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.