No food at birthday party from 10-1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the purpose of the post. So we can all call the party host poor?

I thought DCUM was supposed to be full of educated people. Could you not figure out the purpose of OP’s post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s not a big deal. It was not a dinner party.

Plus 1

[Anonymous]

I agree that some sort of lunch food should have been served, but I don't think it's a federal crime that it was not. The parents are either clueless or cheaped out. The kids went hungry for an hour and nobody was harmed. Move along.

[Anonymous]

I think posts like these are helpful for parents who might not know the ins and outs of how to host a party.

You don't have a party that runs through lunchtime and not provide something to eat other than a mass dose of sugar.

If the parent couldn't afford food, then start the party at 1 - 3, or 9:30 to noon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think posts like these are helpful for parents who might not know the ins and outs of how to host a party.

You don't have a party that runs through lunchtime and not provide something to eat other than a mass dose of sugar.

If the parent couldn't afford food, then start the party at 1 - 3, or 9:30 to noon.

Lord have mercy. Everyone knows to serve food if the party goes from 10-1. That’s why this post is absurd. When someone does something so blatantly ridiculous, it doesn’t really require a post. The host did a bad job. That happens. We don’t know why. Someone in their family died and they spaced? They are terrible people? I don’t know. But yes, obviously they should have served food.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think posts like these are helpful for parents who might not know the ins and outs of how to host a party.

You don't have a party that runs through lunchtime and not provide something to eat other than a mass dose of sugar.

If the parent couldn't afford food, then start the party at 1 - 3, or 9:30 to noon.

I 100% agree. I think it's obvious not every host does realize the need to serve food to kids between noon-1 especially after swimming for 2 hours.

Kid lunch does not have to be expensive and what one could serve inexpensively would depend on the number of kids and what was available facility wise. I am thinking hot dods, pbjs, mac and cheese. One doesn't need to feed the adults as we can all live without food but not feeding the kids, that's almost mean!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have two kids 11 and 8 and we've been to many birthdays over the years. Majority of time its assumed some form of food will be served, or invitation will specify "snacks and cake" if there isn't going to be pizza or meal. Today my 8yr old DD went to a swim party. The invitation said 10-12:00 would be swimming, and then an hour in the party room afterward. Only cupcakes were served, and I guess the rest of the time was opening presents and playing games in the party room. My kid was starving by the time I picked her up, as were the other girls. They were all begging for parents to stop and get them something to eat. Am I mistaken to have assumed they would be eating during the 12:00-1:00 time frame after swimming for 2 hours?

Tell the name of the cheapo so we can shame them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that some sort of lunch food should have been served, but I don't think it's a federal crime that it was not. The parents are either clueless or cheaped out. The kids went hungry for an hour and nobody was harmed. Move along.

Nobody is talking about a federal crime, weirdo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No food for kids who have just been swimming for 2 hours? That's bad hosting.

+1 this time slot + the exercise activity means anyone would assume a meal. Just get a bunch of cheap pizzas and call it a day!

[Anonymous]

Cheap

[Anonymous]

This is so funny.

I remember DCUM 9 years ago when I posted about my sons birthday party and everyone commented that we needed food, no matter the time.
2-4? Need pizza
3-5? Sandwiches.

Pizza and cupcakes, regardless of the time, was a DCUM party must.

Now, it’s ok to have a party 11-1 with NO FOOD?’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes there should have been food.
However, if it wasn’t on the invite ( which u state it wasn’t) I would have asked the host just to clarify. If the host said no I’d have sent snacks with my kid.

Your kid can’t go three hours without snacks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes there should have been food.
However, if it wasn’t on the invite ( which u state it wasn’t) I would have asked the host just to clarify. If the host said no I’d have sent snacks with my kid.

Your kid can’t go three hours without snacks?

After swimming? No. Most people would need something in that time frame. Hopefully the kids were being loud about it so the host realized their mistake. I bet even the birthday child was hungry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes there should have been food.
However, if it wasn’t on the invite ( which u state it wasn’t) I would have asked the host just to clarify. If the host said no I’d have sent snacks with my kid.

That doesn't really help - it's awkward to eat a bunch of hearty snacks on your own while all the other kids are looking at you hungry or asking for some too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes there should have been food.
However, if it wasn’t on the invite ( which u state it wasn’t) I would have asked the host just to clarify. If the host said no I’d have sent snacks with my kid.

Your kid can’t go three hours without snacks?

After swimming? No. Most people would need something in that time frame. Hopefully the kids were being loud about it so the host realized their mistake. I bet even the birthday child was hungry.

Are they doing laps for a few hours? Ocean swimming? Please. No wonder so many kids are obese. My kids go 6 hrs in between meals and there’s no need for snacks.