Would you not reciprocate a play date if friend’s house was too big?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I'm spending my lunch break searching redfin for 15000 sq feet and above homes. There are a surprisingly large number of them in the area.

Just did this too. Why do large houses need such ostentatious entryways/staircases? Most are so cheesy! But I'll take this one, please: https://www.redfin.com/VA/Great-Falls/8922-Jeffery-Rd-22066/home/17112572

$6 million price tag and has well and septic, ugh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, people are going to claim all kinds of things like “values”.

The crux of it is, yes, yiu have more than they do, and they don’t like that. Most people want someone they can compete with, usually mostly so they can feel better about their own choices and “position” in life.

Do you have a source for this fact? If not, speak for yourself!

Please read: previous posts.

+1

I'm with you. It is loud and clear. All these excuses for "loving" their small shacks? Yeah, right. If I could afford to rent anything other than a small shack, I'd be thrilled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I'm spending my lunch break searching redfin for 15000 sq feet and above homes. There are a surprisingly large number of them in the area.

Just did this too. Why do large houses need such ostentatious entryways/staircases? Most are so cheesy! But I'll take this one, please: https://www.redfin.com/VA/Great-Falls/8922-Jeffery-Rd-22066/home/17112572

$6 million price tag and has well and septic, ugh!

I don't care one bit about the well and septic, but those Frank Lloyd Wright influenced windows are awful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I'm spending my lunch break searching redfin for 15000 sq feet and above homes. There are a surprisingly large number of them in the area.

Just did this too. Why do large houses need such ostentatious entryways/staircases? Most are so cheesy! But I'll take this one, please: https://www.redfin.com/VA/Great-Falls/8922-Jeffery-Rd-22066/home/17112572

$6 million price tag and has well and septic, ugh!

I guess that explains why it's been on the market a whole year. I was just looking at the pretty pictures!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

Like what? The rich people I know, who happen to own large houses, have minimalist style (no knick knacks) - that has been in style for years now. Not sure where people are getting these outrageous assumptions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I'm spending my lunch break searching redfin for 15000 sq feet and above homes. There are a surprisingly large number of them in the area.

Just did this too. Why do large houses need such ostentatious entryways/staircases? Most are so cheesy! But I'll take this one, please: https://www.redfin.com/VA/Great-Falls/8922-Jeffery-Rd-22066/home/17112572

$6 million price tag and has well and septic, ugh!

I guess that explains why it's been on the market a whole year. I was just looking at the pretty pictures!

No, it does not.

Homes for sale that are over a certain amount (usually a million, sometimes slightly more) take longer to sell. More than most any house under $1m, certainly longer than any small home. Ask any realtor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, people are going to claim all kinds of things like “values”.

The crux of it is, yes, yiu have more than they do, and they don’t like that. Most people want someone they can compete with, usually mostly so they can feel better about their own choices and “position” in life.

Do you have a source for this fact? If not, speak for yourself!

Please read: previous posts.

is there a house size that you would find excessive? how about 30000sqft? 50000? 500000?

I mean at some point everybody agrees that the house is too big. while not everyone most people agree that some ~ 6000+ should be close to the limit.

this has nothing to with living shitshacks. but at least those people have limited budget so they bought what they could. what is OP's excuse? oh yes, older kids needed to have their own wings and occasional visitors needed their own mansion within mansion. ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, people are going to claim all kinds of things like “values”.

The crux of it is, yes, yiu have more than they do, and they don’t like that. Most people want someone they can compete with, usually mostly so they can feel better about their own choices and “position” in life.

Serious question (I'm not one of the people involved in the tetchy back-and-forths over the last several pages, I'm not trying to start something here): do you truly not believe that what a person spends their money on reflects their values? I don't think it's a smokescreen to say "you've spent $15M on an enormous house that you mostly don't use, and send your kids to public school; I don't understand your priorities." (And I say that as someone who truly values and boosts public schools.) It's not that OP is a bad person, and it's not that she's too rich, it's that there's something confusing and unsettling about her advertised priorities.

I have friends with much bigger houses than mine, and one set of friends with not only a much bigger/more expensive house than mine but also two amazing vacation homes, and I understand why they bought them. Location, functionality, travel, etc. I can't afford their lifestyle but it makes sense to me. If they threw that all over to buy one megamansion for the 5 of them I'd not understand what they were thinking or doing. Maybe it sounds moralistic to call that a difference in values but it mostly is a difference in values -- what do you value enough to spend most of your money on?

Wondering if these people quiz other potential playdate moms: "how many houses do you own"?" "and how did you acquire that?" If the answer (whether or not it is the entire truth) meets their "specifications", then you might go on the playdate, or not? What if the person is a lobbyist for a cause you don't believe in? What if they inherited a small fortune once all of their parents died? I don't understand people who think they have the entire picture, when people only tell you what they want you to know. It makes me think that some people are not nearly as smart as they think they are. Funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

Like what? The rich people I know, who happen to own large houses, have minimalist style (no knick knacks) - that has been in style for years now. Not sure where people are getting these outrageous assumptions?

Before you go around showing your ass, maybe you should read the whole post. I didn't assume anything, I asked her about the nature of her home in case the issue was something other than what she appreciated. Not all people, wealthy or not, have the same interior design tastes, so what the wealthy people you know have in their homes is pretty much irrelevant to what OP may have in her home. I would be asking the same thing if OP had a more modest home and experienced that other moms weren't comfortable coming over for play dates.

And the nature of what could be damaged could be anything -- breakable items, super expensive wallpaper she's afraid her child might scratch, a white couch her child might rub against while sporting a previously-undetected spot of food on their shirt, etc. It's a question of how kid-friendly the house is, regardless of its size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, people are going to claim all kinds of things like “values”.

The crux of it is, yes, yiu have more than they do, and they don’t like that. Most people want someone they can compete with, usually mostly so they can feel better about their own choices and “position” in life.

Do you have a source for this fact? If not, speak for yourself!

Please read: previous posts.

is there a house size that you would find excessive? how about 30000sqft? 50000? 500000?

I mean at some point everybody agrees that the house is too big. while not everyone most people agree that some ~ 6000+ should be close to the limit.

this has nothing to with living shitshacks. but at least those people have limited budget so they bought what they could. what is OP's excuse? oh yes, older kids needed to have their own wings and occasional visitors needed their own mansion within mansion. ridiculous.

WTH does it matter what my criteria is, if I am not the one living there? Are they storing dead bodies of their nemeses in the extra rooms?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

Like what? The rich people I know, who happen to own large houses, have minimalist style (no knick knacks) - that has been in style for years now. Not sure where people are getting these outrageous assumptions?

Before you go around showing your ass, maybe you should read the whole post. I didn't assume anything, I asked her about the nature of her home in case the issue was something other than what she appreciated. Not all people, wealthy or not, have the same interior design tastes, so what the wealthy people you know have in their homes is pretty much irrelevant to what OP may have in her home. I would be asking the same thing if OP had a more modest home and experienced that other moms weren't comfortable coming over for play dates.

And the nature of what could be damaged could be anything -- breakable items, super expensive wallpaper she's afraid her child might scratch, a white couch her child might rub against while sporting a previously-undetected spot of food on their shirt, etc. It's a question of how kid-friendly the house is, regardless of its size.

LOL. I just can't. This is hilarious, but not as this PP intended.

And what, pray tell, does "showing your ass" mean? I am not up on the classy jargon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

Like what? The rich people I know, who happen to own large houses, have minimalist style (no knick knacks) - that has been in style for years now. Not sure where people are getting these outrageous assumptions?

Before you go around showing your ass, maybe you should read the whole post. I didn't assume anything, I asked her about the nature of her home in case the issue was something other than what she appreciated. Not all people, wealthy or not, have the same interior design tastes, so what the wealthy people you know have in their homes is pretty much irrelevant to what OP may have in her home. I would be asking the same thing if OP had a more modest home and experienced that other moms weren't comfortable coming over for play dates.

And the nature of what could be damaged could be anything -- breakable items, super expensive wallpaper she's afraid her child might scratch, a white couch her child might rub against while sporting a previously-undetected spot of food on their shirt, etc. It's a question of how kid-friendly the house is, regardless of its size.

LOL. I just can't. This is hilarious, but not as this PP intended.

And what, pray tell, does "showing your ass" mean? I am not up on the classy jargon.

PP here. You're right. None of my fellow old shack owners have a white/beige/light colored couch...............? Or access to a washing machine.............? Definitely not my big house owning friends..........?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, people are going to claim all kinds of things like “values”.

The crux of it is, yes, yiu have more than they do, and they don’t like that. Most people want someone they can compete with, usually mostly so they can feel better about their own choices and “position” in life.

Do you have a source for this fact? If not, speak for yourself!

Please read: previous posts.

is there a house size that you would find excessive? how about 30000sqft? 50000? 500000?

I mean at some point everybody agrees that the house is too big. while not everyone most people agree that some ~ 6000+ should be close to the limit.

this has nothing to with living shitshacks. but at least those people have limited budget so they bought what they could. what is OP's excuse? oh yes, older kids needed to have their own wings and occasional visitors needed their own mansion within mansion. ridiculous.

WTH does it matter what my criteria is, if I am not the one living there? Are they storing dead bodies of their nemeses in the extra rooms?

so if someone eats their own poop, say, I am not supposed to judge her because it's her body and doesn't harm in any way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your house comfortable to hang out in? Would I feel okay putting my toddler down the moment we walked in the front door, or would I feel the need to pick him up at the door until we'd walked through the "formal" part of the house to the "play" part of the house? While I would have no problem being "grown-up" friends independent of my kids with someone whose house was that kind of showpiece, I probably wouldn't end up becoming "mom" friends, where a big part of our friend centers around getting our kids together for play dates, with someone who lived in that kind of house because I don't know that I'd ever feel truly comfortable having my kid in the space for fear of damaging something.

What on earth would a toddler "damage"?

Um, breakable objects stylishly arranged on tables within their reach?

Like what? The rich people I know, who happen to own large houses, have minimalist style (no knick knacks) - that has been in style for years now. Not sure where people are getting these outrageous assumptions?

Before you go around showing your ass, maybe you should read the whole post. I didn't assume anything, I asked her about the nature of her home in case the issue was something other than what she appreciated. Not all people, wealthy or not, have the same interior design tastes, so what the wealthy people you know have in their homes is pretty much irrelevant to what OP may have in her home. I would be asking the same thing if OP had a more modest home and experienced that other moms weren't comfortable coming over for play dates.

And the nature of what could be damaged could be anything -- breakable items, super expensive wallpaper she's afraid her child might scratch, a white couch her child might rub against while sporting a previously-undetected spot of food on their shirt, etc. It's a question of how kid-friendly the house is, regardless of its size.

LOL. I just can't. This is hilarious, but not as this PP intended.

And what, pray tell, does "showing your ass" mean? I am not up on the classy jargon.

PP here. You're right. None of my fellow old shack owners have a white/beige/light colored couch...............? Or access to a washing machine.............? Definitely not my big house owning friends..........?

PP here. Found something else that is......ironic? I keep finding something good!