Monday's Most Active Threads

Yesterday's most active thread led the day in number of replies and was third in number of views. Posted in the "Family Relationships" forum, the thread was titled, "I never want to plan to see my SIL again". At its root, the topic of this thread is pretty simple. The original poster has a sister-in-law (her husband's brother's wife) who lives 1,000 miles away. Both families have young children who are a year apart in age, but the two have never met. The original poster finds it difficult to coordinate get-togethers with her sister-in-law, apparently because the sister-in-law is not much of a planner. As a result, the original poster wants to stop attempting to plan visits and only see her in-laws if they coincidentally cross paths at her husband's parents home. Understanding that this means that the two cousins may never have a relationship, the original poster asks if this is realistic. What complicates this topic is that the original poster didn't keep things this simple in her original post. Instead, she started off complaining that her sister-in-law constantly tries to one-up her and that she — the original poster — cuts off friends who do that. The original poster doesn't give any examples or further explanation of this "one-upping". As such, many of those responding ask for further details and a lot of discussion gets devoted to this issue with is really extraneous to the basic point that the original poster and her sister-in-law are simply unable to coordinate trips. Some posters suggest that the original poster should just leave any planning to her husband and his brother, but apparently they don't get along either. A few posters do express sympathy for the original poster, but several also target the original poster for criticism. I received at least one report asking if the original poster was a troll and there are a couple of troll accusations within the thread. I don't belive the original poster is trolling, but she certainly made the thread a lot more dramatic than was necessary.

Second in number of replies and fifth in number of views was a thread titled, "S/O Share your snobbish annoying food opinions" and posted in the "Food, Cooking, and Restaurants" forum. I really dislike this genre of threads which simply opens the door for people to be negative and inevitably offend others. As could be expected, very few posters focused on their "snobbish" opinions but instead simply listed foods they didn't like. Some posters mentioned snobbish attitudes held by others rather than their own and, of course, many posters defended foods that others disliked. Frankly, I find topics like this so tiring that I don't even want to write about it. So, if for some reason the thread interests you, you will have to read it for yourself.

Fourth in both number of views and number of replies was a thread in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum titled, "Your thoughts on how to solve this recurring marital disagreement/issue". The original poster explains that she and her husband have recurring fights about home maintenance topics. The original poster suggests hiring someone to fix something in their home but her husband says that he will fix it himself. However, her husband is very busy and doesn't get around to it. When the original poster brings the issue up again later, her husband is irritated and suggests that she fix it herself because she could do it just as easily as he could. The original poster says they have money to hire a professional and is upset by this pattern of behavior. Most of those responding advise the original poster to simply hire someone to do the repair and either don't tell her husband at all or simply tell him that the work has been scheduled rather than allowing him input into the process. At least one poster opined that this would be emasculating to her husband which seemed weird to me. Calling a handyman without permission is emasculating but having your wife become part-time carpenter and plumber is not? I mean, neither should be but I can't see it being one but not the other. Some posters sided with the husband, however. These posters believe that putting a little effort into learning simple home maintenance saves money and builds useful knowledge. Several posters viewed this as primarily a communications issue and advised how to communicate more effectively. Quite a few posters described either being or having been in similar relationships. So, I guess there a quite a few men who share the original poster's husband's personality quirks.

The last thread at which I'll look today is titled, "Rant about Deal and their religious field trip" and posted in the "DC Public and Public Charter Schools" forum. This thread was third in number of replies and fourth in number of views. The original poster explains that her daughter is studying religion as part of a class at Alice Deal Middle School and, as part of the lesson, has the opportunity to visit a church, a synagogue, and a mosque. The girls have been told that they must cover their hair to enter the mosque which the original poster finds upsetting. The original poster resents that she must now refuse permission for her daughter to attend the trip and provoke anger by her daughter at being excluded. The vast majority of those responding believe the original poster is being unreasonable and that her daughter would benefit from the trip despite needing to cover her hair. Some posters argued that this is sexual discrimination and advised contacting the ACLU. Many self-proclaimed atheists described past visits to mosques in which they covered their hair, saying that this was part of learning respect and tolerance for different traditions. There are very few unique viewpoints in this thread and its length is a result of the same arguments being repeated over and over again. It is not clear what resolution those who agree with the original poster are seeking. Some posters suggest that the boys should also be required to cover their hair and others criticize the school for putting the original poster in this position in the first place. I guess they don't think the mosque visit should have even been scheduled. I find it somewhat ironic that with all the attention "parents rights" have been given around school topics recently that the ability to opt-out is now its own cause of controversy. Apparently some parents don't want their children exposed to certain educational experiences, but simultaneously don't want their children excluded while other children take advantage of those opportunities. If every parent is given veto choice over lessons which such a mentality would require, school boards would essentially consist of the parents of the entire student bodies. Maybe my imagination is limited, but that doesn't seem like a great recipe for success.