When dinner is significantly delayed...

[gen xer]

I disagree- particularly when children, the elderly or people with known food-sensitive illnesses like diabetes are involved its incumbent on the host to mention if dinner will be served outside of culturally normal "Dinner time". In most parts of N America that tends to be sometime between 5:30 to 7. If I get invited over for 5 for dinner, I would be upset if I had to wait to eat until 8 or 9 without being warned previously. My father would have to leave, as his diabetes cannot handle that long without food . It's always good to check- but really, if you're invited over at dinner hour for dinner, I wouldn't fault you for not having the timing stamped in triplicate.

Fair enough....my DH is hypoglycemic and needs to eat regularly.  I would not fault someone with a genuine medical need for making a discreet inquiry about the timings of a meal.....and trust me I know what it is like to have hungry, tired small children.  I too have given my kids small snacks etc when they were really young to help them get through to a late meal.

That being said I expect my kids to buck up and make do now.  Yes I think hosts should serve dinner at a reasonable hour - nobody would be served at 9:00 pm at my house - but still....I remember my MIL arriving at my SIL's place at about 1:00 pm and the first words out of her mouth were "Where's my lunch? I haven't eaten and I'm huuuuunnnngggrrryyyy"  She was shrill, rude and obnoxious.

The manners go both ways here.....

Not in CakeBeret's situation.

I have acknowedged several times that I don't think OP was rude since it was discussed beforehand....and I agree that if you are invited for a dinner you should in fact receive said dinner in a reasonable time.  I just think the guests need to consider the line between reasonable accomodation for their needs ( discussed in advance to be fair to both parties ) and being demanding.

This is not a guest's problem. This is a host's problem. In my opinion, she lied to CakeBeret, pulling an unconscionable bait-and-switch.

Agreed.  But I can't figure out why she would invite them over for that time if she had no intention of serving a meal at the agreed upon time.  I don't even ascribe terrible motives on her others have done....cluelessness about what it is like to have kids maybe....but not necessarily deliberate nastiness.

She has a toddler.

Oh...that's right.  I forgot.

[MrsJWine]

Kids have tiny stomachs and can only eat a small amount at a time (usually; sometimes when mine are growing, they can eat insane amounts of food), so eating somewhat frequently is a necessity, not a want.

However, that's completely irrelevant (except to make the situation even more unpleasant). If I were expecting dinner at a certain time and had to wait HOURS past that time to get it, I would be crazy with hunger. I have no health issues that make me a special case. I am a normal person with normal dietary needs. If I'm expecting dinner at a certain time, I plan my other meals of the day around it so I'm at least fairly hungry for dinner. If I were the OP, it would have been at least six hours without food, probably more like eight, by that point. Some people are okay going that long without eating, but I'm pretty sure most aren't.

It doesn't really matter if the hostess did it by accident; it was still rude and extremely inconsiderate. If you find yourself that far behind in food prep, you order a pizza, or, at the very least, put out some crackers and cheese.

[gen xer]

If dinner is delayed by a ridiculous length of time I do not think it is rude to leave when you had intended to leave.  I did not mean to imply that people should endure anything in the name of good manners.  I would not stay somewhere hours longer than I originally planned just because the hosts couldn't get it together for whatever reason.

The OP was not rude since she was clear in what her limitations were....and I have to say I respect that she was upfront about them from the outset. 

But we do need to be reasonably ( key word is reasonably ) flexible as guests and take care to make it easy on the hosts too.  All I'm saying...

[Sharnita]

I don't think kids are even really the issue.  I have mentioned before that teaching affects my schedule.  Say you hace to get up for work at 5 am.  You are inviteted to somebody's home for dinner on a work night and you regretfully decline because your schedule requires you to eat at around 5 or six and be home getting to bed by 9ish. It would still be rude for somebody to pull a bait and switch on you like the "host" did in this case.

[gen xer]

I don't think kids are even really the issue.  I have mentioned before that teaching affects my schedule.  Say you hace to get up for work at 5 am.  You are inviteted to somebody's home for dinner on a work night and you regretfully decline because your schedule requires you to eat at around 5 or six and be home getting to bed by 9ish. It would still be rude for somebody to pull a bait and switch on you like the "host" did in this case.

I agree.....your own schedule shouldn't be totally derailed by poor or non-existent planning. 

[mj]

But that's a completely different situation and I don't see how it applies here.

I mention it because I think it is one of those situations where there is a lot of blurring between having a genuine beef like the OP did ( with respect to having discussed it in advance ) to becoming rigid, inflexible and demanding.  I am not accusing the OP of that....I just think that many parents can become a little too "mama-bearish" when it comes to accomodating their children.

It's a fine line that the OP didn't cross....but others do which is why I do think it applies here.  Just something to consider.

IMO, it doesn't really apply at all.  Other than OPs valid reason to have to leave by a certain amount of time, going anyplace else and whomever else was the host when this scenario happened would be considered rude.  Going to a restaurant with ample enough time to order, eat and leave by 8 PM yet not being served until hours later after your arrival time would be insanely rude no matter which way you slice it. 

So, I don't see how your bolded could actually apply in any similar scenario in the OP.  To make it apply, it wouldn't be a similar scenario.  What the OPs hosts did is rude no matter if there were kids involved or not, the kids are a red herring here.  Put in any reason the OP had to leave by 8PM, anyway you slice it, her host was rude.

[rose red]

I think I understand what gen xer is saying and I agree with some of it, but being a flexable guest and parenting styles are different topics that has nothing to do with this specific thread.  They are interesting topics, but they just don't apply to this OP.

[gen xer]

But that's a completely different situation and I don't see how it applies here.

I mention it because I think it is one of those situations where there is a lot of blurring between having a genuine beef like the OP did ( with respect to having discussed it in advance ) to becoming rigid, inflexible and demanding.  I am not accusing the OP of that....I just think that many parents can become a little too "mama-bearish" when it comes to accomodating their children.

It's a fine line that the OP didn't cross....but others do which is why I do think it applies here.  Just something to consider.

IMO, it doesn't really apply at all.  Other than OPs valid reason to have to leave by a certain amount of time, going anyplace else and whomever else was the host when this scenario happened would be considered rude.  Going to a restaurant with ample enough time to order, eat and leave by 8 PM yet not being served until hours later after your arrival time would be insanely rude no matter which way you slice it. 

So, I don't see how your bolded could actually apply in any similar scenario in the OP.  To make it apply, it wouldn't be a similar scenario.  What the OPs hosts did is rude no matter if there were kids involved or not, the kids are a red herring here.  Put in any reason the OP had to leave by 8PM, anyway you slice it, her host was rude.

I get that what I have been saying is not in direct relation to the OP's situation and I have agreed all along that the OP was badly treated.  I don't, however, think in the course of general discussion that stating that there has to be some flexibility on the part of the guests is totally irrelevant.  I am sorry if it has gotten too off-topic - maybe I should have started a new thread.

[kareng57]

But that's a completely different situation and I don't see how it applies here.

I mention it because I think it is one of those situations where there is a lot of blurring between having a genuine beef like the OP did ( with respect to having discussed it in advance ) to becoming rigid, inflexible and demanding.  I am not accusing the OP of that....I just think that many parents can become a little too "mama-bearish" when it comes to accomodating their children.

It's a fine line that the OP didn't cross....but others do which is why I do think it applies here.  Just something to consider.

IMO, it doesn't really apply at all.  Other than OPs valid reason to have to leave by a certain amount of time, going anyplace else and whomever else was the host when this scenario happened would be considered rude.  Going to a restaurant with ample enough time to order, eat and leave by 8 PM yet not being served until hours later after your arrival time would be insanely rude no matter which way you slice it. 

So, I don't see how your bolded could actually apply in any similar scenario in the OP.  To make it apply, it wouldn't be a similar scenario.  What the OPs hosts did is rude no matter if there were kids involved or not, the kids are a red herring here.  Put in any reason the OP had to leave by 8PM, anyway you slice it, her host was rude.

I get that what I have been saying is not in direct relation to the OP's situation and I have agreed all along that the OP was badly treated.  I don't, however, think in the course of general discussion that stating that there has to be some flexibility on the part of the guests is totally irrelevant.  I am sorry if it has gotten too off-topic - maybe I should have started a new thread.

I do understand what you are saying, even if doesn't really relate exactly to this thread.  Many of us do know parents who will assert "we are parents!  How dare you invite us to something that does not coincide with Baby's schedule?!"  But I agree, that's really a topic for a separate thread.

[Sharnita]

I think the (potential) guest's flexibility mostly comes in when they realize the event decribes don't really fit their scedule and politely decline.  I think to accept and then insist on changes would be rude - OP and her DH didn't do that.  On the other hand, promising changes to lure people in and then not following through is rude too.

[Petticoats]

<snip>  But I can't figure out why she would invite them over for that time if she had no intention of serving a meal at the agreed upon time.  I don't even ascribe terrible motives on her others have done....cluelessness about what it is like to have kids maybe....but not necessarily deliberate nastiness.

Maybe it was unconscious nastiness, then, but the effect was to send the extremely clear message that she didn't give a hang about CakeBeret. She may have been pretending to be a good girlfriend to Mr. Cakeberet's friend by "hosting" dinner, when she really didn't want to, so she could get the points for trying <eyeroll> while not having to be nice to someone she evidently doesn't want to be nice to.

Or perhaps she's such a self-absorbed person that this is standard behavior for her no matter who the guests are. In either case, I would probably be declining future invitations.

[cicero]

Agreed.  But I can't figure out why she would invite them over for that time if she had no intention of serving a meal at the agreed upon time.  I don't even ascribe terrible motives on her others have done....cluelessness about what it is like to have kids maybe....but not necessarily deliberate nastiness.

but the fact is that this is *exactly* what she did.

and as i, and others, have pointed out upthread, if a timing/kitchen mishap prevents you from getting dinner on the table on time, then you (a) update the guests and (b) improvise. the OP brought some bread and toppings, how hard is it to scramble up some eggs, or order in a pizza? or something. maybe I'm cynical than you but it strikes me as extremely... odd, that the "hosts" actually *started* to prepare dinner at the time that dinner was supposed to be served and didn't serve dinner until after the time that cakeberet said she needed to leave. seriously? this was supposed to be a casual, mid-week dinner, for two couples and two toddlers, not thanksgiving turkey dinner with all the trimmings.

[Katana_Geldar]

You shouldn't really try anything new when you're entertaining, just in case you do have a kitchen mishap.

[Bijou]

She really does sound PA, to me.  I think I would tolerate her only because her SO is friends with my husband.  Otherwise, no.  And as for future dinners.  I don't think so, unless we all went out to eat or ate at my house, with her spending bucks on the dinner, of course. 

[mindicherry]

I guess, in my mind, unless this is a next-door neighbor or your "BFF", I don't understand how it is really "acceptable" to drive to a friend's house, be there at 6:30pm, expect to walk in and have dinner on the table, then leave 90 minutes later (in order to get your child to bed).  Where is the time for socializing? Where is the time for treating them as anything more than a free dinner? If someone invites me/my family over for dinner, except for the "neighborhood impromptu barbecues" ("hey - it's a school night and I have some ribs.  Do you have any salad?  Let's toss everything together and feed the kids so we can get them to bed at a reasonable time and they can still have some time to play")...I expect to be there for a MINIMUM of 2-3 hours.

See, things run differently in my social circle. Time is tight for all of us, we understand time is tight, and 2-3 hours for dinner is just not do-able. I would absolutely not expect to spend that long with someone. And the hosts in this circumstance were well aware that this was the situation for CakeBeret.

And I'm not sure why you couldn't socialize over dinner? For my set, dinner IS the socializing time. So, asking where the time for socializing/treating them as something more than a free dinner puzzles me. Isn't the dinner that time? Having dinner on the table and ready to go frees up MORE time for socializing (to me) because then one person isn't in the kitchen trying to finish cooking. Everyone sits right down together and spends that 90 minutes together over dinner, or maybe 30 minutes at the table and then 60 in the living room over tea/coffee or however you want to slice it.

I just can't understand how sitting down to dinner with someone and spending 90 minutes in their company is somehow not acceptable. How much socializing is necessary?

I guess it's just different social circles/expectations.  In my mind (and experience), if someone invited me over for dinner, I would expect to arrive at the appointed time, have about 30-60 minutes of "pre-dinner-talk/appetizers" while the host is cooking dinner, eat dinner and then hang out for at least another hour.  In my life/family/friendships - that's just how it "works".  That doesn't mean that *MY* time isn't tight as well.  I work from home running my own website (so it sometimes seems like a 24/7 job) and my husband is a retail manager (so he often has a yucky schedule of weekends and nights) and we have 3 kids that have school, sports, ballet, etc.  That being said, when we are able to coordinate our schedules to have dinner with friends (barring the impromptu barbecue that I mentioned earlier), I don't schedule it like a business meeting where I have 90 minutes and then I am out of there.

From the responses, it is obvious that some people DO operate that way....and THAT IS FINE.  They are just people that I wouldn't include in my social circle (and I am glad that nobody in my family is like that) because it would stress me out too much to be on that much of strict timetable when I am hosting.  If I invite someone over for dinner, everyone knows that I am inviting them over "for the evening" and I assume the same when I receive an invite. 

That doesn't mean that they are wrong and I am right - it's just a different way of living your life!

That being said - the OP DID specifically outline her time restrictions and Annie and Joe were rude....not only because they (possibly PA) knew her restrictions and didn't abide by them, but because (and I just re-read this), they didn't even say goodby to her.

Lesson learned - don't accept any more invites from Annie & Joe if they can't do what they say they can do.  On the other hand, if Annie & Joe subscribe to the way I operate with invites for dinner, they won't be inviting the OP back anyway.

Once again - neither one is wrong.