MIL mad that we want to host Thanksgiving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are some batshit crazy folk on this forum. In what universe is it okay that the DIL has to go to MIL house on thanksgiving, Christmas , Easter , 4th if July AND TAKE AN ANNUAL VACATION to place of mil choosing EVERY YEAR????

Well, it sounds like OP and her husband also see OP's family for 1/2 the holidays. But that still leaves a hefty command performance level with, say, Easter (MIL house) and Thanksgiving (MIL house) and annual vacation (beach house MIL chose but isn't paying for everyone to stay in). So that's enough MIL-determined locales, already. Time to let OP/husband and the SIL/BIL host every now and then if they want to.

[Anonymous]

If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

you missed the point. the point is, will the Greens be mad that you decided to unilaterally take over St. Patrick's day? the answer is, of course they will be upset.

perhaps you are still justified in throwing your st patrick's day party; perhaps it will even be a better party. but, you don't get to BOTH show off your shamrock china at your party, and NOT have the green's be upset. you can't have your cake and eat it too. if you want to make this change, you have to suck up that it will upset people.

if you prioritize (at all) not upsetting the Greens, then you'd do something a little friendlier than just announcing in July that you'll be hosting St Patrick's day next March. You'd have a discussion, ask them about co-hosting, maybe see if you could do Cinco de Mayo instead ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

you missed the point. the point is, will the Greens be mad that you decided to unilaterally take over St. Patrick's day? the answer is, of course they will be upset.

perhaps you are still justified in throwing your st patrick's day party; perhaps it will even be a better party. but, you don't get to BOTH show off your shamrock china at your party, and NOT have the green's be upset. you can't have your cake and eat it too. if you want to make this change, you have to suck up that it will upset people.

if you prioritize (at all) not upsetting the Greens, then you'd do something a little friendlier than just announcing in July that you'll be hosting St Patrick's day next March. You'd have a discussion, ask them about co-hosting, maybe see if you could do Cinco de Mayo instead ...

Uh, huh. Just like the OP's husband did. After seven YEARS of not hosting, he called his mother to say they want to host. And instead of graciously saying, of course, that's only fair, she's decided to throw a fit. Because it's all about her, right? Because she owns the holiday? Because her wants and needs trump everyone else's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

The point of the hypothetical above is to take out the family context of the situation. And I picked St. Patrick's day as sort of a silly holiday name to use for the sake of the hypothetical.

Dont get caught up in comparing it to OP's situation, just think how a group of neighbors might react to this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

The point of the hypothetical above is to take out the family context of the situation. And I picked St. Patrick's day as sort of a silly holiday name to use for the sake of the hypothetical.

Dont get caught up in comparing it to OP's situation, just think how a group of neighbors might react to this situation.

Well, let's say that, for YEARS, other people have expressed interest in hosting, and--for demonstrable logistical reasons, like travel and overnight stays and time off work and kids. And let's say that, despite all of these requests and reasons, the Greens have not been willing to part with being the hosts. What then?

Then, when the Greens receive a private call and a direct request from the Smiths to step down for one lousy year and let someone else take a turn, the only reasonable option is for them to be gracious about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

The point of the hypothetical above is to take out the family context of the situation. And I picked St. Patrick's day as sort of a silly holiday name to use for the sake of the hypothetical.

Dont get caught up in comparing it to OP's situation, just think how a group of neighbors might react to this situation.

Well, let's say that, for YEARS, other people have expressed interest in hosting, and--for demonstrable logistical reasons, like travel and overnight stays and time off work and kids. And let's say that, despite all of these requests and reasons, the Greens have not been willing to part with being the hosts. What then?

Then, when the Greens receive a private call and a direct request from the Smiths to step down for one lousy year and let someone else take a turn, the only reasonable option is for them to be gracious about it.

I hadn't seen it mentioned before that the OP had been asking for many years to have Thanksgiving at her house. New details keep being added. When OP and husband asked for many years and his mother still wanted to have a Thanksgiving dinner at her house, that made it clear that it was still important to her and that she can still handle the work.

The OP does seem to resent her husband's mother. And for whatever reason, the husband doesn't seem mind taking an action that might hurt his mother. You all should have just stayed home for Thanksgiving. You're right that 2 1/2- 3 hours is too long to travel for a dinner. You could have said that it is too long of a trip, but you didn't have to preemptively invite the people you knew usually went to your husband's mother's home for the meal. That is the part that was hurtful to your husband's mother.

It likely won't be all that many years before it is too much work for the mom to do the dinner- that would have been the kinder time to offer to take over. At that point, you could be the generous daughter in law offering to have the family over instead this situation where it looks as though you are trying to take control by inviting people many months ahead of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, OP hosts IN HER OWN HOME already. This is about OP "getting" this particular holiday, with her Inlaws. Not about hosting in general.


OP here. How does me hosting my family sometimes equal my kids having a sleepover in our basement with their DH-side cousins? How does it equal “spa” time in my home with my SIL, who loves the jacuzzi at my house? How does it equal basketball games in our driveway with BIL?

Op, you're being ridiculous. Now it's not about sharing hosting responsibilities, but about how much better your house is than MIL's? It just proves what I was thinking that it's not about traditions or starting your own, but really you just hate going to MIL's house and you want to take over hosting.

Because what now? Let's say everyone comes to your house for T-giving and loves it (like you say). Will you do Christmas? and Easter too? I mean if everyone really loves your house so much more than MIL's, then they'd prefer to come to your place for all the holidays, right?

OP here. Our hope is to have everyone who actively wants to host have a turn at hosting, including MIL! DH and I love having people over and would love to have the full holiday experience with DH's family, especially the cousins. We also know for a fact that BIL and his wife would love to host a holiday. I have no idea whether DH's aunt/uncle would like to host, or his adult cousin, but I don't think so. Anyway, three people actively want to host--MIL, SIL/BIL and DH and me. Why on Earth is it so wrong for us to all get to host every now and again, if that's what we want? I'd even be happy with something like:

Year 1: Easter at MIL's, Thanksgiving at our place
Year 2: Fourth of July at SIL's, Christmas at MIL's
Year 3: Easter at our place, Thanksgiving at MIL's
and so on

Please keep in mind this is already on top of her usually hosting Fourth of July and a set-in-stone DH family beach trip that is at the same house every year; a house she chose long ago (and yes, we pay our own way so you can take that off your snark list).

Look, you clearly resent your MIL and think this represents some kind of injustice against you. That's fine, but don't act all surprised when she gets upset when you aggressively change things that have been done the same way for a long time. It's not your job to re-structure your IL's family traditions.

Agree with this. It does sound like you don't like that your husband's family spends every holiday with their mother at the home where they grew up and now you want to stake your claim to having a holiday at your house. This is in addition to already having some of the holidays with your own family of origin at your house.

The bottom line is that you have hurt the feelings of your husband's mother. She can forgive you but she is now very aware that you resent her, if she wasn't already. On top of that, you're making it sound as though she has somehow done something wrong to want to gather together with her family in the home where her children grew up.

NP--There's nothing wrong with MIL wanting to gather with her family where her children grew up, but there IS something wrong with that being enforced for every holiday for every member of the family for numerous years. What about how the other family members feel? What about them wanting to make new traditions and memories in the homes where THEIR children are growing up?

+1

This is what I don’t understand about some of these responses. It sounds like there are at least 7 people involved besides MIL. Why shouldn’t other people be taken into consideration as well?

+2

Well, in OP's telling she's the brave one standing up for everyone against her MIL's tryannical "monopoly" over the holidays. Some of us doubt that telling.

Of course, people have a right to decide where they go on the holidays. The issue here is OP aggresively pushing her agenda and then pretending to be confused when her MIL gets upset about it.

But MIL does not own the people who traditionally go to her house. I don’t see why it’s an issue for OP to invite others and then everyone can chose for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Everyone keeps saying this happens every year (even OP says that later on) but that's wrong. OP clearly says they switch off years, so OP, it's not 7 years that this has been going on - it's been 3 (this is the 4th year, I'm assuming). And, by you arguing that this happens EVERY YEAR, yet you don't go every other year, are you being the one that finally stands up to MIL on behalf of everyone else?

Oh, and how will your schedule work when it's your turn to host MIL, but your Aunt's turn to host on your side of the family, and it's your family's turn? you can't host and bring both sides together because you'd be taking away from your Aunt's hosting turn. And if you don't host when it's your turn, all your plans kind of lose meaning because you clearly don't care enough to skip your side's turn, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, OP hosts IN HER OWN HOME already. This is about OP "getting" this particular holiday, with her Inlaws. Not about hosting in general.


OP here. How does me hosting my family sometimes equal my kids having a sleepover in our basement with their DH-side cousins? How does it equal “spa” time in my home with my SIL, who loves the jacuzzi at my house? How does it equal basketball games in our driveway with BIL?

Op, you're being ridiculous. Now it's not about sharing hosting responsibilities, but about how much better your house is than MIL's? It just proves what I was thinking that it's not about traditions or starting your own, but really you just hate going to MIL's house and you want to take over hosting.

Because what now? Let's say everyone comes to your house for T-giving and loves it (like you say). Will you do Christmas? and Easter too? I mean if everyone really loves your house so much more than MIL's, then they'd prefer to come to your place for all the holidays, right?

OP here. Our hope is to have everyone who actively wants to host have a turn at hosting, including MIL! DH and I love having people over and would love to have the full holiday experience with DH's family, especially the cousins. We also know for a fact that BIL and his wife would love to host a holiday. I have no idea whether DH's aunt/uncle would like to host, or his adult cousin, but I don't think so. Anyway, three people actively want to host--MIL, SIL/BIL and DH and me. Why on Earth is it so wrong for us to all get to host every now and again, if that's what we want? I'd even be happy with something like:

Year 1: Easter at MIL's, Thanksgiving at our place
Year 2: Fourth of July at SIL's, Christmas at MIL's
Year 3: Easter at our place, Thanksgiving at MIL's
and so on

Please keep in mind this is already on top of her usually hosting Fourth of July and a set-in-stone DH family beach trip that is at the same house every year; a house she chose long ago (and yes, we pay our own way so you can take that off your snark list).

Look, you clearly resent your MIL and think this represents some kind of injustice against you. That's fine, but don't act all surprised when she gets upset when you aggressively change things that have been done the same way for a long time. It's not your job to re-structure your IL's family traditions.

Agree with this. It does sound like you don't like that your husband's family spends every holiday with their mother at the home where they grew up and now you want to stake your claim to having a holiday at your house. This is in addition to already having some of the holidays with your own family of origin at your house.

The bottom line is that you have hurt the feelings of your husband's mother. She can forgive you but she is now very aware that you resent her, if she wasn't already. On top of that, you're making it sound as though she has somehow done something wrong to want to gather together with her family in the home where her children grew up.

Wow. It's actually perfectly fine to decide that to have holidays in one's own home.

And, frankly, this MIL earned whatever discomfort she has now for not loosening her grip earlier. If OP and her DH and the BIL/SIL have made motions to host and been met with resistance, well, eventually push comes to shove, and, yeah, feelings might get a little hurt--and, yeah, she might might feel like her DILs resent her *because they do.*

Oh well! MIL has been more than accommodated for years. If she ever thought about what other people wanted besides her, she might not have found herself in this position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are some batshit crazy folk on this forum. In what universe is it okay that the DIL has to go to MIL house on thanksgiving, Christmas , Easter , 4th if July AND TAKE AN ANNUAL VACATION to place of mil choosing EVERY YEAR????

Everyone keeps saying this happens every year (even OP says that later on) but that's wrong. OP clearly says they switch off years, so OP, it's not 7 years that this has been going on - it's been 3 (this is the 4th year, I'm assuming). And, by you arguing that this happens EVERY YEAR, yet you don't go every other year, are you being the one that finally stands up to MIL on behalf of everyone else?

Oh, and how will your schedule work when it's your turn to host MIL, but your Aunt's turn to host on your side of the family, and it's your family's turn? you can't host and bring both sides together because you'd be taking away from your Aunt's hosting turn. And if you don't host when it's your turn, all your plans kind of lose meaning because you clearly don't care enough to skip your side's turn, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

The point of the hypothetical above is to take out the family context of the situation. And I picked St. Patrick's day as sort of a silly holiday name to use for the sake of the hypothetical.

Dont get caught up in comparing it to OP's situation, just think how a group of neighbors might react to this situation.

Well, let's say that, for YEARS, other people have expressed interest in hosting, and--for demonstrable logistical reasons, like travel and overnight stays and time off work and kids. And let's say that, despite all of these requests and reasons, the Greens have not been willing to part with being the hosts. What then?

Then, when the Greens receive a private call and a direct request from the Smiths to step down for one lousy year and let someone else take a turn, the only reasonable option is for them to be gracious about it.

I hadn't seen it mentioned before that the OP had been asking for many years to have Thanksgiving at her house. New details keep being added. When OP and husband asked for many years and his mother still wanted to have a Thanksgiving dinner at her house, that made it clear that it was still important to her and that she can still handle the work.

The OP does seem to resent her husband's mother. And for whatever reason, the husband doesn't seem mind taking an action that might hurt his mother. You all should have just stayed home for Thanksgiving. You're right that 2 1/2- 3 hours is too long to travel for a dinner. You could have said that it is too long of a trip, but you didn't have to preemptively invite the people you knew usually went to your husband's mother's home for the meal. That is the part that was hurtful to your husband's mother.

It likely won't be all that many years before it is too much work for the mom to do the dinner- that would have been the kinder time to offer to take over. At that point, you could be the generous daughter in law offering to have the family over instead this situation where it looks as though you are trying to take control by inviting people many months ahead of time.

You sound like a butt-hurt MIL. When you marry, and especially when you have kids, you have a new family and start your own traditions. Plan your traditions with the expectation that your children may not always participate. People with young children should have first right of refusal for hosting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some batshit crazy folk on this forum. In what universe is it okay that the DIL has to go to MIL house on thanksgiving, Christmas , Easter , 4th if July AND TAKE AN ANNUAL VACATION to place of mil choosing EVERY YEAR????

Everyone keeps saying this happens every year (even OP says that later on) but that's wrong. OP clearly says they switch off years, so OP, it's not 7 years that this has been going on - it's been 3 (this is the 4th year, I'm assuming). And, by you arguing that this happens EVERY YEAR, yet you don't go every other year, are you being the one that finally stands up to MIL on behalf of everyone else?

Oh, and how will your schedule work when it's your turn to host MIL, but your Aunt's turn to host on your side of the family, and it's your family's turn? you can't host and bring both sides together because you'd be taking away from your Aunt's hosting turn. And if you don't host when it's your turn, all your plans kind of lose meaning because you clearly don't care enough to skip your side's turn, right?

Is it some sort of surprise that when MIL’s children got married their spouses would have parents as well or was the hope they would just marry two orphans? What they do with OP’s family is irrelevant and very bean counter-y.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this situation did not involve a mother in law and daughter in law, would people feel the same way about how this was handled?

In the earlier example, how would people feel if your neighbors the Smiths, who had attended the Green family's party every year for many years, invited people seven months ahead of time to a party for St, Patrick's day when they were well aware that the Greens, the family that has held this party for about ten years, is still planning to have it?

Would you feel that the Smiths were for some reason trying to "steal" the party from the Greens?

Would you think the Green family would have a right to be upset that their whole guest list was invited to someone else's house for a party they had intended to give?

Would you feel that neighborhood tradition counts for something and be on the side of the Green family?

Or would you think that someone new should get to have the party?

What if the Smiths had a bigger house and nicer linens, china, and silver? Does that give them the upper hand for having the party at their house?

I'm just curious about how people feel about a situation like this when you take away the mother and daughter in law dynamic. (And something similar to the above actually happened in my neighborhood, so I have an idea about how people reacted in real life.)

Except this doesn't hold up as a good example. Why?

- Because St. Patrick's Day isn't a meaningful holiday for most people.
-Because St. Pat's isn't a day traditionally spent with family.
-Because, logistically speaking, St. Pat's Day does not = time off work, time off school, time off from sports events and other obligations; the world doesn't "stop" for St. Pat's Day, so it's not a good opportunity to travel to see family.
-Because St. Pat's Day isn't typically celebrated in a home-with-family environment.
-Because St. Pat's Day doesn't typically involve overnight guests and the "prime time hosting opportunity" that Thanksgiving presents (best food, best dishes, chance to pull out all the stops and use your good stuff)

But even if we worked with your scenario, sorry, I just don't think the Greens own St. Patrick's Day. Would a heads-up phone call be nice (like the one DH gave to his mother)? Yes. But the Greens don't own that holiday. People can decide to go where they want to go.

I don't think OP even mentioned her bigger house except in the context that it is more comfortable for the overnight guests, which--as kids get bigger--we all know is a factor. And even that was a response to a question, not offered up as "SEE, I should host."

The point of the hypothetical above is to take out the family context of the situation. And I picked St. Patrick's day as sort of a silly holiday name to use for the sake of the hypothetical.

Dont get caught up in comparing it to OP's situation, just think how a group of neighbors might react to this situation.

Well, let's say that, for YEARS, other people have expressed interest in hosting, and--for demonstrable logistical reasons, like travel and overnight stays and time off work and kids. And let's say that, despite all of these requests and reasons, the Greens have not been willing to part with being the hosts. What then?

Then, when the Greens receive a private call and a direct request from the Smiths to step down for one lousy year and let someone else take a turn, the only reasonable option is for them to be gracious about it.

I hadn't seen it mentioned before that the OP had been asking for many years to have Thanksgiving at her house. New details keep being added. When OP and husband asked for many years and his mother still wanted to have a Thanksgiving dinner at her house, that made it clear that it was still important to her and that she can still handle the work.

The OP does seem to resent her husband's mother. And for whatever reason, the husband doesn't seem mind taking an action that might hurt his mother. You all should have just stayed home for Thanksgiving. You're right that 2 1/2- 3 hours is too long to travel for a dinner. You could have said that it is too long of a trip, but you didn't have to preemptively invite the people you knew usually went to your husband's mother's home for the meal. That is the part that was hurtful to your husband's mother.

It likely won't be all that many years before it is too much work for the mom to do the dinner- that would have been the kinder time to offer to take over. At that point, you could be the generous daughter in law offering to have the family over instead this situation where it looks as though you are trying to take control by inviting people many months ahead of time.

You sound like a butt-hurt MIL. When you marry, and especially when you have kids, you have a new family and start your own traditions. Plan your traditions with the expectation that your children may not always participate. People with young children should have first right of refusal for hosting.

Haha, nowhere near!

Actually, I think it's crazy for anyone with kids to be driving close to three hours for holidays and I don't get why people don't just celebrate with their own nuclear family if they don't live within 45 minutes or so of people. We move around a lot and we mainly only spend holidays with family if we're living close by. More than about an hour, and we celebrate on our own.

That's why I suggested that they stay home. They seem to be the ones who live farther away, so they can have a nice cozy day at home. My spouse and I both come from military families, so we don't have anyone who has crazy expectations that everyone needs to be together for every holiday. My spouse and kids and I enjoy each other's company and we have our own traditions for ourselves.