or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Poll: Which SIL's side are you on?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Poll: Which SIL's side are you on? - Page 5

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

 
  • 66% (158)
    Mainstream/Hawaii SIL
  • 33% (79)
    Crunchy SIL
237 Total Votes  
post #81 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britishmum View Post
ITA.

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

Which, imo, is, that nobody has the right to dictate to another family that they should go against their personal values in the way that they treat their children while at a family gathering, no matter who pays for the tickets and who hosts.
post #82 of 97
I'm on MSIL's side on this one.
post #83 of 97
Uh-oh, there was a large earthquake in Hawaii. Hopefully MSIL,BIL and kids are okay.
post #84 of 97
I'm on MSIL's side here. It isn't like CSIL is being asked to seperate from an infant. Her kids are 7,8 and 10 iirc. She isn't even being asked to be in a different house. It sounds like the kids would have a blast with their cousins and there would be competent adult supervision for them.

If I got an email like that I might roll my eyes and complain to my good friends about it, but I would still go. 'Different rules for different families', ;When in Rome', etc.
post #85 of 97
I'm just such a rebel, that I'd do the stuff CSIL does JUST to piss off MSIL! I hate people telling me what I will and will not do. CSIL takes it kind of far, but I can't entirely blame her.
post #86 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp View Post
Anyone know why the other thread got closed???
So that we could all get our lives back, I imagine.
post #87 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaomiLorelie View Post
Uh-oh, there was a large earthquake in Hawaii. Hopefully MSIL,BIL and kids are okay.
Yeah, no tsunami so the beach house should be fine Our house shook a while, but no damage. If she lives on the big island in Kona, MSIL might be worse off.
post #88 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNB View Post
Yeah, no tsunami so the beach house should be fine Our house shook a while, but no damage. If she lives on the big island in Kona, MSIL might be worse off.
I am gonna be vague about location, but we got an e-mail saying everyone and everything at MSIL's is fine (Thank G-d)!
post #89 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaKat View Post
So that we could all get our lives back, I imagine.
yes yes . It was something of a relief, wasn't it.
post #90 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by maya44 View Post
I am gonna be vague about location, but we got an e-mail saying everyone and everything at MSIL's is fine (Thank G-d)!
I was just checking to see if you'd posted anything. Thanks for letting us know. When I heard about the earthquake, your SIL's family was the first thing I thought of!

--Olive
post #91 of 97
I can see why MSIL felt she had to put her foot down.

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

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

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

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

In fact, it seems that is really what MSIL is (rudely) saying. I am spending a huge amount of my time and energy planning this and if you don't like what we have planned or how our house is run then don't just use me as a freebie holiday in Hawaii.
post #92 of 97
Darn, I missed all the controversy...

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

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

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

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

Sheesh.
post #93 of 97
MSIL- her house, her rules. She could demand that the entire family dress up as chickens in return for plane tickets and free lodging - and if the family agrees, they'd better be wearing feathers...

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

And I think the BROTHERS should be the ones to duke it out, not making their wives do the dirty work.
post #94 of 97
Well, I have to say that when I initially read the email from MSIL, I was aghast at such effrontery toward someone who was going to be a guest in her house. Then I read what had happened the year before and I understood the email, for the most part.

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

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

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

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

So all in all, I am on MSIL's side. Personally, I think that CSIL should stay at home by herself and let her children go to Hawaii with their father. It sounds like SHE is the only one who is the problem. I bet the children would even eat what was on the table if she was not there.
post #95 of 97
MSIL has pretty much twice as many votes as CSIL. And this is a pretty crunchy board. I bet on a mainstream board votes for MSIL would be off the charts!
post #96 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetAfton View Post
MSIL has pretty much twice as many votes as CSIL. And this is a pretty crunchy board. I bet on a mainstream board votes for MSIL would be off the charts!
I personally don't see this as a crunchy vs. mainstream issue (despite "CSIL" and "MSIL"). I think the "sides" mostly based on one (or both) of two things.

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

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

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

ETA: I just thought of another aspect...whether we see this as a "hostess/guest" thing at all. I don't think of family visiting me as having guests in the first place. Things like the peanut butter, even if they would bother me in a more formal situation, wouldn't even cross my mind if it was family that were visiting me.
post #97 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I personally don't see this as a crunchy vs. mainstream issue (despite "CSIL" and "MSIL"). I think the "sides" mostly based on one (or both) of two things.

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

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

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

ETA: I just thought of another aspect...whether we see this as a "hostess/guest" thing at all. I don't think of family visiting me as having guests in the first place. Things like the peanut butter, even if they would bother me in a more formal situation, wouldn't even cross my mind if it was family that were visiting me.
This post is so right on. If this discussion took place on a mainstream parenting board of a bunch of southerners (a region that has cultivated the ideal of "hosts" and "hospitality"), I imagine the votes would run the opposite direction. For me, msil's breach of manners was worse than csils'. As a host, you can invote and not invite certain people (though this doesn't apply to family except in extreme situations - and csil's rude behavior doesn't rise to that level), but you can't make your guests do and not do things just because it is your house. To do so (at least overtly) is beyond rude and really violates hospitality in ways that the ungraciousness and impertinence and lack of consideration of guests do not

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

Crunchy v. mainstream has nothing to do with it for me - what is the role of a host and who acted badly with malicuousness (as opposed to who acted badly without maliciousess) are the issues for me.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Poll: Which SIL's side are you on?