# Poll: Which SIL's side are you on?



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

I'm just dying to see it in black and white -- it seems so very divided on the looooong SIL thread! I know most of you would qualify your choice with "I think they're both in the wrong, but...", so just assume that part is understood. But if you *had* to place yourself on one side or the other, which would it be? Mainstream/Hawaii SIL or Crunchy SIL?


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Ha ha ha!

This is so silly!

I'm on the OP's side.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

No one has the right to tell any parent that they *must* leave their kids at home and go to an "adult only" party. That line alone would steam me. Also, the "sit at meals until we're done" bit is downright unrealistic for little children.

I'd be upset too over these stupid "rules."


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

they are both behaving badly, but, in this instance, msil is behaving worse.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

I side with the crunchy chick. MSIL sounds like a control freak. I understand it's her house, her rules. So CSIL should either suck it up and go by her rules or not go, IMO. But I still think MSIL's rules suck.


----------



## angelpie545 (Feb 23, 2005)

I'm on the crunchy SIL side. No one, ever, has the right to tell me when my child will go to bed, and what my child should eat. Ever. I personally would never invite someone over to house without the intention of making reasonable allowances for their chosen way of living, and I would never ask someone to compromise their principles concerning the child-rearing of their children.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe* 
they are both behaving badly, but, in this instance, msil is behaving worse.

That about says it for me. I don't think I'd go, if I were CSIL...but I'm aware that if I were actually in the situation, and dh wanted to see his brothers and wanted me to be there, I may change my mind. It wouldn't be a vacation, though...I'd spend 10 days feeling trapped.


----------



## Joannarachel (Dec 10, 2005)

They're both behaving badly, but CSIL sounds like a nightmare.

What a great poll


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

limabean: I kind of wish you'd included two other options, for whose side, and whether or not we think it sounds like a great holiday. I've seen several comments about MSIL going to all this effort to provide a great holiday, and maybe that's one of the factors affecting my take on it. I hate feeling like I'm a hostage to what my host thinks is a good time, be it adult only parties or whale watching or taking conversational topics out of a hat (bowl? whatever it was). I wouldn't really be into any of that, except maybe the whale watching. So, for me, the whole thing would be like "okay, dh - I'll go have a crappy time for 10 days, and I'll be grateful to your brother and MSIL for providing the crappy time, and I'll follow all her rules, too". I might do it, for dh, and I'd try to suck it up and smile...but it just sounds grim. And, being in a position where I'm supposed to be grateful (because they provided this "great" holiday)...ouch...


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

I do find this so entertaining! I am surprised though, how so many people are directly opposite in their opinion here. I think the vacation sounds wonderful and exciting and relaxing and would love to go. I don't mind the rules at all, and would look forward to a couple of evenings alone with adults sitting out by the pool, etc. The family times sound like a lot of fun too, and I think msil sounds like a very creative, thoughtful person. And the fact that for 10 whole days, I don't have to cook or plan a meal, and can be served a wonderful, delicious meal with lots of choices - well, sign me up!!!

I do have a question. A lot of people have mentioned that no one tells their kids what to do - when to go to bed, what to eat, how long to sit, etc. But what happens when most of the people you are with find this very offensive and it is infringing on their good time. What if the kids are a lot more disruptive than you think (I think most parents find their own children more entertaining and less trouble than others think of them)? What would you expect the other family members to do - say nothing and just grit their teeth and just suck it up for 10 days Or is it ever okay to set some basic rules for everyone's sanity (based on the behavior of just one family)?


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

MSIL all the way!!!

I doubt writing a list of rules is the usual way msil treats her guests, and I doubt msil actually likes to give out rules like that, but CSIL acted rudely and disrespectful to her during her last stay and now pushed msil to go to such drastic matters as to spell out the rules before the vacation.

and for the hundredth time msil never "told anyone's kid" when to go to bed, It simply be in your room at a decent hour. I would say something if my guest's kid was running around in my kitchen at 3am in the morning. How is that acceptable.


----------



## WNB (Apr 29, 2006)

Neither - I think the "divide" between these two women has been magnified extraordinarily by people here weaving together reactions to their own experiences with people with different parenting philosophies and the information provided by Maya44. No one is exploring any of the ways in which these women are similar (in a positive way), to maybe help think of ways to reduce the conflidt and help them find some consensus. Instead, most everyone posting on the thread is basically pulling for whichever SIL seems closest to her own parenting style.

It's no longer a thread about the two SILs, really, it's now just the battle between various flavors of "crunchy" parenting versus what is perceived as "mainstream" parenting. The small plot elements: trip to hawaii, frisson of class conflict -- those are at this point utterly secondary to the continuation of the thread.


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

I disagree - I am more crunchy than mainstream, and I totally side with msil. I think it has a lot to do with money (people resent msil for having it) and rules (which bother a lot of people, especially with children). I don't think that the csil is really crunchy, just rude and stubborn.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

I hope reading that monster thread isn't a requirement, here.







:

I read the OP and, based on that, I side with the mainstream sister. Her house, her rules. I don't find them that unreasonable and it seems like a small price to pay for a HI vacation. CSIL doesn't have to go if she finds it that unfair.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *primjillie* 
I disagree - I am more crunchy than mainstream, and I totally side with msil. I think it has a lot to do with money (people resent msil for having it) and rules (which bother a lot of people, especially with children). I don't think that the csil is really crunchy, just rude and stubborn.

That's funny. I think I'm more mainstream than crunchy, and I side with CSIL (to the extent that I side with either of them...which isn't much, actually). I don't care if MSIL is rich. I don't even care that much about rules, as such. I just don't like someone sending out an email that, imo, says "I don't like the way you parent, and I can't stop you at home, but you will parent the way I want you to while you're in my house".


----------



## Irishmommy (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RedWine* 
No one has the right to tell any parent that they *must* leave their kids at home and go to an "adult only" party.

Actually, she's only banning kids from a room or two for a couple of hours. Csil is in the same home as her kids all the time, just different rooms.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Irishmommy* 
Actually, she's only banning kids from a room or two for a couple of hours. Csil is in the same home as her kids all the time, just different rooms.

Nope - MSIL's email also mentioned an adults-only event "at the Hyatt".


----------



## LittleMonkeyMom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WNB* 
Neither - I think the "divide" between these two women has been magnified extraordinarily by people here weaving together reactions to their own experiences with people with different parenting philosophies and the information provided by Maya44.

This about sums it up for me. I think both SILs have room for improvement, yet I find that the litany of "rules" aimed at CSIL under the guise of "wanting everyone to have a good time" the greater offense at the moment. We do not have the benefit of hearing CSIL's voice in this, so it's easy to say, MSIL all the way, and assume the worst about CSIL. Or alternately, give CSIL the benefit of the doubt in some areas. At this point, a lot of people are making stuff up just because it supports the image they have in their mind of these women.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

This poll is hilarious.

I'm on Maya's side. I would vote for "CSIL and MSIL deserve each other" if that were an option


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
I'm on Maya's side. I would vote for "CSIL and MSIL deserve each other" if that were an option

















:


----------



## NaomiLorelie (Sep 2, 2004)

MSIL- I think CSIL sounds like a disrespectful nightmare. MSIL overreacted but I might become a little anal too sharing my home with someone so rude to me.

MSIL even admits she's anal but I don't get the impression that she's rigid about everything from Maya's posts. Cool arts and crafts throughout the house(paper chains with wishes), sandcastle cities, fairy parties, laughing as a baby dumps food on the floor, nursing her 1 yo at dinner, buffet style dinners with food seperated so guests can prepare food as they like it, none of these screams anal retentive freak to me.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

CSIL gets more sympathy from me. I would be horrified if my SIL sent me that email instead of discussing her feelings w/ me. Horrified! Like a shamed child.







:

These 2 posts pretty much sum it up:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I don't care if MSIL is rich. I don't even care that much about rules, as such. I just don't like someone sending out an email that, imo, says "I don't like the way you parent, and I can't stop you at home, but you will parent the way I want you to while you're in my house".


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Little Monkey Mom*
I think both SILs have room for improvement, yet I find that the litany of "rules" aimed at CSIL under the guise of "wanting everyone to have a good time" the greater offense at the moment. We do not have the benefit of hearing CSIL's voice in this, so it's easy to say, MSIL all the way, and assume the worst about CSIL. Or alternately, give CSIL the benefit of the doubt in some areas. At this point, a lot of people are making stuff up just because it supports the image they have in their mind of these women.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *primjillie* 
I disagree - I am more crunchy than mainstream, and I totally side with msil. I think it has a lot to do with money (people resent msil for having it) and rules (which bother a lot of people, especially with children). I don't think that the csil is really crunchy, just rude and stubborn.

It's funny, I don't see her as really crunchy either, but I know it is because of my personal bias - I don't see a diet of PBJ and pizza as crunchy at all. For some reason that seems to cancel out all the other crunchiness to me. I know it's stupid, but that's my gut reaction.


----------



## Rivka5 (Jul 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomiLorelie* 
MSIL even admits she's anal but I don't get the impression that she's rigid about everything from Maya's posts. Cool arts and crafts throughout the house(paper chains with wishes), sandcastle cities, fairy parties, laughing as a baby dumps food on the floor, nursing her 1 yo at dinner, buffet style dinners with food seperated so guests can prepare food as they like it, none of these screams anal retentive freak to me.

Yeah. I think a lot of these aspects of MSIL are being lost as people project their own ideas of "ultra-mainstream" on her.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

I am with the MSIL. Evidently she has encounter rude CSIL and her children and has decided to put her foot down. Her rules were not unreasonable for children between 7-10. Actually my 4 year old could obey all the rules.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
That's funny. I think I'm more mainstream than crunchy, and I side with CSIL (to the extent that I side with either of them...which isn't much, actually). I don't care if MSIL is rich. I don't even care that much about rules, as such. I just don't like someone sending out an email that, imo, says "I don't like the way you parent, and *I can't stop you at home, but you will parent the way I want you to while you're in my house*".

Actually a lot of people here on mothering do this. They will not let their mainstream relatives (I use the term mainstream loosely) discipline their children the way they sit fit in their home, nor will they serve food they may eat, or provide entertainment their children may enjoy (like TV). I've also read where the relatives weren't allowed to bring certain kinds of toys to their house as well.

I see such a double standard here.


----------



## becoming (Apr 11, 2003)

Ew, this is the first time I read the OP. I don't think I'm necessarily on CSIL's side, but I am CERTAINLY not on MSIL's side. Yeesh. She sounds like a real *joy* to be around. I wouldn't go on that trip with kids (or without kids, for that matter) for all the money in the world. Something that rigidly scheduled just does not sound fun to me, and I would not have someone else forcing me to leave my children with nannies or make them go to bed at a certain time. But then, I have a problem with authority figures.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Oh, and just to add:

We take a family vacation ea. yr. with my BIL and SIL and their kids (among other family members)--we all split the cost of a big beach house. And they are the rudest people EVER!

My SIL reads the whole time while her kids shriek and run amok. She won't do dishes or clean up. BIL will if asked directly. They put their trash on the counter ABOVE the trash can if the trash is full. They send their kids (ages 3 & 7) down to the beach with instructions for *us* to watch them. The 3 yr. old tried to push my son down a flight of stairs this year.

They don't bring toys for their kids, yell at my kid for not "sharing" (i.e. not handing over the toy he's using), allow their kids to smear allergens all over his toys and roll their eyes if I say anything about it.

They yell and threaten the entire week. They leave the house to go down to the beach...w/out their kids. And when asked, "Who's watching your kids?" They just shrug, "I don't know. Isn't there an adult at the house?" Meanwhile, everyone else as at least 2 kids and tends to them closely--adding another 2 kids is a big imposition--especially these kids!

It sucks. They suck. I hate it and we're not going anymore (no one is, really). But I would never, ever, ever, in a million years send out the kind of email that MSIL sent out. I just think it was just about the cruelest way to handle that situation.

So, I *do* understand MSIL's frustration to a degree. I just HATE the way she handled it.

eta: And compared to my SIL/BIL's behavior, CSIL seems like a friggin' dream! :LOL


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Actually a lot of people here on mothering do this. They will not let their mainstream relatives (I use the term mainstream loosely) discipline their children the way they sit fit in their home, nor will they serve food they may eat, or provide entertainment their children may enjoy (like TV). I've also read where the relatives weren't allowed to bring certain kinds of toys to their house as well.

I see such a double standard here.

No double standard, as it was my post. The only thing in your post that applies to me is that I won't allow anybody to hit their child in my house. Other than that, they discipline how they choose, can watch TV (I wouldn't expect people to _provide_ TV if they don't already have one or have cable or whatever, though), bring whatever toys they want. My kids play with toy guns, but they'll be put away when my brother and SIL come over at Christmas, because they don't like them around their kids. If ds1 has friends over, I find out from their parents whether or not they can watch whatever movie ds1 has planned. These people are _guests_.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Geez, that sounds _awful_, monkey's mom!! I wouldn't want to continue vacationing with people like that either.

Do they have any idea why people are no longer going on the vacation? Are you going to have to make up a story every year to get out of it, or will they just forget about it if it doesn't happen a couple of times?


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

But that is why msil DID send the rules - so they could all spend time together and hopefully, cohabitate for 10 days. Msil could have just not invited them again, but she did, so I give her credit for trying to sort it out so they could visit together and maybe even have a good time. By not dealing with the problems and not seeing your relatives again, no one really wins or benefits.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

Well CLEARLY I only read the OP in the other thread.







So obviously there's some backstory about CSIL that I've not read. I have a migraine starting, so that ain't gonna happen right now.

I'll just lurk here on this nice little short thread.







:


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
Nope - MSIL's email also mentioned an adults-only event "at the Hyatt".


Actually, although it is not totally clear from my OP, MSIL did not care if CSIL did not come to the Hyatt dinner. She was hoping that she would, but was not saying that she had to "leave her kids" at home if she is not comfortable leaving them with someone else.

MSIL's is objecting to CSIL's protest of the "adults only event."
She thinks her position is "rediculous" ( that she won't go because her kids can't go, even though they are happy where they are and she can "pop in" on them repeatedly AND the kids do not care AT ALL that they are not with mom, though they wouldn't mind being at the party too AND when CSIL boycotted last year she did not spend the time with her kids, but rather in her room)

Here is my post about it on the other thread. As you can see, MSIL made a subtle difference between the two.
8. Liza and Kellie (two of my sil's 3 nannies!) will be available for sitting for you while Angie will be with James [ Hawaii SIL's baby girl] *We will have two adult only parties while you are here and we expect you to show up and leave the kids upstairs).* We will also go to the Hyatt one night for dinner with adults only. I have planned a fun kids night at home!


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Ah, okay. I read that as CSIL being expected to attend the Hyatt thing, as well. However, you know MSIL and I don't, so I'll take your interpretation.

ETA: I have to admit that I still find the idea of a 10-day family gathering in which three adult only nights are planned to be very bizarre. I'd find that very difficult to adjust to.


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

Quote:

But that is why msil DID send the rules - so they could all spend time together and hopefully, cohabitate for 10 days. Msil could have just not invited them again, but she did, so I give her credit for trying to sort it out so they could visit together and maybe even have a good time. By not dealing with the problems and not seeing your relatives again, no one really wins or benefits.
My thoughts exactly.

Quote:

MSIL even admits she's anal but I don't get the impression that she's rigid about everything from Maya's posts. Cool arts and crafts throughout the house(paper chains with wishes), sandcastle cities, fairy parties, laughing as a baby dumps food on the floor, nursing her 1 yo at dinner, buffet style dinners with food seperated so guests can prepare food as they like it, none of these screams anal retentive freak to me.
Again...looks like everyone has a good time with msil except for CSIL..

Quote:

We do not have the benefit of hearing CSIL's voice in this, so it's easy to say, MSIL all the way, and assume the worst about CSIL. Or alternately, give CSIL the benefit of the doubt in some areas. At this point, a lot of people are making stuff up just because it supports the image they have in their mind of these women.
Also we don't have the benefit of hearing the MSIL's voice in this either...so its easy to say oh my god that email is horrible...msil MUST be a terrible person. Making stuff up? Making what up?


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *limabean*
Geez, that sounds awful, monkey's mom!! I wouldn't want to continue vacationing with people like that either.

Do they have any idea why people are no longer going on the vacation? Are you going to have to make up a story every year to get out of it, or will they just forget about it if it doesn't happen a couple of times?

I think they know we are fed up with their behavior, b/c it comes up during the trip. But, they think we're being ridiculous.

I won't make up a story. I'll say why we aren't going--politely!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *primjillie* 
But that is why msil DID send the rules - so they could all spend time together and hopefully, cohabitate for 10 days. Msil could have just not invited them again, but she did, so I give her credit for trying to sort it out so they could visit together and maybe even have a good time. By not dealing with the problems and not seeing your relatives again, no one really wins or benefits.

Oh, I wouldn't say *no one* wins or benefits!









Again, I think there's are lots of choices betw. sending out an email of "rules" like MSIL did, and not going. I do plan to explain why we aren't going to attend. But, ultimately, this is my husband's family and his call, and he's DONE.

And frankly, trying to insist that people behave a certain way, when that's what they are accustomed to doing day-in-and-day-out, and honestly don't have a clue why you would think watching their kids in the ocean while they drink and chill out is SUCH a big deal....is way more effort than I have to give. I mean, look at how divergent the views on MSIL/CSIL are--people aren't easily convinced of other people's ideas of what constitutes politeness or consideration or what-have-you.

I personally think MSIL did much more damage to the relationship by sending out the rules. And I can about guarantee, that even stating as neutrally and politely as possible why we won't be around BIL/SIL, they are going to be offended and pissed.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

I didn't reply to the other thread, but am totally on csil's side! No way is it ever appropriate to dictate the bedtimes, assigned chores, or food of guests in your home! Saying you will only provide certain food is one thing; saying "you _must_ sit at the table and you _may not_ eat other food" is something else. Asking guests to help out around the house is one thing; _assigning chores_ is something else. Csil may have her flaws but sheesh.


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

I have been reading mothering threads since last winter and I still don't get why is it ok for kids to not be sitting when the eat? I mean do you really let your kids run wild all while eating? I know toddlers won't always want to sit to eat, but why not teach them? Having kids run around with food just creates a huge mess ( I know some of you are ok with this) but also they can easily choke while
running around eating. They can also fall and get their teeth knocked out, and choke. This is a real safety issue while they're young. When they get older its an issue of manners. You are expected to eat at the table like a family. I never had guest's kids who come for dinner and wander around while they eat dinner. If that happened to me I would ask the kid to please sit and eat too like msil. I know I'm going to get alot of we don't force our kid to do anything.....but sit at the table for dinner??? Come on now...


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
I have been reading mothering threads since last winter and I still don't get why is it ok for kids to not be sitting when the eat? I mean do you really let your kids run wild all while eating? I know toddlers won't always want to sit to eat, but why not teach them? Having kids run around with food just creates a huge mess ( I know some of you are ok with this) but also they can easily choke while
running around eating. They can also fall and get their teeth knocked out, and choke. This is a real safety issue while they're young. When they get older its an issue of manners. You are expected to eat at the table like a family. I never had guest's kids who come for dinner and wander around while they eat dinner. If that happened to me I would ask the kid to please sit and eat too like msil. I know I'm going to get alot of we don't force our kid to do anything.....but sit at the table for dinner??? Come on now...









I don't even sit at the table for dinner a lot of the time. We do ask that people of all ages eat while sitting down, to minimize spilling and choking risks, but sitting down can be anywhere--living room, bedroom, porch, wherever. Anyway, there's a big difference between running around with food in your mouth and a host dictating what, when, and where you will eat.


----------



## bri276 (Mar 24, 2005)

I don't support CSIL fully b/c it sounds like she has some issues...

but no one, MSIL included, has the right to tell me I am going to leave my child with a sitter if I don't want to. Now, to say children are not allowed is fine. But don't you dare tell me I'm not allowed to stay whereever my child is. That, my friends, is unconstitutional. Pursuit of happiness and all that.

personally, I'm a leader, not a follower. I don't do well with authority especially when that person is in fact, not a true authority figure. I'd simply pay my own way, stay somewhere else, or not go at all.

eta; ok so she's not forceably separating parents/children. well, that's better. BUT, I have a terrible memory of staying with my cousin as a 6 yr old. My uncle demanded that we pick up all crumbs off the floor on hands and knees when dinner was done. I had not been exposed to that type of dictatorship until then and it felt AWFUL. there is something quite wrong about being ordered to perform chores by one's relatives rather than parents. I just have a problem with the whole thing. Anyone with half a clue about etiquette realizes it's the faux pas of the century.


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

Ok well if you don't sit at the dinner table and eat I guess I can't really expect your kid to... We do eat dinner on the porch sometimes, but theres chairs and table and everyone sits, we don't eat in the bedrooms, we can eat in the living room but not dinner since I don't want spaghetti sauce spilled on my couch.

However when you're at someone else's house and everyone is expected to be seated at the dinner table for dinner....how can you let your kid not do that. Its one thing not to do it at home, its another thing to no do it at someone else's house that expects the kids and adults to be seated at the table.

Whats the big problem with the host setting a dinner time? Its dinner time when dinner is ready at someone else's house. At home you can eat dinner whenever you want...but not at someone else's house. The host never dictated "what" you will eat...She sets out food...you choose "what" you eat...If you refuse to eat what she set out thats your problem, not the host's. I believe the host can say "we will eat seated at the dinner table" Is that the most ludicrious thing you ever heard of? No. Why should her house get messed up for your kid.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
Ok well if you don't sit at the dinner table and eat I guess I can't really expect your kid to... We do eat dinner on the porch sometimes, but theres chairs and table and everyone sits, we don't eat in the bedrooms, we can eat in the living room but not dinner since I don't want spaghetti sauce spilled on my couch.

However when you're at someone else's house and everyone is expected to be seated at the dinner table for dinner....how can you let your kid not do that. Its one thing not to do it at home, its another thing to no do it at someone else's house that expects the kids and adults to be seated at the table.

Whats the big problem with the host setting a dinner time? Its dinner time when dinner is ready at someone else's house. At home you can eat dinner whenever you want...but not at someone else's house. The host never dictated "what" you will eat...She sets out food...you choose "what" you eat...If you refuse to eat what she set out thats your problem, not the host's. I believe the host can say "we will eat seated at the dinner table" Is that the most ludicrious thing you ever heard of? No. Why should her house get messed up for your kid.

Saying "this is when dinner is, this is what we're serving, partake or don't," is fine. Saying "you must attend dinner and you may not eat your own food" is not. That was what bothered me more than anything else, the "no different food" rule. Well, and the bedtimes. And the assigned chores.


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

I don't know if you missed it or not but it CLEARLY states that you don't have to partake in it...you can go out to eat with your family. You also have the choice to partake in the vacation or not...you can choose to NOT go.


----------



## mamajama (Oct 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *becoming* 
Ew, this is the first time I read the OP. I don't think I'm necessarily on CSIL's side, but I am CERTAINLY not on MSIL's side. Yeesh. She sounds like a real *joy* to be around. I wouldn't go on that trip with kids (or without kids, for that matter) for all the money in the world. Something that rigidly scheduled just does not sound fun to me, and I would not have someone else forcing me to leave my children with nannies or make them go to bed at a certain time. But then, I have a problem with authority figures.









I coulda totally written this post.


----------



## sphinxie (Feb 28, 2006)

I intensely think they're both wrong, and it's ridiculous how annoying I find them considering that I will never, ever meet these people









I can pick sides for about two seconds, but then I think about the other person and get all annoyed and switch sides again. So I really can't choose!


----------



## Viewfinder (Sep 2, 2005)

I'll pick crunchy, even though she reminds me of one of my SILs who ruined too many family things to count, because Hawaii SIL must have a major screw loose to have THREE nannies and NO HOUSEKEEPER to clean the kitchen. WTF? That's some nerve, man, to have three nannies on the payroll and no kitchen help at a monster function like that. It might be "fun" for the kids to do the after dinner clean up together (yeah, right), but, I think they'd like to just relax and play around like everybody else.

Still, I'd freaking GO to this shindig no matter how much I didn't like the rules. There's a HAWAIIAN BEACH out the back door!! Hello?? Ten days in one of THE most beautiful places in the world, free. My kids get to play for 10 days with their cousins. MSIL can serve me eyeballs and cardboard and tell everybody I'm having an affair with a lizard, and I could care less when I'm on that beach, soaking up the rays, lulled into blissful relaxation by those waves crashing, and, hey, is that one of those, whachacallit? CABANA BOYS? uh, huh, come on over here and rub some oil on me, would you? Who do YOU vote for, Cabana Boy? (He picks the rich one, wouldn't you know? But he does NOT get a vote.)


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Viewfinder* 
I'll pick crunchy, even though she reminds me of one of my SILs who ruined too many family things to count, because Hawaii SIL must have a major screw loose to have THREE nannies and NO HOUSEKEEPER to clean the kitchen. WTF? That's some nerve, man, to have three nannies on the payroll and no kitchen help at a monster function like that. It might be "fun" for the kids to do the after dinner clean up together (yeah, right), but, I think they'd like to just relax and play around like everybody else.

Still, I'd freaking GO to this shindig no matter how much I didn't like the rules. There's a HAWAIIAN BEACH out the back door!! Hello?? Ten days in one of THE most beautiful places in the world, free. My kids get to play for 10 days with their cousins. MSIL can serve me eyeballs and cardboard and tell everybody I'm having an affair with a lizard, and I could care less when I'm on that beach, soaking up the rays, lulled into blissful relaxation by those waves crashing, and, hey, is that one of those, whachacallit? CABANA BOYS? uh, huh, come on over here and rub some oil on me, would you? Who do YOU vote for, Cabana Boy? (He picks the rich one, wouldn't you know? But he does NOT get a vote.)

First of all I think you win the award for: FUNNIEST POST EVER




















































































...and bty, why in the world woud she say you are having an affair with a lizzard, we all know it's the Cabana Boy









Second, just FYI HSIL absoultely has a housekeeper, two actually (one is there in the morning, the other arrives before dinner and helps out for weekend parties). But that does not mean she thinks that kids (or adults) should not help around the house. Her children (except the baby) are expected to set the table at every meal and to clean up (dishes rinsed and in dishwasher, tables wiped down). The housekeeper does alot of work, cleaning up kitchen etc... and does not need more.


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

I would have to say MSIL, although I think they both sound like a piece of work. The last straw for me was CSIL hinting around for free upgraded airline tickets.

It seems pretty straightforward to me. If you don't like the rules in somebody else's house (and I wouldn't like the rules), don't go.

My ILs have a nice vacation house in a gorgeous location a couple of hours away from us. MIL has some house rules that I'm not subjecting myself or my kids to. So we just decline the invitations. We have politely told her why. No big deal.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *primjillie* 
I do have a question. A lot of people have mentioned that no one tells their kids what to do - when to go to bed, what to eat, how long to sit, etc. But what happens when most of the people you are with find this very offensive and it is infringing on their good time. What if the kids are a lot more disruptive than you think (I think most parents find their own children more entertaining and less trouble than others think of them)?

this is long and off topic









We don't have rules about bedtimes and such. When we visit family (or family is staying with us) it really depends on the whole situation. For example, my parents go to bed at 10. It would be rude for anyone, even grown ups, to be up past that time. So I take the kids upstairs, read to them, and we ALL go to bed. It's no big deal. When we visit DH's family it is different because there is a 7 hour time change and my kids never fully adjust. We go to bed at a reasonable time (kids are exhausted the whole time we are there) but often wake up at 3 or 4 in the morning, really hungry. So I take them to the kitchen, get them something to eat, and then we try to get back to sleep. We are quiet, but I also meet my kids' needs.

Our families' gatherings are about spending time together. The real reason my parents and my DH's family love for us to come is so they can see the kids. It would be very odd in either situation to insist that the kids are in bed before everyone else. Obviously, other families are different.

If my kids were behaving in an offensive way, I would remove them from the situation and discuss it with them. When they were young, they sometimes needed positive time outs (I stayed with them) during family visits because they just got overwelmed, over tired, and stressed out. It's been years since that has come up, though. The time of day wouldn't matter in such a situation, though. If a child is behaving in an offensive way, it doesn't matter if it is 10 in the morning or 10 at night, it needs to be dealt with in a constructive way.

We have regular family meals so my kids are used to sitting down to a table and eating and talking. Because meals with extended family tend to last longer, the kids usually get up first and go do kid things. This has never been a big deal to anyone in my extended family, as all the kids seem to be about the same in this respect. I don't think this is about what kids are forced or not forced to do, just what they are used to.


----------



## LittleMonkeyMom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
*Again...looks like everyone has a good time with msil except for CSIL..

*

Also we don't have the benefit of hearing the MSIL's voice in this either...so its easy to say oh my god that email is horrible...msil MUST be a terrible person. Making stuff up? Making what up?

(my bold/emphasis added)

So you do not consider the e-mails that MSIL wrote to be her voice? If it's not her's then whose is it? As far as making stuff up, I bolded one example in your own post. You don't know if that is true at all. Maybe others had problems with MSIL but we don't know about it. I also don't think it's accurate to say that CSIL didn't have a good time either. There were conflicts, but Maya also said that everyone in the family does get along. It has been implied in several posts that CSIL spends her time pouting and sulking, when Maya has written that is not the case. She stayed upstairs in protest once.

If you would like another example, let's talk about the issue of eating at the table. The point is not consuming a meal at the table as you present it. The issue is _not allowing people to be excused from the table until everyone is finished eating_. That is not the same thing as asking food to be eaten at the table. Not the same thing at all.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bri276* 
I have a terrible memory of staying with my cousin as a 6 yr old. My uncle demanded that we pick up all crumbs off the floor on hands and knees when dinner was done. I had not been exposed to that type of dictatorship until then and it felt AWFUL. there is something quite wrong about being ordered to perform chores by one's relatives rather than parents.

Do you think that MSIL expecting her nieces to put their dishes in the dishwasher after dinner is equivalent to picking up crumbs on their hands and knees?

There is an abusive way to do anything -- it doesn't mean that the thing itself is inherently abusive.

And I don't understand your last sentence -- are you saying that if your parents, rather than your uncle, had told you to pick up crumbs on your hands and knees you wouldn't have thought it was awful?


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

well then isn't the follow up posts that maya wrote csil's voice... it is...its just written out by maya

Quote:

But last year she asked for the TV to get shut off when her dd's wanted to come in the room to get stuff (and what is mostly on is Disney Channel stuff like Drake and Josh).

As for the movies, when the girls were going to watch the DVD of Legally Blonde, she said something like "Don't tell my girls that you are going to be watching a movie tonight, I dont' let them watch stuff like that. I will just take them out.")

Quote:

As for the chores thing, last year my nieces would say to their mom CSCIL "do we HAVE to set the table" and she'd say "not unless you want to"

Quote:

Again CSIL took one look and said "I can't believe your kids eat this stuff" and plopped down the big ol jar of pb and j.
I don't really feel like digging but there are more of "csil's voice" within the 800 posts

when I said about csil having problems with msil...I meant in a major way...major enough to write a list of house rules for her. I don't mean like little things like oh msil was annoyed that so and so spilled a glass of red wine on her carpet (this is just a random example i made up)

I always thought the not being excused from the table until everyone is done is good manners.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

No, it's a second hand account.

The email from MSIL was a first hand account--it was *her* speaking.


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

Linda ~ thanks for answering my post! You sound like a thoughtful, respectful guest. I was just wondering about those who didn't require their children in their rooms at a general time or didn't require them to sit at dinners. What if this interfered with the host's family and the other guests. Would this bother the person? Would they just expect everyone else to stifle their feelings because the person felt as their children had every right to do what they wanted and that no one (other than the parent) could tell them what to do?


----------



## whateverdidiwants (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe* 
they are both behaving badly, but, in this instance, msil is behaving worse.

This.


----------



## LittleMonkeyMom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
well then isn't the follow up posts that maya wrote csil's voice... it is...its just written out by maya

What monkey's mom said.







What you are describing as being CSIL's voice is Maya's interpretation of CSIL's words and actions, colored by Maya's own perspective, but it is not CSIL's authentic voice.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
I always thought the not being excused from the table until everyone is done is good manners.

Not excusing one's self from the table before the meal is finished is good manners, I agree with you. Forbidding people to ask to be excused is very rude, IMO, and that is what MSIL effectively told people in her e-mail.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya's SIL's e-mail*
5. Everyone is expected to SIT at every meal until all are done.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LittleMonkeyMom* 
What monkey's mom said.







What you are describing as being CSIL's voice is Maya's interpretation of CSIL's words and actions, colored by Maya's own perspective, but it is not CSIL's authentic voice.

That is absolutely true. I am remembering to the best of my recollection but I am sure my memories are colored by my own perspective!


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
That's funny. I think I'm more mainstream than crunchy, and I side with CSIL (to the extent that I side with either of them...which isn't much, actually). I don't care if MSIL is rich. I don't even care that much about rules, as such. I just don't like someone sending out an email that, imo, says "I don't like the way you parent, and I can't stop you at home, but you will parent the way I want you to while you're in my house".

Not at all trying to be in the least bit rude but you truly think you are mainstream? In the other thread you said you don't have *any* exposure to *any* media. You don't use *any* punishments at all. You use a totally non-coercive parenting approach. You don't want any free time from your kids and wouldn't find a child-free event to be something you would want to attend. You extend BF, cloth diaper, etc etc etc where is the mainstreamness?









I agree with those who say each of us seem to be putting a lot of our expectations of crunchy vs mainstream. We're told one SIL is the mainstream one and one is crunchy and work from there with some of us changing our minds as it seems that maybe CSIL isn't so crunchy and MSIL isn't so mainstream or perhaps you read things the other way and it confirms your initial perspective. I think that is what is making it such a fascinating discussion well that and it's not really a situation many of us have to worry about.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Brigianna* 
I didn't reply to the other thread, but am totally on csil's side! No way is it ever appropriate to dictate the bedtimes, assigned chores, or food of guests in your home! Saying you will only provide certain food is one thing; saying "you _must_ sit at the table and you _may not_ eat other food" is something else. Asking guests to help out around the house is one thing; _assigning chores_ is something else. Csil may have her flaws but sheesh.









: I voted csil, just because I would be very upset if those rules were given to me!
Of course, I'd try hard to be considerate of others' good time too, and wouldn't expect THEM to go out of their way to accompdate me.

I'd be ok with a rule "stay seated until you are done eating" but definitely not "stay seated until EVERYONE is done eating!"


----------



## CtMom (Jan 14, 2003)

I am on MSIL's "side". I might feel differently if there were infants/toddlers, but these are school-age children. Her turf, her rules. Perhaps CIL's children will return home after the vacation with a realization of how different families operate.

And since the "adults" party was in the same house, I don't see a big deal with excluding children. There is no constitutional right for a child to be invited to a party. I guess I see it as the same as any adults only activity (certain weddings/funerals, skydiving, nightclubs). Sometimes I think kids enjoy being with kids (without adults) and adults enjoy being with adults (without kids). Why is that wrong? Again from what Maya said, CIL's childrenn didn't have a problem with being excluded; it was CIL who had the problem. If her children didn't mind hanging with their cousins, why was CIL pushing to have them down with the adults?

As far as bedtimes, I am afraid I assumed that CIL was allowing her kids to be up while other children were in bed and they were disruptive while others were trying to sleep/rest. I feel that CIL's childrens rights end when they impact negatively on others. Again, is that wrong?

It all comes down to treating others with respect, particularly if they are your host. Implicit in accepting the hospitality is a realization that you are in someone else's home with their own customs and preferences.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wasabi* 
Not at all trying to be in the least bit rude but you truly think you are mainstream? In the other thread you said you don't have *any* exposure to *any* media. You don't use *any* punishments at all. You use a totally non-coercive parenting approach. You don't want any free time from your kids and wouldn't find a child-free event to be something you would want to attend. You extend BF, cloth diaper, etc etc etc where is the mainstreamness?









Okay - I do read my local paper sometimes, and read magazines in waiting rooms...plus the omnipresent tabloid headlines at the grocery store. But, yeah - basically media-free (there's always the internet...I seem to hear about a lot of things, despite not watching tv or reading papers).

I don't really use punishments, per se, but I'm not totally non-coercive, either. My home is definitely run with the understanding that dh and I are "boss". There are some expectations (helping with cleanup, for one) and there are some consequences for things.

I never really thought of wanting my kids around all the time as something "crunchy". I've met mainstream moms who want their kids around all the time, and crunchy moms who don't...

Anyway...guess I'm just saying that I'm not really crunchy. I shop at big box stores, don't eat much organic, etc. I do several things that probably aren't very environmentally friendly, etc. I'm very AP, but not very NFL, and have never thought of myself as crunchy. (My sister, on the other hand, says I'll be eating "seaweed sandwiches" soon, so I guess it's a matter of perspective.)


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
I have been reading mothering threads since last winter and I still don't get why is it ok for kids to not be sitting when the eat? I mean do you really let your kids run wild all while eating? I know toddlers won't always want to sit to eat, but why not teach them? Having kids run around with food just creates a huge mess ( I know some of you are ok with this) but also they can easily choke while
running around eating.

I don't make my kids sit at the table for dinner. They do have to eat in either the kitchen or the dining area (absolutely no food upstairs or in the living room, with the exception of a big bowl of popcorn if we're watching a movie). They're also not allowed to wander around while actually eating. However, if dd takes a few bites, then wants to get up and walk around, she can do that. When she wants to eat some more, she comes back to the table. As she's getting older, she's realizing that everyone else sits at the table until the meal is finished, and she's more inclined to stay at the table to converse, etc. I simply see no point in making an active 3-year-old sit at the table.


----------



## vloky (Apr 29, 2006)

you know it seems csil is the picky eater and not her chilldren if she only ever makes 3 meals. maybe her children would like new things but SHE gives them no choice and they don't want to make her think they are going mainstream on her or something of that sort.







:


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

I only read the first page and then a few pages here and there(talk about a fast growing thread!)but I'd say Crunchy sil.


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
That about says it for me. I don't think I'd go, if I were CSIL...but I'm aware that if I were actually in the situation, and dh wanted to see his brothers and wanted me to be there, I may change my mind. It wouldn't be a vacation, though...I'd spend 10 days feeling trapped.

I dunno, I'm sure you could find a way to keep yourself occupied for 10 days in Hawaii while spending minimal time at SIL's... I know I could


----------



## Britishmum (Dec 25, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I just don't like someone sending out an email that, imo, says "I don't like the way you parent, and I can't stop you at home, but you will parent the way I want you to while you're in my house".

ITA.

I think people have got sidelined with what they personally think of the rules and the way that both SILs raise their kids, and have missed the point.

Which, imo, is, that nobody has the right to dictate to another family that they should go against their personal values in the way that they treat their children while at a family gathering, no matter who pays for the tickets and who hosts.

I said it on the monster thread, and I'll say it again. IMO that is not the way that loving families interact. If you truly want family harmony, you embrace on another's differences and love all the children. If that means feeding them pb and j every meal, then you do so with a loving heart. If that means having children stay with their mother at an 'adult' event, you welcome them with a loving heart.

I cannot fathom how anyone can support any aunt who does not welcome her nieces and nephews with tolerance and good humour, even if their mother parents them with different values to one's own.

As for the idea that as it is hosted at the MSIL"s home, she can call the shots, that smacks of control and power play imo. And many posters seem to miss the point that CSIL cannot just stay home - her husband expects her to go and she has little choice. If my dh told me that I had to go to visit his family and 'suck it up' because they were paying and because he wanted to visit with his brother, I'd be furious.

I could not look my child in the face if I'd been forced to treat him/her in a way that contradicted our principles, just because my in-laws were temporarily in a position of control.

The basic principle is the same no matter what CSIL's personal child-raising philosophies are. I don't get it that so many people miss that point.

For example, if the OP had said that MSIL had told everyone in an email that nobody was to nurse in the room with others, or cosleep, or that they must all eat non-organic food, or that children must be left to CIO at 6pm, everyone woudl be up in arms. It is equally wrong, whatever the 'rules'.

I just couldnt fathom having to stay with someone who thought that they could dictate how I treated my own children during my stay. Actually, I've been in that position once, and had to brave some pretty emphatic people while sticking to my guns. I will not treat my children disrespectfully, even if the whole army of ILs are firing big guns at me. No way, no how.

Similarly, I would never try to dictate to my ILs how they should treat their children if I were hosting for them. Although maybe I'd have a problem if they were spanking.... I havent had to deal with that, but for me, that would be an exception to the 'no interference' rule.

I love Hawaii, but I'd have to be starving to accept anything from someone who thought that she could set rules for my kids in this way. I'd feel the same even if I agreed with her rules. Not her place, and totally ugh, ugh, ugh.


----------



## NocturnalDaze (Jul 3, 2002)

I'm on CSIL's side.

Britishmum, that was beautifully put


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Anyone know why the other thread got closed???


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Thank you Britishmum!! Beautifully said!







:


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CryPixie83* 
I dunno, I'm sure you could find a way to keep yourself occupied for 10 days in Hawaii while spending minimal time at SIL's... I know I could









I don't think staying occupied would be the problem -- MSIL has every minute planned.







:


----------



## Joannarachel (Dec 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Viewfinder* 
I'll pick crunchy, even though she reminds me of one of my SILs who ruined too many family things to count, because Hawaii SIL must have a major screw loose to have THREE nannies and NO HOUSEKEEPER to clean the kitchen. WTF? That's some nerve, man, to have three nannies on the payroll and no kitchen help at a monster function like that. It might be "fun" for the kids to do the after dinner clean up together (yeah, right), but, I think they'd like to just relax and play around like everybody else.

Still, I'd freaking GO to this shindig no matter how much I didn't like the rules. There's a HAWAIIAN BEACH out the back door!! Hello?? Ten days in one of THE most beautiful places in the world, free. My kids get to play for 10 days with their cousins. MSIL can serve me eyeballs and cardboard and tell everybody I'm having an affair with a lizard, and I could care less when I'm on that beach, soaking up the rays, lulled into blissful relaxation by those waves crashing, and, hey, is that one of those, whachacallit? CABANA BOYS? uh, huh, come on over here and rub some oil on me, would you? Who do YOU vote for, Cabana Boy? (He picks the rich one, wouldn't you know? But he does NOT get a vote.)


*gasping....can't.....breathe*








:














:














:


----------



## NocturnalDaze (Jul 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Anyone know why the other thread got closed???


Probably because of the rudeness and utter lack of respect some posters have shown regarding parenting styles that are different from their own.


----------



## NaomiLorelie (Sep 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NocturnalDaze* 
Probably because of the rudeness and utter lack of respect some posters have shown regarding parenting styles that are different from their own.

















:


----------



## TinkerBelle (Jun 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomiLorelie* 







:


Yep. From BOTH sides of the issue.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CryPixie83* 
I dunno, I'm sure you could find a way to keep yourself occupied for 10 days in Hawaii while spending minimal time at SIL's... I know I could









I think most people could, but I have no interest in Hawaii, and in that circumstance, I'd only be going because of the family aspect in the first place. (I'm not claiming CSIL feels the same way, though.)


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TinkerBelle* 
Yep. From BOTH sides of the issue.

I only saw disrespect on one side (and then the disrepected side trying to defend itself).

But I hate that it was closed for review (which means it won't be reopened - "under-review" threads never are).


----------



## NaomiLorelie (Sep 2, 2004)

I know. I wanted to see it reach 1000.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomiLorelie* 
I know. I wanted to see it reach 1000.

and even if it had died, someone would have bumped it around Christmas. After all this stress, I'll bet it is uneventful. Everyone smiling and nodding while politely talking smack BEHIND the offending sil's back (which is what families do, right)


----------



## MillingNome (Nov 18, 2005)

Brittishmum:

a-wee-o a-wee-o a-wee-o










Ahem to that.


----------



## zinemama (Feb 2, 2002)

Much as I detest flying with my kids, I'd be on that plane in a second if I was invited to MSIL's house. I'm with her all the way. The food, the fairy parties, the inventive games...the food!

CSIL reminds me of a lot of the "more-ap-than-thou" types I've encountered (uh, only here, actually), the ones who imply that anyone who wants time away from their kids is "unattached" or that those who expect basic politeness from them is "stifling."


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Britishmum* 
ITA.

I think people have got sidelined with what they personally think of the rules and the way that both SILs raise their kids, and have missed the point.

Which, imo, is, that nobody has the right to dictate to another family that they should go against their personal values in the way that they treat their children while at a family gathering, no matter who pays for the tickets and who hosts.


----------



## Emzachsmama (Apr 30, 2004)

I'm on MSIL's side on this one.


----------



## NaomiLorelie (Sep 2, 2004)

Uh-oh, there was a large earthquake in Hawaii. Hopefully MSIL,BIL and kids are okay.


----------



## PajamaMama (Dec 18, 2004)

I'm on MSIL's side here. It isn't like CSIL is being asked to seperate from an infant. Her kids are 7,8 and 10 iirc. She isn't even being asked to be in a different house. It sounds like the kids would have a blast with their cousins and there would be competent adult supervision for them.

If I got an email like that I might roll my eyes and complain to my good friends about it, but I would still go. 'Different rules for different families', ;When in Rome', etc.


----------



## weeirishlass (Mar 30, 2006)

I'm just such a rebel, that I'd do the stuff CSIL does JUST to piss off MSIL! I hate people telling me what I will and will not do. CSIL takes it kind of far, but I can't entirely blame her.


----------



## chinaKat (Aug 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Anyone know why the other thread got closed???

So that we could all get our lives back, I imagine.


----------



## WNB (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomiLorelie* 
Uh-oh, there was a large earthquake in Hawaii. Hopefully MSIL,BIL and kids are okay.

Yeah, no tsunami so the beach house should be fine







Our house shook a while, but no damage. If she lives on the big island in Kona, MSIL might be worse off.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WNB* 
Yeah, no tsunami so the beach house should be fine







Our house shook a while, but no damage. If she lives on the big island in Kona, MSIL might be worse off.

I am gonna be vague about location, but we got an e-mail saying everyone and everything at MSIL's is fine (Thank G-d)!


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chinaKat* 
So that we could all get our lives back, I imagine.









yes yes







. It was something of a relief, wasn't it.


----------



## l_olive (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
I am gonna be vague about location, but we got an e-mail saying everyone and everything at MSIL's is fine (Thank G-d)!

I was just checking to see if you'd posted anything. Thanks for letting us know. When I heard about the earthquake, your SIL's family was the first thing I thought of!









--Olive


----------



## Scarlet (Mar 18, 2003)

I can see why MSIL felt she had to put her foot down.

Perhaps the sitting at the dinner table thing is because CSIL's kids were running around bumping chairs or turning on a playstation etc. while MSIL is trying to get her kids to eat.

Perhaps the be in the rooms by 10 thing is because it is stressful and plain hard work having 20 people there for 10 days, especially if she is organising a pile of fun things for everyone to do and by 10 p.m she wants to be able to come downstairs and have a quiet glass of wine.

It is really hard work getting your kids to help out, sit up nicely, be appreciative of what someone has made for you etc. if their cousins are allowed to slope off and not help or leave the table and play. Perhaps MSIL has enough on her plate without all that.

Perhaps the snide bit about expecting CSIL to be at the party is because it is hard to enjoy a party you are hosting if someone is sitting sulking in their room.

In fact, it seems that is really what MSIL is (rudely) saying. I am spending a huge amount of my time and energy planning this and if you don't like what we have planned or how our house is run then don't just use me as a freebie holiday in Hawaii.


----------



## Laggie (Nov 2, 2005)

Darn, I missed all the controversy...

But I can still post here, heh heh heh. And I voted for CSIL.

I think that MSIL's letter is horrible. I grew up with the idea that when one has GUESTS, one should treat them politely and make accomodations for them. I can't imagine inviting somebody to my house and sending them a list of rules! She should be ashamed.

It does sound like CSIL has behaved rudely as well, but still I think I'd side with her, because MSIL's letter is, imho, way off the charts. My mouth is still hanging open after reading it! I don't even really care WHAT the issues are, if the situation was reversed and CSIL had written the same kind of letter I'd say she was wrong, too...

What is wrong with people that they can't pick up the phone and have a reasonable discussion instead of resorting to crap like this?

Sheesh.


----------



## siobhang (Oct 23, 2005)

MSIL- her house, her rules. She could demand that the entire family dress up as chickens in return for plane tickets and free lodging - and if the family agrees, they'd better be wearing feathers...

That said, I personally would not agree to the rules and therefore not agree to attend (though it is Hawaii...)

And I think the BROTHERS should be the ones to duke it out, not making their wives do the dirty work.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Well, I have to say that when I initially read the email from MSIL, I was aghast at such effrontery toward someone who was going to be a guest in her house. Then I read what had happened the year before and I understood the email, for the most part.

I mean, yes, it is true that any normal person would call up the guest and say, "Let's agree upon a bedtime for the kids". But of course, if you have a guest who is just going to tell you that she refuses to establish a bedtime for her children while she is in your house and you want a child-free evening, then I think the only thing to do is to make the rule and send it out in advance.

And I never had any problem with the food rule to begin with. To me it is self-evident that you eat what is on the table when you are a guest, unless you are an infant.

I think MSIL worded the part about the adults-only party badly and I would have said that there will be an adults-only party on such and such a night, children will be taken care of by such and such a person, and left it at that.

The television rule is obnoxious only because I think when you can guests you have turn off the television and, for example, get the cousins to play a board game with one another, or at least say "we plan to watch this particular show on this particular night".

So all in all, I am on MSIL's side. Personally, I think that CSIL should stay at home by herself and let her children go to Hawaii with their father. It sounds like SHE is the only one who is the problem. I bet the children would even eat what was on the table if she was not there.


----------



## SweetAfton (Sep 23, 2006)

MSIL has pretty much twice as many votes as CSIL. And this is a pretty crunchy board. I bet on a mainstream board votes for MSIL would be off the charts!


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SweetAfton* 
MSIL has pretty much twice as many votes as CSIL. And this is a pretty crunchy board. I bet on a mainstream board votes for MSIL would be off the charts!

I personally don't see this as a crunchy vs. mainstream issue (despite "CSIL" and "MSIL"). I think the "sides" mostly based on one (or both) of two things.

The first is whether we, as outsiders, see this as a hospitality issue or a "telling someone how to parent" issue. I see it as the latter, so my sympathies there are with CSIL.

The second is whether we, as individuals, are more focussed on the behaviour of guests or of hosts. (That's probably not the best way to put it, but I'm not thinking clearly these days.) From my personal perspective, I will bend over backwards and make many allowances for anybody who is an invited guest in my home. If I have such an issue with someone that I can't/won't accommodate them, then I simply won't invite them at all. For _me_, being a good hostess trumps being a good guest. (This is probably also coloured by my tendency to avoid social situations in which I'm a guest in someone else's home.) So, again, I'm with CSIL.

Mind you, I still think they're both acting badly...

ETA: I just thought of another aspect...whether we see this as a "hostess/guest" thing at all. I don't think of family visiting me as having guests in the first place. Things like the peanut butter, even if they would bother me in a more formal situation, wouldn't even cross my mind if it was family that were visiting me.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I personally don't see this as a crunchy vs. mainstream issue (despite "CSIL" and "MSIL"). I think the "sides" mostly based on one (or both) of two things.

The first is whether we, as outsiders, see this as a hospitality issue or a "telling someone how to parent" issue. I see it as the latter, so my sympathies there are with CSIL.

The second is whether we, as individuals, are more focussed on the behaviour of guests or of hosts. (That's probably not the best way to put it, but I'm not thinking clearly these days.) From my personal perspective, I will bend over backwards and make many allowances for anybody who is an invited guest in my home. If I have such an issue with someone that I can't/won't accommodate them, then I simply won't invite them at all. For _me_, being a good hostess trumps being a good guest. (This is probably also coloured by my tendency to avoid social situations in which I'm a guest in someone else's home.) So, again, I'm with CSIL.

Mind you, I still think they're both acting badly...

ETA: I just thought of another aspect...whether we see this as a "hostess/guest" thing at all. I don't think of family visiting me as having guests in the first place. Things like the peanut butter, even if they would bother me in a more formal situation, wouldn't even cross my mind if it was family that were visiting me.

This post is so right on. If this discussion took place on a mainstream parenting board of a bunch of southerners (a region that has cultivated the ideal of "hosts" and "hospitality"), I imagine the votes would run the opposite direction. For me, msil's breach of manners was worse than csils'. As a host, you can invote and not invite certain people (though this doesn't apply to family except in extreme situations - and csil's rude behavior doesn't rise to that level), but you can't make your guests do and not do things just because it is your house. To do so (at least overtly) is beyond rude and really violates hospitality in ways that the ungraciousness and impertinence and lack of consideration of guests do not

On a separate note, I am also bothered by the fact that the e-mail as an attack of csil (and I think that it was sent heedlessly when msil was mad about the tickets shows that, to a small degree at least, the e-mail was meant to hurt). I would feel that way if csil rather than msil sent the e-mail.

Crunchy v. mainstream has nothing to do with it for me - what is the role of a host and who acted badly with malicuousness (as opposed to who acted badly without maliciousess) are the issues for me.


----------

