Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I don't like my fiance's siblings. They have imposed on my (nonexistent)hospitality, BUT they are willing to handle the transportation of their disabled and remotely accomodated parents. The alternate reception they are planning is way out of line, but I'm obsessed with the fact that I can't control every decision this family makes when they enter my orbit.
Cary: How do I nix the alternate reception plans, keep the undesirables out of my house, and come to terms with the fact that the in-laws transportation arrangements are actually in my favor?
Yours,
Peon who aspires to foment Peron-size melodrama
I agreed with Cary's advise here. He's spot on. LW needs to start thinking of this as a church ceremony.
I was baptized, confirmed, etc. For my child's christening, we had to take 6 weeks of classes before we could even schedule it, and those classes are on a schedule. We did not just "contact the church". This is NOT a Roman Catholic event. The Lutherans and Episcopalians here are similiar.
We did have out of town guests: the godmother and godfather. The rest were in town. We sent notices, not invitations, to the out of town guests. I'd say the invitations were mistake #1.
Referring to her relatives as "univited" is mistake #2. I'll bet her fiance' did invite them to stay. He didn't do it in earshot of her, because he knew how she felt about his relatives, and how she'd act. This may be the first time some of these people have seen the baby. She should be more gracious, and have better manners. I smell Bridezilla in the making here.
She has a child. They probably think they are helping her, not hijacking. Lighten up.
And yes, as a Catholic, the marriage comes before the Christening if the couple is engaged. Some priests and conservative dioceses enforce that rule for engaged couples. While other priests would not turn them down, they would be vocally frank about how disrespectful it is to christen the child in the Church while in a state of mortal sin. They have, in the past, tried to force the couple to live apart, etc. Conservative churches would see this as hypocritical, too. More liberal ones would not. I do know of a few Baptist ministers who would have thrown the couple out. They would have welcomed a single mother, but not a couple actively living in sin.
Good job, Cary. Spare us Bridezillas and now Christeningzillas.
Wow, this woman's immaturity and self-absorption boggles my mind. So, this diabled person pays for a plane ticket, gets out of the house, which takes more than 2 hours, stands through an onerous security check-in, gets out of the plane, and all that simply because he/she was invited, and she takes issue because they want to stay at their son's place? If I were the man, I would reconsider marrying a woman who shows a shocking level of inability to empathize with others who obviously extended themselves to celebrate with you on this new growth of the family. To tell you the truth, there are many letters others criticize for being shallow or just unimportant, I usually disagree. But, with this one, I can only say that I hope you won't be marrying into my family, because you sound like a real pill.
I'm Episcopalian...and I just had to call the church and arrange a Christening, or rather a Baptism. No classes, no fuss. Spare me. That is the least of this letter. The problem is what a jerk the letter write is.
Cary's response was solid, disregarding the stuff about "It's my party's" choice to put the cart before the horse.
The world is full of churches, charitable and kind, that refuse to cowtow to the rigid and bilious fundamentalist rabble. Remember, just because your church does it one way does not in any manner levy an obligation on others do the same.
As far as the details of the affair, how long is this whole thing going to take? A weekend? A week at most? This is the perfect opportunity for IMP to establish herself as matriarch. All she has to do is call the shots, use polite and firm "No's" when appropriate, and insist upon peace and order while embracing her new family graciously. Run a tight ship, feed the guests well, and laugh a lot. She may be surprised at how well she gets along with the siblings when they understand that they have to play by her rules in her home court.
The Cary Tennis advice column really turns out to be a Rorschack test sometimes. I'm a little surprised by the anger in some of the responses. The LW wasn't objecting to the parents but the siblings. It makes sense for the disabled parent to stay in a hotel; most hotels have handicapped rooms that would be much easier for the BF's mom to navigate than a non-handicapped house. As for siblings, we don't know how many (I personally would rather pay for a room than sleep under a kitchen table) or why they're considered dysfunctional. I have "dysfunctional" relatives who are heavy drinkers and troublemakers, and I damn sure don't want them spending significant time at my house. The LW also has a baby that is apparently younger than a year and she probably works. She might not have the energy to cope with a houseful of relatives, never mind dysfunctional ones.
Bottom line: maybe she's selfish and petulant, maybe she sees a life of being bullied ahead of her unless she takes action, maybe she just doesn't have it in her to manage this right now. We don't know and to castigate her under the circumstances seems a little cruel.
What comes screaming through this letter to me is the LW's incredible immaturity. People who've lived a little, who have a solid relationship with their spouse or partner, who've made a mature decision to have a child, who've thought through what a christening is all about and what's important about it (and what's not important about it), just don't get caught up in stupidity with their relatives about these sorts of things. They make plans with their spouse/partner that work for them, they do their best to accommodate the reasonable requirements of their family, AND THEY MOVE ON. In other words, they take control over (and responsibility for) their own lives and stop sweating the unimportant details of a party. How is someone who can't make it past the christening without freaking going to actually raise a kid?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
