# Update on Hawaii Trip



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

I know a lot of people have asked how things went on my trip to Hawaii and the issues with my two sisters in law. I am posting it here, the site of the original thread. It was, all in all, a great trip. I am not sure if anyone is really intersted in all of these detail but here it is:

CSIL (Crunchy AP SIL) came in a not great mood. Her DH was the one who insisted that they come and follow the rules about bedtimes, mealtimes etc...
Her mood did improve over time as the beauty of the place and her dd's clear happiness with being with their cousins was clear.

In any event on the main "issues" here is how it went down.

*Bedtimes:* This reallly wasn't the biggest issue as all that MSIL (mainstream Hawaii home owning sister-in-law) asked was that all children be in their rooms at certain times. CSIL's kids did not have to go to bed at a certain time. They could just stay in their rooms reading or playing or talking to their moms. They did and it was not an issue.

*Chores* CSIL said she and DH had talked with the girls about this and told them that they have to folow the house rules which meant having chores like setting the table or cleaning the plates from the table. All of the kids did this. When MSIL told one of CSIL's dd's to pick up some stickers, she at first tried to explan that she had not been using them and MSIL was like "that does not matter, you are here, please pick them up." DN looked at her mom but her dad then interjected "DD you know we need to follow Aunties house rules"

*Media* CSIL and CBIL must have worked this out at home, as they let their girls watch TV and movies with the others. My girls couldn't believe that their cousins had never seen Hannah Montana or Drake and Josh and we did have some private discussions about why.

*Meals*: The rules involved everyone sitting at the table til all were done and no bringing other foods (that is to say the ubiquitous peanut butter to the dinnner table). This definitely caused tension the first full night there. MSIL had made homemade pizzas and CSIL's middle dd burst into tears when it was put on the table with a "I don't like that Kind of pizza." (I think she had been happy when she heard we were having pizza and then suprised when it was not what she expected)

MSIL was like "well DN I am not sure why you think that when you haven't even tried it. If you don't like it, after you have tried it, you can eat something else on the table. (there was bread with some dipping sauces...garlic, tomato and goat cheese on the side) and salads. CSIL said "Rembember what we talked about, honey?" and DN was like "I can have peanut butter in your room after dinner" and CSIL was like "Of course" MSIL rolled her eyes, but went on.

Everyone but DN age 8 ate and loved the pizza. DN age 8's sisters even tried to get her to try the pizza but she refused.

The next day MSIL had announced that we would be going out to dinner that night at a Japanese Steak House/Sushi Bar. No one "had" to come. At first none of CSIL's kids wanted to go and they were going to stay home. However, when they started to hear what would be involved...Chef cooking at table throwing knives in air etc....They didn't want to stay behind.

MSIL said when CSIL told her that all would be joining us that she should be aware that we would probably be there for close to 2 hours as they would order sushi first and that MSIL's dh had ordered a group menu and that the only choices were fillet, shrimp or lobster. I guess CSIL told her kids this and there was some indecision but finally they decided they did not want to miss out.

Things started out tense when they took drink orders and CSIL was not thrilled that we all let the kids get sodas and these Japanese Bubble juices. She doesn't like her kids to have this but relented.

When the sushi course came MSIL's and my kids dug into the california rolls and the cucumber rolls. CSIL's kids looked appalled and asked my middle dd how she could eat raw fish. My dd explained that they were mistaken in thinking that raw fish was involved in the kids sushi...only the adults were eating the raw tuna. After a round of "gross" directed at us eating the delicious tuna maki, we all moved on. However, it was clear that CSIL's kids were getting increasing hungry ( I think that CSIL had planned to feed them a snack before we left, but she was running behind from our day at the beach and did not get a chance.)

By the time the main act started with the chef and the knives my dn were starving. Somehow with all of the excitement with the flying shrimp and the hunger dn's ate their first shrimp and two of them pronouced it "good". MSIL gave me a smug little smile. DN's went on to eat rice and two of them ate the steak.

That night at home MSIL said to me, "this just proves that if you don't give them peanut butter at every meal....." CSIL said nothing including not thanking MSBIL for the very expensive meal....I think he was a little pissed, though his brother later said something (he had stayed at home because his allergies were bothering him).

As the week wore on my two older dn's did get a little more willing to try some of the stuff on the table as I think they got sick of peanut butter.
Mostly the meals were fun. We played some fun games at the meals including "Apples to Apples" which everyone really liked.

*THE Party*. This was our last night there and everyone was kind of exhausted. As you may recall, MSIL's rule was that the kids could not come and the adults were expected to. The party was at their hosue and the kids were upstairs where sitters were available. The kids went off with the sitters right when they got there. The sitters were some local girls who were in their late teens (the regular nanny was with MSIL's littlest one). The sitters brought craft projets and my teen and MSIL's teen spent the evening painting their nails and experimenting with eye liner.

ONce the party started, MSIL asked CSIL's dh where CSIL was. He said that he would get her. She came down to the party at some point not looking thrilled, but her dh's hand was on her waist and she clearly was going along to please him. She went up to say good night to her kids and her dh told her to come back as soon as she could. She was like "only when the girls are ready for me to go." But she came back quickly apparently "kicked out" by her kids who were having a "sleep over" (sleeping in each others rooms) with mine.

So all in all it went fine. My dh had a wonderful time with his brothers and my kids loved every second. Other than my usual time change insomnia, I had a great time too. CSIL who is very hands on with her kids did tell that it was weird for her to be "apart" from her kids that much, as they went off and played with their cousins for hours during the day, even when we were right there the kids were often in their own little world.


----------



## becoming (Apr 11, 2003)

It sounds like it went as well as could be expected! Glad you had a good time.


----------



## ChristineIndy (Jan 3, 2006)

I'm so glad it went (relatively) smoothly!

Maybe next year will actually be FUN fun, what with some of the "issues" already mostly ironed out!


----------



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

Glad it went OK!

I still want to kick MSIL.


----------



## Decca (Mar 14, 2006)

Heh, I still want to kick CSIL.

I'm glad it went as well as it did. It sounded like the kids had a fantastic time!


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

I'm glad it went well. Still "Team MSIL".


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

It sounds like a lot of fun.

CSIL still sounds like a bit of a pill but maybe next year she'll be ready to admit that her kids had fun. Actually I'm really happy for her dh and kids as it sounds like they had a good time.


----------



## Shaki (Mar 15, 2006)

Thanks for the update!!!

We've all been waiting and waiting







!

Sounds like it went well. Inparticular I'm glad YOU and your family had a good time.


----------



## MomInCalifornia (Jul 17, 2003)

Thank you for the update! We were all wondering how it went. I still support MSIL as well







and I'm glad your nices were able to have fun!


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

What a cool thread.







Sounds like a FUN trip, though, and I'm so glad your family went!

Yeah, gotta say I'm impressed more by MSIL.







:


----------



## Nicole77 (Oct 20, 2003)

I am glad to hear that it all went as well as it sounds. What a fantastic trip! I am still definitely on team msil too.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
She went up to say good night to her kids and her dh told her to come back as soon as she could. She was like "only when the girls are ready for me to go." But she came back quickly apparently "kicked out" by her kids who were having a "sleep over" (sleeping in each others rooms) with mine.

I have to say I got a bit of an evil chuckle at this bit.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Thanks for the update!

It would be really interesting to hear MSIL and CSIL's versions of the trip


----------



## fek&fuzz (Jun 19, 2005)

I'm glad you had fun. And I'm glad that CSIL's kids got to have fun, too. Maybe next year they can go without their mom and really blossom and learn all about new things in the world.


----------



## daniedb (Aug 8, 2004)

Thanks for the update! I still hold that both of them sound like they have MAJOR control issues and I don't think I'm on either team - I'm on Team Maya!


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daniedb* 
Thanks for the update! I still hold that both of them sound like they have MAJOR control issues and I don't think I'm on either team - I'm on Team Maya!


Yeah, what she said!


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
Thanks for the update!

It would be really interesting to hear MSIL and CSIL's versions of the trip










Oh yes it would! I think MSIL would say things went well. As for CSIL, I think she would say she is glad its over!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daniedb* 
Thanks for the update! I still hold that both of them sound like they have MAJOR control issues and I don't think I'm on either team - I'm on Team Maya!

You are funny!

Well the next family get together is in CSIL's city. But neither me nor MSIL will not be staying with her, though my girls will spend the night, if CSIL can clear some space for them. She has said she is doing some "major decluttering" MSIL did get CSIL a year's worth of cleaning service for a b-day present. I know that CSIL knew it was a dig at her cleaning abilities, but I also know she is greatful for the help.


----------



## andisunshine (May 2, 2006)

How funny that you posted this! I was just thinking about your original post this morning while in bed, for some reason. I'm glad it all seemed to work out.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marybethorama* 
CSIL still sounds like a bit of a pill but maybe next year she'll be ready to admit that her kids had fun. Actually I'm really happy for her dh and kids as it sounds like they had a good time.

I don't get how she was a pill. How would you react to someone undermining your parenting philosophies, just b/c they thought they knew better--and they were in a position to do so?

I just don't get how imposing your parenting beliefs on anyone (veiled in this case as a "hostess" issue) is ever, ever, ever OK. Whether you agree with those parenting practices or not. (Because, for the record, I don't agree w/ CSIL on many of her parenting practices.)


----------



## nicole lisa (Oct 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I just don't get how imposing your parenting beliefs on anyone (veiled in this case as a "hostess" issue) is ever, ever, ever OK. Whether you agree with those parenting practices or not. (Because, for the record, I don't agree w/ CSIL on many of her parenting practices.)

Does that go for no spanking or yelling rules as well? How about no need for kids to finish their plates? What about swearing around kids?

I think there's a lot of stuff we do everyday that fall under "house rules" that others could get upset about (like no spanking or yelling and swearing's allowed and no one is ever forced to clean their plate) claiming we are imposing our parenting beliefs on them, but if they come to our house that's the deal.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nicole lisa* 
Does that go for no spanking or yelling rules as well? How about no need for kids to finish their plates? What about swearing around kids?

I think there's a lot of stuff we do everyday that fall under "house rules" that others could get upset about (like no spanking or yelling and swearing's allowed and no one is ever forced to clean their plate) claiming we are imposing our parenting beliefs on them, but if they come to our house that's the deal.

But, not yelling and spanking are things that could freak people out--really scar young children. So that's more of a protection issue, to me.

I'm thinking of insisting that a guest punish their child and then smugly saying, "See, it works."

Or an unschooling family prohibiting a guest from doing school-at-home curriculum, and then saying, "See how much fun your kids had."

These are different parenting philosophies. Just b/c you think your way is better doesn't make it ok to impose it on someone else.

Prohibiting people from hitting each other in my house just doesn't strike me the same as someone interfering in what another person feeds their kids.

I just think there is a level of arrogance with MSIL that is totally galling when it comes to parenting issues.


----------



## lalaland42 (Mar 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But, not yelling and spanking are things that could freak people out--really scar young children. So that's more of a protection issue, to me.

<snip>

These are different parenting philosophies. Just b/c you think your way is better doesn't make it ok to impose it on someone else.

Prohibiting people from hitting each other in my house just doesn't strike me the same as someone interfering in what another person feeds their kids.

I just think there is a level of arrogance with MSIL that is totally galling when it comes to parenting issues.

But to some people spanking vs. not spanking is just a difference in parenting philosophies. Some people think that spanking is not scarring and in fact benefitial to the child. The truth of the matter is that you just draw your line between what is never acceptable in you house differently from MSIL.

I have a close family member whose 4 y.o. watches movies on a portable DVD player at restaurants but this same 4 y.o. will never watch movies at the dinner table at my house. To me that is unacceptable and it *is* my house. Of course, that might be part of the reason that they don't come to visit which was certainly CSIL's perogative.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lalaland42* 
The truth of the matter is that you just draw your line between what is never acceptable in you house differently from MSIL.

Insisting that people refrain from hitting each other in one's house just is not on the same level as insisting on how much time people spend with their own children or what they feed them.


----------



## fek&fuzz (Jun 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Insisting that people refrain from hitting each other in one's house just is not on the same level as insisting on how much time people spend with their own children or what they feed them.

CSIL knew all the rules before she went, and she chose to go and stay at MSIL's house. House rules about kids upstairs, eating what is on the table, and picking up are all completely reasonable. CSIL could have stayed at a hotel if she wanted.

CSIL could have gone upstairs to see her kids, and she did, but they didn't want her there. They could have eaten PB in their room, or not gone out for Japanese food, but they chose to and had a good time and tried new food and didn't starve to death.

Sometimes you need a little push to get out of your comfort zone. They weren't being fed junk food, or forced to do anything that they didn't want to do.

Since CSIL knew (as did all of us) exactly how things were going to be, she could have been a little more gracious and encouraging of her kids, and herself, to try new things.


----------



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

I completely agree that MSIL made the rules very clear and that CSIL knew that going in.

I just can't imagine how a mother trying to go along with her husband's wishes into a place where her parenting philosophies are being undermined is supposed to act grateful to her hostess for undermining her.

I think you act civilly and say please and thank you, obviously. But, w/ re. to the parenting stuff? I don't think you get to insist that people parent the way you think they should AND expect their gratitude for it.


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

I'm glad you guys had fun. I didn't see your previous post about it until this post caused me to go look for it. Overall sounds like a lot of family get togethers in its basic premise. All of these individuals related by marriage or blood forced to come together and the history involved. I just wish my family nightmares took place in Hawaii.


----------



## lalaland42 (Mar 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Insisting that people refrain from hitting each other in one's house just is not on the same level as insisting on how much time people spend with their own children or what they feed them.

To you. What you call hitting, a most of the people here, in TX, call "popping" and see it a) as no big deal and b) as a necessary tool to curb "bad behavior". I agree that hitting one's children is wrong and I agree that the degree of whether or not to hit the child is more important then what the child eats but not everyone values these things the same. Some people here would think that a child's refusal to eat what is offered is a power struggle and rates right up there with corporal punishment. Again, these are your values and even though I tend to agree with the values, I disagree that everyone weighs them equally.

ETA: I am glad almost everyone had a good time. I also agree that both CSIL and MSIL sound like a little bit of a PITA and I am on Maya's side.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lalaland42* 
To you. What you call hitting, a most of the people here, in TX, call "popping" and see it a) as no big deal and b) as a necessary tool to curb "bad behavior".

My point is not that they are equal parenting issues, my point is that one is a personal boundary ("You may not hit in my home.") and one is an imposition on another's parenting ("Spend more/less time with your children in my home.")

Requesting that people not hit or spank in your home as a way to impose on someone's parenting is also different than requesting that people not hit or spank in your home b/c you find it upsetting.

And finding spanking upsetting just doesn't equate with finding that someone spends too much time with their children.

That MSIL is that upset by what her SIL feeds her kids or that she spends too much time with them makes me think she is wildly controlling and/or codependent. Seriously...I think it is really disturbing.


----------



## lisac77 (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 

That MSIL is that upset by what her SIL feeds her kids or that she spends too much time with them makes me think she is wildly controlling and/or codependent. Seriously...I think it is really disturbing.


I agree with this but I think both SILs are in the wrong here. There are limits on how much a hostess should bend for her guests, and there is a limit on how much guests should bend for their hosts. I think CSIL in this case is essentially being railroaded by the MSIL because MSIL has money and a huge house. However, it is difficult to host 20 people for any length of time, so....







. I think it could definitely have been worked out to everyone's benefit if things hadn't been so strained from the get go.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
That MSIL is that upset by what her SIL feeds her kids or that she spends too much time with them makes me think she is wildly controlling and/or codependent. Seriously...I think it is really disturbing.

I agree with this. It really kind of weirds me out.

I do see the spanking issue as different. I wouldn't let someone hit their kids in my house, _because it would freak out *my* kids_. I'm not trying to tell them how to parent in my home - I'm asking them to respect my children's boundaries.

I think MSIL goes way beyond these boundaries on many issues, including food. I do realize, however, that my take on this is coloured by my own childhood. I'd have gagged if someone had tried to get me to eat anything Maya describes as being on the table the first night, and I'd have been pissed at my mom for letting them get away with it, honestly. (For the record, my mom did encourage me to try other foods, but I wasn't interested. In fact, I was violently opposed to the idea.)

It does sound as though CSIL and her dh had discussed this thoroughly ahead of time, and CSIL did go along with MSIL's rules. I'm not sure why anybody would expect her to do so happily. I wouldn't be happy if I had to parent differently to keep my hostess happy. As I said in the original thread, I have no idea what I'd do in CSIL's situation, as I would prefer not to go at all, but that would upset dh...

I'm glad it all worked out, Maya. It sounds as though things went much more smoothly than anyone would have expected. I take it that it will be a few years until these issues come up again, as the next gathering is in CSIL's city and doesn't involve the "hostess/houseguest" aspect? Are you also in the rotation to host this?


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

It sounds like they both have some control issues, but no Hawaii vacation would make me deal with MSIL's power trip. I'm not down with the "I have the money so I make the rules" attitude. She sounds like an awful hostess. You're supposed to make your guests comfortable in your home.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I think MSIL goes way beyond these boundaries on many issues, including food. I do realize, however, that my take on this is coloured by my own childhood. I'd have gagged if someone had tried to get me to eat anything Maya describes as being on the table the first night, and I'd have been pissed at my mom for letting them get away with it, honestly. (For the record, my mom did encourage me to try other foods, but I wasn't interested. In fact, I was violently opposed to the idea.)

It does sound as though CSIL and her dh had discussed this thoroughly ahead of time, and CSIL did go along with MSIL's rules. I'm not sure why anybody would expect her to do so happily. I wouldn't be happy if I had to parent differently to keep my hostess happy. As I said in the original thread, I have no idea what I'd do in CSIL's situation, as I would prefer not to go at all, but that would upset dh...

I'm glad it all worked out, Maya. It sounds as though things went much more smoothly than anyone would have expected. I take it that it will be a few years until these issues come up again, as the next gathering is in CSIL's city and doesn't involve the "hostess/houseguest" aspect? Are you also in the rotation to host this?

Well yes there is a rotation, but it is is more than once a year. We go to MSIL's over winter break and go to CSIL's in the spring (usually over a long weekend). Everyone comes to me in the summer for a long weekend also or to our summer place.

BTY, would you really not have eaten plain bread? As I said in the OP (*there was bread with some dipping sauces*...garlic, tomato and goat cheese *on the side)*


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
Well yes there is a rotation, but it is is more than once a year. We go to MSIL's over winter break and go to CSIL's in the spring (usually over a long weekend). Everyone comes to me in the summer for a long weekend also or to our summer place.

Ah - okay...misunderstood the setup. That sounds pretty good. We live in a small townhouse, so we can't really have family over here.

Quote:

BTY, would you really not have eaten plain bread? As I said in the OP (*there was bread with some dipping sauces*...garlic, tomato and goat cheese *on the side)*
What kind of bread? Maybe - maybe not. I liked one kind of white bread, and several kinds of whole wheat, and that was about it. Depending on age, I didn't even care for most rolls (hamburger buns and hot dog buns were okay).


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fek&fuzz* 
CSIL could have gone upstairs to see her kids, and she did, but they didn't want her there. They could have eaten PB in their room, or not gone out for Japanese food, but they chose to and had a good time and tried new food and didn't starve to death.

Sometimes you need a little push to get out of your comfort zone. They weren't being fed junk food, or forced to do anything that they didn't want to do.

Since CSIL knew (as did all of us) exactly how things were going to be, she could have been a little more gracious and encouraging of her kids, and herself, to try new things.









:
She sounded pretty smug and righteous, honestly. I do wonder if anything will carry over since, obviously, her kids enjoyed themselves.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

I am so glad it went well. I was on the MSILs side and I say rock on. I think its good the CSILs kids got to experience a great vacation, follow some rules, and eat some different foods. (not to mention having mom up their butt)


----------



## lab (Jun 11, 2003)

See, here's the thing..... and to me, this is the biggest reason that makes MSIL right and CSIL out in left field.....

CSIL's youngest child is 8. The youngest. At 8 and up, kids can totally roll with the punches and figure stuff out for themselves. Especially with family.

MAYA! Thank you so much for updating us. I seriously have been looking for your thread. How sad am I??????


----------



## sparkprincess (Sep 10, 2004)

Yay! Thanks for the update! I was wondering about you all. I think it sounds like a good time overall. I wanna go next year!


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Insisting that people refrain from hitting each other in one's house just is not on the same level as insisting on how much time people spend with their own children or what they feed them.

Not only is it not on the "same level", it is a different kind of insistence altogether. One is a prohibition. As far as I am concerned, I have a right to prohibit pretty much whatever I want in my house, from spanking to smoking to eating and swearing. You don't like it, then don't come over. I believe that this is altogether different from requiring someone to actively do something in my house - to attend a party or to make my children eat something, for example. (However, in this regard, note that MSIL never said that CSIL's children HAD to eat anything. She just said that there would be nothing else available on the table, which I think is altogether reasonable).

Quote:

Things started out tense when they took drink orders and CSIL was not thrilled that we all let the kids get sodas and these Japanese Bubble juices. She doesn't like her kids to have this but relented.
I would be CSIL in that situation. I already experience this in playgroup events where other (2-year old!!!!) children are being given Coca-Cola and other sodas. In this case, I just give my DD water and she does not ask for anything else, but I imagine that as she gets older, she will start to ask to have the soda as well.

I think that in that situation, you either have to speak to the parents ahead of time and get them to all agree that the kids will be having water or milk or whatever, or just decide yourself whether you, as a general matter, are going to go along with the other parents and let your child have the soda when you are out or not. The real world is out there and your child is going to be exposed to sodas and other evil things more and more so I think you have to find a way to deal with this kind of event early on.


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

A lot of the food issues could have been dealt with ahead of time by CSIL by simply explaining to MSIL that her kids are picky eaters and she wanted to have back up food for them. I don't know MSIL has sounded pretty accomodating to things, I wouldn't be suprised if at some point in the past she had asked both SILs what sort of things their kids eat to ensure that she had it in the house. Plopping down bread and PB and J for every meal at someone else's house and not even trying what's on offer is rude imho. There are better ways of dealing with it.

I was raised in a house where you tried everything that was on offer. You didn't have to eat a plate full of if but you had to try it. That's the rule in my house as well. It takes somewhere betwee 3-6 tries of somethings in order to grow to like them. And I do feel it's part of my job as a mother to make sure dd has a varied diet and includes a wide range of things. I think MSIL made an outstanding effort to make sure there was something for even the pickiest eater. Even breaking things down so that if you didn't want sauce on your pasta you didn't have to have it. Good lord she even served one night the one thing the kids do eat according to CSIL.


----------



## Irishmommy (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

That night at home MSIL said to me, "this just proves that if you don't give them peanut butter at every meal....."
If this was said in csil's hearing, then that is just rude. However, it's the only think I can fault msil on.


----------



## jackson's mama (Apr 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lab* 
See, here's the thing..... and to me, this is the biggest reason that makes MSIL right and CSIL out in left field.....

CSIL's youngest child is 8. The youngest. At 8 and up, kids can totally roll with the punches and figure stuff out for themselves. Especially with family.

ITA with this. It's not like MSIL was asking her to leave her toddler upstairs with a stranger for a party, or force her preschooler to eat some bizarre foreign delicacies. By the time a child is 8, if they're not rolling with the punches and figuring things out for themselves, it's about time they learn to start. CSIL isn't doing them any favors in that regard.

On priniciple I agree that it wasn't MSIL's job to force CSIL into a new parenting role (especially in such a passive-aggressive way with an email that was so clearly directed at all the things that annoyed MSIL on the last trip), and I certainly would have bristled at it too, but none of the rules seemed all that over-the-top to me.

Glad most everyone had a good time







.


----------



## WNB (Apr 29, 2006)

It's unfortunate that the economic situation will make it exceedingly unlikely that MSIL will ever have to have a week of living/parenting CSIL's style during a family get-together on her turf (even though I think I lean to the "team msil" side a bit).

I'm not so sure the "rules conflict" stemmed from the undermining of csil's parenting style, but perhaps from csil's separation anxiety instead.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

Maya44, I just wanted to comment it is great that your different parenting philosophies do not prevent your kids from developing a close and affectionate bond with their cousins. I imagine for some of the parents these get-togethers must be stressful, at times at least, but, it is great that they all do come and do their best - it really sounds like they were all doing what best they could, honestly!!! - to respect the other parents.... I wish I could organize a nice get-together for my extended family, we are scattered and we simply do not have enough space anywhere. Thanks for sharing this story!


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I don't get how she was a pill. How would you react to someone undermining your parenting philosophies, just b/c they thought they knew better--and they were in a position to do so?

by the time kids are as old as the CSILs kids I feel they can learn about "different rules for different families".

If she was asked not to breastfeed her kids or to let them cry it out that would be very different.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marybethorama* 
by the time kids are as old as the CSILs kids I feel they can learn about "different rules for different families".

If she was asked not to breastfeed her kids or to let them cry it out that would be very different.

What if she was giving alcohol to a devoutly baptist family?

What if she told the teenagers they could stay out until the wee hours of the morning and that their mother's curfew no longer applied?

But, hey, the kids had fun!

It's not her call. They are her nieces, not her children. She can parent *her* kids any way she pleases. And the same curtesy should apply to CSIL.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
What if she was giving alcohol to a devoutly baptist family?

What if she told the teenagers they could stay out until the wee hours of the morning and that their mother's curfew no longer applied?

But, hey, the kids had fun!

It's not her call. They are her nieces, not her children. She can parent *her* kids any way she pleases. And the same curtesy should apply to CSIL.

Since she did none of these things above, I don't see it as relevant. MSIL sent an email months before the trip outlining her house rules. There were no surprises as far as I can see.

Maybe CSIL should have stayed home and sent her husband by himself.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
What if she was giving alcohol to a devoutly baptist family?

What if she told the teenagers they could stay out until the wee hours of the morning and that their mother's curfew no longer applied?

But, hey, the kids had fun!

It's not her call. They are her nieces, not her children. She can parent *her* kids any way she pleases. And the same curtesy should apply to CSIL.


Yes, but she must also follow house rules. And giving alcohol to a family versus food is not the same. If she had been asked to eat non-kosher foods then you could compare the two.

And the only thing in regards to undermining her "parenting" was helping clean up. Sorry, this also does not compare to allowing them out past curfew.

The party was in the same house and to say this is a parenting issue is silly because in implies that CSIL's parenting rule is that she is NEVER in different rooms of the house without her kids for more than a few minutes.


----------



## lab (Jun 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
What if she was giving alcohol to a devoutly baptist family?

What if she told the teenagers they could stay out until the wee hours of the morning and that their mother's curfew no longer applied?

But, hey, the kids had fun!

It's not her call. They are her nieces, not her children. She can parent *her* kids any way she pleases. And the same curtesy should apply to CSIL.

With all due respect, your analogy is sorta ludicrous. Giving alcohol is children is illegal.

Asking children to clean up after themselves or eat a balanced meal isn't.......


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

Quote:

What if she was giving alcohol to a devoutly baptist family?

What if she told the teenagers they could stay out until the wee hours of the morning and that their mother's curfew no longer applied?

But, hey, the kids had fun!

yup I also think this is ridiculous.... Lets see...Csil's children went...had fun...actually tried the new foods(without force), enjoyed time away from their mom at the sleepover, obviously its not csil's children that had problems with the rules but its CSIL who couldn't take it. Nothing msil did was out of line...all the kids had fun...no suffering...no starving.... Team msil wins this time.


----------



## lab (Jun 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
Team msil wins this time.


NEW SIGGY!!!

I called it first


----------



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

The point is is that CSIL's parenting philosophies (no tv, no sodas, no extended time away from her kids) were NOT respected. Whatever one thinks about those philosophies (and on most of them I am with MSIL), it's not some else's place to try to step in and say, "Your parenting philosophies are whack. My way is better and I'm going to show your kids how."

How cool do think things are at CSIL's house right now? "But we got to watch Drake and Josh at MSIL's! Puh-lease mom." "Why can't we have soda? We did at MSIL's?!"

That's just crappy and disrespectful in my book.

MSIL knows CSIL's values and disagrees with them and is working her best to impose her own. That crosses a serious boundary as far as I'm concerned.

And if CSIL had MSIL to her house and told her kids that they didn't have to do chores even if their mom said, or didn't stay at the table after dinner, or whatever MSIL's parenting philosophies are, then that's equally messed up in my book.

eta: I think the party thing is a parenting thing and a control thing. Who makes parties mandatory for other adults? Seriously...whackjob. Control freak. Needs help with healthy boundaries.


----------



## MillingNome (Nov 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
The point is is that CSIL's parenting philosophies (no tv, no sodas, no extended time away from her kids) were NOT respected. Whatever one thinks about those philosophies (and on most of them I am with MSIL), it's not some else's place to try to step in and say, "Your parenting philosophies are whack. My way is better and I'm going to show your kids how."

How cool do think things are at CSIL's house right now? "But we got to watch Drake and Josh at MSIL's! Puh-lease mom." "Why can't we have soda? We did at MSIL's?!"

That's just crappy and disrespectful in my book.

MSIL knows CSIL's values and disagrees with them and is working her best to impose her own. That crosses a serious boundary as far as I'm concerned.

And if CSIL had MSIL to her house and told her kids that they didn't have to do chores even if their mom said, or didn't stay at the table after dinner, or whatever MSIL's parenting philosophies are, then that's equally messed up in my book.

eta: I think the party thing is a parenting thing and a control thing. Who makes parties mandatory for other adults? Seriously...whackjob. Control freak. Needs help with healthy boundaries.









:

What kind of choice is that- to go but sell out or not go and miss out seeing family so far away. It doesn't pass the smell taste.


----------



## MomInCalifornia (Jul 17, 2003)

monkey's mom said:


> The point is is that CSIL's parenting philosophies (no tv, no sodas, no extended time away from her kids) were NOT respected. Whatever one thinks about those philosophies (and on most of them I am with MSIL), it's not some else's place to try to step in and say, "Your parenting philosophies are whack. My way is better and I'm going to show your kids how."
> 
> How cool do think things are at CSIL's house right now? "But we got to watch Drake and Josh at MSIL's! Puh-lease mom." "Why can't we have soda? We did at MSIL's?!"
> 
> ...


----------



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

I absolutely don't think MSIL's kids should have to forego things b/c CSIL prohibits them.

But it doesn't go both ways.

Why should CSIL's kids have to do chores just b/c MSIL's kids have to?

It's easy to say, "Well, it's just soda or TV or bedtime or chores...." when these aren't your values. For whatever reason, these are CSIL's values. These are the lessons she is trying to instill in her kids. It's her call. She's not abusing them. It's not what I would do. It's not what you would do. It's not what MSIL would do. But it's not up to any of us to impose what WE would do on HER kids.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
The point is is that CSIL's parenting philosophies (no tv, no sodas, no extended time away from her kids) were NOT respected. Whatever one thinks about those philosophies (and on most of them I am with MSIL), it's not some else's place to try to step in and say, "Your parenting philosophies are whack. My way is better and I'm going to show your kids how."

How cool do think things are at CSIL's house right now? "But we got to watch Drake and Josh at MSIL's! Puh-lease mom." "Why can't we have soda? We did at MSIL's?!"

That's just crappy and disrespectful in my book.

MSIL knows CSIL's values and disagrees with them and is working her best to impose her own. That crosses a serious boundary as far as I'm concerned.

And if CSIL had MSIL to her house and told her kids that they didn't have to do chores even if their mom said, or didn't stay at the table after dinner, or whatever MSIL's parenting philosophies are, then that's equally messed up in my book.

eta: I think the party thing is a parenting thing and a control thing. Who makes parties mandatory for other adults? Seriously...whackjob. Control freak. Needs help with healthy boundaries.


her children were NOT given sodas. Everyone around them had sodas. That is going to happen EVERYWHERE in life.

The tv rule was that MSIL was not going to turn off the tv just because her children were there. They didn't have to watch but no one else was going to have to forgo just for the sake of CSIL's children. Which is what CSIL demanded in years past in someone else's house.

And unless Maya can tell us that CSIL had NEVER spent time away from her children in another room of the house for a few hours then the party thing was a no brainer. It was an adult's party and not in CSIL's house so it wasn't her right to break the rules as she had in years past. She is the one that made it a control issue years ago and MSIL had finally had enough and took some control back.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
her children were NOT given sodas. Everyone around them had sodas. That is going to happen EVERYWHERE in life.

The tv rule was that MSIL was not going to turn off the tv just because her children were there. They didn't have to watch but no one else was going to have to forgo just for the sake of CSIL's children. Which is what CSIL demanded in years past in someone else's house.

And unless Maya can tell us that CSIL had NEVER spent time away from her children in another room of the house for a few hours then the party thing was a no brainer. It was an adult's party and not in CSIL's house so it wasn't her right to break the rules as she had in years past. She is the one that made it a control issue years ago and MSIL had finally had enough and took some control back.

No they weren't given sodas. And I agree completely about that. But the pbj thing and the effort MSIL puts into getting her nieces to eat other food is outside of her jurisdiction, imo.

TV rule--totally understandable. But, CSIL made the concession and didn't say anything (that we know.) And that's why I was asking before why she was being a "pill" during this visit--b/c it seemed to me that she sucked up a lot of stuff she had issues with.

Re. the party--fine to say no kids. Saying adults must attend? Bizarre. And again, it makes me think that for MSIL it is more about imposing her belief system on CSIL and her kids than it is about keeping a party a certain way or making sure everyone is having a good time or being a good hostess.

The whole thing reeks of control and arrogance to me.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

The bottom line is that CSIL knew the deal before going. If she didn't want to follow the rules of the house for the vacation at MSIL, she didnt have to go or let her kids go.

I applaud the MSIL for standing her ground and putting the rules out there to begin with. Control freak or not. The CSIL sounds just as control freakish (not to mention a few other things) as the MSIL to me, if not worse. She sounds like she gives into her kids too much, has some unhealthy attachment issues with them, and tends to be up their booty cracks. CSIL chose to take her kids. Evidently the vacation was more important to her than he so called parenting values.


----------



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

But, she did follow the rules. And so did her kids, right?

But, people are still saying she's being a "pill" about it. And my point is how many concessions is one parent supposed to make to please another family member and be 100% chipper and grateful about it?

Regardless of what you think about her values, she gave in to a lot of things. And instead of being grateful, MSIL was smug that she got the result she wanted.


----------



## NYCVeg (Jan 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
It's easy to say, "Well, it's just soda or TV or bedtime or chores...." when these aren't your values. For whatever reason, these are CSIL's values. These are the lessons she is trying to instill in her kids. It's her call. She's not abusing them. It's not what I would do. It's not what you would do. It's not what MSIL would do. But it's not up to any of us to impose what WE would do on HER kids.

Yes, but the crucial point is that CSIL does not HAVE to stay at MSIL's house. She knew the house rules in advance and she choose to go. If MSIL was staying at CSIL's house and insisted on TV, soda at the table, adults only parties, etc. that would be a horse of a different color.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NYCVeg* 
Yes, but the crucial point is that CSIL does not HAVE to stay at MSIL's house. She knew the house rules in advance and she choose to go. If MSIL was staying at CSIL's house and insisted on TV, soda at the table, adults only parties, etc. that would be a horse of a different color.

She did choose. I think there were other things going on there--with her husband and such. But you're right--she chose. And technically you can pretty much insist on anything you want in your own home. But, it doesn't make it nice or gracious to your family and guests.

If MSIL went to CSIL's house, CSIL could insist that MSIL's not go to school, sleep in their parent's bed, not do chores, etc. And, technically, if MSIL agreed to it, then that's that.

But, it would still make me question CSIL's mental health and think she was arrogant to try to push her agenda on someone else's kids and family.


----------



## Twocoolboys (Mar 10, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
I just wish my family nightmares took place in Hawaii.









:


----------



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

No joke!


----------



## babywolverine (Jun 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom*
But, she did follow the rules. And so did her kids, right?

But, people are still saying she's being a "pill" about it. And my point is how many concessions is one parent supposed to make to please another family member and be 100% chipper and grateful about it?

Regardless of what you think about her values, she gave in to a lot of things. And instead of being grateful, MSIL was smug that she got the result she wanted.

I agree. Why couldn't MSIL just be happy that things went smoothly? Why rub CSIL's nose in it?


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Godaime* 
yup I also think this is ridiculous.... Lets see...Csil's children went...had fun...actually tried the new foods(without force), enjoyed time away from their mom at the sleepover, obviously its not csil's children that had problems with the rules but its CSIL who couldn't take it. Nothing msil did was out of line...all the kids had fun...no suffering...no starving.... Team msil wins this time.

so if I have guests in my home who never let their kids watch PG-13 movies, and I let the kids watch PG-13 movies, and the kids have FUN!, does that make what I did OK?

What about vegan kids eating meat? What if they like it and have FUN!?

I'm just not buying that it is OK to undermine another parent based on how much fun it is for the kid.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
The bottom line is that CSIL knew the deal before going. If she didn't want to follow the rules of the house for the vacation at MSIL, she didnt have to go or let her kids go.

In the previous thread, it sounded like she really had no choice. This is her DH's family, not hers, and she is stuck going.

Or let her family go over the holidays without her.

Or force her DH to never see his brother again.

Really, she didn't have any good options.


----------



## lalaland42 (Mar 12, 2006)

DH and I discussed this thread heatedly last night and I have to admit that he made some good points (don't tell him I said that







).

My points:
Ok, the soda thing and the tv thing, CSIL's kids don't have to drink/watch just because their cousins are and forbidding these actions just aren't fair to everyone else.

It is kinda controlling to say that an adult _must_ attend a party. I thought it was pretty funny that CSIL's kids kicked her out of their room but honestly if CSIL didn't want to attend then that should be her perogative.

DH's points that I now agree with:
Whether I agree with the pb&j thing or not, CSIL's kids are people too and they shouldn't be coerced into eating something they do not want. DH also says that it is not the same thing for _me_ to prepare a large meal for 20 people and for _my chef_ (don't I wish) to prepare a large meal for 20 so I shouldn't get my feelings hurt if the chef prepares it. I don't know, I haven't been in that situation. The other thing is that MSIL knows the kids will eat pb&j and that's about it, so she is not being accomodating if she doesn't accomodate the kids too. Although I think that CSIL is completely wrong to allow her kids to eat nothing but pb&j, that is not my call and isn't MSIL's.

We didn't get around to talking about the rest, his hair stylist was ready for him. -He cut off two feet of hair last night. Eek.

Oh, and not thanking MSIL for the large meal that she paid for when they went out is plain rude. I actually think that CSIL reeks of rudeness in the, "I'm the mom who has to do everything my way even when I am trying to cohabitate for a week with 15 other people who also want things their way" sort of way. I'm related to too many people like that so it irks me in a way that the power trip MSIL is on doesn't.

Real quick, I would like to point out that other then the party, CSIL could spend as much time with the kids as she wanted. The kids were the ones running off with their cousins.

I'll be power-tripped in Hawaii anytime.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Okay, I have to relay one funny thing. While we were at dinner one night CSIL started talking about some issue about diapers. (MSIL's baby wears 'spoises) and she said something like "Well in MOTHERING there was an article..."

And M*B*IL says to my DH "Mothering"? Hey isn't that that crackpot magazine mom used to get when the bros were little (DH and MBIL are the oldest).

And then he says something like "You know one day a few years ago I was doing some reserach on google and I saw that there is some Website where these Mothering types go on and on about all their stuff...probably about how it's a good idea to buy their five year old boys a efiin loom!"
(here the background on that from a post in another thread!:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
ITA!

And I hope you take THIS in the manner it is intended OP, but buying a 5 y.o. a pentatonic glockenspiel instead of a car, is just the kind of thing that caused my NFL raised BIL to become the " I can't buy ennough big boy "toys", can you believe my parents bought be a loom (yeah, I said a freaking LOOM) when I was 5 instead of the cool toy I wanted, No wonder I need therapy now and a job that pays me the big bucks" kind of man he is today!










And CSIL was like "yeah the only thing I am sad about our decision not to have internet access anymore is that I can't see that website."

And MBIL was like "it figures"

And me I was just














I mean just him bringing up the whole loom thing that I had posted had me ready to







:


----------



## lalaland42 (Mar 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
Okay, I have to relay one funny thing. While we were at dinner one night CSIL started talking about some issue about diapers. (MSIL's baby wears 'spoises) and she said something like "Well in MOTHERING there was an article..."

And M*B*IL says to my DH "Mothering"? Hey isn't that that crackpot magazine mom used to get when the bros were little (DH and MBIL are the oldest).

And then he says something like "You know one day a few years ago I was doing some reserach on google and I saw that there is some Website where these Mothering types go on and on about all their stuff...probably about how it's a good idea to buy their five year old boys a efiin loom!"
(here the background on that from a post in another thread!:

And CSIL was like "yeah the only thing I am sad about our decision not to have internet access anymore is that I can't see that website."

And MBIL was like "it figures"

And me I was just














I mean just him bringing up the whole loom thing that I had posted had me ready to







:


















It really is a small internet.


----------



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

Ha! Maya, that's awesome!!


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lalaland42* 
DH's points that I now agree with:
Whether I agree with the pb&j thing or not, CSIL's kids are people too and they shouldn't be coerced into eating something they do not want. DH also says that it is not the same thing for _me_ to prepare a large meal for 20 people and for _my chef_ (don't I wish) to prepare a large meal for 20 so I shouldn't get my feelings hurt if the chef prepares it. I don't know, I haven't been in that situation. The other thing is that MSIL knows the kids will eat pb&j and that's about it, so she is not being accomodating if she doesn't accomodate the kids too. Although I think that CSIL is completely wrong to allow her kids to eat nothing but pb&j, that is not my call and isn't MSIL's.

Still not convinced. First of all, noone was COERCING the kids to eat anything. How could you, short of shoving the fork down their throats? It is their body, after all. The issue is not that the kids were being forced to eat what was on the table but whether they should be offered peanut butter or other alternatives at the table when the host has either herself prepared or spent good money to have someone else prepare a meal.

I'm sorry but pulling peanut butter and jelly out at every single meal when you are staying at someone's house for 15 days is just plain rude. If your kids are fussy eaters, then send the host a list ahead of time of what your kids cannot or will not eat (or if it is too long a list, send the reverse - a list of what they will eat). And I just fundamentally disagree with offering children alternatives when a meal has been prepared - even at home. It is inconsiderate to the person who has made the meal (or to the person who has paid to have the meal prepared= and reeks of "spoiled brat". Again, you cannot force a child to put food in her mouth but you can offer what is on the table and let the child decide.

Another thing: This is what I don't understand about CSIL. She doesn't like her kids drinking the odd soda (which I understand) but then she has no problem with them eating peanut butter. I don't know what kind of peanut butter she gives her girls but commercial peanut butter is as bad if not worse than soda, healthwise, AFAIC. First of all it is full of sugar. Secondly, it is packed with hydrogenated vegetable oil (or as bad, palm oil). Thirdly, it is WAY too much protein when eaten at every meal and way too much fat to go with it. I just don't get it.

Maya, can you enlighten me as to this dietetic choice of hers? Why doesn't she forbid garbage peanut butter at every meal the way she forbids sodas?


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
If your kids are fussy eaters, then send the host a list ahead of time of what your kids cannot or will not eat (or if it is too long a list, send the reverse - a list of what they will eat).

She basically did. She said, my kids will eat pbj and I'll handle it.

Just like I have to do with my allergic kids when we visit or travel.

People's dietary considerations are no one else's business.

Whether you think their reasons are valid or not.


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

I don't recall from the previous posts that CSIL did do that. She basically let the hostess know by plopping it on the table every night. Dietary and allergy concerns are completely different from picky eaters.

A good hostess feels out what her crowd of guests likes and tries to accomodate as MSIL did when she served pizza the first night. But to just plop your meal on the table without giving what's on offer a try is rude. I know her nickname is CSIL but she seems far from crunchy when it comes to food choices.

Really the only thing I had a problem with is that adults had to attend the parties. All the other rules were perfectly reasonable. If CSIL didn't like the meal rule she had the option of going out or taking the kids out to the beach and serving them PB&J. She didn't have to sit at the dinner table and neither did her kids.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
Dietary and allergy concerns are completely different from picky eaters.

To YOU. In YOUR mind.

Not in mine. Maybe not in CSIL's.

The point is, that MSIL has taken it upon herself to take CSIL's parenting to task here. And has made it very clear that *her* way (prohibiting the kids' desired food choice) is *the* way to get them to do what she wants (try other foods).

That's messed up.

Maybe it *is* the right way. But they aren't HER KIDS. And just because it's her house, and she can, doesn't mean that she should.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
If CSIL didn't like the meal rule she had the option of going out or taking the kids out to the beach and serving them PB&J. She didn't have to sit at the dinner table and neither did her kids.

That's true. But, to have to feed your kids in your room or not sit at the dinner table b/c someone else has an issue with how you feed your kids? That's a good hostess?


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
her kids drinking the odd soda (which I understand) but then she has no problem with them eating peanut butter. I don't know what kind of peanut butter she gives her girls but commercial peanut butter is as bad if not worse than soda, healthwise, AFAIC. First of all it is full of sugar. Secondly, it is packed with hydrogenated vegetable oil (or as bad, palm oil). Thirdly, it is WAY too much protein when eaten at every meal and way too much fat to go with it. I just don't get it.

Maya, can you enlighten me as to this dietetic choice of hers? Why doesn't she forbid garbage peanut butter at every meal the way she forbids sodas?


Well I think she uses some natural/organic p.b. MSIL does special order it for when CSIL is in town (its name is "______ Farms Natural Peanut Butter"..can't remember the exact name"). Her kids also eat some sort of mac and cheese (natural/organic brand) and some sort of yogurt. Also waffles and pizza. And some fruits.

One of the things they did like at MSIL's were her handcut sweet potato chips that she makes herself. They definitely were keyed up to try it because all of the other kids were scarfing them down and "yumming" it up. And of course because (in MSIL's eyes) there was nothing they liked on the table that night... We had Terriaki Salmon, White cheese Rissota and this yummy salad she makes along with the sweet potatos and I am sure CSIL's kids were hungry after a long day of swimming since we often were calling them in at the last minute.

MSIL did not say anything, but again her eyes spoke volumes.


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
To YOU. In YOUR mind.

Not in mine. Maybe not in CSIL's.

The point is, that MSIL has taken it upon herself to take CSIL's parenting to task here. And has made it very clear that *her* way (prohibiting the kids' desired food choice) is *the* way to get them to do what she wants (try other foods).

Obviously she doesn't since she does stock the house with PB and made pizza for them. It had nothing to do with prohibiting food choices and everything about basic, good table manners. Do you often go to other people's houses even family and bring your own food b/c you assume you won't like what the host or hostess is serving? I'm not talking about allergies or dietary concerns (like keeping kosher or being a vegan) I'm talking about just assuming you won't like what's being served? That's basically what CSIL was doing. Why bother to to someone's house?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
That's true. But, to have to feed your kids in your room or not sit at the dinner table b/c someone else has an issue with how you feed your kids? That's a good hostess?

How is it being a good guest to not even try what's on offer?


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
Obviously she doesn't since she does stock the house with PB and made pizza for them. It had nothing to do with prohibiting food choices and everything about basic, good table manners. Do you often go to other people's houses even family and bring your own food b/c you assume you won't like what the host or hostess is serving? I'm not talking about allergies or dietary concerns (like keeping kosher or being a vegan) I'm talking about just assuming you won't like what's being served? That's basically what CSIL was doing. Why bother to to someone's house?

OK, so even if it's good table manners, why does MSIL need to be the one to "teach" them to CSIL's kids?

But I'm not buying that it's table manners based on the comments MSIL has made about the peanut butter.

If someone came to my house and brought their own food for their kids (or themselves) I would assume there was some other issue that was NONE of my business. I certainly wouldn't ask for an expanation (other than maybe a casual inquiry) and I wouldn't request a doctor's note to see if it was only picky eating or something that was valid in my book.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
How is it being a good guest to not even try what's on offer?

It's not. But they're kids. It's up to their parents to take them to task (or not) for that.

You don't restrict their choices so that they either try the food or go hungry until they can eat in their room at a later time. Really, you don't think that's crazy? This aunt knows what her nieces like. They like PBJ. How hard is it to let the mother feed them that at the table? How does that impact anyone else? I, personally, would want EVERYone at my table to have an enjoyable, fulfilling meal. If that meant they crunched dry pasta that they brought from home, then go for it. How personally invested do you become in someone else's kids eating before it's totally rude and/or kooky?


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
If someone came to my house and brought their own food for their kids (or themselves) I would assume there was some other issue that was NONE of my business. I certainly wouldn't ask for an expanation (other than maybe a casual inquiry) and I wouldn't request a doctor's note to see if it was only picky eating or something that was valid in my book.

Actually I never invite anyone to my house regardless of relation for something that will involve a meal without inquiring about food allergies, preferences, dietary restrictions and general aversions. I would never invite anyone back who said, "anything's fine" and who then brought their own food and got snippy when I looked at askance upon it, regardless of relation to me.

But like I said earlier in a way - these two obviously have a long history. I'm on MSIL's side for the most part but I don't really know all of the details. For all we know MSIL may have tried to broach these topics in the past with CSIL and she got snippy and in order to maintain civility this was MSIL's desperate attempt to hold onto it. Or it could be MSIL has always hated CSIL and this is her revenge. Or most probably it somewhere in between.


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

I'm glad the trip worked out so well!


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
I don't recall from the previous posts that CSIL did do that. She basically let the hostess know by plopping it on the table every night. Dietary and allergy concerns are completely different from picky eaters.

Who says? Why is being a "picky eater" considered such a bad thing? If you're fortunate enough to enjoy a wide variety of foods - good for you. Some of us aren't. Some of us also have huge comfort zone issues involved in being somewhere strange and having to eat strange food. I'm 38, and I'm still not over this. When I'm staying with my in-laws, my stomach feels slightly 'off' the entire visit - because I'm not in my home, and I'm eating strange foods. There's nothing wrong with what they serve - I've really enjoyed a few of the new foods I've tried (FIL loves that I like mustard greens, as he was the only one in the family who did before I came along). But, that doesn't change the emotional side of it for me. It's _hard_ to eat foods I'm not used to. When dh and I were thinking of moving to Knoxville, the different stock in the grocery stores was one of my biggest concerns. This may seem trivial to other people, but it's not trivial to me - and I'd bet there are a lot of 'picky eaters' in the same boat.

Then there's this one...a friend of our family...this little girl didn't like to eat meat when she was young. Her parents, in an attempt to get her to eat a 'balanced diet', and with real parental concern, always got her to eat some. It was a running battle for years. It eventually turned out that she lacks an enzyme necessary to digest meat properly. So - 'picky eater' turned out to be a genuine 'dietary concern'.

So - why is being 'picky' not valid?


----------



## WNB (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
...
MSIL did not say anything, but again her eyes spoke volumes.

Maya, other posters have said that MSIL was "smug" about winning (or whatever, hard to paraphrase) versus CSIL -- I noted the "eye-rolling" you referred to in your initial post (I think), and this quote above. I hadn't interpreted the eye-rolling as being smug or "nyah nyah" to CSIL, instead as mild exasperation of the "oh well, it's family" kind of thing.

Was there something I missed in your reports? And do you agree that MSIL was smug about the whole situation with CSIL?


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WNB* 
Maya, other posters have said that MSIL was "smug" about winning (or whatever, hard to paraphrase) versus CSIL -- I noted the "eye-rolling" you referred to in your initial post (I think), and this quote above. I hadn't interpreted the eye-rolling as being smug or "nyah nyah" to CSIL, instead as mild exasperation of the "oh well, it's family" kind of thing.

Was there something I missed in your reports? And do you agree that MSIL was smug about the whole situation with CSIL?

I'm interested to hear from Maya, too.

But, WNB, here are the parts that I was referring to:

Quote:

Somehow with all of the excitement with the flying shrimp and the hunger dn's ate their first shrimp and two of them pronouced it "good". MSIL gave me a smug little smile. DN's went on to eat rice and two of them ate the steak.

That night at home MSIL said to me, "this just proves that if you don't give them peanut butter at every meal....."


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Hmmm, I don't know if I'd call MSIL "smug" about it. Well let me give an example. If one of your relatives lets say spanked and you told them they couldn't in your home and let's say they instead hd to try a GD method and it "worked." They let say gave their child a chance to throw something safe like a pillow and they stopped throwing the hard ball around. And then the next day the child said "Mama I feel like throwing, can you get me a pillow"

You might say (or at least think) "See, it just shows that a child does not have to be hit to learn how to behave"

I think this is the tone MSIL was taking. She feels that the way CSIL feeds her kids is limiting for them. She would think it is terrible that someone would have to worry about the kind of food available to them and that this issue could stop them from living somewhere or going to an exotic locale. She feels like its unfair to the child. So her response is sort of like "It does not have to be this way."


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
Who says? Why is being a "picky eater" considered such a bad thing? If you're fortunate enough to enjoy a wide variety of foods - good for you. Some of us aren't. Some of us also have huge comfort zone issues involved in being somewhere strange and having to eat strange food. I'm 38, and I'm still not over this. When I'm staying with my in-laws, my stomach feels slightly 'off' the entire visit - because I'm not in my home, and I'm eating strange foods. There's nothing wrong with what they serve - I've really enjoyed a few of the new foods I've tried (FIL loves that I like mustard greens, as he was the only one in the family who did before I came along). But, that doesn't change the emotional side of it for me. It's _hard_ to eat foods I'm not used to. When dh and I were thinking of moving to Knoxville, the different stock in the grocery stores was one of my biggest concerns. This may seem trivial to other people, but it's not trivial to me - and I'd bet there are a lot of 'picky eaters' in the same boat.

Then there's this one...a friend of our family...this little girl didn't like to eat meat when she was young. Her parents, in an attempt to get her to eat a 'balanced diet', and with real parental concern, always got her to eat some. It was a running battle for years. It eventually turned out that she lacks an enzyme necessary to digest meat properly. So - 'picky eater' turned out to be a genuine 'dietary concern'.

So - why is being 'picky' not valid?

Have you ever had yourself checked out to find out why your stomach is so off if you eat anything other than the limited range of food you eat? Your problems sound like something much deeper than simple pickiness.

I strive to be open minded about things and to ask my dd to be the same way. This extends to food. That's why I don't find pickiness the same as allergies or dietary restrictions.

Frankly most of the picky eaters I've met are overly proud of their pickiness like it's some badge of honor that they have. Like the people who claim to be lactose intolerant as they refuse aged cheese. Hey guess what, there's no lactose in aged cheese. But these same people will turn around and seem to have no problem with cream sauce.

Sorry I see nothing wrong with MSIL wanting to broaden the horizons of CSIL's children. Could it have been done in a better way? Sure. But as I said above we don't know the full history and even with the smug remarks there could be much deeper history than just this one trip. Well, obviously there is.


----------



## mamasaurus (Jun 20, 2004)

Maya - thanks so much for sharing your story! What a classic case of family togetherness!







I really learned a lot from reading it, and reading all the replies.

I live in Hawaii, too, by the way!


----------



## vbactivist (Oct 4, 2006)

mamasaurus...are you mayas msil?


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou* 
Have you ever had yourself checked out to find out why your stomach is so off if you eat anything other than the limited range of food you eat? Your problems sound like something much deeper than simple pickiness.

It's not from actually eating the food - it starts as soon as I know that my usual diet is unavailable. It's definitely psychological. Trying new and unusual foods makes me really nervous, and I get an upset stomach when I'm nervous.

Quote:

Sorry I see nothing wrong with MSIL wanting to broaden the horizons of CSIL's children.
MSIL sounds to me like she's trying to undermine CSIL. This is something that I have _huge_ issues with, due to my own background, so I may be over-reacting. While I don't like the behaviour of either of them, my sympathies tend to be with CSIL because I can put myself in her shoes more easily than MSIL's.

I have issues with how some of my relatives raise their kids, too - but I don't think I'd be doing those kids any favours to declare an open war on the way they're being parented.


----------



## TinkerBelle (Jun 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
Who says? Why is being a "picky eater" considered such a bad thing? If you're fortunate enough to enjoy a wide variety of foods - good for you. Some of us aren't. Some of us also have huge comfort zone issues involved in being somewhere strange and having to eat strange food. I'm 38, and I'm still not over this. When I'm staying with my in-laws, my stomach feels slightly 'off' the entire visit - because I'm not in my home, and I'm eating strange foods. There's nothing wrong with what they serve - I've really enjoyed a few of the new foods I've tried (FIL loves that I like mustard greens, as he was the only one in the family who did before I came along). But, that doesn't change the emotional side of it for me. It's _hard_ to eat foods I'm not used to. When dh and I were thinking of moving to Knoxville, the different stock in the grocery stores was one of my biggest concerns. This may seem trivial to other people, but it's not trivial to me - and I'd bet there are a lot of 'picky eaters' in the same boat.

Then there's this one...a friend of our family...this little girl didn't like to eat meat when she was young. Her parents, in an attempt to get her to eat a 'balanced diet', and with real parental concern, always got her to eat some. It was a running battle for years. It eventually turned out that she lacks an enzyme necessary to digest meat properly. So - 'picky eater' turned out to be a genuine 'dietary concern'.

So - why is being 'picky' not valid?


Stormbride, if you don't mind elaborating, what do you mean by the stock in the grocery stores being different? I have not been to BC, so I would not know how the stores are there. I have lived in KY, IN, TN and now FL, and the only differences I have seen here are in the fact that there is more citrus fruit and other tropical fruits readily available than in the other states I lived in.

I promise I am not picking on you. I am simply curious.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

I'm not too sympathetic to the whole "Let picky eaters be" argument. When in Rome, do as the Romans, I say (and I can say that, as I DO live in Rome







). Seriously, picky eating is gastronomical snobbery. If you don't like the taste, I understand. If the food makes you physically ill (which it definitely will if you do not have the enzyme to digest it), I understand. But I think in our world, kids should be encouraged to try things as much as possible.


----------



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

But wherever you stand on the "picky eater" thing--you should be able to decide or you and your children.

Not have to be at the mercy of some else's philosophy on it.

CSIL has a philosophy of not coercing or encouraging her children to try new things. I'm sure she disagrees with the way MSIL handles food for her kids. It's not one is right and one is wrong. Different approaches, different ideas.

But, there *should* be a certain amount of respect for other family member's choices on the matter.

My ILs have fought with their kids at probably every meal since the kids were born. It is painful for me to watch. The bribing, the shaming, the coercion. And no surprise to me, the kids don't eat and they sneak treats, etc. But, I would NEVER presume to tell their kids that "in my house you can have dessert first, you don't have to eat what you don't want, etc." b/c it would be directly undermining my IL's parenting. And to set up "house rules" under the guise of "making the visit run smoothly" or whatever would just be over the top.

I have to say I am really surprised that on an alternative parenting board, there isn't more support for respecting parental choices.

I'm sure people think we, at MDC, are actively harming our children for co-sleeping, nursing, homeschooling, not spanking, etc. But, it doesn't give them the right to make those choices for our kids or try to impose their ideas when they can.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I have to say I am really surprised that on an alternative parenting board, there isn't more support for respecting parental choices.

I'm sure people think we, at MDC, are actively harming our children for co-sleeping, nursing, homeschooling, not spanking, etc. But, it doesn't give them the right to make those choices for our kids or try to impose their ideas when they can.


Well said.









I've taken so much crap from extended family for the way I am raising my kids (long term nursing, family bed, homeschooling, and gentle discpline) that I could never, ever side with someone who feels it is their place to "fix" the way their inlaws are parenting.

I also think that for a child, food sensativities and pickiness can be a bit tricky to sort out. One of my DDs is lactose intolerate and is VERY picky. She doesn't trust new foods where things are mixed together -- even when she is told that they are dairy free. Thank god we have enough money we would never have to accept "hospitality" from someone like MSIL in order to see our extended family.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TinkerBelle* 
Stormbride, if you don't mind elaborating, what do you mean by the stock in the grocery stores being different? I have not been to BC, so I would not know how the stores are there. I have lived in KY, IN, TN and now FL, and the only differences I have seen here are in the fact that there is more citrus fruit and other tropical fruits readily available than in the other states I lived in.

I promise I am not picking on you. I am simply curious.

Brand names are different. Some products are harder to find. One example is roasted sunflower seeds. They're my favourite snack item - I've been hooked on them since I was about five. They're in virtually every corner store, grocery store - even some gas stations - here. I think it was my third trip to Knoxville before I managed to find them at a store in the area (Fresh Market). My MIL bought us bagels last time we visited, and they didn't taste quite right to me - lots of little things like that. I just know the food won't be the same.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
I'm not too sympathetic to the whole "Let picky eaters be" argument. When in Rome, do as the Romans, I say (and I can say that, as I DO live in Rome







). Seriously, picky eating is gastronomical snobbery. If you don't like the taste, I understand. If the food makes you physically ill (which it definitely will if you do not have the enzyme to digest it), I understand. But I think in our world, kids should be encouraged to try things as much as possible.

I was encouraged. I'm still 'picky'. (I also don't consider 'you can't feed your kids what you want to feed them and they want to eat' to be encouraging.)

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by 'gastronomical snobbery'. I think the gastronomical snobs are the ones who enjoy trying new foods and experimenting with different kinds of cooking and eating a huge variety of foods - so they think they have the right to demand that the rest of us mimic their approach.


----------



## MomInCalifornia (Jul 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I was encouraged. I'm still 'picky'. (I also don't consider 'you can't feed your kids what you want to feed them and they want to eat' to be encouraging.)

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by 'gastronomical snobbery'. I think the gastronomical snobs are the ones who enjoy trying new foods and experimenting with different kinds of cooking and eating a huge variety of foods - so they think they have the right to demand that the rest of us mimic their approach.


Just out of curiocity...what do you eat??? You have me all curious now


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:

But wherever you stand on the "picky eater" thing--you should be able to decide or you and your children.

Not have to be at the mercy of some else's philosophy on it.

CSIL has a philosophy of not coercing or encouraging her children to try new things. I'm sure she disagrees with the way MSIL handles food for her kids. It's not one is right and one is wrong. Different approaches, different ideas.
Again, from what I understand, noone was forcing CSIL's kids to eat what was on the table. I don't think that MSIL said that they MUST eat her food. As I have stated before, even if MSIL had wanted to do that, it would be impossible short of hooking the kids up to intravenous.







If they don't want to try the food, they don't have to. It is a question of good manners among adults. Personally, I would be very offended if a mother who was staying at my house pulled out pb&j for her EIGHT YEAR OLD CHILD at every meal that I had prepared. Again, it's not a question of tolerating other parental choices. I do that all the time with other children at our house. It is a question of good manners.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Again, from what I understand, noone was forcing CSIL's kids to eat what was on the table. I don't think that MSIL said that they MUST eat her food. As I have stated before, even if MSIL had wanted to do that, it would be impossible short of hooking the kids up to intravenous.







If they don't want to try the food, they don't have to. It is a question of good manners among adults. Personally, I would be very offended if a mother who was staying at my house pulled out pb&j for her EIGHT YEAR OLD CHILD at every meal that I had prepared. Again, it's not a question of tolerating other parental choices. I do that all the time with other children at our house. It is a question of good manners.

It's not about manners in this situation.

MSIL is doing it b/c she finds her nieces' pickiness limiting and sad and she feels that this is a good way for them to overcome that. Go back and read what Maya wrote.

And here's the thing about manners: They are supposed to be used to make people feel more comfortable. THey are social *graces.* What is gracious about FORBIDDING a house guest to have a food they like at dinner with everyone else? Especially when they were hungry from swimming and playing all day? Did you read the part where the child burst into tears? How is that good manners on the hostess' part? How is that anything other than a power struggle betw. and adult and an 8 yr. old?

Can you elaborate on why you would be offended by what a child ate while staying at your home? I really don't get it. It's not a personal rejection. It's not an indictment of your cooking skills. People like certain things. And if you know what a particular person likes, why wouldn't you just serve that?


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Well, as it has come up on a few very different threads.....my ethics go before manners. Making a child (or adult for that matter) feel miserable in the name of "manners" is rude.....whether it "works" or not. Playing power struggle over food borders on "ethical dilemma" for me and I would not stand for it. I have seen too many eating disorders to play that game. Luckily I am not in this situation and probably never will be. Dd eats everything. But if I have a guest that seriously cannot stomach anything on my table, then I will be more than happy to make the peanut butter sandwich for them. Be it a 2 yo or a 70 yo. That is called being a good hostess anyway. So who is being rude here? And sorry, but 8yo is still a baby in many ways anyway. An 8 yo still has a very hard time obstaining from food for an hour (until the your-allowed-to-eat-PBJ-in-your-room-alone-hour) after playing all day AND do it graciously.

I was a VERY picky eater as a child. Despite not being forced to eat anything and *gasp* bringing my own food to many things until half-way through high school, I was able to broaden my own horizons when I was ready. I eat almost anything and eat most of the foods I could barely stand to look at when I was 8. No well-meaning-but-out-of-line aunt would have changed that. I still to this day cannot drink strange tap water. I have no idea why. But I will literally throw up on a table if I try to drink a glass of water at dinner at my ILs house. So, I bring my own. Rude? Maybe. Less rude than barf on a table I gather........


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
People like certain things. And if you know what a particular person likes, why wouldn't you just serve that?









I am not a short order cook. If there were upwards of 20 people staying at my house I would not cook to each person's specifications. You've got to be kidding.

I would cook one main meal, trying to keep it as broad and with as many choices that were reasonable. Homemade pizza with bread and various dipping sauces seems like a good choice to me.

Where MSIL (whom I'd still rather have in my house than CSIL) and I differ is, if the kids sat down and really didn't want to try anything, CSIL could knock herself out and fix them an alternative.

I don't mind catering to pickier eaters, but the rules change somewhat when I'm serving 20+ as opposed to 10 and under.


----------



## Rivka5 (Jul 13, 2005)

Before we get too worked up about CSIL's kids "starving" during the dinner hour, let's keep in mind that nothing was preventing CSIL from serving them PB&J _before_ the rest of the family sat down to dinner.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
It's not about manners in this situation.

MSIL is doing it b/c she finds her nieces' pickiness limiting and sad and she feels that this is a good way for them to overcome that. Go back and read what Maya wrote.

And here's the thing about manners: They are supposed to be used to make people feel more comfortable. THey are social *graces.* What is gracious about FORBIDDING a house guest to have a food they like at dinner with everyone else? Especially when they were hungry from swimming and playing all day? Did you read the part where the child burst into tears? How is that good manners on the hostess' part? How is that anything other than a power struggle betw. and adult and an 8 yr. old?

Can you elaborate on why you would be offended by what a child ate while staying at your home? I really don't get it. It's not a personal rejection. It's not an indictment of your cooking skills. People like certain things. And if you know what a particular person likes, why wouldn't you just serve that?









Social graces also apply to how you behave in other peoples homes. Apart from being seriously pissed at any adult who comes to my home a plops their own food on my table at dinner time it is also a matter of what CSIL is teaching her children about respecting other people and the hospitality they offer.

I can tell you from the point of a mother with a severely allergic child and two really really picky eaters that it would never occur to me to serve my own food to my children unless necessary. I find out what is being served ahead of time for my allergic child and make changes as necessary to insure that he is eating as similarily as everyone else; after that I put in front of them what is being served. Whether they eat it or not is their responsibility. But I DON'T wait until the dinner is one the table and then say, "my kids won't like this, so here (plop) they will eat this instead."

Had CSIL approached this in a different way then maybe it could be argued that the onus is on MSIL to accomadate the culinary demands of the children at all meals but CSIL did not make this about anything more than a parenting style that in her mind supercede good ediquette and politeness.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
I am not a short order cook. If there were upwards of 20 people staying at my house I would not cook to each person's specifications. You've got to be kidding.

I would cook one main meal, trying to keep it as broad and with as many choices that were reasonable. Homemade pizza with bread and various dipping sauces seems like a good choice to me.

Where MSIL (whom I'd still rather have in my house than CSIL) and I differ is, if the kids sat down and really didn't want to try anything, CSIL could knock herself out and fix them an alternative.

I don't mind catering to pickier eaters, but the rules change somewhat when I'm serving 20+ as opposed to 10 and under.

I'm certainly not suggesting cooking to 20 different peson's specifications.

Pizza and such sounds like a good choice to you, so that's a good choice for all? It wasn't a good choice for the niece.

No one was asking MSIL to prepare a separate meal.

CSIL was wanting to prepare and offer her children food that they liked during dinner.

Again, how does that impact others, unless it's a parenting difference that MSIL can't let go of?


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Had CSIL approached this in a different way then maybe it could be argued that the onus is on MSIL to accomadate the culinary demands of the children at all meals but CSIL did not make this about anything more than a parenting style that in her mind supercede good ediquette and politeness.

This isn't a dinner party with the queen. THis is a family reunion for a week.

No one is asking MSIL to "accomadate the culinary demands of the children."

Her SIL wanted to make and serve a sandwich during the mealtime to her child. That's really that big a deal to you? Why would you care what other people feed their kids? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just really don't understand where it's anybody else's business, or frankly, why it would even cross your radar screen.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I'm certainly not suggesting cooking to 20 different peson's specifications.

Pizza and such sounds like a good choice to you, so that's a good choice for all? It wasn't a good choice for the niece.

No one was asking MSIL to prepare a separate meal.

CSIL was wanting to prepare and offer her children food that they liked during dinner.

Again, how does that impact others, unless it's a parenting difference that MSIL can't let go of?

The neice was actually excited about the prospect of pizza. It wasn't until she saw it and realized it wasn't the *exact* pizza she was expecting that it all fell apart. Therefore pizza *was* a reasonable choice. The kids like pizza. The 8 year old was just picky enough to not like the particular pizza that was served. Something MSIL could not have known until the meal was served.

Like I said, CSIL could fix whatever she wanted *after* the meal had been served. When I'm cooking for 20 people, get out of my kitchen unless you are helping me. Call it a personal quirk.

MM, I can hear what you are saying and agree with you to certain extent. I think that for very young children and smaller groups what you are saying is reasonable. I'm saying I can't blame MSIL for wanting to get some control when she had 20+ people staying at her house. When you've got a group that large you've got to have some rules.

I'm a fan of picking your battles at someone else's house. For me, breastfeeding whenever and whereever is a battle I'll fight. Not leaving my children to cry is a battle I'll fight. Demanding that my 8years and older children be fed exactly what they want at all times? Not a battle I'm going to fight. You, obviously, will. I, personally, feel that children that old (catering a bit to a tired, cranky 8 year old) can manage on a special trip so long as the food they liked was available at the house (which it was in this case) and I could fix it for them before and/or after meals.

At the end of the day, I don't think either SIL is mentally unstable or overly demanding. I see a MSIL trying to get some control in HER OWN HOUSE and being just a little pickier than I would be, and a CSIL who handled being outside her comfort zone less well than her own children. Both flawed people, like all of us. Still Team MSIL.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
The neice was actually excited about the prospect of pizza. It wasn't until she saw it and realized it wasn't the *exact* pizza she was expecting that it all fell apart. Therefore pizza *was* a reasonable choice. The kids like pizza. The 8 year old was just picky enough to not like the particular pizza that was served. Something MSIL could not have known until the meal was served.

Like I said, CSIL could fix whatever she wanted *after* the meal had been served. When I'm cooking for 20 people, get out of my kitchen unless you are helping me. Call it a personal quirk.

But it wasn't a reasonable choice if she didn't like it. I can say we're having pizza and have a room full of kids all excited, but if I pull out an anchovy pizza, then it's not really a good choice anymore. You see?

And that's the thing, if MSIL was saying, "I really can't have people milling about the kitchen." I would be 100% fine with that.

But, it's not about that.

It's not about her being offended b/c people don't like her cooking.

It's about her thinking that CSIL has made her kids picky and limited b/c she offers pbj or other choices that the kids are comfortable with. And MSIL has taken it upon herself to try to change that by making a rule that other choices not be offered during the meal times.

THAT is what I have a problem with.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
I'm a fan of picking your battles at someone else's house. For me, breastfeeding whenever and whereever is a battle I'll fight. Not leaving my children to cry is a battle I'll fight. Demanding that my 8years and older children be fed exactly what they want at all times? Not a battle I'm going to fight. You, obviously, will.

But, it's not about any particular issue for me. It's the *principle* that parents--even if they are in someone else's home--should be able to parent their children the way they see fit (barring the obvious abuse and such).

And I think a person who is so sure that they know what's best for other families, that they would make up rules to foist their parenting agenda upon someone else has some real issues.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But, it's not about any particular issue for me. *It's the *principle* that parents--even if they are in someone else's home--should be able to parent their children the way they see fit (barring the obvious abuse and such).*

And I think a person who is so sure that they know what's best for other families, that they would make up rules to foist their parenting agenda upon someone else has some real issues.

bolding mine

I guess this is the crux of the issue. I do disagree. I don't think you should be able to parent any way you want in someone else's house, especially when trying to accomodate at least 3 families. That is where picking your battles comes in. Everyone has got to compromise.

CSIL and MSIL both felt the food issue was a battle worth fighting. I think they both made it more of a battle than it should have been. BUT when it comes down to it it's MSIL's house and I don't think her requests were unreasonable.

You disagree and feel her requests were unreasonable. There's no arguing that. Obviously you and MSIL won't be getting together any time soon.









This was something that was agreed upon ahead of time. The compromises were made. Any issues CSIL still had should be with her husband, not with MSIL. If I felt *that* uncomfortable in my SIL's house I would want to stay somewhere else. A rented house/condo or a hotel. If my dh would not respect that, it's my problem with HIM, not with my SIL.

Where were the men in all this any way? Did CBIL compromise on CSIL's behalf without really consulting her? Did he back her (metaphorically) into a corner and not really leave her a "choice"? Did he pull a guilt trip? Or did CSIL agree to the compromise verbally and then pout when she got there?

If she had an active role in the compromise at all, once CSIL got to HI she should have respected what was agreed upon without pouting, and appreciated her HI vacation. If CBIL did not give her much of a choice than I can at least see why she acted so unhappy with the compromises.

At the end of the day I think the real problem lies with CSIL and CBIL. They agreed to the rules, they made the compromises. If CSIL was still unhappy with the result she should've brought it up with her husband. It's not MSIL's fault that the agreements EVERYONE made left CSIL unhappy.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
bolding mine

I guess this is the crux of the issue. I do disagree. I don't think you should be able to parent any way you want in someone else's house, especially when trying to accomodate at least 3 families. That is where picking your battles comes in. Everyone has got to compromise.

Wait, wait, wait. I didn't say parent "any way you want." I think that issues of consideration and decency obviously come into play.

But, if the choice is allow a mom to fix a bpj sandwich or have the kid eat after the meal in her room JUST b/c the host parent doesn't agree with that philosophy, I don't see how that as reasonable. I guess other people feel differently.

I think on an issue like this, where it's no skin off anyone else's nose, it's just a mean power play.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

I noticed that CSIL didn't take PB&J to the restaurant. WHY?! Was it because she was afraid that MSIL would be mad at her or that the house rules applied at the restaurant. Or

Was it because she felt that it would be impolite and uncivilized to bring your own food to a restaurant? If this is the case, then all the arguments about not force feeding picky children are mut, because then it should apply in restaurants as well. CSIL believed that her personal rules should apply in someone elses home. But they weren't strong enough to apply out in the general public arena.


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

I haven't seen from the first thread or this thread where MSIL is trying to "fix" anybody or their children. From the email MSIL sent out before the trip it seems that there have been some problems in the past, and she was trying to come to a clear compromise so that everything for the children is equal.

I remember being a child in a family of cousins who were picky eaters and many LONG family dinners where they whined and complained threw dinner. I was their age and even I thought as a child they were both pains in the a$$. We're very close now.

MSIL never said everybody had to come to dinner. Everybody could decide to go out to dinner if they liked. She said that if you come to family dinner with everybody else that they won't be serving PB&J. Which I don't think is the most evil request. Especially when if could (you never know) set up a problem for the other kids wondering why if they are expected to be polite and try dinner that other's can eat PB&J every night. CSIL could have made her kids PB&J before dinner so that they wouldn't be hungry if she liked, OR taken them out to dinner. She had choices.

The rules were IMO made to make everything for the whole extended family even and fair. They weren't forcing children to eat food that they are allergic to. They weren't making a no breast feeding in our home rule. Nobody was forcing beef into a vegan lifestyle. It was simply no PB&J at the table. I don't get why that's such a big deal.

I think it's sad that some would not have gone on the trip only because MSIL made house rules. It seems like a lovely trip to be invited to. I wouldn't want my dd to miss out of such a cool opportunity just because I as an adult wouldn't want to compromise.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Wait, wait, wait. I didn't say parent "any way you want." I think that issues of consideration and decency obviously come into play.

But, if the choice is allow a mom to fix a bpj sandwich or have the kid eat after the meal in her room JUST b/c the host parent doesn't agree with that philosophy, I don't see how that as reasonable. I guess other people feel differently.

I think on an issue like this, where it's no skin off anyone else's nose, it's just a mean power play.

Believe me, I do agree with you that a pb&j sandwich is no big deal. That's what I mean when I say that both of them made too much out of the food thing. CSIL for not being able to follow the rule that she agreed to, that the kids had to eat the pb&j before dinner or wait until after. MSIL for not allowing it during the meal, at least when it was clear the kids were really not happy with what was served - especially the youngest girl.

MSIL's requests were not super unreasonable to me. These were older kids, their favorite food was available, just not during the main meal.

CSIL's presence in the house means she agreed to the arrangement. If she didn't agree with it at all, that's a problem she and her husband should have worked out. Not MSIL's issue. If she verbally agreed to the rules to keep the peace or whatever, well sometimes you pay a price to keep the peace. Again, it's CSIL's issue, not MSIL's.

If CSIL truly had a problem with the rules, she should not have agreed to them. She should have worked something out with her husband. I firmly believe that if you agree to the house rules before buying your tickets and arriving, you follow them with a pleasantly civil attitude - barring extreme circumstances. You don't pout to other family members and your kids. You don't act like a kid not getting their way. You act like someone who agreed to these rules and is having a fun vacation in Hawaii. You make the best of it and set a good example for your kids. You let your kids know that sometimes you have to compromise and you make the best of it when you do.

ETA

Quote:

CSIL could have made her kids PB&J before dinner so that they wouldn't be hungry if she liked, OR taken them out to dinner. She had choices.
I think this is an important point. CSIL had choices. She seems to have chosen the martyr road. That's my problem with her. She agreed to these rules, rules that left her with choices, yet she makes her choices and acts like a martyr. Grow up.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
This isn't a dinner party with the queen. THis is a family reunion for a week.

No one is asking MSIL to "accomadate the culinary demands of the children."

Her SIL wanted to make and serve a sandwich during the mealtime to her child. That's really that big a deal to you? Why would you care what other people feed their kids? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just really don't understand where it's anybody else's business, or frankly, why it would even cross your radar screen.

Because CSIL made this about parenting choices superceding politeness. She didn't ask ahead of time or quietly inquire before hand in order to accomodate her children. Remember that the food wasn't the only dinner time issue. The getting up whenever they wanted and cleaning up afterward also came into play. Had it been the one issue it could have been simply satisfing picky children but it was about how she choose to parent regardless of where she was and who else was around or what was expected of everyone else around them.


----------



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

CSIL did follow the rules, though. When her kids asked, she reminded them that they had discussed the rules beforehand and that they needed to do as MSIL said. And they did.

And I agree, that if you agree to it then you do it. And from everything Maya wrote it sounds as if she did.

(I think she TOTALLY should have said thank you for the sushi dinner! Rude.)

But, again, just because it's your house and you *can,* doesn't necessarily mean you *should.*


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Because CSIL made this about parenting choices superceding politeness. She didn't ask ahead of time or quietly inquire before hand in order to accomodate her children. Remember that the food wasn't the only dinner time issue. The getting up whenever they wanted and cleaning up afterward also came into play. Had it been the one issue it could have been simply satisfing picky children but it was about how she choose to parent regardless of where she was and who else was around or what was expected of everyone else around them.

CSIL didn't have a chance to ask ahead of time. MSIL made the rules based on last year's visit and sent them out beforehand.

And if you want to make rules that affect parenting issues which are disruptive or whatever, then I'm pretty OK with that. But, I'm not sure how making a sandwich or skipping a party fits into that category. I just don't think it's reasonable.


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 

I'm a fan of picking your battles at someone else's house. For me, breastfeeding whenever and whereever is a battle I'll fight. Not leaving my children to cry is a battle I'll fight. Demanding that my 8years and older children be fed exactly what they want at all times? Not a battle I'm going to fight.










We each have our own battles.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AbigailsMomSarah* 
Just out of curiocity...what do you eat??? You have me all curious now









Okay - this is long!

I grew up on a basically British diet, I guess - kind of standard 'meat and potatoes', with a few variations. I still eat a lot of the same things (shepherd's pie, macaroni and cheese from scratch, toad in the hole), although I've modified a few recipes here and there.

_Meat/Poultry/Fish:_ I eat ground beef quite a bit...burgers, shepherd's pie, something called 'potato boats', etc. I like _really_ lean steak reasonably well, but don't eat if often, due to cost. I occasionally eat roast beef. Bison is okay, but not my favourite.

I like pork chops, if they're _really_ lean. I like ham (the sole exception to my strong aversion to meat fat), but don't like bacon.

I like chicken breasts, cooked by almost any method. I don't much like drumsticks, and hate both wings and thighs. I really, really like turkey breast. I don't care for goose and haven't tried duck.

I like every kind of fish that I've tried - if a small child would draw it as a triangle attached to a sideways teardrop - especially salmon (oh - except catfish). I _love_ salmon. I love shrimp (little shrimp/big shrimp - doesn't matter) and crab. I'm avoiding lobster, because it's way too expensive. I like clams and mussels okay - don't like oysters. I'm afraid of calamari...tried it twice and liked it okay once, and almost threw up once.

_Dairy:_ I'm ambivalent about milk. I've _finally_ trained myself to like yogurt, but it took about 15 years, and constant self-lecturing. I like cheddar, mozzarella and parmesan, but no other cheeses (I can handle some of them in sauces...asiago, ricotta, etc.). Cottage cheese makes me feel ill. I'm learning to use sour cream in cooking, but only in the last three or four years. Cream cheese is heavenly. I could live on whipping cream and ice cream *sigh*.

_Produce:_ I'll list what I don't like. I don't like eggplant. I don't really like avocadoes or squash, but can eat them. Mushrooms are _vile_. I can't stand the taste of them at all...it's hard to make myself eat something if I know there are mushrooms in it, even if I can't taste them! I think I like all other fruits and veggies that I've tried...but there are many that I haven't.

As far as seasonings and regional cuisine and such:
I'll eat tacoes, chili, spaghetti & pizza...but only since my early/mid-20s, and it took a _lot_ of work to get there. You couldn't have paid me to eat any of them in my teens.
I don't like authentic Chinese cooking at all. I like some of the North American variants (egg rolls, chow mein, fried rice, breaded almond chicken, _some_ chop sueys). I hate soy sauce. In fact, I don't like any soy products I've tried.
I don't like any of the Japanese food I've tried. I don't like teryaki.
I like all the Indian and Sri Lankan food I've tried, although a lot of it is too spicy.
Italian food based in cream sauces I tend to like, but have never really been into the rest of it (aside from spaghetti & pizza above - do they even count?).
I didn't much like real Mexican food the one time I tried it.
I like a lot of spices, but there's one I hate - think it's cilantro - completely ruins anything for me. I don't like hot peppers...fresh, powder, flake, sauce - all icky.
I like sweet pickles and dills...no others - even the smell of olives makes me ill.

I don't know what else. I know there are lots of things I don't like, but the above list covers a lot of them. Some of them seem trivial - like mushrooms - but look at a restaurant menu sometime, and notice how many recipes have mushrooms in them! It's not uncommon for me to have only one real option on an entire restaurant menu.

This is the new, adventurous me. DH has been very gently urging me to try new things for several years (eg. ordering something I like, and offering to switch if I don't like my 'experiment'), and there are a fair number of things on my 'like' list that wouldn't have been there in 2002. This is as far as I've made it so far...I'm 38.


----------



## SneakyPie (Jan 13, 2002)

Not that anyone has asked us, but . . .







Even though both of them seem to set each other's teeth on edge, I'd probably have to side slightly with CSIL. I mean, both of them seem to have done nothing more than a slight failure of grace, and who among us has never done that? MSIL comes across as bossy and thinking that things can be your way if only you insist upon it strongly enough. CSIL seems like she's been stretched a little thin dealing with the food and togetherness needs of her brood. (I mean really, no matter how old the child, if you've gone through days or years of having to get super-creative to make sure your kid eats enough, it can be a strain. And it can be very hard to believe that someone else could convince that child to enjoy a new food.)

There has been a lot of talk about how rude it is for a guest not to try the food on the table -- and I agree it's an ideal -- but not only are we talking about children here, but there are *20* people around that table. Effort or no effort, that still meant that 17 other people were eating the considerately-planned menu each day. Even if I *were* a skoche irritated, I think I'd suck it up and take the compliments. (And besides, as has been pointed out before, CSIL knows the score with her kids and handled it -- no special favors asked.)

I really do hope that MSIL's kids don't grow older into eating issues, health problems, behavioural challenges, etc. But honestly if anything like that were to happen (again, God forbid), I wonder if that would loosen her up a bit about how other people's kid should act. (Hastening to repeat that I do NOT wish problems on a family!)


----------



## Twocoolboys (Mar 10, 2006)

Does this remind anyone else of Are Your There God, It's Me, Margaret? I admit that it has been many, many years since I read this book, but didn't the main character go to a bar mitzvah with a pb&j sandwich just in case she didn't like any of the food served? I think she ended up eating the sandwich in the bathroom - lol.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Twocoolboys* 
Does this remind anyone else of Are Your There God, It's Me, Margaret? I admit that it has been many, many years since I read this book, but didn't the main character go to a bar mitzvah with a pb&j sandwich just in case she didn't like any of the food served? I think she ended up eating the sandwich in the bathroom - lol.


Huh! I LOVED that book, but don't remember that scene. Then again its been like 30 years since I read it!


----------



## Twocoolboys (Mar 10, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
Huh! I LOVED that book, but don't remember that scene. Then again its been like 30 years since I read it!


I hope I have the right book - lol! It's been close to 30 years since I've read it too, but that scene always stuck with me. But, maybe I'm wrong about the book. It was in some book I read when I was in about 5th grade, I know that. LOL


----------



## Rivka5 (Jul 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Twocoolboys* 
Does this remind anyone else of Are Your There God, It's Me, Margaret? I admit that it has been many, many years since I read this book, but didn't the main character go to a bar mitzvah with a pb&j sandwich just in case she didn't like any of the food served? I think she ended up eating the sandwich in the bathroom - lol.

You're close - it's Judy Blume, all right. That scene was in "Blubber." And she runs into the girl her class torments at the Bar Mitzvah, and it's really uncomfortable.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Well, I know without a shadow of a doubt I wouldn't have gone on this trip.

If I ever go to Hawaii, I want to *enjoy* myself. A trip that begins with an email explaining how I'm expected to parent, party, eat, and clean? *Shudders*. So, I'm not any side here, because I really don't understand CSIL decision to subject herself or her kids to that environment.

Quote:

CSIL said she and DH had talked with the girls about this and told them that they have to folow the house rules which meant having chores like setting the table or cleaning the plates from the table. All of the kids did this. When MSIL told one of CSIL's dd's to pick up some stickers, she at first tried to explan that she had not been using them and MSIL was like "that does not matter, you are here, please pick them up." DN looked at her mom but her dad then interjected "DD you know we need to follow Aunties house rules"

Quote:

This was our last night there and everyone was kind of exhausted. As you may recall, MSIL's rule was that the kids could not come and the adults were expected to.
...with her csil's dh holding on to her waist like he had to force her back into the party....

I don't understand either of these SIL









It does bother me that people keep saying the kids are "all at least 8 years old and should roll with the punches".

*Everyone* said that the CSIL should have gone to a hotel or not gone at all if she didn't like it. And everyone seemed to agree that MSIL would be out of line interfering with a small child or infant. So babies and adults don't have to put up with people like MSIL. But...everyone in between the ages of 4 and 18 do? Why couldn't the niece explain those were not her stickers? Why did she have to shut up and clean? I know, I know...MSIL had the same deal with CSIL--do what I say or don't stay... I don't understand either one of them creating or consenting to this arrangment.


----------



## Flor (Nov 19, 2003)

I have felt for CSIL from the beginning, because I had to go visit in laws for a week FOR DH, and it isn't fun to be so uncomfortable for a whole week. It's not just one day. If I am visiting someone for a few hours, of course it is their rules. But, if I invite people to my house for a week, especially children, you bet I'm am going to go out of my way to make them comfortable with foods and activities they like. As I recall, the CSIL's family could not afford to just go stay somewhere else. I can imagine the situation. In my case, I want the kids to go see their grandparents, there is no way I am staying at their house for a week, but we can't afford a hotel for the week. So what do you do? You can guess that I'll be there for a week at their house again.

The detail with the party that annoyed me wasn't that the children had to be upstairs, that's fine, but that the adults HAD to attend. Do they have to laugh and drink a certain amount too? I just can't imagine my in laws saying, "Everyone WILL watch our favorite tv show." "Everyone WILL take turns driving the tractor."


----------



## bri276 (Mar 24, 2005)

I agree with you heartmama -as usual









this is sort of OT- but not-

when I was around 8 I spent a week at my aunt & uncles house. the first day, my cousin and I (same age) were playing in the living room, roughhousing and whatnot. something happened and I either slipped and grabbed or hit her- not intentionally or violently, and she wasn't injured- but my aunt was extremely upset at me and decided to LOCK me in my cousin's room. I remember they opened the door once so that my cousin could throw my cabbage patch doll at me, then closed it. I laid on the bed and cried, so scared and confused as to why I was being treated this way for an accident, at home if it had been my sister, no one would have punished me, and never so severely.

on that trip I also remember being forced to get down on my hands and knees to pick up any crumbs that may have fallen on the floor after eating. by my uncle who was ex-military. even at 8, I felt humiliated. just because I had fun playing with my cousin on that trip, doesn't mean I wasn't miserable, lonely, and sometimes scared- granted, my parents were not there, that would have helped.

I think it's easy to forget what it feels like to be 8. still so much a small child emotionally. unable to see through the actions of adults because your world is so small, you take each injustice personally, as if you are at fault for it. it is intimidating enough to leave home, travel, and stay at someone else's home- when you can sense that you, or your parents, are not TRULY welcome to be yourselves, and that your own mother's authority is being undermined, it must be uncomfortable. I would never bend someone else's non-abusive parenting style to fit the "rules" of my house, because doing so isn't fair to their children. jmho. I don't think either SIL are bad people- just misguided. ftr there are things I agree and disagree with them both, but have to choose CSIL overall.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Maya44, are you even following this thread anymore?


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Maya44, are you even following this thread anymore?










Still here. Spoke with CSIL and MSIL over the weekend. CSIL told me she was happy to be home, though her kids asked on the airplane if they could 'for sure' go back next year. I guess CSIL had said she would go this time but probably not again with all these rules in place. She told the girls that if they went again the same rules would be in place and they said that they did not care.

She also said her oldest DD asked if she could make shrimp sometime. She said to me "Don't tell MSIL. She'll get too much pleasure out of that!"


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

when I was around 8 I spent a week at my aunt & uncles house. the first day, my cousin and I (same age) were playing in the living room, roughhousing and whatnot. something happened and I either slipped and grabbed or hit her- not intentionally or violently, and she wasn't injured- but my aunt was extremely upset at me and decided to LOCK me in my cousin's room. I remember they opened the door once so that my cousin could throw my cabbage patch doll at me, then closed it. I laid on the bed and cried, so scared and confused as to why I was being treated this way for an accident, at home if it had been my sister, no one would have punished me, and never so severely.
This is exactly what I mean.

All the talk about "When in Rome..." and big kids "rolling with the punches"....uh, we travel all the time. These phrases mean things like... you pick dinner from the choices offered at the only rest stop for miles...you don't complain about the lumpy hide-a-bed Uncle Frank let you sleep on for free....you find something else to do till the next stop when you realize your gameboy was packed in a bag at the bottom of the trunk...you take shoes off at the door if that's what the host family does too...you remember to store their bread in the fridge, even though at home you store it in the pantry....

"When In Rome" does not mean that you meekly subject yourself to someone who speaks to you like a second class citizen. It doesn't mean silently enduring someone who oppress's your right to explain yourself, attend a party, bring and prepare your own snack foods etc.

We just got back from staying two weeks with a host family out of state during a workshop. Ds was fabulous if I do say so...polite, considerate, and made a real effort to do everything on their schedule. At home we don't eat at formal times, but the host family was very big into scheduled meals. Did they force us to eat? No, they simply asked around 3pm if we planned to eat with them at 6, and as we always say YES to free food, we adjusted to their schedule. Ds did not HAVE to eat with us...the host herself made a point of saying that there was bread and peanut butter if he wanted that (how ironic!). But he wanted to be where the action was and 99% of the time he ate with the group. By the end of the first week he was very comfortable in their routine. Nobody ever forced him, nobody made it their business to micro manage when/what/how ds ate. He enjoyed picking and choosing from what was on the table, and usually ate the main course, although there were some meals where he chose to just eat a roll or a little salad at the table and then had a sandwich afterwards. It was just a non-issue. I honestly think adults make these things into big deals-not the kids.

In fact I thought it was hysterical at the end of the first week ds piped up during dinner and said 'I get it!. When everyone is gone all day at work or at school and don't see each other, they eat a meal at the same time so that everyone gets to tell about their day. Is that right?'. Apparently ds had been politely observing for a week that all the adults went over their day while they ate-talking about the workshop or sightseeing experiences. He figured out on his own the point of "dinner at 6". Ds decided given the daytime schedules involved....dinner at 6 was a very sensible plan









Maya...did you have any idea you'd get 7 pages out of this thread


----------



## Twocoolboys (Mar 10, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rivka5* 
You're close - it's Judy Blume, all right. That scene was in "Blubber." And she runs into the girl her class torments at the Bar Mitzvah, and it's really uncomfortable.


Thank you! At least I had the right author - lol!


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
CSIL didn't have a chance to ask ahead of time. MSIL made the rules based on last year's visit and sent them out beforehand.

And if you want to make rules that affect parenting issues which are disruptive or whatever, then I'm pretty OK with that. But, I'm not sure how making a sandwich or skipping a party fits into that category. I just don't think it's reasonable.

Actually, I get the feeling that this was not based simply on last years trip but on the previous year and the year before that. It appears that CSIL has gone on this trip every year with the idea in mind that HER rules, parenting styles and ideologies (no adult only parties) apply no matter where she is and who is around. I think that based on last years temper tantrum by her that MSIL had just had enough of it and put her foot down on everything rather than just on one or two things.

Like I said, had CSIL approached MSIL years ago quietly and said, "you know I want to come but I have a rule for raising my children that includes only giving them what they want at meals, can I please be allowed to bring extra food for them at meals." Then I can't see that MSIL wouldn't have either given in or politely suggested that she feed them ahead of time to avoid conflicts with the other 5+ children and 10+ adults.

Instead CSIL went each year and ran MSIL's house the way she ran her own house.

1. Don't believe in adults only parties - fine, leave the house with your children but instead she kept allowing them to come and had an adult temper tantrum when MSIL finally said no.

2. Don't believe in making your children pick up after themselves - fine, but in someone else's home don't tell your children they are allowed to disregard the requests of the hostess.

3. Don't believe in making your children sit through the entire meal - fine, eat somewhere else but don't disrupt the other 15 people at the table.

4. Don't believe in certain tv shows - fine, leave the room but don't make them turn off the tv for your children.

5. Don't believe in bed times - fine, stay with your children in their room so as to avoid disrupting the other sleeping children and relaxing adults but don't let them run someone else's house at 10:00 pm.

I don't think anyone in MSIL's camp will argue that she isn't overbearing on some of the smaller points however, I can see that after several years of CSIL's behavior and attitude it was just easier for her to put her foot down everywhere rather than just the big points. It guarantees that CSIL won't pick different battles next year in order to annoy on purpose.


----------



## NYCVeg (Jan 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bri276* 
I think it's easy to forget what it feels like to be 8. still so much a small child emotionally. unable to see through the actions of adults because your world is so small, you take each injustice personally, as if you are at fault for it. it is intimidating enough to leave home, travel, and stay at someone else's home- when you can sense that you, or your parents, are not TRULY welcome to be yourselves, and that your own mother's authority is being undermined, it must be uncomfortable. I would never bend someone else's non-abusive parenting style to fit the "rules" of my house, because doing so isn't fair to their children. jmho. I don't think either SIL are bad people- just misguided. ftr there are things I agree and disagree with them both, but have to choose CSIL overall.

I think the difference here is that the kids seemed to have a really great time. They enjoyed being upstairs having a "sleepover" with cousins--but CSIL was grumpy that they didn't prefer to be with her. They enjoyed going to the Japanese restaurant and trying the shrimp (and even asked their mom to make it again!) and didn't want to be left out--but CSIL didn't thank MBIL for the meal. Even the food didn't seem like much of an issue for the kids--one of CSIL's kids didn't want the pizza (though the other two enjoyed it), but seemed fine knowing that she would get PB+J later on. The kids asked if they could go back next here.

I guess the problem I have with CSIL's behavior (and I certainly don't think MSIL emerges from all this looking like a saint) is that she seems to be projecting onto her kids how she WANTS them to feel about MSIL, when really it's how SHE feels about MSIL.


----------



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

I think you are making a lot of assumptions and embellishments about what happened or what might have happened and drawing conclusions based on them.

I don't know where Maya stated anyone had "an adult temper tantrum," that children were "running the house" at 10 at night, etc.

Perhaps easier to stick to "the facts" and draw our conclusions from there. ?? Maybe? Makes it easier to discuss, it seems.

eta: directed towards mahrphkjh, not the above.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NYCVeg* 
I think the difference here is that the kids seemed to have a really great time. They enjoyed being upstairs having a "sleepover" with cousins--but CSIL was grumpy that they didn't prefer to be with her. They enjoyed going to the Japanese restaurant and trying the shrimp (and even asked their mom to make it again!) and didn't want to be left out--but CSIL didn't thank MBIL for the meal. Even the food didn't seem like much of an issue for the kids--one of CSIL's kids didn't want the pizza (though the other two enjoyed it), but seemed fine knowing that she would get PB+J later on. The kids asked if they could go back next here.

Well you could argue that, of course the kids had a good time LOL--they got to indulge in things they are used to having restricted--TV, sodas.

I think CSIL was grumpy b/c she HAD to attend the party, not b/c her kids didn't want her. Some people don't do well with parties--perhaps she's one of them. Especially if she's crunchy and alternative and MSIL/BSIL's guests are real mainstream. And some people think "kid only" events aren't nice--perhaps she's one of those people--that's the sense I got from the first thread. I got the impression that she was hoping to hang out with the kids more as an excuse to not have to go.

I'm glad the kids had fun. But, I don't think that's any great proof that you shouldn't try to tamper with other folks' parenting agendas.

I'm sure MSIL's kids would love to not have to do chores or have a bedtime in CSIL's house. But, it wouldn't make it any less rude for CSIL to step in in that regard when MSIL feels chores and bedtimes are important.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
It guarantees that CSIL won't pick different battles next year in order to annoy on purpose.

You think CSIL is trying to purposfully annoy MSIL?


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
You think CSIL is trying to purposfully annoy MSIL?

I strongly suspect that she is...but then, similar situations I've seen in my own extended family have probably biased my viewpoint









I'm glad that CSIL and MSIL were able to overcome their personality clash enough for all the kids to have a good time. It would suck for the kids to lose the opportunity to have fun and bond together because their mothers were being petty.


----------



## emmabelle (Jul 2, 2005)

I have followed both threads and I am team MSIL.









I think some of the 'arguing' here is pointless.









The kids had a great time... The neice actually did try new foods and (shocker) liked them! Has anyone stopped to think that maybe CSIL isnt allowing her kids to branch out and try new things? If she had brought pb&j with to the resturant, the child would not have tried, and enjoyed, shrimp. Now maybe the neice will feel confident and comfortable trying new things in the future.

I agree with whoever (sorry!) said that it seems CSIL is projecting her ideas about MSIL onto her children ('if we go back next year you will have to follow the same rules'), which is sad.

Anyway, it seems everyone had a great time regardless of the rules. The cousins got to see each other and the neice got to experience new foods.. Seems like a fun trip to me!


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I strongly suspect that she is...but then, similar situations I've seen in my own extended family have probably biased my viewpoint









So how? Like she doesn't really make her kids not do chores? Or have bedtimes? Or get up when they're done eating?

Those were some of the points of contention, so I'm not sure how CSIL would be doing those things to deliberately annoy MSIL. ?? Unless, you think she only does that stuff around MSIL. ?? I don't understand.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
So how? Like she doesn't really make her kids not do chores? Or have bedtimes? Or get up when they're done eating?

Those were some of the points of contention, so I'm not sure how CSIL would be doing those things to deliberately annoy MSIL. ?? Unless, you think she only does that stuff around MSIL. ?? I don't understand.

No, like two sisters in law trying to one up each other about who's parenting style is "best".

It gets old.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

The kids had a great time... The neice actually did try new foods and (shocker) liked them! Has anyone stopped to think that maybe CSIL isnt allowing her kids to branch out and try new things? If she had brought pb&j with to the resturant, the child would not have tried, and enjoyed, shrimp. Now maybe the neice will feel confident and comfortable trying new things in the future.
Ds tried new things with our host family and it wasn't necessary to force him. Did he try everything? No. Did he pick up a few new favorites? Yes.

I honestly have not seen with ds that knowing a sandwich is available means he will never try new foods.

And, I will say that in general, I notice that kids around 10 and up begin to try more foods *no matter how they were raised before that age*. By the teen years I definitely recall my friends starting to think it was 'cool' to eat lots of ethnic and foreign foods.

I really think MSIL and CSIL had a right to parent how they wanted, and there was just no need for one to be over-riding the other to "prove" anything


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emmabelle* 
Has anyone stopped to think that maybe CSIL isnt allowing her kids to branch out and try new things? If she had brought pb&j with to the resturant, the child would not have tried, and enjoyed, shrimp. Now maybe the neice will feel confident and comfortable trying new things in the future.

I think pretty much EVERYONE here thinks that CSIL isn't allowing her kids to branch out and try new things.

But, does that give someone else the right to step in and do it differently?

Maybe that's OK with you, I don't know. I don't think it's OK.

Just as I wouldn't think it was OK for someone to tell a formula feeding mother that she had to bf in my home, or a family who used a crib that they had to co-sleep in my home, or that a family couldn't put their baby in a swing for extended periods but had to sling them.

Just b/c we believe that bfing, co-sleeping, and babywearing are ideal, and just b/c their baby would probably be happier co-sleeping, etc. for the week in my house, does not change the fact that I would be imposing MY parenting agenda on another family.

Does that make sense? Regardless of the outcome, regardless of where you stand on the issue...for me the question is: Is it fair game to try to impose parenting styles/methods on people just b/c they are guests in your home (and if what they're doing isn't causing a mess or disurbing people or otherwise interfering with the well-being of the rest of the group)?

I just can't see how that's cool. Apparantly other people feel differently and that surprises me and I'm really trying to understand the ins and outs of that thinking. I find it *completely* baffling.







:









Quote:


Originally Posted by *emmabelle* 
I agree with whoever (sorry!) said that it seems CSIL is projecting her ideas about MSIL onto her children ('if we go back next year you will have to follow the same rules'), which is sad.

How is that statement projecting? Her kids asked if they could go back and she told them the conditions. Are you envisioning it said in a particular tone? I'm hearing, "Listen, I know you had some problems with the cleaning up and crying over the pizza, just so you know, that's all going to stand. Do you still agree to that?" And they said sure. It's not like the was complaining or trying to get them to talk smack about MSIL.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
No, like two sisters in law trying to one up each other about who's parenting style is "best".

It gets old.

No, I understand that level of "competition" among people, but I'm not seeing where that's the case here.

Like the TV thing, if CSIL was going on and on about how TV is the work of the devil and how much better off her kids were or whatever, I'd see what you mean.

But, based on what's been presented it seemed like CSIL was doing what she always does (and maybe being thougtless or ill-mannered), but not anything to "deliberately annoy" MSIL.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I think you are making a lot of assumptions and embellishments about what happened or what might have happened and drawing conclusions based on them.

I don't know where Maya stated anyone had "an adult temper tantrum," that children were "running the house" at 10 at night, etc.

Perhaps easier to stick to "the facts" and draw our conclusions from there. ?? Maybe? Makes it easier to discuss, it seems.

eta: directed towards mahrphkjh, not the above.

no, the exact story was that for several years MSIL allowed CSIL's children to come and go at the adult's only party because she felt that they were too young to expect to be away from mom and mom definitely wasn't asking them to stay away. Last year when the youngest was 6 and was interupting adults at the party MSIL finally told CSIL that the children were no longer allowed to come and go and must stay upstairs at their own party. At this point CSIL left the party NOT TO BE WITH HER CHILDREN but to hide out in her room while her children attended the children's party by themselves. THIS is an adult's temper tantrum which is what illicited the "adult's must attend" email and all subsequent rules. Until this point MSIL had allowed all disruptions to her home and disregards to her wishes.

In addition, Maya did say that CSIL did not have bed times for her children which was why MSIL made the rule that all children must be in their room at a certain time at night (see previous thread).


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
You think CSIL is trying to purposfully annoy MSIL?

Yes, in certain areas I do believe her behavior is purposefully antagonistic. Telling your children in front of their aunt that they don't have to listen to her and clean up IN HER HOME is either completely OBSTUSE in etiquette or undermining to the hostess to prove that your parenting style is better and more important that her wishes.


----------



## bri276 (Mar 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emmabelle* 
The kids had a great time... The neice actually did try new foods and (shocker) liked them! Has anyone stopped to think that maybe CSIL isnt allowing her kids to branch out and try new things? If she had brought pb&j with to the resturant, the child would not have tried, and enjoyed, shrimp. Now maybe the neice will feel confident and comfortable trying new things in the future.


reading the OP carefully, I picked up on one child not eating anything but rice at the restaurant...correct me if I'm wrong maya... that doesn't sound "great" to me...

absolutely, I think CSIL is making an error by basically encouraging her children to be picky. then again- they're her kids- that's totally her prerogative. it is not right for someone to override the judgment of the parents to try and break bad habits or "fix" other issues in children who are guests in their home JUST as the adults are. control issues.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I think pretty much EVERYONE here thinks that CSIL isn't allowing her kids to branch out and try new things.

Just as I wouldn't think it was OK for someone to tell a formula feeding mother that she had to bf in my home, or a family who used a crib that they had to co-sleep in my home, or that a family couldn't put their baby in a swing for extended periods but had to sling them.

.

exactly. though, I might pick the baby up and sling it myself


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Just as I wouldn't think it was OK for someone to tell a formula feeding mother that she had to bf in my home, or a family who used a crib that they had to co-sleep in my home, or that a family couldn't put their baby in a swing for extended periods but had to sling them.

Just b/c we believe that bfing, co-sleeping, and babywearing are ideal, and just b/c their baby would probably be happier co-sleeping, etc. for the week in my house, does not change the fact that I would be imposing MY parenting agenda on another family.

Actually, in your home you could argue for family members to co-sleep on the grounds that letting their baby CIO is disrupting to your children and your sleep. The same could be said if you did not have a swing or room for one. Formula feeding would be difficult because you can't tell a woman to relactate for a week visit but besides that the extra dishes and mess could be an argument against bottles.

Most, not all, of MSIL's rules regarded disruptions to her home by CSIL's parenting style. I will agree that the mandatory party attendence was only a means of "getting back" at CSIL for her behavior from the previous year and the PB was probably partly idealogy and partly the means by which CSIL expressed herself but beyond that the rest of the rules were what everyone else had to follow and made the MSIL's house run more smoothly for herself and everyone else.

Remember every year MSIL has to open her home to 15+ people and knows every year that 5 members will be running the house to THEIR specifications. That is as stressful at having to go to someone's house out of your own environment.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Last year when the youngest was 6 and was interupting adults at the party MSIL finally told CSIL that the children were no longer allowed to come and go and must stay upstairs at their own party. At this point CSIL left the party NOT TO BE WITH HER CHILDREN but to hide out in her room while her children attended the children's party by themselves. THIS is an adult's temper tantrum....

I guess. Perhaps she was embarrassed?

I don't see how leaving a party is a tantrum.

She didn't yell at anyone or throw stuff.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
In addition, Maya did say that CSIL did not have bed times for her children which was why MSIL made the rule that all children must be in their room at a certain time at night (see previous thread).

Not being in bed at 10:00 is not the same as "running the house" at 10:00.

What if they were reading quietly in the corner?

We don't know these details. Just filling stuff in that you *think* happened and discussing from there makes it difficult. If you want to share why you are drawing certain conclusions (like why I think the pbj thing isn't a manners thing, it's a parenting thing for MSIL--based on the eye rolling, the comments to Maya, etc.), then that's one thing, you know?

But stating that someone "threw a tantrum" or kids were "running the house" as if it were a fact, when it's an opinion makes discussion difficult. That's all I mean. I'm not upset and I hope you're not either.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I guess. Perhaps she was embarrassed?

I don't see how leaving a party is a tantrum.

She didn't yell at anyone or throw stuff.

Not being in bed at 10:00 is not the same as "running the house" at 10:00.

What if they were reading quietly in the corner?

We don't know these details. Just filling stuff in that you *think* happened and discussing from there makes it difficult. If you want to share why you are drawing certain conclusions (like why I think the pbj thing isn't a manners thing, it's a parenting thing for MSIL--based on the eye rolling, the comments to Maya, etc.), then that's one thing, you know?

But stating that someone "threw a tantrum" or kids were "running the house" as if it were a fact, when it's an opinion makes discussion difficult. That's all I mean. I'm not upset and I hope you're not either.


No, not upset. I got the "idea" of the night time schedule from Maya saying, or maybe it was "us projecting" that all the adults got together at the end of the day after the kids were in bed to sit and talk and that CSIL's children came and went on these sessions as well. Even if they were sitting quietly in a corner they were still a disruption to adult topics and how the other children would view the inequalities of rules. What kids doesn't want to be party to adult conversations late at night?

The Party - However, whether or not she yelled or threw things does not make it less of a temper tantrum. But a temper tantrum is how MSIL interpeted it. Yes, she may have been embarassed but I get the feeling that MSIL didn't see it that way. Remember all this has been happening for years. This was the only thing that happened differently. Which is why I see it as the catalyst for why MSIL wrote the letter she did. She accepted with slightly ill-grace everything up until this one point every year. But when she requested that this one rule not be broken CSIL left in what she obviously saw as a huff.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Yes, in certain areas I do believe her behavior is purposefully antagonistic. Telling your children in front of their aunt that they don't have to listen to her and clean up IN HER HOME is either completely OBSTUSE in etiquette or undermining to the hostess to prove that your parenting style is better and more important that her wishes.

But CSIL doesn't think that the kids should have to do set up and clearing for meals--or any chores.

As far as etiquette, I mean it's nice to help out and all, but children aren't our slaves. If a hostess has too much work to do, then it's fine to ask your guests to pitch in, but what if they say, "no?" At some point it's not really asking, it's ordering them around. And if you think that people shouldn't be ordered around, then you'd do what CSIL did in years past--tell the kids they didn't have to do MSIL's assigned chores.

I think CSIL is trying to stand up for the autonomy of her kids--that she thinks *that* is more important than MSIL's wishes. Not that her parenting style is more important, you know?

I don't think that has anything to do with MSIL at all. I think CSIL would do that anywhere.

I dunno....I'm just not seeing an attempt to *deliberately* annoy. I certainly think CSIL's approaches DO annoy MSIL, but I think that's about MSIL.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But CSIL doesn't think that the kids should have to do set up and clearing for meals--or any chores.

As far as etiquette, I mean it's nice to help out and all, but children aren't our slaves. If a hostess has too much work to do, then it's fine to ask your guests to pitch in, but what if they say, "no?" At some point it's not really asking, it's ordering them around. And if you think that people shouldn't be ordered around, then you'd do what CSIL did in years past--tell the kids they didn't have to do MSIL's assigned chores.

I think CSIL is trying to stand up for the autonomy of her kids--that she thinks *that* is more important than MSIL's wishes. Not that her parenting style is more important, you know?

I don't think that has anything to do with MSIL at all. I think CSIL would do that anywhere.

I dunno....I'm just not seeing an attempt to *deliberately* annoy. I certainly think CSIL's approaches DO annoy MSIL, but I think that's about MSIL.


Sorry, but I find it highly offensive to equate asking someone to clean up their own mess with slavery. Slavery was about people being your property in order that they do your things for you. Which is, in essence, what CSIL and her children were doing to MSIL by coming into her home and having her or even her cleaning staff, clean up THEIR mess.

And this is where CSIL's parenting philosophy is trumped by MSIL's house. When you go to someone's house you DO NOT treat it as your own. You wouldn't send your children into a store and expect or allow them to treat it as their own so why is MSIL expected to accept such behavior simply because it falls under "parenting ideaology" heading.

And given that in the end CSIL's own autonomy was trumped by MSIL's house rules it is obvious that her children need to learn from her GOOD example that that is how life works and to make the best of it.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Sorry, but I find it highly offensive to equate asking someone to clean up their own mess with slavery. Slavery was about people being your property in order that they do your things for you. Which is, in essence, what CSIL and her children were doing to MSIL by coming into her home and having her or even her cleaning staff, clean up THEIR mess.

I'm sorry I offended you.

But, using your definition of slavery, MANY people treat children that way. Many people believe that treating children that way is important and good for the children--so they learn important lessons.

And if the answer can't be "No." then it ceases to be asking.

Where the husbands treating MSIL like a slave, then? Because they weren't told to clean up or set up.

Whether or not you think that kids should have to set the table or not, I'm just pointing out what I believe (based on Maya's descriptions of CSIL) CSIL's philosophy is. And that is, that children should not be forced or compelled to do chores against their will.

*I* don't think its an attempt to deliberately annoy her SIL or hold her parenting ideas up as better, I think she was trying to uphold her ethics and ideals re. her children's autonomy.

And, it can, obviously, be argued that that makes her a bad house guest.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
And this is where CSIL's parenting philosophy is trumped by MSIL's house. When you go to someone's house you DO NOT treat it as your own. You wouldn't send your children into a store and expect or allow them to treat it as their own so why is MSIL expected to accept such behavior simply because it falls under "parenting ideaology" heading.

Well, that's the big discussion!









Just b/c its your house, do you have the right to to demand certain behavior or enforce parenting decisions? And, if you *have* that right, does it *make* it right to do it?


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

And given that in the end CSIL's own autonomy was trumped by MSIL's house rules it is obvious that her children need to learn from her GOOD example that that is how life works and to make the best of it.
This doesn't need to be "either/or". The adults involved designed it that way.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:

I think CSIL is trying to stand up for the autonomy of her kids--that she thinks *that* is more important than MSIL's wishes. Not that her parenting style is more important, you know?

It's been said before and I'll say it again. If CSIL feels that strongly about it, she NEEDS to stop accepting MSIL's hospitality.

I don't care what someone's parenting philosophies are. If the hostess makes the guidelines known ahead of time and you feel that strongly about it, you need to stay somewhere else.

If a hostess set a rule that I felt strongly against (for example, breastfeeding only in the bedroom or behind closed doors) I wouldn't go. I wouldn't say, "Okay, I"ll be there." then be a martyr when I'm made to go to my bedroom to breastfeed.

To agree to the rules, then go and make sure everyone knows you are miserable is immature and passive-aggressive.

I don't care about the parenting philosophies involved. I really don't. In fact, I think they are irrelevant. MSIL set the rules for her household, CSIL agreed to the rules. Once that occured CSIL needs to suck it up and act like an adult. There were no surprises thrown at her. Everything that happened fell into the rules MSIL sent out.

If you feel SO strongly about household rules that violate your parenting philosophy, grow a backbone and put your foot down. This "Look at me being a martyr and being miserable over what I agreed to" crap doesn't look good on high school kids. It looks much worse on an adult.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

If you feel SO strongly about household rules that violate your parenting philosophy, grow a backbone and put your foot down. This "Look at me being a martyr and being miserable over what I agreed to" crap doesn't look good on high school kids. It looks much worse on an adult.
Well, I certainly agree with that. To be fair though, dh would never, ever pressure me to wither in silence, and that seems to be what CSIL's dh was doing.

My parents have guns in their home. If they choose not to lock them up, we choose not to stay there. I'm not going to stay and then play a martyr.

It does stink though that if CSIL refuses in the future, she will be painted the bad guy by her entire family. I don't think that is fair. People can't have it both ways. For some reason this family almost seems afraid of MSIL. I don't quite understand the underlying dynamics. I don't think any of us ever will.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
If you feel SO strongly about household rules that violate your parenting philosophy, grow a backbone and put your foot down. This "Look at me being a martyr and being miserable over what I agreed to" crap doesn't look good on high school kids. It looks much worse on an adult.

How are you perceiving martyrdom from CSIL?

I read that she came "not in a great mood" and two instances of "not looking terribly thrilled"--one of which was not in reaction to MSIL's rules--it was b/c of the sodas. Oh, and not thanking for the Sushi--but that may have been oversight? Or maybe pissed off? Don't know.

But other than that, she backed up MSIL w/ re. to the rule about pbj in the room and CBIL backed up MSIL w/ re. to the cleaning up. ANd they followed all the other rules. If she had been sullen and pissy, that's one thing, but I'm not sure if that's what Maya meant by "not in a great mood."

Up thread I was referring to the last year visit when CSIL told her kids they didn't have to help set the table.

I think it's so complicated b/c there is an almost forced element to whole setup. It's family. So, you don't want to NOT go--esp. when her husband is insistent. But, how much bending do you have to do b/c somebody else doesn't like your parenting style?

It's easy for me to say, "I would never go!" But, in it, I don't know. I certainly have eaten plenty of s---- on family functions. And one has gotten so awful that we're not going.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
Well, I certainly agree with that. To be fair though, dh would never, ever pressure me to wither in silence, and that seems to be what CSIL's dh was doing.

It does stink though that if CSIL refuses in the future, she will be painted the bad guy by her entire family. I don't think that is fair. People can't have it both ways. For some reason this family almost seems afraid of MSIL. I don't quite understand the underlying dynamics. I don't think any of us ever will.


Yup. I said in an earlier post that the real issue was not between CSIL and MSIL, but CSIL and CBIL. My dh wouldn't guilt me into a situation like that.

And it does stink, but sometimes standing by your principles means not being liked. I know my dh would support me and it does make me wonder if CSIL doesn't get that from her dh.

I'd stay at MSIL's house in a second with those rules, though I'm not a pushover. I enjoy a challange, let her try and surprise me with new rules and I'll watch her wither.


----------



## LovemyBoo (Oct 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
How are you perceiving martyrdom from CSIL?

I read that she came "not in a great mood" and two instances of "not looking terribly thrilled"--one of which was not in reaction to MSIL's rules--it was b/c of the sodas. Oh, and not thanking for the Sushi--but that may have been oversight? Or maybe pissed off? Don't know.

But other than that, she backed up MSIL w/ re. to the rule about pbj in the room and CBIL backed up MSIL w/ re. to the cleaning up. ANd they followed all the other rules. If she had been sullen and pissy, that's one thing, but I'm not sure if that's what Maya meant by "not in a great mood."

Up thread I was referring to the last year visit when CSIL told her kids they didn't have to help set the table.

I think it's so complicated b/c there is an almost forced element to whole setup. It's family. So, you don't want to NOT go--esp. when her husband is insistent. But, how much bending do you have to do b/c somebody else doesn't like your parenting style?

It's easy for me to say, "I would never go!" But, in it, I don't know. I certainly have eaten plenty of s---- on family functions. And one has gotten so awful that we're not going.

I don't have time now to go back and reread Maya's post, but Maya seemed left with the impression that CSIL was not happy and did not have a good time due to MSIL's rules.

The bottom line is, you agree to the rules, you do it with grace. CSIL followed the rules, but grace was lacking. Maybe she needs to put her big girl panties on and have a chat with CBIL. If MSIL makes her that unhappy, her dh needs to support her and find another arrangement. Otherwise, like I said before, keeping the peace can come with a price. CSIL didn't seem to want to pay.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
Well, I certainly agree with that. To be fair though, dh would never, ever pressure me to wither in silence, and that seems to be what CSIL's dh was doing.

My parents have guns in their home. If they choose not to lock them up, we choose not to stay there. I'm not going to stay and then play a martyr.

It does stink though that if CSIL refuses in the future, she will be painted the bad guy by her entire family. I don't think that is fair. People can't have it both ways. For some reason this family almost seems afraid of MSIL. I don't quite understand the underlying dynamics. I don't think any of us ever will.

CSIL's kids had a wonderful time and want to go next year again "for sure". I think that's significant.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LovemyBoo* 
I don't have time now to go back and reread Maya's post, but Maya seemed left with the impression that CSIL was not happy and did not have a good time due to MSIL's rules.

The bottom line is, you agree to the rules, you do it with grace. CSIL followed the rules, but grace was lacking. Maybe she needs to put her big girl panties on and have a chat with CBIL. If MSIL makes her that unhappy, her dh needs to support her and find another arrangement. Otherwise, like I said before, keeping the peace can come with a price. CSIL didn't seem to want to pay.

Wow. I thought she was quite gracious given the way MSIL came at her and the things she was asked to do/not do.

IF she wasn't sullen and pissy. If she was just sort of mildly annoyed at first, then yeah, way more gracious than I think you could expect.


----------



## Flor (Nov 19, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
CSIL's kids had a wonderful time and want to go next year again "for sure". I think that's significant.

I don't think it means anything. I have to suck it up and stay at the in laws because it is important to me that my kids see their out of town grandparents. Like CSIL, I cannot afford to stay elsewhere. But, it is really hard to keep up the smiley face for an entire week. I'm not off pouting, but I did go in the bedroom and have a good cry once in a while. My kids had a great time, they didn't pick up on the underlying adult issues. They can't wait to go back.

The thing that bothers me the most is declaring that all adults must attend the party. That is so bizarre to me. Just because someone's behavior annoys me doesn't mean I start legislating. I just roll my eyes in private. Why isn't CSIL's dh stepping in?


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Flor* 
I don't think it means anything. I have to suck it up and stay at the in laws because it is important to me that my kids see their out of town grandparents. Like CSIL, I cannot afford to stay elsewhere. But, it is really hard to keep up the smiley face for an entire week. I'm not off pouting, but I did go in the bedroom and have a good cry once in a while. My kids had a great time, they didn't pick up on the underlying adult issues. They can't wait to go back.

The thing that bothers me the most is declaring that all adults must attend the party. That is so bizarre to me. Just because someone's behavior annoys me doesn't mean I start legislating. I just roll my eyes in private. Why isn't CSIL's dh stepping in?


You don't think having fun with and bonding with their cousins means anything? I think it's important and the point of the whole trip. It's just a pity that MSIL and CSIL couldn't put themselves above making it a passive aggressive power struggle.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

See and I think that CSIL's bad graciousness (unhappiness) started prior to this year. It started the year that she went and acted as if her house rules superceded MSIL's house rules. When she specifically allowed her children at an adult's only party under the guise of "they are too young", when she attended the first dinner together with family and plopped the PB on the table when her child(ren) deemed the food "icky" and when she told her child(ren) that they didn't have to help clean up, when all of the other children went to bed and her children sat in/ran wild on the adults only time. There is a possibility that the very first visit she was unaware of the "rules" or just how MSIL liked to have things done. But once she became aware and did things her way regardless, that is when her bad manners started.

Parenting rules and philosophies end at your door step when superceded by government rules, store rules, public property rules or other peoples homes. I let my children play in my pantry however, I would never imagine to allow them to do so anywhere else and other people have a right to be annoyed if my children come into their home and rearrange their pantry. Lord knows, I get annoyed often enough if I forget to tightly seal the noodle box in my pantry, I don't want friends and family to be afraid of that whenever I come over.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

I'd stay at MSIL's house in a second with those rules, though I'm not a pushover. I enjoy a challange, let her try and surprise me with new rules and I'll watch her wither.
I wasn't going to say it first but...yes! MSIL would have had an...interesting...experience had I been her guest







:

Quote:

You don't think having fun with and bonding with their cousins means anything? I think it's important and the point of the whole trip. It's just a pity that MSIL and CSIL couldn't put themselves above making it a passive aggressive power struggle.
It is important that the kids had fun. But there is fun and then there are people who put the "fun" in dys*fun*ctional, and IMO this was a great example of that. I dunno, I grew up around some really dysfunctional family stuff...and I always loved seeing my cousins, and we did have fun...but there was also so much adult melodrama, which did trickle down to the kids. I think the impact of that was seen in the long term, not in our behavior during the trip









I guess we actually agree







If the adults are going to behave this way (and by that I mean both sil), that is just sad.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
But once she became aware and did things her way regardless, that is when her bad manners started.

But she didn't do that.

When she became aware of MSIL's rules--sent out prior to *this* year's visit--she abided by EVERY single one of them.

In previous years, I suspect she had little idea that her parenting decisions would matter to anyone else, would be up for discussion with extended family, and certainly would not result in the email the MSIL sent out.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But she didn't do that.

When she became aware of MSIL's rules--sent out prior to *this* year's visit--she abided by EVERY single one of them.

In previous years, I suspect she had little idea that her parenting decisions would matter to anyone else, would be up for discussion with extended family, and certainly would not result in the email the MSIL sent out.

You honestly think that CSIL believed that her parenting decision to allow children at an adult's only party every year wouldn't matter to anyone else or be up for discussion in someone else's home. Or turning the tv off on other members of the family if her children were in the room.

Given these two examples I am fully convinced that in regards to these and in almost all other aspects, children not having to clean up in someone elses home or being allowed in on adult quiet time after all the other kids were in their rooms, that she was aware of the disruptions these caused and didn't care. Her parenting philosophies took precidence.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
You honestly think that CSIL believed that her parenting decision to allow children at an adult's only party every year wouldn't matter to anyone else or be up for discussion in someone else's home. Or turning the tv off on other members of the family if her children were in the room.

Given these two examples I am fully convinced that in regards to these and in almost all other aspects, children not having to clean up in someone elses home or being allowed in on adult quiet time after all the other kids were in their rooms, that she was aware of the disruptions these caused and didn't care. Her parenting philosophies took precidence.

No, I'm saying that it was my understanding that no one ever said to CSIL, "this is an adult only party," "nighttime is for adults only," "chores are a conditional part of your visit."

Some people don't find the presence of children at parties or in the evening objectionable or automatically a "disruption." Should they automatically assume that other people do?

Once those rules were laid out (in a rather rude fashion, imo) CSIL followed them to the letter.

So, I'm not sure where your getting that she's doing all this stuff deliberately and willfully and disregarding rules (rules, which in my understanding of the situation in year's past did not exist). Or turning off the TV while people were watching it. ??? When did that happen?


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
No, I'm saying that it was my understanding that no one ever said to CSIL, "this is an adult only party," "nighttime is for adults only," "chores are a conditional part of your visit."

Some people don't find the presence of children at parties or in the evening objectionable or automatically a "disruption." Should they automatically assume that other people do?

Once those rules were laid out (in a rather rude fashion, imo) CSIL followed them to the letter.

So, I'm not sure where your getting that she's doing all this stuff deliberately and willfully and disregarding rules (rules, which in my understanding of the situation in year's past did not exist). Or turning off the TV while people were watching it. ??? When did that happen?

Actually, based on Maya's previous post I got the impression that it was KNOWN fact that children were not invited to the parties EVER. But that MSIL had let CSIL slide on the rules prior because the children were younger. However, most people, in someone else's home, would never assume that their children be granted an acception regardless of an age beyond infancy. Or would ask if their children could be allowed based on age and not take it upon themselves to disregard the rules.

I also understood from Maya's previous posts that the tv rule was written because CSIL insisted that the tv be turned off if her children were in the room. Now maybe she herself didn't follow the children around and turn of the tv herself but to insist that it be turned off because her children were not allowed to watch certain shows is 1. disruptive of the others in the family 2. takes away that precious autonomy of the other children that she so dearly protected by disallowing her children from chores imposed by their aunt.

I am saying that given these two incidences that seem rather obvious disregards that it is possible but not a complete forgone conclusion that the other things were also done on purpose rather than in ignorance.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
I also understood from Maya's previous posts that the tv rule was written because CSIL insisted that the tv be turned off if her children were in the room. Now maybe she herself didn't follow the children around and turn of the tv herself but to insist that it be turned off because her children were not allowed to watch certain shows is 1. disruptive of the others in the family 2. takes away that precious autonomy of the other children that she so dearly protected by disallowing her children from chores imposed by their aunt.

If I recall the original thread correctly, CSIL's child had to go into the tv room to collect one of her belongings, and CSIL asked the people watching the show to turn if off while her child did so. That carries a strong implication that it was for a very brief period of time.

Personally, I wouldn't do that (unless maybe it was adults watching porn, as I don't want to have to explain that!). But, I don't think it falls into quite the same category as expecting others to avoid tv, just because she is tv-free. I can also see it being done out of over-protectiveness, not out of a deliberate intent to annoy.

Honestly...dh and I have been almost completely tv-free since last August. I have trouble even remembering how annoying it used to be when someone interrupted my program or something like that. I wouldn't be surprised at all if CSIL just plain didn't realize it was an imposition on the watchers.

I also don't think CSIL's children are banned from "certain shows". I don't think they watch tv at all.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
If I recall the original thread correctly, CSIL's child had to go into the tv room to collect one of her belongings, and CSIL asked the people watching the show to turn if off while her child did so. That carries a strong implication that it was for a very brief period of time.

Personally, I wouldn't do that (unless maybe it was adults watching porn, as I don't want to have to explain that!). But, I don't think it falls into quite the same category as expecting others to avoid tv, just because she is tv-free. I can also see it being done out of over-protectiveness, not out of a deliberate intent to annoy.

Honestly...dh and I have been almost completely tv-free since last August. I have trouble even remembering how annoying it used to be when someone interrupted my program or something like that. I wouldn't be surprised at all if CSIL just plain didn't realize it was an imposition on the watchers.

I also don't think CSIL's children are banned from "certain shows". I don't think they watch tv at all.

I get the feeling that this was just an example. Otherwise, I can't understand why she would have allowed her children any tv watching this year just because they were not allowed to turn it off when they walked in the room to get something.

but maybe she didn't realize it was in imposition but quite frankly I remember as a child being really annoyed and frustrated even missing a minute or two of a program and I haven't watch tv consistently for years, videos yes, tv no.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
but given that she gives her children the option of saying no to chores but not others the option of saying no to her in turning off the tv I think it is slightly hypocritical of her.

What are even talking about?? She asked, they DID say no, and no one turned the TV off.







:


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
What are even talking about?? She asked, they DID say no, and no one turned the TV off.







:


Sorry I think I may be confused here, nevermind.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
I get the feeling that this was just an example. Otherwise, I can't understand why she would have allowed her children any tv watching this year just because they were not allowed to turn it off when they walked in the room to get something.

but maybe she didn't realize it was in imposition but quite frankly I remember as a child being really annoyed and frustrated even missing a minute or two of a program and I haven't watch tv consistently for years, videos yes, tv no.

I understand that. But, that doesn't mean that CSIL remembers feeling that way.

I'm not saying that what she did was polite - but I think that assuming that she's doing it deliberately to annoy MSIL is a bit of a stretch.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I understand that. But, that doesn't mean that CSIL remembers feeling that way.

I'm not saying that what she did was polite - but I think that assuming that she's doing it deliberately to annoy MSIL is a bit of a stretch.

I guess 'annoy' would be the wrong word. However, I think it is greatly within the realm of possibility that she did it, not out of ignorance, but out of a deliberate "my parenting rules apply everywhere regardless" mentality.

I think that we can look at the actions of both SIL and assume the best or worst out of each of them. It could be assumed that CSIL has always gone to Hawaii with a "my parenting philosophy trumps" mentality or that she honestly had no idea how her actions affected those around her. The same could be said for MSIL, that each year she bit her tongue and allowed distruptions to her home that truly did bother her and finally she wrote an email to everyone in an attempt avoid making CSIL feel singled out by writing only to her.


----------

