Oh please…no one wrestled anyone to the ground and shoved money in their face…in the social exchange…“Oh, no, please, I insist” is necessary with socially conscientious people. Snatching the money from my hand would be rude. A response of “Oh no, really, my pleasure” ended the entire exchange. .
Oh about the picking up the tap…golf clap. Your missing the point, which seems to be the theme in your responses. What if the the children never play again…how would you reciprocate? You wouldn’t. You didn’t offer, you didn’t pay and you didn’t reciprocate. In the meantime, another parent paid a substantial amount for your child for the day.
And in your world, that is polite because you think an invitation to a theme park includes every single expense of the day. If the kids no longer see each other, tough, the host invited the child and it is their loss.
In addition, a gracious host NEVER mentions the tab they picked up for their guests so to me, you just rubbed the noses of those you paid for lunch in their faces to show how wonderfully generous and kind you are.
But, see, I don’t focus on the dollar aspect of it. If I decided, for example, to take a couple of kids to a theme park for my daughter’s birthday, I would expect to pay for everything. If one of those kids reciprocated by taking some kids to a movie for her birthday, I would consider it fully reciprocated, even though the amount spent is vastly different. It’s my choice to pick the amusement park…if I want to do something extravagant, that’s my lookout…I wouldn’t expect everyone necessarily to do the same.
Why are the kids no longer seeing each other? I would expect that if another parent took my child somewhere, I would reciprocate by inviting their child somewhere. If the children had decided that they weren’t that interested in being friends with each other, then I would say yes, then it’s their loss. It’s not that big of a deal…every little thing in life does not have to be quid pro quo.
There are so many sites with so many opinions that I think I will agree to disagree with all our folks who feel offering money was unnecessary.
Even after reading the disagreements, I am not convinced it is wrong for me to offer money for such an expensive day and will continue to play the “game”.
Why would the kids never play again? Why would someone invite my kid to an expensive event like a theme park if that was even a possibility? Why would I consent to have my child go if that were a possibility? I don’t send my kids off to theme parks unless I have a darn good feeling for the family and the kid in question - and I know that I’ll have a chance to reciprocate.
If this really were the case, then why the following posts only a few hours earlier:
I’m confused. So this discussion which clarified everything satisfactorily came out within the last few hours? Or did you already know that when you wrote the above posts?
Also from today:
Previously we have
What is the difference between social arrangements and social decisions?
My question if he knew that he was not allowed to make decisions can be rephrased more specifically. Is he aware that he isn’t allowed to make a single social decision?
The difference between social arrangements and social decisions are simple. Social arrangements are plans with other couples…social decisions are the behaviors that should be followed by people with manners and class. My husband and I are from different social circles and he has no trouble deferring those decisions to me.
I don’t recall exactly when he broke down and admitted that he simply forgot but it was after we “made up”. Whether that is even the truth or just a way to drop the issue entirely is not worth rehashing the entire incident over again. I have done that enough here. :rolleyes:
8 year old girls have a different best friend every other week. This is a new friend. I have no idea if there will be future plans. As of now, there have not been. As a matter of fact, I asked my daughter if she wanted me to invite her new friend to a movie we saw Friday evening and she choose another friend for that play date. (The Mom offered me money not once but twice for the ticket btw which I politely declined with no embarrassment whatsoever.)
I am not going to FORCE my daughter to continue a friendship just because she was invited somewhere. Fortunately, I don’t have that obligation since I paid her way and do not have to reciprocate.
Really, I have an eight year old girl. There are only two girls she has been friends with long enough for them to take her on significant events - they took her to the symphony (it was phrased as ‘we have an extra ticket’ so I didn’t even offer to pay), we took them horsebackriding (they didn’t offer).
You still need to reciprocate (according to Emily Post and Miss Manners) even if you paid. They took their time to spend with your daughter. Paying has nothing to do with that.
Three girls. One set of twins (the symphony set) and a girl she has known since daycare when she was three. The symphony set are the only ones we exchange cash events with, but if the other girls parents invited her (or we went somewhere we wanted her along) - her other friends are play date and sleepover friends. There is a fourth girl who, if that family invited her somewhere, I’d probably say yes.
It is the use of the specific phrase, “I insist” which would irritate my husband. He prefers not to be offered money at all; however, he understands that some people manage treating and reciprocation differently. But, once he has declined (“No, thank you, it is our treat.”) he hates when the other party ‘insists.’ Because by using the phrase, ‘I insist’ the other couple leave him no choice but to take the money, or back out of the deal entirely, thus disappointing all the kids.
What he would probably have done in Foxy’s situation is take the money (with extreme discomfort), then treated the daughter as he meant to do, and given the money back to the daughter at the end of the date, saying, “Tell your mom we didn’t need this.” I don’t say this is the best way to deal with it, but that’s what he probably would have done.
No. I don’t see the difference between being invited to someone’s home and having your child invited to a high price amusement park.
I also don’t think that not going to an amusement park counts as “suffering”.
You misunderstand (deliberately? because it suits you?) my “scenario”. You are, of course, welcome to take only your child to the amusement park, if you can only afford an outing there for one child. No “suffering” there that I can see. You are welcome to send your kid with the family that invited her, say “thank you”, and take their kid out for an ice cream cone sometime. They will, presumably, say “thank you”, also.
The social principle at work here is that one does not entertain beyond one’s means. “We” live by that principle, ourselves, and we presume - because it is the polite and simple thing to do - that others live by the same principle.
It saves a world of insulting trouble: trying to compensate others for their generosity; trying to calculate the net worth, gross income, and approximate tax debt of our acquaintances to determine if they are being kinda nice, way cordial, sorta friendly, or embarrassingly extravagant when they host us or our children for any event, at their homes or out in the world somewhere. It is impossible to reciprocate or cancel out a social obligation with a financial reward. It is unrealistic to assume that everyone has the same resources. It is realistic to assume that a well-meaning family would not send their kid to an amusement park with a family they hardly know and never intend to see again. People who live a social life instead of a calculated life will understand that absolute and constant equilibrium doesn’t happen. We entertain as we can, we develop affections and affinities, we continue to entertain and be entertained according not only to the financial resources but also to the style (super formal, camping, symphony, bowling, amusement park, ice cream cone) of the hosting family.
Quid pro quo is for circumstances in which no affinities exist – not for marriages or social connections.
How, for example, would you handle this situation?
The parents of a friend of your daughter invited her to fly in their private plane to their mountain cabin to cross country ski on their property with their cross country skis for a long weekend? They’ll feed her - real maple syrup on her pancakes and everything - and give her a warm bed and a spare pair of snow pants to wear and marshmallows to roast in the fireplace in the evening. They’ll even teach her to play a couple of simple songs on a guitar.
They don’t want or need your money. They enjoy your daughter’s company. There’s no place to buy souvenirs. Now, suppose they’ll be renting a pair of ski boots for your daughter because they don’t have her size in the big heap of boots in the equipment room at their cabin. Does this twelve dollar expenditure change anything? What if you only find out about it after they get back from the trip? Do you race over there and press twelve dollars on them, refusing to take no for an answer?
I’ll add this: If there’s no way for you to contribute financially to the trip, do you then plan an equally extravagant weekend, to be sure you’re not a leech? Or do you tell your daughter she can’t go, because you can’t reciprocate in kind?
So you guys honestly came to the agreement that he decides on which mechanic to use and you make all the frigging “social” decisions? Boy wouldn’t that be fun. I’m sure your husband is grateful to not have to do all that hard brain work that’s involved when interacting with other humans. Oh, and you don’t have to worry about the lube guy ripping you off.
I think this is pretty common along gender lines, let alone class lines - when my boyfriend gets an invitation, he shows it to me and says, “What exactly does cocktail attire mean?” or “Do I have to go to this?” or “Could you respond for us?” or whatever. Because he doesn’t understand the niceties and he knows that.
The second principle is that quid pro quo reciprocity is not expected. I may accept my friends invitation to their summer home without having a summer home to extend to them. Although dinner out (or even dessert and coffee at our house) is not of the equivalent value, it is an appropriate response and we don’t keep count.
Rather than have the expectations that each partner in a relationship is able to do be well informed in every area, we defer to the partner that is better able to make the best decision.
I’ll choose the best wine to bring to the dinner party and he will tell me what my car needs to keep it running.
And this is odd to some people? Interesting.
As I said before…whatever works for you folks isn’t necessarily what works for others.
No, that’s still my job. “When is that thing we have to go to?” “Should we take something?” “Do we have to go?”