TOTALLY GEEKED!

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 I am far from one of those, MIL haters found on sites like DWIL. But at the same time, I refuse to accept bad behavior - behavior I would not put up with in the busunless world - becuase it was perpetrated by family. 

lets say this was a bride who asked a friend to be a brides maid, changed her mind (for whatever reason) and did not let the friend know about being dropped for months, until the uninvited brides maid mentioned it. 

are you honestly saying that - taking all of the faux pas into account - would still go to the wedding like nothing had changed? That you wouldn't at least let the bride know what she did was wrong? Are you telling me you trust and strength of relationship with this "friend" wouldt be even slightly damaged and need time for repair? 

So why should the child and child's mother be expected to move on like nothing happened? Just becuase its family? to keep harmony? What does that teach the child? And what does that teach the SIL and MIL? That the 4 yo can be treated with little respect and consideration? 

This isn't about Two women having to learn about sharing one man's time over the holidays, it's about common courtesy and manners. 

and yes, if my husband were to allow his mother treat me in a manner that he would not allow a coworker or friend treat himself, then he IS choosing his extended family over his nuclear family. 

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 It should never come to that.  His parents should acknowledge right off the bat his wife's role as his new family.  If his mother is part of creating such discord, she shouldn't win.  The man is to LEAVE his mother and father and become one with his wife. 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 It should never come to that.  His parents should acknowledge right off the bat his wife's role as his new family.  If his mother is part of creating such discord, she shouldn't win.  The man is to LEAVE his mother and father and become one with his wife. 

---

Then by gosh, SHE better leave her parents too. But you don't see that happening nearly as often as the man being forced to LEAVE/FORSAKE/ABANDON his parents totally.

It works both ways, or it's suppose too.

The man is not going to win. Even IF his mother acknowledges the new wife's role as his new family immediately. 

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 I agree that there is a push to demonize MILs and search for "boundary stomping" where there is none (or at least not intentionally). and I agree that the focus is almost always on the husband's mother. 

But is that becuase the WIVES are all vindictive controlling freaks or is it that husbands are less likely to find issues with their MILs and therefore not push for their wives to cut off their mothers? 

I have had to put my own mother in her place when she oversteps with DH, even when he doesn't see it or care about it. But then when it comes to DH doing the same for me, I have to push him. I'm not trying to control the nuclear unit, I'm just expecting both the grandmothers to recognize that I am an adult and to treat me the same way they would any other adult they know. They wouldn't go against a neighbor's rules with their kids. They wouldn't just show up to or announce WHEN they are coming to visit a friend? They wouldn't pry into their coworkers medical information. 

Borthing me (or in my MILs case birthing my husband) 45 years ago doesn't give them the right to treat me without basic respect. 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 It should never come to that.  His parents should acknowledge right off the bat his wife's role as his new family.  If his mother is part of creating such discord, she shouldn't win.  The man is to LEAVE his mother and father and become one with his wife. 

---

Then by gosh, SHE better leave her parents too. But you don't see that happening nearly as often as the man being forced to LEAVE/FORSAKE/ABANDON his parents totally.

It works both ways, or it's suppose too.

The man is not going to win. Even IF his mother acknowledges the new wife's role as his new family immediately. 

---

 It usually works that way when Momma doesn't want to let go of her son and fights the new wife for attention. 

---

Usually, it's a DIL from hell. IMHO. 

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 It should never come to that.  His parents should acknowledge right off the bat his wife's role as his new family.  If his mother is part of creating such discord, she shouldn't win.  The man is to LEAVE his mother and father and become one with his wife. 

---

Then by gosh, SHE better leave her parents too. But you don't see that happening nearly as often as the man being forced to LEAVE/FORSAKE/ABANDON his parents totally.

It works both ways, or it's suppose too.

The man is not going to win. Even IF his mother acknowledges the new wife's role as his new family immediately. 

---

 It usually works that way when Momma doesn't want to let go of her son and fights the new wife for attention. 

---

Usually, it's a DIL from hell. IMHO. 

---

 It's all about perspective.   Mother in laws usually don't see what they are doing to interfere with the marriage.

Ilumine wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 Husband and wife are supposed to be a unit.  His wife and child did nothing wrong here, his sister and mother DID.  Therefore, taking their "side" over his nuclear family would put him in the wrong, too.

---

He can acknowledge his wife and daughters side. But wife will always (in general) FORCE him to then abandon his mother. In this case his mother was wrong, but all he should HAVE to do is acknowledge that his mother was wrong. He shouldn't be crucified for not demanding his dd be the flower girl. Good gosh. 

---

 I don't think anyone said he should force his sister to reinstate his daughter as the flower girl. But saying something to his Sister and MIL is a must. not forcing his daughter to go to the wedding if she doesn't want to is a good choice. Not forcing his wife and daughter to pretend nothing happened and allowing them to expect his family to earn back their trust is a great idea. 

None of that is abandoning his mother. It's just putting the onus of repairing the broken relationship on the ones who actually -gasp - did the bad deed. 

---

 Exactly.  Put the blame for this disaster where it belongs.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 Husband and wife are supposed to be a unit.  His wife and child did nothing wrong here, his sister and mother DID.  Therefore, taking their "side" over his nuclear family would put him in the wrong, too.

---

He can acknowledge his wife and daughters side. But wife will always (in general) FORCE him to then abandon his mother. In this case his mother was wrong, but all he should HAVE to do is acknowledge that his mother was wrong. He shouldn't be crucified for not demanding his dd be the flower girl. Good gosh. 

---

 I don't think anyone said he should force his sister to reinstate his daughter as the flower girl. But saying something to his Sister and MIL is a must. not forcing his daughter to go to the wedding if she doesn't want to is a good choice. Not forcing his wife and daughter to pretend nothing happened and allowing them to expect his family to earn back their trust is a great idea. 

None of that is abandoning his mother. It's just putting the onus of repairing the broken relationship on the ones who actually -gasp - did the bad deed. 

---

 Exactly.  Put the blame for this disaster where it belongs.

---

I'd bet good money, that neither of you would "bend" for his sake. 

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 Husband and wife are supposed to be a unit.  His wife and child did nothing wrong here, his sister and mother DID.  Therefore, taking their "side" over his nuclear family would put him in the wrong, too.

---

He can acknowledge his wife and daughters side. But wife will always (in general) FORCE him to then abandon his mother. In this case his mother was wrong, but all he should HAVE to do is acknowledge that his mother was wrong. He shouldn't be crucified for not demanding his dd be the flower girl. Good gosh. 

---

 I don't think anyone said he should force his sister to reinstate his daughter as the flower girl. But saying something to his Sister and MIL is a must. not forcing his daughter to go to the wedding if she doesn't want to is a good choice. Not forcing his wife and daughter to pretend nothing happened and allowing them to expect his family to earn back their trust is a great idea. 

None of that is abandoning his mother. It's just putting the onus of repairing the broken relationship on the ones who actually -gasp - did the bad deed. 

---

 Exactly.  Put the blame for this disaster where it belongs.

---

I'd bet good money, that neither of you would "bend" for his sake. 

---

 My child is more important than his sister or mother.  PERIOD.  If they are mean to her, no I'm not going to bend.  But I wouldn't have to b/c my husband would have let them have it over this.

just Czech wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

I have seen way to many men forced to abandon their own mother and father. The wife always makes the husband choose between her and his family. This is an "in general" statement.

I have also noticed it is most prevalent in women who do not have brothers and/or sons.

The man almost never wins.

---

 I agree that there is a push to demonize MILs and search for "boundary stomping" where there is none (or at least not intentionally). and I agree that the focus is almost always on the husband's mother. 

But is that becuase the WIVES are all vindictive controlling freaks or is it that husbands are less likely to find issues with their MILs and therefore not push for their wives to cut off their mothers? 

I have had to put my own mother in her place when she oversteps with DH, even when he doesn't see it or care about it. But then when it comes to DH doing the same for me, I have to push him. I'm not trying to control the nuclear unit, I'm just expecting both the grandmothers to recognize that I am an adult and to treat me the same way they would any other adult they know. They wouldn't go against a neighbor's rules with their kids. They wouldn't just show up to or announce WHEN they are coming to visit a friend? They wouldn't pry into their coworkers medical information. 

Borthing me (or in my MILs case birthing my husband) 45 years ago doesn't give them the right to treat me without basic respect. 

 

---

If you are in your mid 40's, you were raised (unknowingly) with the concept of "husband training" of the 80's.

DH's brother's 2 son's both married girls raised with the "husband training" concept. Both young ladies spoke the term. Both of the new wives made their husbands abandon their parents in favor of their own mom and dad. Forcing the sons to move a 15 hour drive from mom and dad. The young brides do not allow the in-laws to attend holidays or birthdays at their homes, since that is reserved for the ladies parents/family. And they do not travel to the in-laws for the holidays unless it's convenient for them and then it is always way after the holiday is over.

DH's niece has done the same to her DH's family.

IMHO, it is a trend. It's really (IMHO) about control.

---

   After reading about this I just love my DIL even more.  She is all about family and includes us as well as her family.  In my family it was the opposite.  My sister chose her first husbands family over hers.  I felt I lost my big sister and it hurt not only me but my mom and dad when they see their car across the street at her inlaws and not bother walking across the street to see her own family, even if it had been months since we seen them. 

  Per topic, I think the husband/father should talk to his sister and mom about the way they handled the situation and to have them personally apologize to the little girl.   At least they would know without a doubt where they stand on the situation and won't be surprised if the dil and niece isn't at the wedding.

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

just Czech wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 Husband and wife are supposed to be a unit.  His wife and child did nothing wrong here, his sister and mother DID.  Therefore, taking their "side" over his nuclear family would put him in the wrong, too.

---

He can acknowledge his wife and daughters side. But wife will always (in general) FORCE him to then abandon his mother. In this case his mother was wrong, but all he should HAVE to do is acknowledge that his mother was wrong. He shouldn't be crucified for not demanding his dd be the flower girl. Good gosh. 

---

 I don't think anyone said he should force his sister to reinstate his daughter as the flower girl. But saying something to his Sister and MIL is a must. not forcing his daughter to go to the wedding if she doesn't want to is a good choice. Not forcing his wife and daughter to pretend nothing happened and allowing them to expect his family to earn back their trust is a great idea. 

None of that is abandoning his mother. It's just putting the onus of repairing the broken relationship on the ones who actually -gasp - did the bad deed. 

---

 Exactly.  Put the blame for this disaster where it belongs.

---

I'd bet good money, that neither of you would "bend" for his sake. 

---

 Did I or did I NOT write in another post that I dealt with MY mother whe she overstepped his boundary? I think I did? And yes, I have "bent" or in real world words, compromised and given over to his requests on a number of occasions. One big one being looking to move to Maine and his home town. 

But no, I won't "bend" if/when it comes to him asking me to ignore or accept his mother's actions or beliefs if they negatively affect our child. A great example is her insistence on HUGGING everyone, no matter if the person wants to be hugged. if I wouldn't allow a co-worker hug me, why would I suck up a hug from a family member? the default is always to the person who feels the discimfort, not to gratify the other.  Well guess what, I also refuse to force my child to hug or be hugged and most certainly will not allow my MIL to brow-beat my tired 4 year old to hug some smokey bar buddy of MIL's we met at a restaurant. 

im not sure how me standing up for my daughter's body autonomy at the expense of not making a scene (my DH agrees with me I theory, but didn't want to have it out with MIL in public) is pussy-whipping my husband or forcing him to abandon his mother. 

at the same time, I happily work with my husband with things I don't like my MIL does. She thinks it's perfectly ok to start drinking her Bud light from the bottle at 10:00 am. Yep, she is a functioning alcoholic. And I could Easily use that to cut her off. But becuase she doesn't get "drunk" I have chosen to work with the situation I have. We just don't go over to her house before noon And we don't stay for extended periods. That way the non-verbal influences are controlled and limited. 

I am a firm believer that NO relationship, good or bad, lives in a vacuum and ALL parties, to include the husbands have an effect. 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

When you discuss the letters, you have to go with the facts presented. You can "what if" all day long, but WHAT IF it happened exactly as she said?

---

 True.

But there has to be that grain of salt with these things.

For me anyway.

Maybe it's cause I don't trust people to always tell the truth in these things.

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

When you discuss the letters, you have to go with the facts presented. You can "what if" all day long, but WHAT IF it happened exactly as she said?

---

 And it doesn't really matter if the BTB had a  perfectly good reason for doing it.  That fact was not conveyed to the mother.  Nothing was said about the MIL being involved at all.  She could be part of the problem or she might not be.  You just can't assume extra facts based on your feelings.

---

 The LW mentioned the mother-in-law.  "Am I wrong to be upset with my sister-in-law and mother-in-law for excluding my little girl and not telling her themselves?"

Whenitrains wrote:

---

This is one of those letters I would love to hear an update about.

---

 Exactly!

Or hear the husband's or the BTB's side of the story.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 No kidding.  Especiallynover NOTHING--which is what this is.

flan327 wrote:

---

Well, husker, there are NINE pages of people disagreeing with you.

That's not my definition of "NOTHING."

flan

---

 People who mistakenly think that feelings are something to base decisions on.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

""Only this mother can decide what is right for her family."

You all seem to be forgetting one person. Dad. His opinion and input matter too.

---

 True!

Sometimes men are not comfortable with emotional confrontations, but they should present a united front.

flan

---

 Yes, but mom doesnt' unilaterally get to decide what to do in this instance.

---

 At the same time, Dad doesn't get to choose his extended family's feelings at the expense of his daughter's.  

When you have a conundrum like this, you choose what is best for the nuclear family.  

---

 This is why so many women cannot function in marriage nowadays and wind up divorced from very good men.  Can he honestly not have a difference of opinon with it being painted as "choosing his extended family at the expense of his daughter"?  So many women talk in catastrophic language nowadays.  It's no wonder.

---

 No kidding.  Especiallynover NOTHING--which is what this is.

---

And part of the problem is people infantalizing men.  If their wife makes a decision - the guy is "pussy-whipped".  Has it ever occurred to you that the men could agree with their wives, or not care at all and leave that stuff up to their wives.  If men don't take a stand, that is not the wife's fault.  And if a man is pussy-whipped, that's a weak man, and he is the one to blame for that.

---

 Not taking some ridiculous "stand" would be the correct course of action here.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Whatever, Husker. MOST of the people here disagree with you. Completely.

---

 some do, some don't.  The ones who don't are wrong.  

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Whatever, Husker. MOST of the people here disagree with you. Completely.

---

 some do, some don't.  The ones who don't are wrong.  

---

No, you are wrong.  Husker is wrong, Husker is wrong, Husker is wrong.   

---

 I'll mark the date on my calendar...

(Calendar is getting pretty crowded, to tell you the truth.)

flan