Pirates & Princess Party for a 2 year old???

[jollymon2]

Hey all,

I will be down in Feb. with my youngest DD (she will be about 3 month short of 2 years old). DW and older DD will join us a few days later. So...youngest DD and I will have a few days to ourselves. I've never been to a ticketed event, so I'm not sure if they would be appropriate to do with such a young one. Obviously I wouldn't be able to go on some of the rides (Splash, Space, Thunder, etc.) because I would be there alone with her, but would it be enjoyable for us. Honestly I'd be cool not doing any rides and just spend the evening taking it all in. Are there photopass photographers there for these types of events (last year she was terrified of the characters and if that's still the case I'd need to be in pictures too). Any insight you could give a father on taking his youngest daughter to one of these events would be much appreciated.

Thanks for all of you help.

 

[MamaMunk]

In my opinion this event will be great for all ages. We're thinking about taking our daughter who will be only 9 months. All the princesses will be out. Most of the rides will be open. And there will be a couple of dance parties, usually the really little ones love those. The parade should be great for kids (and adults) of all ages too. There should be photopass photographers out too. They are usually at hard ticket event, so I don't see why they wouldn't be at this one too. Have fun if you decide to go, it should be a good time!

 

[Shelby's Dad]

Jolly Mon:

I have a 3 year old daughter. I would highly recommend that you take her. We started taking our daughter ( a bit by accident) when she was 16 months. We were going with a friend of mine from LA who was taking his 2 year daughter. We just tagged along but my little girl loved it and has ever since. We have done the Halloween Party and the Christmas Party twice and she loves them. It is a bit less crowded, usually. There are some special thing that happen, of course, that you don't get regularly (like dance parties). It is just a special time. One bit of advice. On that day, try to get her to nap a late as you can. We always get ours up early on the day of the party and then get her to nap and wake her up at 4 or 5. Then she is fresh and ready to go late. The best things about the parties, if you can keep her up is that later on in the night, the ride lines are non exisitent. This year at Christmas we rode Pooh's Ride, Small World and others back to back because there were no lines (yes, Small World back to back is a bit of a challenge for the parents). I think it will be a real special time for you and her that you will remember for a long time. Have fun and if you remember, let us know how it goes.

 

[slappy magoo]

I'm not a parent, so take my opinion with a little more than a grain of salt. WDW is so expensive as it is, and when you go with little ones, yes, they might dig it, but they'll probably never remember it. It's mainly for your benefit, so you have the memories and the photos and can tell them what they were like that day 'cause they'll have no idea. So really, you oughta ask yourself if you will both enjoy it, rather than will SHE enjoy it, because if she enjoys WDW, she'll probably enjoy it whether she's on a ride, watching a parade, eating a treat, posing for a photo, what have you. You've already admitted that you won't be able to go on most rides for this event. Personally, I'd say, if you're a regular visitor, wait until she's older and can get more out of it.

 

[thedisneydad]

We are taking our son, who turns three in May. We think he will really enjoy the atmosphere, as he is absolutely in love with the movie Peter Pan. As was suggested, we plan on taking it easy the day of the party (not visiting any other parks) and are going to try to get him to take a good nap. We will have my parents with us so we can switch off if we decide to ride any of the grown up rides, but most likely we will be letting him dance and play all he wants and take lots of pictures.

 

[Jessie&Buzz]

My 3 1/2 year old son loved MVMCP. He had the time of his life. He really loved the parade and seeing the special fireworks. We also took him to MNSSHP when he was 18 months old. He really liked that too. He was big on the characters then. This time not so much. He would go to some but not others.

I say you should take her and have a wonderful time!

 

[coltow]

We took our son to MNSSHP when he was 22months. He enjoyed it. He was too young to appreciate it, but he loved trick or treating and there are characters all over the place to meet and get autographs. He LOVED the fireworks and parade. The lines were minimal, the most we waited was maybe 10 minutes for Peter Pan. I say GO FOR IT!

 

[jollymon2]

Just one more thing...I'm assuming that I don't need a ticket for the two year old for this. Just one for me and the two of us would be set, is this correct???

 

[Jessie&Buzz]

That would be correct! Have a great time and don't forget to post a report and some pics when you get home!

 

[thedisneydad]

Correct. A child who has not yet turned three gets in without a ticket.

 

[JimboJones123]

I'm not a parent, so take my opinion with a little more than a grain of salt. WDW is so expensive as it is, and when you go with little ones, yes, they might dig it, but they'll probably never remember it. It's mainly for your benefit, so you have the memories and the photos and can tell them what they were like that day 'cause they'll have no idea. So really, you oughta ask yourself if you will both enjoy it, rather than will SHE enjoy it, because if she enjoys WDW, she'll probably enjoy it whether she's on a ride, watching a parade, eating a treat, posing for a photo, what have you. You've already admitted that you won't be able to go on most rides for this event. Personally, I'd say, if you're a regular visitor, wait until she's older and can get more out of it.

If your kid won't remember it, why let it out of the closet until it is 5 years old? This is the dumbest excuse to keep parents from doing anything with their kids.

 

[raremerebear]

We took our 2 & 4 year old to MVMCP and they just loved it. I've already made plans for us to go back for the Pirate & Princess Party. I think the hard ticket events are great b/c capacity is limited, there was virtually no wait in lines & there are some special extras you don't normally get. There was Photopass at MVMCP, so I imagne it will be the same setup. Our 2 year old is still scared of the characters - we learned that the hard way at Liberty Tree Tavern which sent Goofy to the stairs to cry. But he did okay as long as he could look, but not be any closer. The parades were a little bit harder for him being scared and all. BUt all fear aside, he didn't want to leave. I really believe that these events are a wonderful time to spend time with your kids, ride some rides, and just take it all in and enjoy the magic

 

[slappy magoo]

If your kid won't remember it, why let it out of the closet until it is 5 years old? This is the dumbest excuse to keep parents from doing anything with their kids.

Which is exactly why I specified that one should take my opinion "with a little more than a grain of salt."

In an attempt to be polite, I'll democratically say that perhaps I wasn't as clear as I would have liked to be.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm sure most kids would love the Pirates & Princess Party Shindig. I'm sure they'd also enjoy their time at any of the other parks, the pool, looking at the big lego dragon in DTD, time in a resort playground, a character meal, the free movies outside at Fort Wilderness, the private savannahs at Animal Kingdom Lodge, etc. etc. And when/if my wife & I have kids, I look forward to seeing their eyes their first trip down to WDW, even if they never really remember the trip as they get older.

As far as I'm concerned the question really isn't "Will a child enjoy him or herself?" The question is "Is it appropriate to take a very young child?"

Or rather, as based on the original poster's concern, "If you're traveling alone with a child, who based on her age and size would make it impossible to take full advantage of all the perks you get at a hard-ticketed event, and with no one to help me watch her if I wanted to ride an attraction she's too young to experience herself, is it worth paying the extra scheckles?"

What I'm saying is, with all the expense of a Disney vacation, perhaps the OP is better off saving her money for now, doing something else with her time at WDW that a child would probably enjoy just as much, and then save the P&P for when her daughter is older. My apologies if some people interpreted that to mean "you should raise your child like veal for as long as you possibly can."

 

[DisneyBunny]

The only thing to keep in mind is that the party starts at 7:30 ish... that's right around a lot of toddler's bedtimes. If you think that their schedules are so thrown off that they won't mind being out so late at night, then go for it! Otherwise, plan on heading back to the hotel once they pass out in the stroller...

 

[Aprilnjosh]

If your kid won't remember it, why let it out of the closet until it is 5 years old? This is the dumbest excuse to keep parents from doing anything with their kids.

I totally agree.

People who do not have kids, need not put down those who do.:sohappy:

 

[JimboJones123]

Which is exactly why I specified that one should take my opinion "with a little more than a grain of salt."

In an attempt to be polite, I'll democratically say that perhaps I wasn't as clear as I would have liked to be.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm sure most kids would love the Pirates & Princess Party Shindig. I'm sure they'd also enjoy their time at any of the other parks, the pool, looking at the big lego dragon in DTD, time in a resort playground, a character meal, the free movies outside at Fort Wilderness, the private savannahs at Animal Kingdom Lodge, etc. etc. And when/if my wife & I have kids, I look forward to seeing their eyes their first trip down to WDW, even if they never really remember the trip as they get older.

As far as I'm concerned the question really isn't "Will a child enjoy him or herself?" The question is "Is it appropriate to take a very young child?"

Or rather, as based on the original poster's concern, "If you're traveling alone with a child, who based on her age and size would make it impossible to take full advantage of all the perks you get at a hard-ticketed event, and with no one to help me watch her if I wanted to ride an attraction she's too young to experience herself, is it worth paying the extra scheckles?"

What I'm saying is, with all the expense of a Disney vacation, perhaps the OP is better off saving her money for now, doing something else with her time at WDW that a child would probably enjoy just as much, and then save the P&P for when her daughter is older. My apologies if some people interpreted that to mean "you should raise your child like veal for as long as you possibly can."

It's not polite at all when you say "why not let them look at the lego dragon" instead.

Even an 18 month would know what a "Party" is and if you dress them up, they would have even more fun. Why even buy toys for kids, or read them books? Why not dumb everything down for them and only feed and change them? I understand the argument of it being to late. I also understand that if it is a short trip this sleep adjustment can hurt your other plans for the day before, day of and day after.

Is it really necessary for you to post that all kids need is something colorful moving in front of them?

Maybe you aren't qualified to answer, so don't. Kids aren't accessories. Even breastfeeding in their first days, they are learning and absorbing more and more.

 

[slappy magoo]

I totally agree.

People who do not have kids, need not put down those who do.:sohappy:

Wow...just...wow.

aprilnjosh, instead of reading jimbo's response to my comment, why not read my comment? I defy you to point out where, exactly, I was "putting down" people who have kids. DEFY you.

I can't help it if Jimbo wants to put words in my mouth, but before you should agree with him you should find out for sure if HE understood what I said BEFORE you agree with him. And then I'll gladly accept your apology.

I'll try to rephrase what I said, to make things easier for those who have difficulties understanding what I thought was pretty straightforward stuff.

The original poster is thinking about going to the P&P-aplaooza with her daughter and no one else. No other adults, and her little one is too little to do most of the stuff that will be available to the guests at that time. So the OP wants to know if it's worth going.

Now, I'm sure the kid would probably have a great time. But the kid's at WDW. She'll probably have a great time no matter what. Moreover, she probably WON'T know she's missing a party if, instead of going to P&P, her mom takes her to another park or does anything else with her. Because there will be a whole lot going on, and the OP won't have any other adults there to assist her, I hardly think I'm an advocate of child abuse to say maybe it's better to wait until either a: the kid is older, or b: the OP can go with another person, who can help her out if the kid gets cranky, or SHE gets too tired herself to handle the kid, or one person can wait on line for ice cream while the other adult waits on line for Dumbo with the kid, etc.

Again, where in any of that does it sound like I'm putting down parents? WHERE in any of that does it sound like I think kids shouldn't do anything fun ever?

And if the OP decides to ignore my suggestion, and goes to the P&P, fine. Great. Last I heard, kids seem to enjoy it. I'm not trying to start some big argument, any more than I'd be trying to start a fight if I suggested, say, someone who plans to stay at a mod might want to avoid POR while the food court is being renovated, even though POR is my favorite mod.

Jimbo seems to think I'm all about punting babies for distance because I'm offering a different opinion on a lone parent spending the extra money on a hard-ticket event with a kid too young to realize she's missing something if she doesn't go, in a vacation destination where there's a million and one other things for a 2 year old to do. Personally, the idea that I'm being cruel reminds me of a snippet from The Simpsons where Bart wants fresh baked cookies, but Marge tells him he can't until he finishes his hot fudge sundae, and then we see Bart CHOKING down the delicious sundae like it was poison. So because Jimbo is being willfully ignorant of what my opinion on this matter really is, doesn't mean you have to drink his Kool-Aid.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to put the finishing touches on my self-help book "Jangling Your Keys In Their Face-Good Enough For My Brat, Good Enough For Yours!" Jeez...

 

[slappy magoo]

It's not polite at all when you say "why not let them look at the lego dragon" instead.

Even an 18 month would know what a "Party" is and if you dress them up, they would have even more fun. Why even buy toys for kids, or read them books? Why not dumb everything down for them and only feed and change them? I understand the argument of it being to late. I also understand that if it is a short trip this sleep adjustment can hurt your other plans for the day before, day of and day after.

Is it really necessary for you to post that all kids need is something colorful moving in front of them?

Maybe you aren't qualified to answer, so don't. Kids aren't accessories. Even breastfeeding in their first days, they are learning and absorbing more and more.

Your ability to selectively edit out anything that doesn't support your position is astounding. Kinda like if a movie critic said a movie is "The best movie of the year if you've recently been hit in the head by a lead pipe and are now severely brain damaged" and the studio opts to use "The best movie of the year" in their ad.

HERE'S what I wrote:

"As far as I'm concerned, I'm sure most kids would love the Pirates & Princess Party Shindig. I'm sure they'd also enjoy their time at any of the other parks, the pool, looking at the big lego dragon in DTD, time in a resort playground, a character meal, the free movies outside at Fort Wilderness, the private savannahs at Animal Kingdom Lodge, etc. etc. And when/if my wife & I have kids, I look forward to seeing their eyes their first trip down to WDW, even if they never really remember the trip as they get older."

And from that, YOU get:
"It's not polite at all when you say 'why not let them look at the lego dragon' instead."

And, of course,

"Is it really necessary for you to post that all kids need is something colorful moving in front of them?"


Nothing about the parks, the pool, the movies, the meals, none of it. I'm a latter-day gender bending Miss Hannigan from Annie, believing children should be neither seen nor heard. Nice. Way to go, you.

Look, I can't be too terribly upset. After all, someone like me can't be a misunderstood geniuis without being a genius. :lol: But obviously, when you take in a person's whole opinion, instead of just picking and choosing the passages they write to support your agenda, getting everyone else riled up for things they didn't really say, and opinions they never really expressed, you come across as a little smarter yourself. What you did is the stuff of hacky political commentators and shock jock radio, not civil discourse. Food for thought for the next time you want to comment on anything I or anyone else writes, there, bubbo.

 

[JimboJones123]

If you are spending 2K on a trip, what's another $38.50 or whatever. Just don't have kids if you don't want them. That's the point we are making. If you have them, enjoy them.

 

[JimboJones123]

Your ability to selectively edit out anything that doesn't support your position is astounding. Kinda like if a movie critic said a movie is "The best movie of the year if you've recently been hit in the head by a lead pipe and are now severely brain damaged" and the studio opts to use "The best movie of the year" in their ad.

HERE'S what I wrote:

"As far as I'm concerned, I'm sure most kids would love the Pirates & Princess Party Shindig. I'm sure they'd also enjoy their time at any of the other parks, the pool, looking at the big lego dragon in DTD, time in a resort playground, a character meal, the free movies outside at Fort Wilderness, the private savannahs at Animal Kingdom Lodge, etc. etc. And when/if my wife & I have kids, I look forward to seeing their eyes their first trip down to WDW, even if they never really remember the trip as they get older."

And from that, YOU get:
"It's not polite at all when you say 'why not let them look at the lego dragon' instead."

And, of course,

"Is it really necessary for you to post that all kids need is something colorful moving in front of them?"


Nothing about the parks, the pool, the movies, the meals, none of it. I'm a latter-day gender bending Miss Hannigan from Annie, believing children should be neither seen nor heard. Nice. Way to go, you.

Look, I can't be too terribly upset. After all, someone like me can't be a misunderstood geniuis without being a genius. :lol: But obviously, when you take in a person's whole opinion, instead of just picking and choosing the passages they write to support your agenda, getting everyone else riled up for things they didn't really say, and opinions they never really expressed, you come across as a little smarter yourself. What you did is the stuff of hacky political commentators and shock jock radio, not civil discourse. Food for thought for the next time you want to comment on anything I or anyone else writes, there, bubbo.

No, these are things you DID say, you just padded them to make them sound less harsh or whatever. If you didn't mean them, they wouldn't have been said, if you didn't think they were offensive, you wouldn't have padded them. Or you may not understand what you were saying, which I was helping you to get to the root of. Yer Welcome.