Author Topic: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.  (Read 8002 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7332
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #45 on: December 26, 2013, 09:47:14 PM »
Do not underestimate how important having both parents, even if divorced, celebratea child together, is to a child...especially that of a child Pam's age. Making an argument around the premise that she was probably playing her parents is reaching even further than the assumption Dave was just out to get Linda and didn't go because his daughter asked him to.

For Linda to be doing anything "together" with Dave, let alone "celebrating their child," requires her consent, something she was not give the opportunity to give.

What a child would learn from Dave's actions is that one can use a person's love for them and/or a special occasion as leverage to get what they want.

A better lesson is to say "We need to talk to your mom about that" so that the child understands that her mother desserves respect even at the cost of not getting what she wants.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12898
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #46 on: December 27, 2013, 11:27:45 AM »
I feel that Dave (and to an extent Pam) were rude here. Pam, although a resident of the house and the GOH is still a minor and is not the party's host. Inviting an extra guest without checking with the host is rude. Inviting a problematic guest like an ex-husband is even more so. If she wanted her father there, she should have gone to her mother first and asked that he be invited. By inviting him without checking first, she put her mother in a tough position. Linda would have to either agree to his presence or publicly be a bad guy.

Dave should not have accepted without checking with Linda (out of Pam's hearing) first. From the OP's update, he was even more rude in the fact that it sounds like she wasn't really aware that he was there. It sounds more like he used Pam's invitation as an excuse to be nosy more than an opportunity to be with his daughter.

I'm divorced. Fortunately my ex and I are good friends (we've invited her over to dinner tonight since her SO is out of town visiting relatives.) Our sons are adult or nearly so. Despite all of that, I would never accept a 3rd-person invitation to something that she was hosting, without checking with her first. We get along well in part because we respect each other's boundaries (mostly  ;D )
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #47 on: December 27, 2013, 11:44:49 AM »
Do not underestimate how important having both parents, even if divorced, celebratea child together, is to a child...especially that of a child Pam's age. Making an argument around the premise that she was probably playing her parents is reaching even further than the assumption Dave was just out to get Linda and didn't go because his daughter asked him to.

For Linda to be doing anything "together" with Dave, let alone "celebrating their child," requires her consent, something she was not give the opportunity to give.

What a child would learn from Dave's actions is that one can use a person's love for them and/or a special occasion as leverage to get what they want.

A better lesson is to say "We need to talk to your mom about that" so that the child understands that her mother desserves respect even at the cost of not getting what she wants.

Again, you don't know Pam...or Dave and Linda for that matter.  Sorry, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine when posters get so extreme when arguing their points.  We have limited information and based on that limited information, it is not rude for the father of a child to attend a birthday party his child invited him to.  Yes, he and/or the child, should have spoken to the mother first (and I still say her answer should have been 'sure you can stay'), he had no right to go inside her house when the party was outside, etc, but he was not rude for accepting his child's invitation.  The fact that he's her father makes a HUGE difference.

As for all the "he's probably trying to get at Linda and upset her", "Pam was playing her parents", etc...they aren't valid arguments here.  Of course IF Dave was trying to upset Linda and IF Pam wanted to play her parents AND Dave knew it, then obviously it was rude for him to be there.  But, that's not the scenairo presented here. The OP hasn't indicated that's the case (and I doubt she knows anyway).  If you want to argue those obvious points then argue them as hypotheticals.  No one would disagree that it's rude.  At best, it's unkind to push behavior and motivation on people where no evidence exists...even if it is online and they'll never find out. 

And yes, there's a learning opportunity here for Pam. 

ETA: I want to clarify that I know that you weren't the one that made the "playing her parents" argument that I was originally responding to.  The 'yous' in this post are not directed at you specifically.

« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 11:55:08 AM by bah12 »

Ryuugan80

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 70
    • AO3 Profile
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #48 on: December 27, 2013, 12:49:22 PM »
Do not underestimate how important having both parents, even if divorced, celebrat ea child together, is to a child...especially that of a child Pam's age. Making an argument around the premise that she was probably playing her parents is reaching even further than the assumption Dave was just out to get Linda and didn't go because his daughter asked him to.

For Linda to be doing anything "together" with Dave, let alone "celebrating their child," requires her consent, something she was not give the opportunity to give.

What a child would learn from Dave's actions is that one can use a person's love for them and/or a special occasion as leverage to get what they want.

A better lesson is to say "We need to talk to your mom about that" so that the child understands that her mother deserves respect even at the cost of not getting what she wants.

Again, you don't know Pam...or Dave and Linda for that matter.  Sorry, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine when posters get so extreme when arguing their points.  We have limited information and based on that limited information, it is not rude for the father of a child to attend a birthday party his child invited him to.  Yes, he and/or the child, should have spoken to the mother first (and I still say her answer should have been 'sure you can stay'), he had no right to go inside her house when the party was outside, etc, but he was not rude for accepting his child's invitation.  The fact that he's her father makes a HUGE difference.

As for all the "he's probably trying to get at Linda and upset her", "Pam was playing her parents", etc...they aren't valid arguments here.  Of course IF Dave was trying to upset Linda and IF Pam wanted to play her parents AND Dave knew it, then obviously it was rude for him to be there.  But, that's not the scenario presented here. The OP hasn't indicated that's the case (and I doubt she knows anyway).  If you want to argue those obvious points then argue them as hypothetical.  No one would disagree that it's rude.  At best, it's unkind to push behavior and motivation on people where no evidence exists...even if it is online and they'll never find out. 

And yes, there's a learning opportunity here for Pam. 

ETA: I want to clarify that I know that you weren't the one that made the "playing her parents" argument that I was originally responding to.  The 'yous' in this post are not directed at you specifically.

I think you're making our arguments sound a bit more malicious than they are. It may not necessarily have been rude of Dave to show up knowing that he was not invited by the actual host but invited by the GOH. But it was rude of him to come, under those circumstances, and not actually spend that time outside with his daughter. All of the things that he was doing inside (lounging around, chatting with his former FIL) could have been done outside or in his own home.

Pam is a child, but she's really not that young. She, theoretically, should be old enough to notice that her parents don't like spending time with one another normally. And, while it's understandable that she would want them in the same place, I don't think that gives her a pass. Her father is a person that she likes but should know by now has never been invited to her home. Maybe (most likely) this is one of those times where she felt that hey, if I get them together, maybe they'll get over their differences and we can all spend more time together!

But, still. Even if we can say that Pam didn't know better, Dave should have (he's known Linda for at least a decade after all. Would he have been just as weirded out had she done the same thing at his home?). And if he didn't, if he was just oblivious to how weird this all is, that doesn't mean he wasn't rude in his actions. Just that he didn't INTEND to be.
"Yo, those kids are straight up liars, man. All I told them to do was run product. And by product, I mean chewing gum."  - Lie to Me

-----

Lestrade: "Exactly how many times did he fall out of the window?"
Sherlock: "Oh, it's all a bit of a blur, Detective Inspector. I lost count

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #49 on: December 27, 2013, 01:17:24 PM »
I don't think it's weird at all for divorced parents to celebrate their children together.  And, I don't think the OP said that he spent the whole time in the house.  She went inside the house and saw him there.  Seeing him there ( and I agree it seems he had no business there), doesn't mean he was there the whole time and spent no time with his daughter.  The OP even says he was outside too.  Also, if I went inside someone's house meaning to only be there for a few minutes and someone that I know started talking to me (or I started a conversation), I wouldn't stop and say "Oh wait, we should make sure we go outside immediately".  I'm pretty sure most of us would have a conversation where we are standing.   I think we all agree that Dave shouldn't have been in the house.  But, I still don't think that implies that he spent "the whole time" in the house or because he did one inappropriate thing he had no right to be there at all.

As for the arguments sounding maliciuos.  I'm not purposely trying to make you look bad...I do, however, think it's a bit extreme to try to prove a point by assigning behavior to people.  It may be understandable if your own personal experience makes you see things that way, but it doesn't make it right. 

So basicially, if you think that exes should never be allowed in each others homes because exes should always be on neutral territory...that's fine.  I just don't think you should qualify that feeling with "he was purposely trying to upset Linda" and "Pam was just playing her parents and wanted to get at her mom/dad" when there is zero evidence that's the case. 

I'm glad that Linda acted as graciously as she did.  I understand that she didn't like the situation and I understand why, but I'm glad she didn't accuse him of malice and cause a scene at her daugher's birthday.  OP, do you know if she discussed how Pam should handle these requests in the future?
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 01:27:00 PM by bah12 »

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7332
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #50 on: December 27, 2013, 03:55:49 PM »
Do not underestimate how important having both parents, even if divorced, celebratea child together, is to a child...especially that of a child Pam's age. Making an argument around the premise that she was probably playing her parents is reaching even further than the assumption Dave was just out to get Linda and didn't go because his daughter asked him to.

For Linda to be doing anything "together" with Dave, let alone "celebrating their child," requires her consent, something she was not give the opportunity to give.

What a child would learn from Dave's actions is that one can use a person's love for them and/or a special occasion as leverage to get what they want.

A better lesson is to say "We need to talk to your mom about that" so that the child understands that her mother desserves respect even at the cost of not getting what she wants.

Again, you don't know Pam...or Dave and Linda for that matter.  Sorry, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine when posters get so extreme when arguing their points.  We have limited information and based on that limited information, it is not rude for the father of a child to attend a birthday party his child invited him to.  Yes, he and/or the child, should have spoken to the mother first (and I still say her answer should have been 'sure you can stay'), he had no right to go inside her house when the party was outside, etc, but he was not rude for accepting his child's invitation.  The fact that he's her father makes a HUGE difference.

As for all the "he's probably trying to get at Linda and upset her", "Pam was playing her parents", etc...they aren't valid arguments here.  Of course IF Dave was trying to upset Linda and IF Pam wanted to play her parents AND Dave knew it, then obviously it was rude for him to be there.  But, that's not the scenairo presented here. The OP hasn't indicated that's the case (and I doubt she knows anyway).  If you want to argue those obvious points then argue them as hypotheticals.  No one would disagree that it's rude.  At best, it's unkind to push behavior and motivation on people where no evidence exists...even if it is online and they'll never find out. 

And yes, there's a learning opportunity here for Pam. 

ETA: I want to clarify that I know that you weren't the one that made the "playing her parents" argument that I was originally responding to.  The 'yous' in this post are not directed at you specifically.

In terms of etiquette, we are in agreement--Dave was wrong.

Etiquette does not require that Linda consent to let him stay.  She can say yes, she can say no.  But, it is her decision to make.

People's opinions in terms of "pam playing her parents" among others are just as valid as yours that Linda should let him stay. 

No one is saying that divorced couples should act one way or another.  They are however, saying why its important that the boundaries that they establish should be respected and why Linda may indeed not have wanted him there beyond the fact that he didn't talk to her about it.

It's up to Dave and Linda how they want to celebrate their child together if that is what they want to do.  I haven't seen anyone here say that people who are divorced shouldn't do that.

But honestly, Dave could be the sweetest person on the face of the earth and have the best relationship with the child's mother in the history of divorced parents and I would still fault him for going to her house uninvited.

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #51 on: December 27, 2013, 04:13:54 PM »
Do not underestimate how important having both parents, even if divorced, celebratea child together, is to a child...especially that of a child Pam's age. Making an argument around the premise that she was probably playing her parents is reaching even further than the assumption Dave was just out to get Linda and didn't go because his daughter asked him to.

For Linda to be doing anything "together" with Dave, let alone "celebrating their child," requires her consent, something she was not give the opportunity to give.

What a child would learn from Dave's actions is that one can use a person's love for them and/or a special occasion as leverage to get what they want.

A better lesson is to say "We need to talk to your mom about that" so that the child understands that her mother desserves respect even at the cost of not getting what she wants.

Again, you don't know Pam...or Dave and Linda for that matter.  Sorry, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine when posters get so extreme when arguing their points.  We have limited information and based on that limited information, it is not rude for the father of a child to attend a birthday party his child invited him to.  Yes, he and/or the child, should have spoken to the mother first (and I still say her answer should have been 'sure you can stay'), he had no right to go inside her house when the party was outside, etc, but he was not rude for accepting his child's invitation.  The fact that he's her father makes a HUGE difference.

As for all the "he's probably trying to get at Linda and upset her", "Pam was playing her parents", etc...they aren't valid arguments here.  Of course IF Dave was trying to upset Linda and IF Pam wanted to play her parents AND Dave knew it, then obviously it was rude for him to be there.  But, that's not the scenairo presented here. The OP hasn't indicated that's the case (and I doubt she knows anyway).  If you want to argue those obvious points then argue them as hypotheticals.  No one would disagree that it's rude.  At best, it's unkind to push behavior and motivation on people where no evidence exists...even if it is online and they'll never find out. 

And yes, there's a learning opportunity here for Pam. 

ETA: I want to clarify that I know that you weren't the one that made the "playing her parents" argument that I was originally responding to.  The 'yous' in this post are not directed at you specifically.

In terms of etiquette, we are in agreement--Dave was wrong.

Etiquette does not require that Linda consent to let him stay.  She can say yes, she can say no.  But, it is her decision to make.

People's opinions in terms of "pam playing her parents" among others are just as valid as yours that Linda should let him stay

No one is saying that divorced couples should act one way or another.  They are however, saying why its important that the boundaries that they establish should be respected and why Linda may indeed not have wanted him there beyond the fact that he didn't talk to her about it.

It's up to Dave and Linda how they want to celebrate their child together if that is what they want to do.  I haven't seen anyone here say that people who are divorced shouldn't do that.

But honestly, Dave could be the sweetest person on the face of the earth and have the best relationship with the child's mother in the history of divorced parents and I would still fault him for going to her house uninvited.

Actually, no...because they aren't "opinions"...that is assigning motivation and malice without evidence.  Not at all the same as a "valid opinion".

Linda did let Dave stay.  That's a fact.  So, I don't think it's rude for a father to be invited by his child to her birthday party to stay at her birthday party when the mother never asked him to leave.  Didn't the OP say that he stayed after he dropped off Pam?  He already had a valid reason for being there.  Linda could have asked him to leave if she wanted to.  She didn't.  I think she acted graciously and he wasn't rude for being there.  Awkward for Linda after he already was at the front door? Sure.  Could he have called ahead?  Yep.  But he was invited by the birthday girl...his daughter.  He had to take her home anyway.  He wasn't rude for staying the absence of being kicked out.  The onus here isn't completely on Dave.  All we know is that Linda was understandably uncomfortable and acted wonderfully.  Dave's motivations are unknown.  The only fact was that he was invited by the GOH and the host allowed him to stay.  So, instead of assigning malice to Dave, I choose to say, with the facts as we know it, he was fine to attend the party.  Anyone else wants to err on the side of ungraciousness, that's on them. 

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7332
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #52 on: December 27, 2013, 04:35:43 PM »

Actually, no...because they aren't "opinions"...that is assigning motivation and malice without evidence.  Not at all the same as a "valid opinion".

Linda did let Dave stay.  That's a fact.  So, I don't think it's rude for a father to be invited by his child to her birthday party to stay at her birthday party when the mother never asked him to leave.  Didn't the OP say that he stayed after he dropped off Pam?  He already had a valid reason for being there.  Linda could have asked him to leave if she wanted to.  She didn't.  I think she acted graciously and he wasn't rude for being there.  Awkward for Linda after he already was at the front door? Sure.  Could he have called ahead?  Yep.  But he was invited by the birthday girl...his daughter.  He had to take her home anyway.  He wasn't rude for staying the absence of being kicked out.  The onus here isn't completely on Dave.  All we know is that Linda was understandably uncomfortable and acted wonderfully.  Dave's motivations are unknown.  The only fact was that he was invited by the GOH and the host allowed him to stay.  So, instead of assigning malice to Dave, I choose to say, with the facts as we know it, he was fine to attend the party.  Anyone else wants to err on the side of ungraciousness, that's on them.

I don't agree with you.  I don't have to assign any malice at all to Dave to find that what he did was rude.

No one has found fault with him being there.  Of course, he had a valid reason for that.  But, he didn't talk to Linda about staying and that was rude, full stop.

Just because Linda was gracious doesn't lessen the fact that he was rude to her.

The fact is that inviting yourself to someone's house is rude.  That is really the only fact here that applies.  You can't have it both ways--that his daughter invited him so that made it ok; that Linda didn't throw him out, so that made it ok.

There's a whole lotta bad stuff in there.  By your logic, he could come and do whatever he wanted to until someone threw him out.

Part of being polite is behaving yourself without needing others to stop you from misbehaving..
 
He never should have put Linda into the position that he did in the first place.  And there is no need to know his motivation, her motivation or the daughter's.  We know that Linda was not comfortable with him staying and that is all we need to know really.

If it was talked about before and they had such a casual relationship with each other that he could come and go at her house whenever, then presumably, Linda would not have been uncomfortable with it.  I would certainly not expect someone to be uncomfortable with the 40th time of what one was comfortable with 39 times before.

But, that wasn't the case here.

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4588
  • So many books, so little time
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #53 on: December 27, 2013, 05:15:07 PM »

Actually, no...because they aren't "opinions"...that is assigning motivation and malice without evidence.  Not at all the same as a "valid opinion".

Linda did let Dave stay.  That's a fact.  So, I don't think it's rude for a father to be invited by his child to her birthday party to stay at her birthday party when the mother never asked him to leave.  Didn't the OP say that he stayed after he dropped off Pam?  He already had a valid reason for being there.  Linda could have asked him to leave if she wanted to.  She didn't.  I think she acted graciously and he wasn't rude for being there.  Awkward for Linda after he already was at the front door? Sure.  Could he have called ahead?  Yep.  But he was invited by the birthday girl...his daughter.  He had to take her home anyway.  He wasn't rude for staying the absence of being kicked out.  The onus here isn't completely on Dave.  All we know is that Linda was understandably uncomfortable and acted wonderfully.  Dave's motivations are unknown.  The only fact was that he was invited by the GOH and the host allowed him to stay.  So, instead of assigning malice to Dave, I choose to say, with the facts as we know it, he was fine to attend the party.  Anyone else wants to err on the side of ungraciousness, that's on them.

I don't agree with you.  I don't have to assign any malice at all to Dave to find that what he did was rude.

No one has found fault with him being there.  Of course, he had a valid reason for that.  But, he didn't talk to Linda about staying and that was rude, full stop.

Just because Linda was gracious doesn't lessen the fact that he was rude to her.

The fact is that inviting yourself to someone's house is rude.  That is really the only fact here that applies.  You can't have it both ways--that his daughter invited him so that made it ok; that Linda didn't throw him out, so that made it ok.

There's a whole lotta bad stuff in there.  By your logic, he could come and do whatever he wanted to until someone threw him out.

Part of being polite is behaving yourself without needing others to stop you from misbehaving..
 
He never should have put Linda into the position that he did in the first place.  And there is no need to know his motivation, her motivation or the daughter's.  We know that Linda was not comfortable with him staying and that is all we need to know really.

If it was talked about before and they had such a casual relationship with each other that he could come and go at her house whenever, then presumably, Linda would not have been uncomfortable with it.  I would certainly not expect someone to be uncomfortable with the 40th time of what one was comfortable with 39 times before.

But, that wasn't the case here.

But he didn't invite himself - Pam invited him. Without the consent of her mother, perhaps, but she still invited him. Dave might not have known she did it on her own. Should he have checked? Perhaps. Was he rude not to do so? No. Possibly thoughtless, but unless he knew Pam hadn't talked it over with Linda, I wouldn't call him rude.

It makes me think of a slightly different scenario though - let's say Pam wasn't the GoH, but a cohost, what would people's opinions be then?
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7332
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #54 on: December 27, 2013, 05:22:36 PM »

Actually, no...because they aren't "opinions"...that is assigning motivation and malice without evidence.  Not at all the same as a "valid opinion".

Linda did let Dave stay.  That's a fact.  So, I don't think it's rude for a father to be invited by his child to her birthday party to stay at her birthday party when the mother never asked him to leave.  Didn't the OP say that he stayed after he dropped off Pam?  He already had a valid reason for being there.  Linda could have asked him to leave if she wanted to.  She didn't.  I think she acted graciously and he wasn't rude for being there.  Awkward for Linda after he already was at the front door? Sure.  Could he have called ahead?  Yep.  But he was invited by the birthday girl...his daughter.  He had to take her home anyway.  He wasn't rude for staying the absence of being kicked out.  The onus here isn't completely on Dave.  All we know is that Linda was understandably uncomfortable and acted wonderfully.  Dave's motivations are unknown.  The only fact was that he was invited by the GOH and the host allowed him to stay.  So, instead of assigning malice to Dave, I choose to say, with the facts as we know it, he was fine to attend the party.  Anyone else wants to err on the side of ungraciousness, that's on them.

I don't agree with you.  I don't have to assign any malice at all to Dave to find that what he did was rude.

No one has found fault with him being there.  Of course, he had a valid reason for that.  But, he didn't talk to Linda about staying and that was rude, full stop.

Just because Linda was gracious doesn't lessen the fact that he was rude to her.

The fact is that inviting yourself to someone's house is rude.  That is really the only fact here that applies.  You can't have it both ways--that his daughter invited him so that made it ok; that Linda didn't throw him out, so that made it ok.

There's a whole lotta bad stuff in there.  By your logic, he could come and do whatever he wanted to until someone threw him out.

Part of being polite is behaving yourself without needing others to stop you from misbehaving..
 
He never should have put Linda into the position that he did in the first place.  And there is no need to know his motivation, her motivation or the daughter's.  We know that Linda was not comfortable with him staying and that is all we need to know really.

If it was talked about before and they had such a casual relationship with each other that he could come and go at her house whenever, then presumably, Linda would not have been uncomfortable with it.  I would certainly not expect someone to be uncomfortable with the 40th time of what one was comfortable with 39 times before.

But, that wasn't the case here.

But he didn't invite himself - Pam invited him. Without the consent of her mother, perhaps, but she still invited him. Dave might not have known she did it on her own. Should he have checked? Perhaps. Was he rude not to do so? No. Possibly thoughtless, but unless he knew Pam hadn't talked it over with Linda, I wouldn't call him rude.

It makes me think of a slightly different scenario though - let's say Pam wasn't the GoH, but a cohost, what would people's opinions be then?

Any adult should know that an invitation from a child needs to be checked with the relevant adult.  Should he have checked? Absolutely! No perhaps about it!

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #55 on: December 27, 2013, 05:32:13 PM »

Actually, no...because they aren't "opinions"...that is assigning motivation and malice without evidence.  Not at all the same as a "valid opinion".

Linda did let Dave stay.  That's a fact.  So, I don't think it's rude for a father to be invited by his child to her birthday party to stay at her birthday party when the mother never asked him to leave.  Didn't the OP say that he stayed after he dropped off Pam?  He already had a valid reason for being there.  Linda could have asked him to leave if she wanted to.  She didn't.  I think she acted graciously and he wasn't rude for being there.  Awkward for Linda after he already was at the front door? Sure.  Could he have called ahead?  Yep.  But he was invited by the birthday girl...his daughter.  He had to take her home anyway.  He wasn't rude for staying the absence of being kicked out.  The onus here isn't completely on Dave.  All we know is that Linda was understandably uncomfortable and acted wonderfully.  Dave's motivations are unknown.  The only fact was that he was invited by the GOH and the host allowed him to stay.  So, instead of assigning malice to Dave, I choose to say, with the facts as we know it, he was fine to attend the party.  Anyone else wants to err on the side of ungraciousness, that's on them.

I don't agree with you.   I don't have to assign any malice at all to Dave to find that what he did was rude.

No one has found fault with him being there.  Of course, he had a valid reason for that.  But, he didn't talk to Linda about staying and that was rude, full stop.

Just because Linda was gracious doesn't lessen the fact that he was rude to her.

The fact is that inviting yourself to someone's house is rude.  That is really the only fact here that applies.  You can't have it both ways--that his daughter invited him so that made it ok; that Linda didn't throw him out, so that made it ok.

There's a whole lotta bad stuff in there.  By your logic, he could come and do whatever he wanted to until someone threw him out.

Part of being polite is behaving yourself without needing others to stop you from misbehaving..
 
He never should have put Linda into the position that he did in the first place.  And there is no need to know his motivation, her motivation or the daughter's.  We know that Linda was not comfortable with him staying and that is all we need to know really.
If it was talked about before and they had such a casual relationship with each other that he could come and go at her house whenever, then presumably, Linda would not have been uncomfortable with it.  I would certainly not expect someone to be uncomfortable with the 40th time of what one was comfortable with 39 times before.

But, that wasn't the case here.

I'll go point by point:

1. We can agree to disagree.

2. Linda was gracious.  We agree.  We don't agree that he was rude to be at the party.  Her graciousness isn't what makes it ok for me....the fact that he was invited makes it ok.  The fact that he wasn't asked to leave, makes me not blame him for not leaving.

3. Again, he was invited.  Linda can talk to Pam about who she can and can't invite to her future birthdays, but I really hope that she and Dave continue to put whatever their personal feelings are aside for their daughter.

4. I'm not sure where you would get the idea that I think people can go wherever they want until someone kicks them out.  Not even remotely close to what I said.  I'm talking about this specific situation.  To apply that as a blanket statement to everything makes no sense.

5. He didn't put Linda in any position at least not by himself.  Pam did.  If Dave said "no, I"m not coming" then he's the bad guy.  If he says "Your mom doesn't want me there" she is.  They can talk to Pam about working these things out before hand, but really they both did the right thing in having him go.

6. You are actually coming pretty close to arguing logic back to me.  You are correct that there are certain facts and that we don't need to know motivation.  But Linda being uncomfortable isn't the only fact...it's the only fact that supports your argument, but the other facts are also present: Pam invited Dave.  Linda let him stay.  The OP also stated that Linda didn't say anything to Dave while he was there (and she doesn't know if she said anything after).  So, while you can assume that Dave should have known that she was peeved...it would still be an assumption and not a fact.  If Linda wanted him gone (and I can see that she likely did) she needs to say something to him.  It's not fair to expect everyone to read your mind all the time. Being divorced, by itself, doesn't mean that he's not welcome at his child's birthday party.    We don't know (and neither does the OP, though probably more than us) the exact dynamics of their relationship.  There are many people that I don't like and I prefer not to have around that I can still have pleasant interaction with.  It's not a foreign concept...especially when talking about etiquette. 

Of course, this has kind of veered off from my original argument.  I do think Dave was wrong to go inside the house and I do think it would have been more polite for him to call Linda and confirm with her ahead of time.   We agree.   I don't think he was rude to go since he was invited and I'm glad Linda let him stay.  If she asked him to leave, barring any other reason outside of 'he's an ex' I wouldn't have agreed with her, but I would have agreed that Dave then was obligated to leave.  My main contention on this thread is posters making their argument by assigning malice to certain 'characters'.  I think arguments can be made without assuming the absolute worse of people or assuming that these people act just like the awful people they have in their lives.  It's neither fair nor kind...something etiquette encourages.

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4588
  • So many books, so little time
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #56 on: December 27, 2013, 05:38:37 PM »
Quote
But he didn't invite himself - Pam invited him. Without the consent of her mother, perhaps, but she still invited him. Dave might not have known she did it on her own. Should he have checked? Perhaps. Was he rude not to do so? No. Possibly thoughtless, but unless he knew Pam hadn't talked it over with Linda, I wouldn't call him rude.

It makes me think of a slightly different scenario though - let's say Pam wasn't the GoH, but a cohost, what would people's opinions be then?

Any adult should know that an invitation from a child needs to be checked with the relevant adult.  Should he have checked? Absolutely! No perhaps about it!

Had Pam been younger I would agree, but if I recall correctly she's 11 - plenty old enough to pass on an invitation from her mother without being checked up on. And if that is how she presented it to Dave... how was he to know otherwise? Sure, he'll know now that he has to check, but hindsight is 20/20, and he might have thought it was all prearranged.

Of course if Pam said something like "Oh, come along! Mum won't mind" or in other ways made it clear that she didn't know, then I agree that he ought to have checked. But we don't know.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 05:55:21 PM by MariaE »
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

tinkytinky

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 430
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #57 on: December 27, 2013, 05:46:17 PM »
If you think of the situation in terms of a guest instead of an ex, I think it gets a lot clearer.

Dave should have talked with Linda first, but once she allowed him to stay he became a guest. As a guest, it was his obligation to stay with the party, not invade Linda's living space. NO GUEST should every go anywhere that is off limits.

That being said, I agree that Dave had his celebration with his daughter earlier and should have bowed out.

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #58 on: December 27, 2013, 05:53:08 PM »
But he didn't invite himself - Pam invited him. Without the consent of her mother, perhaps, but she still invited him. Dave might not have known she did it on her own. Should he have checked? Perhaps. Was he rude not to do so? No. Possibly thoughtless, but unless he knew Pam hadn't talked it over with Linda, I wouldn't call him rude.

It makes me think of a slightly different scenario though - let's say Pam wasn't the GoH, but a cohost, what would people's opinions be then?

Any adult should know that an invitation from a child needs to be checked with the relevant adult.  Should he have checked? Absolutely! No perhaps about it!

Had Pam been younger I would agree, but if I recall correctly she's 11 - plenty old enough to pass on an invitation from her mother without being checked up on. And if that is how she presented it to Dave... how was he to know otherwise? Sure, he'll know now that he has to check, but hindsight is 20/20, and he might have thought it was all prearranged.

Of course if Pam said something like "Oh, come along! Mum won't mind" or in other ways made it clear that she didn't know, then I agree that he ought to have checked. But we don't know.
[/quote]

Not to mention, different households have different rules.  It seems that posters are treating Dave like he's any random adult.  Like all of sudden, the fact that he's her father is irrelevent simply because he's divorced from her mother.  Him being her father makes a difference.

My best friend, who is divorced from her first husband and who's second husband is divorced from his first wife (both sets have shared children) don't put that kind of pressure on their kids.  If they want parents around for birthday, graduations, weddings, etc, then they get to invite them.  This whole "neutral territory" thing never comes up.  They may not be married, but they still co-parent.  And my friend HATES her ex-husband.  She can't stand him.  But she does have three kids with him, so she puts those feelings aside regardless of how much she wishes her kids did want second birthdays with just their dad and his new wife.  She also happens to not be very fond of her husband's ex...but you know, she gets to show up to her kids stuff too.  Why?  Because instead of the adults treating the children like their wishes (especially on their days) don't matter when it comes to having their parents in their lives...they act like adults.  It's amazing...but it does work.

JoieGirl7

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7332
Re: More uninvited guest (sort of) questions - bit long sorry.
« Reply #59 on: December 27, 2013, 05:56:16 PM »
But he didn't invite himself - Pam invited him. Without the consent of her mother, perhaps, but she still invited him. Dave might not have known she did it on her own. Should he have checked? Perhaps. Was he rude not to do so? No. Possibly thoughtless, but unless he knew Pam hadn't talked it over with Linda, I wouldn't call him rude.

It makes me think of a slightly different scenario though - let's say Pam wasn't the GoH, but a cohost, what would people's opinions be then?

Any adult should know that an invitation from a child needs to be checked with the relevant adult.  Should he have checked? Absolutely! No perhaps about it!

Had Pam been younger I would agree, but if I recall correctly she's 11 - plenty old enough to pass on an invitation from her mother without being checked up on. And if that is how she presented it to Dave... how was he to know otherwise? Sure, he'll know now that he has to check, but hindsight is 20/20, and he might have thought it was all prearranged.

Of course if Pam said something like "Oh, come along! Mum won't mind" or in other ways made it clear that she didn't know, then I agree that he ought to have checked. But we don't know.
[/quote]

I still believe that he should have checked it with Linda.  She had never invited him to stay before that--it was out of the ordinary.  I won't give him a pass.  There was no reason for him not to say anything to Linda about why he was staying.  His odd behavior of going inside the house while everyone else was outside just makes it that much worse.