S/O being excluded from birthday parties

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

The problem isn't that she had only 5 people at the party, it's that she coached/allowed/was proud of her kid telling the other kid "you couldn't come to my party because you have a potty mouth" instead of "I'm so sorry, but it was a very small party and I couldn't invite everyone". Basically she called out the other kid, but was happy to go to her party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

Please read the thread. This is NOT about small parties (I think small parties are great, personally). This is about defending your 7 year old DD's decision to exclude a girl from her birthday party, even as the DD attended other girl's birthday party that very same weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

No one takes offense to the small party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

Please read the thread. This is NOT about small parties (I think small parties are great, personally). This is about defending your 7 year old DD's decision to exclude a girl from her birthday party, even as the DD attended other girl's birthday party that very same weekend.

I did read the thread. And it does seem like people are more concerned that the invitation wasn't reciprocated. That because she got to go to the other girl's party, that other girl should have been able to go to hers. I don't think that's necessarily true. People decide what size parties they want to have. She had her 5 person party. The other girl had a larger party. What in god's name is the problem? This is like saying, "You invited me to your wedding. I chose to attend that wedding. Now, even though I'm having a family-only wedding, I have to invite you to my wedding because I went to yours." No sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you don't invite everybody from one group to a party do you explain to the "not invited" ones why they're left out?

I was reading the other thread and lots of people are saying it was rude to exclude the girl and not say why so I'm wondering here if it's normal or expected to address the crowd left out.

Thanks for any insight.

well, my dd recently made a guest list for her birthday party that excluded a girl who subsequently invited dd to her own birthday party the same weekend. we urged dd to reconsider, but she was adamant saying the other girl had a potty mouth and talked about poop and farts and she didn't want that kind of talk at her party. Keep in mind these kids are 7.

So, awkward, yes, especially since several girls attended both parties. Sure enough, come Monday, the other girl discovers her invitation wasn't reciprocated and marches up to dd to demand why. DD repeated, frankly, what she told us: That the girl had a potty mouth and thus wasn't welcome at her party.

Kids are so refreshingly honest, aren't they? On the one hand we were horrified. I'm sure the girl's parents despise us now. On the other hand, it was probably useful for the kid to hear that there are consequences for having a potty mouth.

She didn't say anything about it being a 5 person party until she started to get flamed for her decision. They could have made room for this little girl.

[Anonymous]

Also, the fact that it was okay for her daughter to attend the "potty mouth" girl's party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

Please read the thread. This is NOT about small parties (I think small parties are great, personally). This is about defending your 7 year old DD's decision to exclude a girl from her birthday party, even as the DD attended other girl's birthday party that very same weekend.

I did read the thread. And it does seem like people are more concerned that the invitation wasn't reciprocated. That because she got to go to the other girl's party, that other girl should have been able to go to hers. I don't think that's necessarily true. People decide what size parties they want to have. She had her 5 person party. The other girl had a larger party. What in god's name is the problem? This is like saying, "You invited me to your wedding. I chose to attend that wedding. Now, even though I'm having a family-only wedding, I have to invite you to my wedding because I went to yours." No sense.

1) The birthdays were the same weekend, which does make a difference.
2) The girls are in the same class at school, which means that the girls are going to talk at school about the party/ies.
3) 7 year old's reason for not inviting the other girl was that the other girl had a "potty" mouth; but apparently the "potty" mouth wasn't so dirty that it stopped the DD from attending her birthday anyway.

[Anonymous]

Step away from the thread, people. Settle down. It's getting increasingly toxic. Let's not talk manners and what we teach our kids when name calling, swearing, calling people stupid has become the exchange.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

NP here. How can you not get it? As I'm going through this thread, I wanted to type +1, this, agree over and over again. Here's the point:

No one (or maybe a small few) thinks it was bad for the dd to have a small party and only invite a few people.

No one said that dd had to change plans because other girl's party was same weekend.

EVERYONE agrees that because dd made it clear she didn't like the other girl's potty mouth and wouldn't invite her even after she got an invite from her - that she shouldn't go to that girl's party.

How can you not see that? If you clearly don't like someone - enough to purposely exclude them (even when you have room - since the OP said she could add this girl when they got an invite - so they had room specifically for this girl) and enough to tell them to their face "you're not invited because ..." then DON'T GO TO THEIR PARTY. Why is that so hard to see? It makes the dd out to be a selfish user. "I don't like you, but I want to socialize with all your friends on your dime." How can you not see that as rude?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
-You should not have allowed your daughter to attend Girl B's party. If Girl B wasn't good enough for your daughter to invite to her party than your daughter should not have taken advantage of Girl B's hospitality.

this, x100.

either she's not good enough for your daughter or she is. what you essentially taught your daughter is that she can choose to be friends with people only when it is convenient for her rather than be a real friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

NP here. How can you not get it? As I'm going through this thread, I wanted to type +1, this, agree over and over again. Here's the point:

No one (or maybe a small few) thinks it was bad for the dd to have a small party and only invite a few people.

No one said that dd had to change plans because other girl's party was same weekend.

EVERYONE agrees that because dd made it clear she didn't like the other girl's potty mouth and wouldn't invite her even after she got an invite from her - that she shouldn't go to that girl's party.

How can you not see that? If you clearly don't like someone - enough to purposely exclude them (even when you have room - since the OP said she could add this girl when they got an invite - so they had room specifically for this girl) and enough to tell them to their face "you're not invited because ..." then DON'T GO TO THEIR PARTY. Why is that so hard to see? It makes the dd out to be a selfish user. "I don't like you, but I want to socialize with all your friends on your dime." How can you not see that as rude?

Good summation. Now let's see who just wants to pick a fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are so up in arms that someone allowed their child to invite just 5 people to her birthday party. Just because this other girl had a party that same weekend doesn't mean the OP had to change their plans. She had a 5 person party. What's the big deal? Are people not allowed to have small parties anymore? And if you opt for a small party, but someone else didn't, that means you can't go to that party? That doesn't make sense to me.

Please read the thread. This is NOT about small parties (I think small parties are great, personally). This is about defending your 7 year old DD's decision to exclude a girl from her birthday party, even as the DD attended other girl's birthday party that very same weekend.

I did read the thread. And it does seem like people are more concerned that the invitation wasn't reciprocated. That because she got to go to the other girl's party, that other girl should have been able to go to hers. I don't think that's necessarily true. People decide what size parties they want to have. She had her 5 person party. The other girl had a larger party. What in god's name is the problem? This is like saying, "You invited me to your wedding. I chose to attend that wedding. Now, even though I'm having a family-only wedding, I have to invite you to my wedding because I went to yours." No sense.

I think you're missing the point that the girl specifically wanted to exclude the other girl - and had no qualms about telling her that - while at the same time going to the other girl's party. I think it would have been a whole other issue if it really was limited to just 5 girls and the mother said, sorry, you only get 5 and the other girl didn't make the cut - which is similar to your wedding example. However, the mom (OP) specifically said that after they got the other girl's invite, she told her daughter they'd make room for the other girl. the dd said no because of XYZ. Then turns around and goes to her party. Does that now make sense?

[Anonymous]

The only person fighting is OP. Everything thinks she is wrong, and she has been continuing to justify her bad behavior. Although, she hasn't been around for a little bit, so maybe she's given up. Unfortunately, she probably won't give up teaching her child to be a fair weather friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Poop and farts are funny.

poopy farts are the bomb. Just sayin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only person fighting is OP. Everything thinks she is wrong, and she has been continuing to justify her bad behavior. Although, she hasn't been around for a little bit, so maybe she's given up. Unfortunately, she probably won't give up teaching her child to be a fair weather friend.

Is 12:19 (from the first page, the poster with the daughter who excluded another girl) the same as the OP? I don't think they are the same two people, but I may have missed something.