Title for baby neice

torontobride14

So my SIL to-be just had a baby and she will be 3 months at the wedding.  I'm looking for a nice way to include her in the program and wedding website and wondering what an appropriate and cute title could be.  I also have a 6 year old niece that will be the official flower girl.

I know it's just for fun,  but any ideas would be appreciated.  

lc07

You can list her as a family member, as your niece. But then it would be odd not to name all of your family members. I can't think of anything else that makes sense.

artbyallie

lw22 said:

So my SIL to-be just had a baby and she will be 3 months at the wedding.  I'm looking for a nice way to include her in the program and wedding website and wondering what an appropriate and cute title could be.  I also have a 6 year old niece that will be the official flower girl.

I know it's just for fun,  but any ideas would be appreciated.  

A three-month-old doesn't need a title, though. It won't mean anything to her now or ever. I was under a year old at my aunt's first wedding and I wasn't in it. I wore a dress that matched my mom's (who was her sister's MOH) and was in some pictures with her and my aunt. But I didn't have or need any sort of title since I was, you know, a baby.

ETF: first wedding, to clarify, since I've mentioned being in my aunt's second wedding four years ago.

vk2204

Leave her out of the program and she can just be a guest. There is no special title for a 3 month old.

Maggie0829

vk2204 said:

Leave her out of the program and she can just be a guest. There is no special title for a 3 month old.

This.

Just get a couple cute pictures with her and call it a day.

kmmssg

While I agree with the others, if it is that important to you just call her an Honorary Flower Girl.  Completely unnecessary, but completely harmless in the world of etiquette.

climbingsingle

vk2204 said:

Leave her out of the program and she can just be a guest. There is no special title for a 3 month old.

This. 

STARMOON44

Neither your program nor your website are supposed to provide a family tree. 3 month old babies are adorable in and of themselves and don't need some stupid cutesy title.

Jen4948

STARMOON44 said:

Neither your program nor your website are supposed to provide a family tree. 3 month old babies are adorable in and of themselves and don't need some stupid cutesy title.

This.  Just take pictures with your 3 month old niece and let it go at that.

torontobride14

wow!  people relax!  I said it was just for fun, you don't need to be so harsh.  i was looking for a cute idea, if you don't have one, then don't post.

thank you to those who did offer actual help. 

AddieCake

Nobody was harsh, and you can't tell people how to post or whether or not to post on a public forum.

MobKaz

lw22 said:

So my SIL to-be just had a baby and she will be 3 months at the wedding.  I'm looking for a nice way to include her in the program and wedding website and wondering what an appropriate and cute title could be.  I also have a 6 year old niece that will be the official flower girl.

I know it's just for fun,  but any ideas would be appreciated.  

Perhaps you could find some play on words related to flower girl, such as bloom, bloomer, petal, sprout, or rosebud. You could also just have two flower girls.

Jen4948

lw22 said:

wow!  people relax!  I said it was just for fun, you don't need to be so harsh.  i was looking for a cute idea, if you don't have one, then don't post.

thank you to those who did offer actual help. 

Ideas aren't always good because someone thinks they're "cute."  Cuteness isn't always desirable.
And it's not up to you if or how other people post.  Disagreeing with you isn't being "harsh."

AddieCake

lw22 said:

So my SIL to-be just had a baby and she will be 3 months at the wedding.  I'm looking for a nice way to include her in the program and wedding website and wondering what an appropriate and cute title could be.  I also have a 6 year old niece that will be the official flower girl.

I know it's just for fun,  but any ideas would be appreciated.  

I think an "appropriate and cute" title would be "niece of the groom." 

CMGragain

lw22 said:

wow!  people relax!  I said it was just for fun, you don't need to be so harsh.  i was looking for a cute idea, if you don't have one, then don't post.

thank you to those who did offer actual help. 

People are trying to help you.  You have a bad idea, and people are trying to help you understand this.  This is your wedding.  A baby cannot take part in your ceremony, and therefore shouldn't be in your program.  "Cute" is a word that has often been used to try to make something acceptable when it is not. 

biggrouch

I think the "rosebud" idea is cute from @Mobkaz. BTW, to those who are saying it's "not acceptable"... what in the world is unacceptable? I realize you wouldn't do it if you prefer to be literalist about putting people in the program who are in the wedding. But is there any possible way that any harm is in it? If not, who is it not "acceptable" to? I'm so confused. If a guest doesn't think it's cute, can't they just... not look at the program anymore?

Jen4948

biggrouch said:

I think the "rosebud" idea is cute from @Mobkaz. BTW, to those who are saying it's "not acceptable"... what in the world is unacceptable? I realize you wouldn't do it if you prefer to be literalist about putting people in the program who are in the wedding. But is there any possible way that any harm is in it? If not, who is it not "acceptable" to? I'm so confused. If a guest doesn't think it's cute, can't they just... not look at the program anymore?

Nope.  Not good enough.  When one is doing something unacceptable, it is not okay to put the onus of ignoring it on those whom one has specifically asked to be present.

"Cuteness" does not make something acceptable.  The wedding is not about or for the benefit of the kids-regardless of how "cute" someone thinks they are.

CMGragain

I was using "not acceptable" as a polite word for what I really think about this idea.

biggrouch

"Nope. Not good enough. When one is doing something unacceptable, it is not okay to put the onus of ignoring it on those whom one has specifically asked to be present." Haha... um, thanks, but I didn't say that guests should ignore something unacceptable? I asked a) why it was unacceptable and b) what that even means when it has no conceivable effect on anyone's life. Saying that "cuteness doesn't make something acceptable" is true but completely irrelevant. I asked the question because I literally don't understand the original premise. It's not hurting anyone, deceiving anyone, asking for money or time or favors from anyone; it's not sexist or racist or homophobic. Your hating the idea is like... a perfectly legitimate reaction? But it has nothing to do with what I asked.

AddieCake

You're right. It's not hurting anyone if someone wants to "include" people and make up unnecessary titles for people for their wedding. No harm is done. I just know that a lot of people roll their eyes at this kind of stuff and gossip about it. My cousin had a random kid walk down the aisle at her wedding 8 years ago for no other reason than he was a cute kid in dress clothes. My family still mentions the pointlessness of it. That's just us being judgmental, I realize, but that's the point. I know that people in the world are very judgmental of all kinds of stuff, and I, personally, would want to avoid being the butt of jokes or to avoid having people snicker about something I did if I could help it.

HisGirlFriday13

I agree with Addie. Do you want your wedding to be the wedding people talk about as, 'Oh, my God, can you believe that they did x, y, or z? It was so random and pointless.'

biggrouch

Ahhh I see. Well I'm a heartless wedding snarker, too. (Not about babies though. Babies are too cute.) AND I hate when people talk about me negatively (I'm trying to overcome that trait though). But I mean, it's just talk. People will always find something to judge, some of it legitimately bad--say, making your BMs buy $500 dresses--but most of it not.

theartistformerlyknownas

AddieCake said:

You're right. It's not hurting anyone if someone wants to "include" people and make up unnecessary titles for people for their wedding. No harm is done. I just know that a lot of people roll their eyes at this kind of stuff and gossip about it. My cousin had a random kid walk down the aisle at her wedding 8 years ago for no other reason than he was a cute kid in dress clothes. My family still mentions the pointlessness of it. That's just us being judgmental, I realize, but that's the point. I know that people in the world are very judgmental of all kinds of stuff, and I, personally, would want to avoid being the butt of jokes or to avoid having people snicker about something I did if I could help it.

This was my initial reaction. I'd avoid it because it would be embarrassing for me, not hurtful to anyone else (except the rest of my huge family tree wondering why they didn't get a made-up title too). It's unnecessary, the baby won't care, I'd just let it go.

(FTR, FI and I have 6 nieces and nephews age 4 and under. A 4yo niece and 3.5yo nephew will be FG and RB, the rest will be guests.)

coleford0

I think that calling this idea "bad", "unacceptable" or "embarassing" is a little dramatic. If I went to a wedding and saw something like "Honorary Flower Girl" in a program I would probably think "Oh cute!", and not give it a single other thought.

I sometimes wonder how some of you girls can ever enjoy yourselves at weddings if you're so busy judging the bride and groom for everything.

mysticl

I think it's confusing to people. I went to a wedding and I saw the bride's sister listed in the program as the MOH. Only she was nowhere to be seen. I was sitting with my parents so I asked my mom where she was and my mom told me she had been deployed. That makes perfect sense why she was in the program but not at the wedding. Now if I saw a little kid listed in the program and he/she wasn't at the alter I'd just figure the kid didn't make it down the aisle, always a risk with kids in a wedding and no big deal.  But if I then discovered the kid was an infant I'd probably think the bride was crazy for even expecting a baby to make it down the aisle.  

lc07

coleford0 said:

I think that calling this idea "bad", "unacceptable" or "embarassing" is a little dramatic. If I went to a wedding and saw something like "Honorary Flower Girl" in a program I would probably think "Oh cute!", and not give it a single other thought.

I sometimes wonder how some of you girls can ever enjoy yourselves at weddings if you're so busy judging the bride and groom for everything.

Alcohol.

lc07

In all seriousness, this is no big deal to me. If you listed her as a flower girl and she didn't go down the aisle I wouldn't even blink at it. Someone could also carry her down in the processional and sit with her. I wouldn't give two shits.

Also, Alcohol.

Jen4948

Honestly, not everyone is into babies or "cuteness," and it wastes the time of those who have to watch as someone not old enough to consent to participation in his/her own right, who won't understand its significance for years to come or remember what's going on now, and who can't get up and down the aisle on their own, has to be carried by someone and be listed in some program with some made-up title just to be "cute."

biggrouch

It's a wedding, it's not exactly the G8 summit. If the OP skips having a barely-mobile flower girl, your time is freed up to be spent on listening to readings that may or may not have meaning to you, witnessing religious rituals that might or might not conflict with your own spirituality, listening to music you may or may not like, listening to vows that may or may not be incredibly lame and cheesy, etc. It's not like you would have been spending that thirty seconds writing a brief for a Supreme Court case or something. Of course it sounds like the niece wasn't doing anything in the ceremony anyway...

kmmssg

Jen4948 said:

Honestly, not everyone is into babies or "cuteness," and it wastes the time of those who have to watch as someone not old enough to consent to participation in his/her own right, who won't understand its significance for years to come or remember what's going on now, and who can't get up and down the aisle on their own, has to be carried by someone and be listed in some program with some made-up title just to be "cute."

OP never said the child was coming down the aisle.  She just wanted a title for her for the program and website.

What on Earth is the big deal here anyway ladies?  If you consider a 30 second walk down the aisle (which OP never mentioned) a waste of your time, YOU are showing some seriously bad etiquette.  You agreed to come to a wedding - if you are going to snark and gossip about a 30 second walk (which was never mentioned) OR gossip about a title given to the groom's niece out of loving intentions you need to check yourself.

This is about the most harmless thing out there.   

 

Edited to add Miss Manners thoughts:

 

Dear Miss manners - My fiance and Iare trying to finalize the members of the wedding party.  Should the ring bearer and the flower girl be a  certain age or is it up to each couple to decide?

 

Gentle Reader - The ring bearer and the flower girl are supposed to be of an age to make everyone smile and nudge one another and say, "Awwwww, looooooook" during the processional.  A mere "Don't they look cute?" with no extra letters in the pronunciation means that the young pepol are old enough to be junior bridesmaid and usher.

 

What age produces the desired effect is something that the bridal couple may decide.

 

 

 

 

kmmssg

I have tried to add Miss Manners comments three times on my post and it doesn't show up.