author:** ![Sauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Sauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauron)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/55 "2004-04-26T17:55:52Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > Of course he can make concessions in spite of his friend having been the one who was wrong about kids being included. That just doesn’t make any sense. I think you’re wrong here. In my opinion, the friend should have reminded **Jonathan Chance** about the no-kids policy, and politely expressed regret when/if **JC** told him that meant he couldn’t come to the wedding. It sounds to me like the friend is really pushing to get **JC** to come to the wedding. The thing is, when you put restrictions on who can/can’t attend the wedding, you start throwing variables into the equation that can’t be ignored. The friend should be understanding about **JC** ’s inability to come, given the no-kids rule. Let’s assume, though, that **JC** and his family (including the child) go to the wedding. What’s gonna happen? Other couples who arranged for sitters or who had some hassle getting childcare will now see the Chance family, including child, attending the wedding. This can be a huge problem, depending on the people involved, and it’s exactly the sort of problem the friend should have avoided in the first place. That’s what I mean about the friend using the etiquette defense about the way the invitation is written, when he’s gonna turn right around and throw etiquette out the window. And, if he IS pressuring **JC** to attend the wedding despite his initial restriction, that’s just wrong. ---
**Author:** ![jellytoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/eb9ed0/32.png) [@jellytoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jellytoes)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/56 "2004-04-26T17:57:38Z")
Okay, I’m thoroughly confused now. Let’s say that I want to have a wedding where there are no children (13 and under). How would I word the invitation to make it clear that children are not invited? [ol] [li]Just write the names of the parents on the invites.[/li][li]Have “no children 13 and under” (or something of the sort) printed on the invite.[/li][li]Call every guest with children and make it clear to them that their little darlings aren’t welcome.[/li][/ol] Any other suggestions? **Jonathan** , how would you have preferred to be addressed about this? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/57 "2004-04-26T18:30:01Z")
> [@Sauron](#): > > I think you’re wrong here. In my opinion, the friend should have reminded **Jonathan Chance** about the no-kids policy, and politely expressed regret when/if **JC** told him that meant he couldn’t come to the wedding. And how do you know he didn’t? **Jonathan** states quite clearly in his OP that he was “cheesed off” and that he and the groom went “back and forth” over this issue for several days. It sounds to _me_ like the friend _tried_ the polite route and finally just gave in to undue (and IMO, unacceptable) pressure. Once **Jonathan** got the clarification he was seeking in the initial phone call, it was his responsibility to accept the situation as it was offered (no kids!). But no, _he_ had to keep pushing and pushing until he got his way, then whined about the groom relenting in a “huffy” tone. > [@](#): > > The thing is, when you put restrictions on who can/can’t attend the wedding, you start throwing variables into the equation that can’t be ignored. The friend should be understanding about **JC** ’s inability to come, given the no-kids rule. Again, how do you know he wasn’t? You’re making a lot of suppositions without any real evidence to back them up. It’s just as likely that the groom completely understood the variables, stood his ground and kept getting hammered about **Jonathan** wanting to bring his kid along. > [@](#): > > Let’s assume, though, that **JC** and his family (including the child) go to the wedding. What’s gonna happen? Other couples who arranged for sitters or who had some hassle getting childcare will now see the Chance family, including child, attending the wedding. This can be a huge problem, depending on the people involved, and it’s exactly the sort of problem the friend should have avoided in the first place. And that’s exactly the sort of problem the groom _tried_ to avoid in the first place, but **Jonathan** just wouldn’t accept it. The fact that other people might get in a snit about it is a legitimate concern. However, the groom ultimately made the call that it was more important to him to have **Jonathan** there _with_ kid and possibly cheese some other people off, than it was not to have him there at all. It’s _his_ wedding and therefore _his_ call to make. And all of this just further illustrates why it’s **Jonathan’s** repsonsibility, if he really wants to attend this wedding, to leave his child at home with a sitter and stop pestering the groom about it. It can’t possibly be that hard to find someone responsible to take care of his child. As others have said in this thread about their parents, my parents took weekends away from time to time and left us with a sitter and we _loved_ it. And I did weekend/overnight babysitting for people all through college, myself. It should not be that big of a deal. ---
**Author:** ![Sauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Sauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sauron)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/58 "2004-04-26T18:41:16Z")
You raise valid points, **Shayna**. I guess our interpretations differ on who is pushing for the Chances to attend the wedding. Since the only person who can answer that is **JC** , I’ll reserve judgement until he can clarify. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/59 "2004-04-26T19:17:00Z")
I wanted to post, interesting thread, since I’m getting married in a couple of months and our wedding is a firm “no kids”. We did this for a variety of reasons, some of which we know are destined to insult and offend some of our thinner-skinned guests. –Evening wedding, late reception. We’d prefer to have an adult, formal, atmosphere. Kids would be bored silly and wouldn’t enjoy the event. –Formal venue, the place is an old mansion filled with antiques and breakables. We, the bride and groom, have to pay to clean that velvet drapery that your little Katzenjammer Kids smeared grape jam on. –Alcohol, drunk and festive adults, and kids do not mix. Ever. Unless you want your precocious little Sally to overhear Uncle Walt’s stories about picking up Thai hookers during shore leave during the Korean War. –Babies squealing during the vows and ceremony are never cute, and never forgotten. I don’t care how sweet and nice the sympathetic smiles from the other guests and officiant are, behind that smile are laser beams of extreme irritation and disgust. The bride will _never_ forgive you. –We know that, somehow through your child’s life, you have managed to slip out to a movie, show, or shopping without the rugrats in tow and have found a sitter or friend. Our invites are giving you _4 months warning_, don’t you dare imply that we are inconveniencing you by asking you to leave the kids behind. –Lastly, we are the bride and groom, and it is our own damn decision. If we ask you to come without kids, then do so or politely decline the invitation. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937/60 "2004-04-26T19:31:13Z")
> [@Sauron](#): > > You raise valid points, **Shayna**. I guess our interpretations differ on who is pushing for the Chances to attend the wedding. Since the only person who can answer that is **JC** , I’ll reserve judgement until he can clarify. Thanks, **Sauron**. I went through this very thing with my cousins at our wedding, so I know how hard it is to stand firm with people you love and really want to be there with you, in the face of their begging and pleading with you. As you pointed out, it really puts the bride and groom in an untenable position with their other guests if one person is allowed to bring a child and no one else is. That’s why I think it’s unfair for **Jonathan** to have put him in that position in the first place. I went “back and forth” with both my aunt and my cousin, every phone call initiated by them, begging me to let my cousin bring her baby (her older kids, ages 9 & 11, were invited). I’ll keep the story short except to say that I refused to back down and whaddaya know, they found a sitter, came and had a much better time not having to hand off the baby back and forth between them so they could all relax and dance and have a great time. I hope that **Jonathan** does the same, and loses the attitude towards his friend, who shouldn’t have been put on the spot like that to begin with. It sounds to me like their friendship means enough to both of them not to damage it because of what is really nothing more than a misunderstanding, and the groom has made an effort to show that by (even begrudgingly) allowing them to bring their child. I think they need to show similar respect and not do so, anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-wedding-weenie/241937.md?page=4)