Anonymous wrote:A highly amusing read considering the topic is about rules of polite behavior

Oh yes, lots of stunning examples of polite behavior on this thread

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.

You mean if you want to gift grab, gift grab.

Anyone is free not to attend if they’re so offended about buying a gift for a new baby,

There is a difference between buying a new outfit and the parents registering for all new gear when their stuff is 3 years old.

Anonymous wrote:Exactly - have a celebratory party and say “no gifts.” Then it’s not tacky at all. People just want more free stuff, especially when most of the invitees are the wealthier older generation (instead of the bride/mom-to-be’s friends.)

This is my thought exactly!

If "no gifts" are not specified, my friends who are upper middle class will get from me a couple packages of onesies from Target and a box of chocolates for mom. For my working class friends/family I will get a dozen packages of onesies , and lots of necessities from Costco, all prettied up with a bow. Last thing a new mm needs is a run to Costco with a 3-week old; load her up ahead of time. Doesn't matter if it is baby number 1 or 2 or 3 for the lower-income mom; for the upper income mom they get a card in the mail.

Who gives a F about who is throwing the party? Never heard of that.

Oh no!! Whatever will we do?

The nerve of some people.

If these are the rules you live by or regard as being even remotely relevant, you need to get out more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see anything wrong with that at all.

OP here. Well my own mother and grandmother are both dead. But I was always taught (and previous threads on here have confirmed that:

A - and immediately family member of the bride cannot host and
B - no showers after the first baby

She's not a bride. Along as you don't throw your own baby shower, I don't care who hosts it.

I have always thought the 2nd baby+ rule is bs. So only first babies are worthy of celebrating? Sure, don't ask for all kinds of expensive baby gear again, but clothes and books and diapers are still needed for a new baby.

A family either has money, in which case they don't really "need" anything for a first baby either, or money is tight in which case consumable necessities are still really helpful.

If money is tight then you can't afford a baby. Abortion is still legal.

This is most DCUM response ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.

You mean if you want to gift grab, gift grab.

Anyone is free not to attend if they’re so offended about buying a gift for a new baby,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.

You mean if you want to gift grab, gift grab.

Don’t be so uptight. Nothing wrong with celebrating a new baby, no matter if it’s the first or last.

I doubt it is the last as these gift grabbers have five or six babies just to get their husbands and daughter or other close relative to throw a shower for them. By now, I imagine her registry has a new Toyota 9-seater van.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see anything wrong with that at all.

OP here. Well my own mother and grandmother are both dead. But I was always taught (and previous threads on here have confirmed that:

A - and immediately family member of the bride cannot host and
B - no showers after the first baby

She's not a bride. Along as you don't throw your own baby shower, I don't care who hosts it.

I have always thought the 2nd baby+ rule is bs. So only first babies are worthy of celebrating? Sure, don't ask for all kinds of expensive baby gear again, but clothes and books and diapers are still needed for a new baby.

A family either has money, in which case they don't really "need" anything for a first baby either, or money is tight in which case consumable necessities are still really helpful.

If money is tight then you can't afford a baby. Abortion is still legal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see anything wrong with that at all.

OP here. Well my own mother and grandmother are both dead. But I was always taught (and previous threads on here have confirmed that:

A - and immediately family member of the bride cannot host and
B - no showers after the first baby

This is the rule

Was her first baby born during COVID?

If so, I totally see my MIL doing this. She canceled our baby shower just one week after everything shut down.

It was her first grandchild and the shower was really for her and her girlfriends. Not us!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read all 6 pages and am 45, married and have two children. I never heard the “rule” that mother’s can’t host until this thread.

Too bad your mother did not think it necesy to teach you proper etiquette
Now you know so do not host a shower for your daughters or any female relative.

NP. I can’t help but picture the PP sloshing her gigantic glass of wine onto her 2009 laptop keyboard as she attempts to school the young people on “etiquette”

100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.

You mean if you want to gift grab, gift grab.

Don’t be so uptight. Nothing wrong with celebrating a new baby, no matter if it’s the first or last.

Anonymous wrote:If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.

You mean if you want to gift grab, gift grab.

If you want to party, party. Who cares what rules dictate.