I don’t want to travel OR host for the holidays

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

[Anonymous]

“Hi Sue and Bob. I know it’s your year for Christmas but this year we are not traveling to you or hosting you. Yes, I know we saw my family last year but that’s different because they fly to us, do all the cooking and cleaning and babysit our kids so that we don’t have to get off the couch while they are here. Yes, we will still see them next Christmas for the same reason, but we can’t see you at all this year because we are just too tired. I’m sure you totally understand and this doesn’t feel at all unfair to you. And yes of course Brad is totally on board with the plan and doesn’t miss seeing you at all! Tootles!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

I never said she was being harmed— I said there is a solution in which she had a perfectly nice Christmas with her family and does no harm to anyone. You don’t need to be being harmed to not want to do something, or to want to do something else. If she came on to say her in-laws said, in August, that they had been offered a luxury Swiss vacation and they couldn’t make it to Christmas this year, I wouldn’t say she has anything to complain about either.

There just isn’t a justification for OP to not be allowed to have her holiday as she likes it one year. I refuse to buy this idea that having children makes you a 20 year indentured servant to your in laws or your parents. I’m certainly not raising my daughter that way, and if that means I always spend my later year Christmas’ with my husband on a sandy beach, I will cope.

I get along fine with my in laws and my husband is very happy. I did let him know you think he’s a doormat yesterday and he thanks you for your concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

I never said she was being harmed— I said there is a solution in which she had a perfectly nice Christmas with her family and does no harm to anyone. You don’t need to be being harmed to not want to do something, or to want to do something else. If she came on to say her in-laws said, in August, that they had been offered a luxury Swiss vacation and they couldn’t make it to Christmas this year, I wouldn’t say she has anything to complain about either.

There just isn’t a justification for OP to not be allowed to have her holiday as she likes it one year. I refuse to buy this idea that having children makes you a 20 year indentured servant to your in laws or your parents. I’m certainly not raising my daughter that way, and if that means I always spend my later year Christmas’ with my husband on a sandy beach, I will cope.

I get along fine with my in laws and my husband is very happy. I did let him know you think he’s a doormat yesterday and he thanks you for your concern.

So neither of you feels any attachement to your parents, and you are raising your children the same. This explains a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

I never said she was being harmed— I said there is a solution in which she had a perfectly nice Christmas with her family and does no harm to anyone. You don’t need to be being harmed to not want to do something, or to want to do something else. If she came on to say her in-laws said, in August, that they had been offered a luxury Swiss vacation and they couldn’t make it to Christmas this year, I wouldn’t say she has anything to complain about either.

There just isn’t a justification for OP to not be allowed to have her holiday as she likes it one year. I refuse to buy this idea that having children makes you a 20 year indentured servant to your in laws or your parents. I’m certainly not raising my daughter that way, and if that means I always spend my later year Christmas’ with my husband on a sandy beach, I will cope.

I get along fine with my in laws and my husband is very happy. I did let him know you think he’s a doormat yesterday and he thanks you for your concern.

So neither of you feels any attachement to your parents, and you are raising your children the same. This explains a lot.

…we both love our parents, we see both sets often, and we’re raising our daughter that her mother doesn’t put herself last, and so she is not to put herself last.

Here’s an idea for you. Instead of posting projection after projection, why don’t you make a list of everything about your daughter in law you are (or should be) deeply grateful for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

I never said she was being harmed— I said there is a solution in which she had a perfectly nice Christmas with her family and does no harm to anyone. You don’t need to be being harmed to not want to do something, or to want to do something else. If she came on to say her in-laws said, in August, that they had been offered a luxury Swiss vacation and they couldn’t make it to Christmas this year, I wouldn’t say she has anything to complain about either.

There just isn’t a justification for OP to not be allowed to have her holiday as she likes it one year. I refuse to buy this idea that having children makes you a 20 year indentured servant to your in laws or your parents. I’m certainly not raising my daughter that way, and if that means I always spend my later year Christmas’ with my husband on a sandy beach, I will cope.

I get along fine with my in laws and my husband is very happy. I did let him know you think he’s a doormat yesterday and he thanks you for your concern.

So neither of you feels any attachement to your parents, and you are raising your children the same. This explains a lot.

…we both love our parents, we see both sets often, and we’re raising our daughter that her mother doesn’t put herself last, and so she is not to put herself last.

Here’s an idea for you. Instead of posting projection after projection, why don’t you make a list of everything about your daughter in law you are (or should be) deeply grateful for.

I only have daughters and they are not yet of marrying age. But I would never treat my inlaws (or encourage my daughters to treat their inlaws the way you are proposing.) And I think its pretty rich that your family sees both sets of parents "often" and yet you think its fine for OP to go literal years without seeing her inlaws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand what’s such a big deal about traveling or hosting. It doesn’t have to be a full Pinterest spread. We do it and it’s not the slave labor some posters are making it out to be. OP’s mom clearly does it, in addition to traveling and taking care of OP’s kids too. OP just…can’t? Why not?

Her OP is pretty clear: she doesn’t want to cook and clean for eight. Different people have different preferences— yours apparently includes cooking and cleaning for people and OPs doesn’t.

I just don’t understand the big deal about insisting someone host or travel. There’s a very lovely third option where she and her family have a lovely small Christmas this year. That doesn’t do anyone any harm but to read it here you’d think she was committing a crime.

It absolutely does harm to her husband and in-laws, who you conveniently seem to forget even exist, or else don’t matter as much as OP.

It doesn’t harm her in laws. If she tells them December first and they have to scramble to make new plans, that may harm them, but telling them in August she’s not hosting in December? No, they’re not being harmed. They’re just not getting their own way. Which only feels harmful if you’re incredibly entitled.

OP doesn’t say— anywhere— that her husband wants to host or visit his parents. All we hear about him is that he also likes when her parents visit and take on the work of hosting. You are projecting a viewpoint on to him.

Hilarious that you call the in-laws entitled in a thread that’s all about OP’s entitlement. And I disagree that taking away Christmas from her in-laws on their year is harming them. Especially when it’s quite obvious nothing is being taken away from OP’s own family. She conveniently says very little about her husband, which I think is intentional. It wouldn’t serve her narrative.

“Taking away”
“Their year”

Her in laws are not owed Christmas, nor is Christmas something that can be “taken away” from someone by not inviting them to your home. With six months of notice they can visit other family, plan an amazing vacation, host other family members or friends, volunteer…literally anything. Not getting your first choice is not being harmed.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. And traveling to your husband's family or hosting them with a few takeout dinners is not being "harmed" either, using your bizarre word choice. Its clear you hate your inlaws and believe that a wife's preferences trumps a husband's all day long. Your hen-pecked, brow-beaten husband must be so in love with you.

I never said she was being harmed— I said there is a solution in which she had a perfectly nice Christmas with her family and does no harm to anyone. You don’t need to be being harmed to not want to do something, or to want to do something else. If she came on to say her in-laws said, in August, that they had been offered a luxury Swiss vacation and they couldn’t make it to Christmas this year, I wouldn’t say she has anything to complain about either.

There just isn’t a justification for OP to not be allowed to have her holiday as she likes it one year. I refuse to buy this idea that having children makes you a 20 year indentured servant to your in laws or your parents. I’m certainly not raising my daughter that way, and if that means I always spend my later year Christmas’ with my husband on a sandy beach, I will cope.

I get along fine with my in laws and my husband is very happy. I did let him know you think he’s a doormat yesterday and he thanks you for your concern.

So neither of you feels any attachement to your parents, and you are raising your children the same. This explains a lot.

…we both love our parents, we see both sets often, and we’re raising our daughter that her mother doesn’t put herself last, and so she is not to put herself last.

Here’s an idea for you. Instead of posting projection after projection, why don’t you make a list of everything about your daughter in law you are (or should be) deeply grateful for.

I only have daughters and they are not yet of marrying age. But I would never treat my inlaws (or encourage my daughters to treat their inlaws the way you are proposing.) And I think its pretty rich that your family sees both sets of parents "often" and yet you think its fine for OP to go literal years without seeing her inlaws.

We went “literal years” without seeing my in-laws at the holidays when they were working overseas. Should I be here crying that I had Christmas “taken away”from me? Or should I say I valued the long vacations we took together at other times of year? Are my in-laws lazy or entitled for not traveling to us during the busiest global travel season? I’ve never thought so.

The holidays are not the only time you can see people. You are going to teach your daughter’s that they have no agency and must only please their parents and in-laws; that is how you get the very sad estrangement’s you see on this board.

[Anonymous]

OP makes no mention of seeing them other times of the year, or offering alternate dates, but nice try. I bet she got a break for a few years over Covid (while still "risking it" with her own parents of course) and doesn't care if her poor husband sees his parents ever again. My husband wouldn't go years without seeing his parents because he is not a terrible son.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP makes no mention of seeing them other times of the year, or offering alternate dates, but nice try. I bet she got a break for a few years over Covid (while still "risking it" with her own parents of course) and doesn't care if her poor husband sees his parents ever again. My husband wouldn't go years without seeing his parents because he is not a terrible son.

You really are constructing an enormous work of fiction here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine being so lazy with kids. Christmas is about them. I go all out and it’s the thing my kids remember the most about holidays.

My parents do help me cook when they visit and my in-laws dont, but that’s because I like cooking with my mom and my in-laws instead play with dh and the kids.

I do refuse to travel for Christmas though. Other holidays are fine to travel.

Agree. Not sure why some of these people even have kids.

To have kids.

The people showing up at their home demanding to be waited on? Not kids. No one has kids thinking “at last! I can wash dishes while my in laws sit on the couch!”

I am truly sad for you that you can imagine any value in extended family holidays.

I can— and do. I don’t see value in exhausting myself to wait on people. My children won’t have holiday memories of an exhausted mother.

Heaven forfend they see their mother working hard for her family.

Right?! Especially when the alternatives are memories like snuggling with your mother in her bed reading Christmas stories, walking through Christmas lights with her, skating with her, baking cookies with her, having Christmas morning breakfast in bed with her…gosh why would you trade any of those memories for “my mother worked hard at Christmas”?

We hosted my MiL and BIL for years when my kids were little and were still able to do all of the above, except breakfast in bed because that seems terrible to me and my kids wouldn’t have wanted to do that.

I don’t see how this is either/or?!?!

In cases where the people you’re hosting require a lot of work, they are either or. My husband taught my daughter when she was very small that on Christmas morning you have to bring your parents coffee and buns in bed. Not doing that if you’ve got guests waiting around for you to make them breakfast.

However the bigger point was I consider any of these memories a million times more valuable than my kids “seeing me working hard”.

If the children are working to bring you breakfast in bed, what difference is it to you if she also serves her grandparents in bed?

What's up with this crazytown thread--only your parents and your kids should work on the holidays for your benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine being so lazy with kids. Christmas is about them. I go all out and it’s the thing my kids remember the most about holidays.

My parents do help me cook when they visit and my in-laws dont, but that’s because I like cooking with my mom and my in-laws instead play with dh and the kids.

I do refuse to travel for Christmas though. Other holidays are fine to travel.

Agree. Not sure why some of these people even have kids.

To have kids.

The people showing up at their home demanding to be waited on? Not kids. No one has kids thinking “at last! I can wash dishes while my in laws sit on the couch!”

I am truly sad for you that you can imagine any value in extended family holidays.

I can— and do. I don’t see value in exhausting myself to wait on people. My children won’t have holiday memories of an exhausted mother.

Heaven forfend they see their mother working hard for her family.

Right?! Especially when the alternatives are memories like snuggling with your mother in her bed reading Christmas stories, walking through Christmas lights with her, skating with her, baking cookies with her, having Christmas morning breakfast in bed with her…gosh why would you trade any of those memories for “my mother worked hard at Christmas”?

We hosted my MiL and BIL for years when my kids were little and were still able to do all of the above, except breakfast in bed because that seems terrible to me and my kids wouldn’t have wanted to do that.

I don’t see how this is either/or?!?!

In cases where the people you’re hosting require a lot of work, they are either or. My husband taught my daughter when she was very small that on Christmas morning you have to bring your parents coffee and buns in bed. Not doing that if you’ve got guests waiting around for you to make them breakfast.

However the bigger point was I consider any of these memories a million times more valuable than my kids “seeing me working hard”.

If the children are working to bring you breakfast in bed, what difference is it to you if she also serves her grandparents in bed?

What's up with this crazytown thread--only your parents and your kids should work on the holidays for your benefit.

Gross all over.