can i say something snarky back

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My sister regularly makes comments about how she'd NEVER sacrifice the family time etc for her or her husband to have the demanding / high income jobs my husband and I have. Things like "well i'd NEVER want to not be the one waiting for my kids when they get home from school" or "I'd never want my husband to regularly miss dinner". She acts like we're making these tradeoffs just to buy fancy clothes (we don't) or some other silly materialistic reason

Yet she also makes kind of rueful "must be nice" comments about all the actual upside of our choices (long vacations without having to penny pinch on them in ways that add stress, my potentially leaving the workforce for a few years, both of our retiring by 50, ability to afford housing close to our offices to not have long commutes etc)

I make absolutely no judgments about her choices, i'm happy she's living the life she wanted to, but the next time she makes some "must be nice" type comment I kind of just want to bluntly say back "yeah...it will be nice to retire at 50, thats why we're putting in the hours now. i'd NEVER make the choice to have to grind at an unfulfilling job until 65+ when I could work harder now and spend 15 more good years traveling, volunteering, spending lots of time with my kids, and whatever else I feel like doing"

I should just keep my mouth shut though......right?

1. "Luckily, you can be there/ he doesn't miss dinner etc etc"
2. "Yes, it is nice."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Why do you care? And why do you think you deserve an answer to your questions?

Because OP opened the door to the question. That's why. Piss off.

No she didn’t. She asked for ideas on how to handle her sisters comments. Not questions/judgments from a$$holes like you.

Well, my response is that she "handle her sister's comments" but looking inward and thinking about how maybe her sister has a point. And you're not the boss of me. So I can respond however I want.

I guess you neglect your kids too?

Hit a nerve??

Yea, right. One of us has had her nerve hit, that's for sure -- and it ain't me.

[Anonymous]

Your sister is rude to say it…but it’s absolutely what the majority of parents would think about your choices (yes, even in this area).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

We ARE doing it for the money 100% - but not for fancy clothes and art and ridiculous restaurants. its to bank it to buy ourselves full flexibility later. my husband may be missing dinners now - but when the kids are teens we'll be able to spend the whole summer with them hiking through colorado with them (or whatever we feel like) vs a one week vacation at ocean city. I may get home just in time for dinner now, but when they're preteens i can be the one doing all drop offs and pickups to not miss any problems that may be brewing etc. We are sacrificing some family time now for the ability to have so much flexibility in 10 years. Not saying that's a better or worse choice than anyone else for a family, its just ours

There are lots of "ifs" and "whens" and suppositions in your response. Trust me -- when your kids are teenagers they're not going to want to spend all summer hiking Colorado with you. They're going to want to be with their friends. That's likely to be the case no matter what, but even more in your situation -- the less you are with them now, the less they're going to want to be with you later because they will have formed closer relationships with others in your absence. I am afraid you are really in for a very rude awakening. You can put money in the bank. You can't put time in the bank.

I'm not. My kids have me from 6am - 8:30am every morning and 5pm - bedtime every night. The demanding part comes in in that i pick up work after their bedtime and work late into the night instead of having hobbies or downtime. I have no qualms about the time I spend with my kids even if its less than my sister does. But also not the point of this post.

also there are no "ifs". The money has been banked, the positions have been achieved (vs hoping for a promition or whatever)....I'll be retiring by the time my oldest is 10 and my husband will be going very part time then. Unless we are dead, in which case thats a bigger problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Good for you. In this area - most people do. On my street a normal 3,000 sqft home is $1.7M. The entire street is young parents in their 30s to 40s with kids between newborn to 8/10. To afford that you need a household income of at least $400K. Preferably higher and that's not even considering the costs of nannies, daycares, and/or private education. So you need to be strivers. If you live somewhere that's not the case, good for you. If only one of your partners makes $400K by themselves, also good for you. That's rare. We do what we have to have the lifestyle and opportunities we desire for our kids.

You don't desire it for your kids. You desire it for yourself, and often it comes at your kids' expense. You just can't or won't see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Good for you. In this area - most people do. On my street a normal 3,000 sqft home is $1.7M. The entire street is young parents in their 30s to 40s with kids between newborn to 8/10. To afford that you need a household income of at least $400K. Preferably higher and that's not even considering the costs of nannies, daycares, and/or private education. So you need to be strivers. If you live somewhere that's not the case, good for you. If only one of your partners makes $400K by themselves, also good for you. That's rare. We do what we have to have the lifestyle and opportunities we desire for our kids.

You don't desire it for your kids. You desire it for yourself, and often it comes at your kids' expense. You just can't or won't see it.

Okay? That's your belief. I had my firstborn(s) within 4 months of my friend. I've been able to afford a live-in nanny, doula services, and pre-registered for a private pre-K with educational services for my twins. The friend had to beg her husband to shuffle around income for a part-time nanny 3 times a week and he's still not home as often as she likes because he's the main source of income. Their commute is now an hour each way (on days she's not WFH) and mine has stayed 15 minutes. I can afford to take my child on trips for educational enrichiment abroad and get intensive language tutors when needed. She can't.

Those things are not at my kids' expense, they are providing my children for a better, more well-rounded future. In addition to the personal time I spend caring for and with them. If I was earning the money just for myself I'd spend the $30,000 a year I've allocated beyond the nanny expenses on a Berkin.

And that isn't even including housing. If my friend is spending $40,000 a year on rent and I'm spending that equivalent+ on a mortgage with appreciation baked in every year - who's coming out ahead? Me. Because I planned and made it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sister regularly makes comments about how she'd NEVER sacrifice the family time etc for her or her husband to have the demanding / high income jobs my husband and I have. Things like "well i'd NEVER want to not be the one waiting for my kids when they get home from school" or "I'd never want my husband to regularly miss dinner". She acts like we're making these tradeoffs just to buy fancy clothes (we don't) or some other silly materialistic reason

Yet she also makes kind of rueful "must be nice" comments about all the actual upside of our choices (long vacations without having to penny pinch on them in ways that add stress, my potentially leaving the workforce for a few years, both of our retiring by 50, ability to afford housing close to our offices to not have long commutes etc)

I make absolutely no judgments about her choices, i'm happy she's living the life she wanted to, but the next time she makes some "must be nice" type comment I kind of just want to bluntly say back "yeah...it will be nice to retire at 50, thats why we're putting in the hours now. i'd NEVER make the choice to have to grind at an unfulfilling job until 65+ when I could work harder now and spend 15 more good years traveling, volunteering, spending lots of time with my kids, and whatever else I feel like doing"

I should just keep my mouth shut though......right?

“Why would you say that?”

Every. Single. Time.

+1 My therapist taught me this. The other reply, the one that doesn't invite more conversation on the topic, is "Don't do that." (they say, "Do what?"; you say, "you know what. just stop" and then continue on with something else)

The beauty of either of the above replies is that they are rote and non-specific to the situation being discussed, so you don't have to engage your brain (and all the emotions) to say it.

The other reply she taught me, although I have yet to use it, is "Did you really just say that to me?" (they comment) "That's pretty rude." This is a more confrontational response so I am working up to it, LOL, just practicing with the "Don't do that" response first.

But in all this, the first trick is to be super-calm-sounding, and the second trick is, do NOT engage on the facts. Don't defend the facts. Here is the example of how NOT to do it, which led to my therapist talking to me about the above responses. I helped my kids start a food drive and my snarky friend said "oh, how's YOUR food drive going...etc" and I started to defend, saying my kids help a LOT on that food drive and I just help sometimes when they are in school, and she was "yeah, right," OMG I was so pissed because F***, here my kids are trying to do something constructive and she's done nothing, but slags on my efforts.

Should have just calmly said, "Don't do that. Oh, so tell me, what happened at work yesterday?"

[Anonymous]

OP, how would you treat a friend. If they treated you this way, you might let is slip a time of two but not more. You'd stand up for yourself. You'd insist on a different power dynamic (more equal) in this relationship. If the relationship wasn't respectful and at least neutral-enjoyable, you'd distance.

Sister doesn't get a pass

[Anonymous]

"Is it OK, Sis, if I reply with snark next time you say what you just said? Because your comments about our demanding jobs and wealth are starting to grate on me. No offense, of course."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

We ARE doing it for the money 100% - but not for fancy clothes and art and ridiculous restaurants. its to bank it to buy ourselves full flexibility later. my husband may be missing dinners now - but when the kids are teens we'll be able to spend the whole summer with them hiking through colorado with them (or whatever we feel like) vs a one week vacation at ocean city. I may get home just in time for dinner now, but when they're preteens i can be the one doing all drop offs and pickups to not miss any problems that may be brewing etc. We are sacrificing some family time now for the ability to have so much flexibility in 10 years. Not saying that's a better or worse choice than anyone else for a family, its just ours

When your kids are teens, they aren’t going to want to hang out with you. It’s fine to do what you are doing, but if you have small children now, preteens and teens are a completely different story. Don’t kid yourself about the lifestyle when you have teens. They will have their own lives and interests, and if you haven’t been super available when they were younger, the relationship just isn’t there. This is specifically why some people choose less demanding careers. Money isn’t everything, and when the moment passes, the time can’t be bought back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

That's all well and good, but you don't need two parents to both have "high paying demanding jobs" while kids are still young in order to do that.

We didn't.

Good for you. In this area - most people do. On my street a normal 3,000 sqft home is $1.7M. The entire street is young parents in their 30s to 40s with kids between newborn to 8/10. To afford that you need a household income of at least $400K. Preferably higher and that's not even considering the costs of nannies, daycares, and/or private education. So you need to be strivers. If you live somewhere that's not the case, good for you. If only one of your partners makes $400K by themselves, also good for you. That's rare. We do what we have to have the lifestyle and opportunities we desire for our kids.

You don't desire it for your kids. You desire it for yourself, and often it comes at your kids' expense. You just can't or won't see it.

Oh, we all know you. You're the one that walks around talking about supporting and empowering women but then seizes on any opportunity to disparage another woman's choices so you can make yourself feel better about your own. Just because you set the bar so low for your own growth and development, and that of your family, doesn't mean everyone else has to. There is not one thing in any of OP's posts that indicates her children are neglected or suffer in any way by her choices, other than that she chooses a different lifestyle than your own. Disparaging that doesn't make you superior in any way, it just makes you look jealous.

[Anonymous]

OP, you won by your own definition. Why do you need to be snarky back. If you feel as comfortable with your life choices as you say you do, just ignore.

We have earning differences in our families. We used to hear snark, then we stopped talking about trips and expenditures that set us apart. Why rub my success in someone else’s face? I can enjoy my nice life style without having to let the world know. It’s made for a much more peaceful family life with siblings and cousins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

We ARE doing it for the money 100% - but not for fancy clothes and art and ridiculous restaurants. its to bank it to buy ourselves full flexibility later. my husband may be missing dinners now - but when the kids are teens we'll be able to spend the whole summer with them hiking through colorado with them (or whatever we feel like) vs a one week vacation at ocean city. I may get home just in time for dinner now, but when they're preteens i can be the one doing all drop offs and pickups to not miss any problems that may be brewing etc. We are sacrificing some family time now for the ability to have so much flexibility in 10 years. Not saying that's a better or worse choice than anyone else for a family, its just ours

There are lots of "ifs" and "whens" and suppositions in your response. Trust me -- when your kids are teenagers they're not going to want to spend all summer hiking Colorado with you. They're going to want to be with their friends. That's likely to be the case no matter what, but even more in your situation -- the less you are with them now, the less they're going to want to be with you later because they will have formed closer relationships with others in your absence. I am afraid you are really in for a very rude awakening. You can put money in the bank. You can't put time in the bank.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

When she says this just say “don’t worry you won’t ever have to worry about that.” Because she won’t and she knows that so she is trying to justify it because she is insecure. Laugh and ignore. Be glad you are not like her without high paying skills. 😀

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think your sister has a point. Why DO both you and your husband feel the need to have "high paying demanding jobs" while you still have kids around? You say you aren't doing it just for the money, so why, then? Why is it so critically important that you both have "high paying demanding jobs" as your first priority, with family time being second?

Some people like to set themselves up for success and provide for their families. Some people are content with working until they're 70, being renters their whole life, and hoping their kids student loans aren't too high. Different strokes.

This!😁