Where are people’s manners?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why you invited a family over for dinner, specifically told them to come after lunch so you don't have to feed them, specifically told them to bring snacks so you don't have to feed them snacks....that's a weird flex.

They were rude to not ask, yes, but you are not a gracious host. At all. If guests are coming after lunch you could easily have put out a spread of snacks and drinks.

THIS

Exactly. It’s this fundamental part of the story that makes me doubt the veracity of OPs claims regarding the other family’s behavior. I can’t believe that someone who explicitly told guests “you may only arrive after you’ve eaten lunch and you must bring snacks as we will not be sharing any food with you beyond what we cook for dinner” has a strong grasp on normal human behavior.

Also, I am suspicious that, while OP was clearly dedicated to the no food sharing policy, the other family renting may not have been as rigid. If all hosts were, why did no one speak up? Were all the other hosts and their kids firmly on board with the no snack sharing? It’s just hard for me to me imagine a house full of adults and kids vehemently against sharing any food with the guests they invited over. And if they all were why did no one say anything?

Agreed. Plenty of plot holes. Makes the bedroom storyline very unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weve entered the phase of this thread where the OP is sock puppeting like crazy to make it appear she has allies

I’ve posted in support of OP and I’m not her. Ask Jeff (or, you know, get a life).

The slavering pack of hyenas piling on to defend the ill-mannered, spoiled kid “guests” and their parents are very telling, though.

I'm another poster who supports op. I am not a sock puppet. I'm an older mom and saw all of this kind of crap at playdates. I did vacation with other parents but only shared space with those I knew well. I did have a friend take advantage of an invitation but I shut it down. I resent what she did to this day, it was so rude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

This is probably the “issues with food” rearing its head that people suggested you probably had.

They’re probably fat if they think sharing snacks because that means they eat every 2 hours is a logical progression that only a pathological person with an unhealthy relationship with food would follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

You don't think kids (who are calorie furnaces by virtue of growing in the first place) would benefit from a snack after 2 hours of physical activity? wtf?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

Did you never play a sport growing up? We had orange slices every quarter and ssssips and orange slices at half time. In the 80s.

What 3 year old is playing a “less than 2 hour soccer match” unless by less than 2 hours you mean 25 minutes.

What in the world are you even talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

You don't think kids (who are calorie furnaces by virtue of growing in the first place) would benefit from a snack after 2 hours of physical activity? wtf?

Less than 2 hours though.

People actually think this is proof that snacks are over emphasized? Whaaaaacky

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

Born in 1970s, always had a mid-morning snack & an afternoon snack. So always had breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, supper. The snacks were small things: fruit, small cheese sandwich, cookie, … so snacking is not something new. May be the frequency increased? But for kids who had breakfast at 8 or 9, and then play till 10 or 10:30, it is quite reasonable to provide a snack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But crying and screaming because a CHILD laid down in your rental bed because she was tired is just immature. Grow. Up.

Who is crying and screaming? Are you projecting?

I don’t care if your CHILD is tired. Your child being tired doesn’t entitle you to anything.

Going into people’s bedrooms is off limits unless it’s under the age of 4 and parents asked permission to use your bedroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t believe that someone who explicitly told guests “you may only arrive after you’ve eaten lunch and you must bring snacks as we will not be sharing any food with you beyond what we cook for dinner” has a strong grasp on normal human behavior.

Where did I say that explicitly told them to come after lunch? I didn’t say that, you made that up, along with other idiotic things.

I told them to bring everything for a day at the beach including snacks to carry kids over until dinner. They arrived after lunch. I assume people feed their kids lunch, but apparently I was wrong. They didn’t bring any snacks. The kids ate ALL the snacks both families brought for that weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

This is probably the “issues with food” rearing its head that people suggested you probably had.

They’re probably fat if they think sharing snacks because that means they eat every 2 hours is a logical progression that only a pathological person with an unhealthy relationship with food would follow.

Exactly. The previous posters suggest that one should buy astronomical amounts of snacks at the store so God forbid their little Larlo will be hungry before dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

What soccer league is this? My oldest is 8 and has done soccer in different leagues, etc since he was 3 and not once have we been asked to bring snacks.

I usually bring something for him if a game or practice is pushing up against a normal snack or meal time (my kids get an afternoon snack at a somewhat set time). If the game or practice is around a snack or meal time it is disingenuous to say "oh no kid is dying by not having a snack over the course of two hours." If he didn't eat for three or four hours before the game when he normally would then the fact that the game itself is two hours is not relevant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t believe that someone who explicitly told guests “you may only arrive after you’ve eaten lunch and you must bring snacks as we will not be sharing any food with you beyond what we cook for dinner” has a strong grasp on normal human behavior.

Where did I say that explicitly told them to come after lunch? I didn’t say that, you made that up, along with other idiotic things.

I told them to bring everything for a day at the beach including snacks to carry kids over until dinner. They arrived after lunch. I assume people feed their kids lunch, but apparently I was wrong. They didn’t bring any snacks. The kids ate ALL the snacks both families brought for that weekend.

Is this the same family that ate your bacon?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, we all know DCUM is in full support of the weird (mostly) Gen Y/Z obsession with their kids needing to cram something in their mouths every 60-90 minutes between meals, lest they wither and die on the vine.

Their kids probably weigh 200 lb from all the sandwiches and muffins these women shove in them every two hours.

As a new parent the emphasis on snacks for everything shocked me. When my kids started soccer at age 3 I could not understand why we had to provide juice and snacks after matches - not practice, but matches which seemed to be shorter. It was such an important thing to parents, they would get pissed if the snacks weren't "good" enough. The fields were filled with trash from the kids snacks. If you walk around the fields at any public school you'll see it. The whole match start to finish was less than 2 hours. No kid was dying or so depleted to need this. It is insane.

I felt the same about gd goody bags filled with plastic crap for every event in school. Why do parents not question this idiocy and refuse?

You don't think kids (who are calorie furnaces by virtue of growing in the first place) would benefit from a snack after 2 hours of physical activity? wtf?

I watched two teenage boys eat an entire frozen pizza as a snack after school, then asked what's for dinner.

Has PP met actual kids, especially teenagers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t believe that someone who explicitly told guests “you may only arrive after you’ve eaten lunch and you must bring snacks as we will not be sharing any food with you beyond what we cook for dinner” has a strong grasp on normal human behavior.

Where did I say that explicitly told them to come after lunch? I didn’t say that, you made that up, along with other idiotic things.

I told them to bring everything for a day at the beach including snacks to carry kids over until dinner. They arrived after lunch. I assume people feed their kids lunch, but apparently I was wrong. They didn’t bring any snacks. The kids ate ALL the snacks both families brought for that weekend.

You need to stop inviting people over, if minor things like this can set you off so badly.

Your anxiety, control and food issues make you unsuitable as a host. Just save yourself and your potential guests the drama.