If all your siblings went on vacation without you, would you be hurt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Omg you are really committed to being an asshole OP. Inviting the youngest sister is a huge mistake and will undoubtedly hurt feelings. I would be SO sad if I were the sister with younger kids. It’s really not fun being left out.

This is not kindergarten. Put on your big girl panties and realize that having 4 kids under the age of 10 means that some things, like a ski vacation meant for experienced skiers, are not a good fit for your family. I really don’t get everyone’s reactions to this. Everyone is an adult and should be over being hurt like elementary school children. Look in the mirror and realize a 5 month old baby, a 4 year old, and 2 other kids under 10 would cramp everyone else’s ski vacation. It’s not like OP is talking about a toddler centric vacation.

[Anonymous]

Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it would be mean to exclude the 3rd sister, without offering a way she could come at low impact to you (eg only breastfed infant + babysitter).

But sometimes the end justifies the mean. (This is from the office, I’m not serious.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

I think people are missing the fact that the 3rd sister doesn't just have little ones. She has older kids who are the same age as OP's kids, but are not as good of skiers. That's why she doesn't want them to come, because they will hold her kids back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

I think people are missing the fact that the 3rd sister doesn't just have little ones. She has older kids who are the same age as OP's kids, but are not as good of skiers. That's why she doesn't want them to come, because they will hold her kids back.

Which is a perfectly legitimate consideration, particularly when with an infant and a 4 year old to take care of who is going to be responsible for skiing with the sister’s older 2 kids? OP has planned this trip with her family and their skiing abilities in mind, she shouldn’t have to change it to somehow make it fit for a family with 4 kids, 2 of which are too young and 2 of which are not as experienced as OP and her family. This isn’t excluding the sister becuase they don’t like her or don’t want to be around her, it’s because her family is not a good fit for this trip. The idea that people can’t plan a specific type of vacation and include only those that would be a good fit for that vacation because someone who isn’t a good fit for the vacation will get their feelings hurt is absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

I think people are missing the fact that the 3rd sister doesn't just have little ones. She has older kids who are the same age as OP's kids, but are not as good of skiers. That's why she doesn't want them to come, because they will hold her kids back.

Which is a perfectly legitimate consideration, particularly when with an infant and a 4 year old to take care of who is going to be responsible for skiing with the sister’s older 2 kids? OP has planned this trip with her family and their skiing abilities in mind, she shouldn’t have to change it to somehow make it fit for a family with 4 kids, 2 of which are too young and 2 of which are not as experienced as OP and her family. This isn’t excluding the sister becuase they don’t like her or don’t want to be around her, it’s because her family is not a good fit for this trip. The idea that people can’t plan a specific type of vacation and include only those that would be a good fit for that vacation because someone who isn’t a good fit for the vacation will get their feelings hurt is absurd.

Literally no one is disagreeing that the OP shouldn't be able to go on the vacation she wants. She should go with the older sister and their kids as planned. The problem arises when they invite the youngest sister, so three families are going on the trip and only one family is excluded, because they are "not a good fit." That's a dick move. If you can't see that, I really don't know what to tell you.

[Anonymous]

Yes, OP it is rude. It's like the birthday party rule. If you just want to invite half the class fine. Once you go inviting everyone but a few who have special needs/considerations, you are a jerk.

You can either:

1.) Invite all sisters and let the one with all the kids know the boundaries-you will not be able to provide babysitting.

2.) Stick to just you and 1 sister.

3.) Exclude 1 sister only and deal with the fall out and possibly create a life long rift.

To the person who says "put on your big girl pants" my mother says that all thew time and she wonders why she has lost so many friends and cousins and her sister. Usually people that callous are hyper-sensitive if they are the ones being left out, but have no empathy for those they exclude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

I think people are missing the fact that the 3rd sister doesn't just have little ones. She has older kids who are the same age as OP's kids, but are not as good of skiers. That's why she doesn't want them to come, because they will hold her kids back.

Which is a perfectly legitimate consideration, particularly when with an infant and a 4 year old to take care of who is going to be responsible for skiing with the sister’s older 2 kids? OP has planned this trip with her family and their skiing abilities in mind, she shouldn’t have to change it to somehow make it fit for a family with 4 kids, 2 of which are too young and 2 of which are not as experienced as OP and her family. This isn’t excluding the sister becuase they don’t like her or don’t want to be around her, it’s because her family is not a good fit for this trip. The idea that people can’t plan a specific type of vacation and include only those that would be a good fit for that vacation because someone who isn’t a good fit for the vacation will get their feelings hurt is absurd.

Literally no one is disagreeing that the OP shouldn't be able to go on the vacation she wants. She should go with the older sister and their kids as planned. The problem arises when they invite the youngest sister, so three families are going on the trip and only one family is excluded, because they are "not a good fit." That's a dick move. If you can't see that, I really don't know what to tell you.

It would be a dick move if the other sister was actually a good fit but they just didn’t want her there, or if the youngest sister was being invited despite not being a skier just because they like her more. So you have to invite a family with a 5 month old, a 4 year old, and 2 other kids under 10 who aren’t as strong skiers as the other kids on the trip because adult siblings need to all be included in everything? These are the things you have to do in elementary school not when people are adults.

[Anonymous]

I don't get it. We go skiing with a group of mixed ages and abilities all the time. Someone says "we're taking the kids up to Difficult Slope this morning. We'll join up with you at Easy Slope after lunch." And anyone not comfortable with Hard Slope says "ok, have fun! "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

But not because they don’t love her. Because this trip and her family circumstances are incompatible. If the sister is rational and emotionally mature, she should understand this. Clearly there are a lot of people who operate solely from a place of emotion rather than logic, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. We go skiing with a group of mixed ages and abilities all the time. Someone says "we're taking the kids up to Difficult Slope this morning. We'll join up with you at Easy Slope after lunch." And anyone not comfortable with Hard Slope says "ok, have fun! "

I’m guessing the issue with this scenario is the baby and 4 year old. We used to go to a ski resort with family at Christmas and continued that when my kids were babies, and I put an end to it because being stuck at a ski resort with kids too little to ski was not fun in the least. If you added to that kids who were old enough to ski, but not old enough to ski alone, and not as good as the others on the trip, what do you do with those kids that doesn’t involve imposing on the other members of the group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. We go skiing with a group of mixed ages and abilities all the time. Someone says "we're taking the kids up to Difficult Slope this morning. We'll join up with you at Easy Slope after lunch." And anyone not comfortable with Hard Slope says "ok, have fun! "

And then you leave the four year old alone on the bunny slope?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op stated very clearly that she and older sister DON’T want sister number 3 to come. I.e they WANT to EXCLUDE her. Yes that is extremely hurtful.

It would be less hurtful to say we want this trip to be for older kids/adults - you are welcome to come without young kids. Ok understandable. And sister will probably refuse given she is unlikely to leave 5 month old.

It’s hard for me to understand though how OP can claim to be close to her sister and that an honest conversation cannot take place e.g. we planned this adult/older kid ski vabcation a long time. It’s not going to be appropriate for your young kids. However we have a little extra space and think it would be a nice wedding gift for baby sister. However we don’t want you to feel excluded or hurt if we invite her. We are assuming you wouldn’t want to come without your little ones. Or something like that. Not sure why there can’t be honest communication about this dilemma.

I think people are missing the fact that the 3rd sister doesn't just have little ones. She has older kids who are the same age as OP's kids, but are not as good of skiers. That's why she doesn't want them to come, because they will hold her kids back.

Which is a perfectly legitimate consideration, particularly when with an infant and a 4 year old to take care of who is going to be responsible for skiing with the sister’s older 2 kids? OP has planned this trip with her family and their skiing abilities in mind, she shouldn’t have to change it to somehow make it fit for a family with 4 kids, 2 of which are too young and 2 of which are not as experienced as OP and her family. This isn’t excluding the sister becuase they don’t like her or don’t want to be around her, it’s because her family is not a good fit for this trip. The idea that people can’t plan a specific type of vacation and include only those that would be a good fit for that vacation because someone who isn’t a good fit for the vacation will get their feelings hurt is absurd.

Literally no one is disagreeing that the OP shouldn't be able to go on the vacation she wants. She should go with the older sister and their kids as planned. The problem arises when they invite the youngest sister, so three families are going on the trip and only one family is excluded, because they are "not a good fit." That's a dick move. If you can't see that, I really don't know what to tell you.

+1

[Anonymous]

Why are people even entertaining the idea of inviting the sister with young kids? OP and the eldest don’t want her there. Don’t invite her and also don’t invite the youngest.

It’s what OP planned initially, it makes the most sense, and it isn’t hurtful because it’s not leaving one person out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. We go skiing with a group of mixed ages and abilities all the time. Someone says "we're taking the kids up to Difficult Slope this morning. We'll join up with you at Easy Slope after lunch." And anyone not comfortable with Hard Slope says "ok, have fun! "

And then you leave the four year old alone on the bunny slope?

Huh? The 4 year old has two parents. Why would she need to be alone on the bunny slope?