Dear Abby 2/4/14 - Men's Only Club

[LifeOnPluto]

-A good friend belongs to a women's bible study group. Rule is that no kids or non-group members are in the home during the meetings as they discuss very personal issues that they want to remain within the group.

If somebody in the home I'm living in now joined a group with those rules, that would be a real burden to me- I am a non driver and live in an area very poorly served by public transit. (It only serves office workers and others who work 9-5 hours, no evening or night service) And my neighborhood has nowhere to walk to, nothing to do. None of my friends live nearby either. So if I found myself ordered out of the house, I'd be in a real bind. There's nowhere around here for me to go to, and for a good chunk of the year it's too cold to just "go for a long walk". So unless somebody was willing to drive me somewhere, there would be a real problem. (We live too far outside of town for a taxi- the fare would be easily $50 or 60.)
Now, if the group members understood my situation and were cool with me staying in my room with the headphones on and playing World of Warcraft, good luck hearing "personal stuff" over the clamor of a 25 person raid!), that would be cool. If not, me being ordered out of my own home would be a real imposition- I would need to find transportation, and would probably end up having to spend money- here in my town, there's not a lot to do downtown during the evenings unless you're spending money, and I can't always just go to a friend's house, as some of them work hours as odd as mine.

I wonder if any of the wives in this group are in a similar situation? Depending on their community, there may not be a lot of options for "just slipping out and going somewhere", that going double for non drivers. And there may not be a lot of things to "slip out" and go do, some places close down pretty early or just don't have a lot going on to begin with.

But if your house companions knew of this limitation about your leaving the home I assume they wouldn't choose to join this particular bible study. So if you had a roommate who knew the rules of this group, joined and then said "but can you make an exception for my housemate, I promise she'll always have headphones on and won't listen", I'd be pretty annoyed and suggest they find a different group.

Honestly, I don't see the LW's trying to change the rule as being rude.

This is a rule that she didn't have a say in, yet affects her very much (having to vacate her own home whenever the Men's Club is over). I see this as one of the situations where it's ok to ask, provided you accept "no" for an answer.

In fact, perhaps by asking that the rule be adapted (eg the women can stay in the house, just not in the room, etc) is simply the LW's attempt to be a peace keeper, and find a solution that makes everyone happy?

This to me is a false statement. The "rule" doesn't effect her. The rule could exist without ever effecting her. Her husband's decision to join a group with the rule is what is impacting her life.

It's the same with Aminita's scenario. The bible study group could exist for years and never effect Aminita. it would be her housemates decision to join the group that would impact the Aminita.
Amanita's housemate shouldn't say "I want to join this particular group, but I don't want to agree to the rules that all the other group members seem perfectly fine to abide by and accept".

I also find the LW's statement that "Therefore, the wives must clean and prepare" very old fashioned. To me she is assuming that the other other couple's households are managed just like her's is... wives cook and clean and husband's do "?"  I honestly don't know of very many households run this way anymore, no matter the age group. Even in my parent's generation (they'd be in their 80's) the men were more than capable to put a tray of cheese, cracker, and meet together and run a broom across the kitchen floor.

I disagree. The rule IS affecting her, regardless of whether it's the club organiser, or her husband, who is attempting to impose it on her.

And yes, it's arguable she could simply ignore the rule and stay in her house while the Men's Club meets. But that could result in ramifications for her husband (he could get chucked out of the club). The LW also mentioned that the club organiser has a lot of social clout in the retirement village. So ignoring the rule might also see the LW shunned socially.

[Iris]

And not everyone is you. I have cardboard scratchers for the cats. Within hours I have little pieces of cardboard on the carpet. I don't mind it myself - keeps them happy and I can happily ignore it. But I am not going to allow others into my house without dragging out the vaccuum and getting rid of them for a few hours. I don't consider it an imposition - I do it because I want my friends to come over and I want a reasonably presentable house. But i wouldn't be doing it at that time if I didn't have people coming over so it is an extra thing I have to do if I have a gathering.

And that is what my question was: how much extra housecleaning do people have to do? And do they consider it an imposition, or just "normal household maintenance"?

I clean a fair bit when guests are coming. Although we regularly clean there are two factors.

1. Since we both work full time and have a busy out of work schedule with the kids, DH and I do bits each day e.g. sorting dvds the kids have left out one day, folding laundry another (obviously kitchens etc are cleaned every day). So the house is always 'mostly' tidy it's never all tidy at once so when people are coming we do a big 'all at once' clean. Also all the jobs that we can leave for a couple of weeks or so usually get done at the same time so it takes probably from 1 - 2 hours.

2. Since the house is small we lack storage space so there are things that are usually 'out' that we put away when guests are coming.

It's not a massively huge thing but I do consider a good clean as part of preparing for guests, separate from the household maintenance. I don't consider it an imposition though, it's just a part of hosting - if I didn't want to do it I wouldn't host.

[Hmmmmm]

-A good friend belongs to a women's bible study group. Rule is that no kids or non-group members are in the home during the meetings as they discuss very personal issues that they want to remain within the group.

If somebody in the home I'm living in now joined a group with those rules, that would be a real burden to me- I am a non driver and live in an area very poorly served by public transit. (It only serves office workers and others who work 9-5 hours, no evening or night service) And my neighborhood has nowhere to walk to, nothing to do. None of my friends live nearby either. So if I found myself ordered out of the house, I'd be in a real bind. There's nowhere around here for me to go to, and for a good chunk of the year it's too cold to just "go for a long walk". So unless somebody was willing to drive me somewhere, there would be a real problem. (We live too far outside of town for a taxi- the fare would be easily $50 or 60.)
Now, if the group members understood my situation and were cool with me staying in my room with the headphones on and playing World of Warcraft, good luck hearing "personal stuff" over the clamor of a 25 person raid!), that would be cool. If not, me being ordered out of my own home would be a real imposition- I would need to find transportation, and would probably end up having to spend money- here in my town, there's not a lot to do downtown during the evenings unless you're spending money, and I can't always just go to a friend's house, as some of them work hours as odd as mine.

I wonder if any of the wives in this group are in a similar situation? Depending on their community, there may not be a lot of options for "just slipping out and going somewhere", that going double for non drivers. And there may not be a lot of things to "slip out" and go do, some places close down pretty early or just don't have a lot going on to begin with.

But if your house companions knew of this limitation about your leaving the home I assume they wouldn't choose to join this particular bible study. So if you had a roommate who knew the rules of this group, joined and then said "but can you make an exception for my housemate, I promise she'll always have headphones on and won't listen", I'd be pretty annoyed and suggest they find a different group.

Honestly, I don't see the LW's trying to change the rule as being rude.

This is a rule that she didn't have a say in, yet affects her very much (having to vacate her own home whenever the Men's Club is over). I see this as one of the situations where it's ok to ask, provided you accept "no" for an answer.

In fact, perhaps by asking that the rule be adapted (eg the women can stay in the house, just not in the room, etc) is simply the LW's attempt to be a peace keeper, and find a solution that makes everyone happy?

This to me is a false statement. The "rule" doesn't effect her. The rule could exist without ever effecting her. Her husband's decision to join a group with the rule is what is impacting her life.

It's the same with Aminita's scenario. The bible study group could exist for years and never effect Aminita. it would be her housemates decision to join the group that would impact the Aminita.
Amanita's housemate shouldn't say "I want to join this particular group, but I don't want to agree to the rules that all the other group members seem perfectly fine to abide by and accept".

I also find the LW's statement that "Therefore, the wives must clean and prepare" very old fashioned. To me she is assuming that the other other couple's households are managed just like her's is... wives cook and clean and husband's do "?"  I honestly don't know of very many households run this way anymore, no matter the age group. Even in my parent's generation (they'd be in their 80's) the men were more than capable to put a tray of cheese, cracker, and meet together and run a broom across the kitchen floor.

I disagree. The rule IS affecting her, regardless of whether it's the club organiser, or her husband, who is attempting to impose it on her.

And yes, it's arguable she could simply ignore the rule and stay in her house while the Men's Club meets. But that could result in ramifications for her husband (he could get chucked out of the club). The LW also mentioned that the club organiser has a lot of social clout in the retirement village. So ignoring the rule might also see the LW shunned socially.

No I'm not saying she should ignore the rule. That would be very rude in my opinion to the members of the group. I'm saying she can't request the rule be changed. And the rule only effects her because her husband joined the club. This is between her and her husband. Not her and the club organizer.

[gellchom]

8i7
[snip]

Honestly, I don't see the LW's trying to change the rule as being rude.

This is a rule that she didn't have a say in, yet affects her very much (having to vacate her own home whenever the Men's Club is over). I see this as one of the situations where it's ok to ask, provided you accept "no" for an answer.

In fact, perhaps by asking that the rule be adapted (eg the women can stay in the house, just not in the room, etc) is simply the LW's attempt to be a peace keeper, and find a solution that makes everyone happy?

This to me is a false statement. The "rule" doesn't effect her. The rule could exist without ever effecting her. Her husband's decision to join a group with the rule is what is impacting her life.

It's the same with Aminita's scenario. The bible study group could exist for years and never effect Aminita. it would be her housemates decision to join the group that would impact the Aminita.
Amanita's housemate shouldn't say "I want to join this particular group, but I don't want to agree to the rules that all the other group members seem perfectly fine to abide by and accept".
[snip]

Hmmmmm puts her finger on it again.

Think about dues.  If a spouse joins a club that requires dues, I suppose you could say that that affects the other spouse, who didn't have a say in it.  But that doesn't make the dues requirement rude or make it an unreasonable imposition by the club on the nonmember spouse. 

Whether it is an unreasonable imposition by the member spouse is a different question, and one that simply has a different answer for different couples.  And that's the question I think that the LW was trying to avoid by diverting focus onto the club and the organizer instead of her husband.

[LifeOnPluto]

-A good friend belongs to a women's bible study group. Rule is that no kids or non-group members are in the home during the meetings as they discuss very personal issues that they want to remain within the group.

If somebody in the home I'm living in now joined a group with those rules, that would be a real burden to me- I am a non driver and live in an area very poorly served by public transit. (It only serves office workers and others who work 9-5 hours, no evening or night service) And my neighborhood has nowhere to walk to, nothing to do. None of my friends live nearby either. So if I found myself ordered out of the house, I'd be in a real bind. There's nowhere around here for me to go to, and for a good chunk of the year it's too cold to just "go for a long walk". So unless somebody was willing to drive me somewhere, there would be a real problem. (We live too far outside of town for a taxi- the fare would be easily $50 or 60.)
Now, if the group members understood my situation and were cool with me staying in my room with the headphones on and playing World of Warcraft, good luck hearing "personal stuff" over the clamor of a 25 person raid!), that would be cool. If not, me being ordered out of my own home would be a real imposition- I would need to find transportation, and would probably end up having to spend money- here in my town, there's not a lot to do downtown during the evenings unless you're spending money, and I can't always just go to a friend's house, as some of them work hours as odd as mine.

I wonder if any of the wives in this group are in a similar situation? Depending on their community, there may not be a lot of options for "just slipping out and going somewhere", that going double for non drivers. And there may not be a lot of things to "slip out" and go do, some places close down pretty early or just don't have a lot going on to begin with.

But if your house companions knew of this limitation about your leaving the home I assume they wouldn't choose to join this particular bible study. So if you had a roommate who knew the rules of this group, joined and then said "but can you make an exception for my housemate, I promise she'll always have headphones on and won't listen", I'd be pretty annoyed and suggest they find a different group.

Honestly, I don't see the LW's trying to change the rule as being rude.

This is a rule that she didn't have a say in, yet affects her very much (having to vacate her own home whenever the Men's Club is over). I see this as one of the situations where it's ok to ask, provided you accept "no" for an answer.

In fact, perhaps by asking that the rule be adapted (eg the women can stay in the house, just not in the room, etc) is simply the LW's attempt to be a peace keeper, and find a solution that makes everyone happy?

This to me is a false statement. The "rule" doesn't effect her. The rule could exist without ever effecting her. Her husband's decision to join a group with the rule is what is impacting her life.

It's the same with Aminita's scenario. The bible study group could exist for years and never effect Aminita. it would be her housemates decision to join the group that would impact the Aminita.
Amanita's housemate shouldn't say "I want to join this particular group, but I don't want to agree to the rules that all the other group members seem perfectly fine to abide by and accept".

I also find the LW's statement that "Therefore, the wives must clean and prepare" very old fashioned. To me she is assuming that the other other couple's households are managed just like her's is... wives cook and clean and husband's do "?"  I honestly don't know of very many households run this way anymore, no matter the age group. Even in my parent's generation (they'd be in their 80's) the men were more than capable to put a tray of cheese, cracker, and meet together and run a broom across the kitchen floor.

I disagree. The rule IS affecting her, regardless of whether it's the club organiser, or her husband, who is attempting to impose it on her.

And yes, it's arguable she could simply ignore the rule and stay in her house while the Men's Club meets. But that could result in ramifications for her husband (he could get chucked out of the club). The LW also mentioned that the club organiser has a lot of social clout in the retirement village. So ignoring the rule might also see the LW shunned socially.

No I'm not saying she should ignore the rule. That would be very rude in my opinion to the members of the group. I'm saying she can't request the rule be changed. And the rule only effects her because her husband joined the club. This is between her and her husband. Not her and the club organizer.

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

[shhh its me]

-A good friend belongs to a women's bible study group. Rule is that no kids or non-group members are in the home during the meetings as they discuss very personal issues that they want to remain within the group.

If somebody in the home I'm living in now joined a group with those rules, that would be a real burden to me- I am a non driver and live in an area very poorly served by public transit. (It only serves office workers and others who work 9-5 hours, no evening or night service) And my neighborhood has nowhere to walk to, nothing to do. None of my friends live nearby either. So if I found myself ordered out of the house, I'd be in a real bind. There's nowhere around here for me to go to, and for a good chunk of the year it's too cold to just "go for a long walk". So unless somebody was willing to drive me somewhere, there would be a real problem. (We live too far outside of town for a taxi- the fare would be easily $50 or 60.)
Now, if the group members understood my situation and were cool with me staying in my room with the headphones on and playing World of Warcraft, good luck hearing "personal stuff" over the clamor of a 25 person raid!), that would be cool. If not, me being ordered out of my own home would be a real imposition- I would need to find transportation, and would probably end up having to spend money- here in my town, there's not a lot to do downtown during the evenings unless you're spending money, and I can't always just go to a friend's house, as some of them work hours as odd as mine.

I wonder if any of the wives in this group are in a similar situation? Depending on their community, there may not be a lot of options for "just slipping out and going somewhere", that going double for non drivers. And there may not be a lot of things to "slip out" and go do, some places close down pretty early or just don't have a lot going on to begin with.

But if your house companions knew of this limitation about your leaving the home I assume they wouldn't choose to join this particular bible study. So if you had a roommate who knew the rules of this group, joined and then said "but can you make an exception for my housemate, I promise she'll always have headphones on and won't listen", I'd be pretty annoyed and suggest they find a different group.

Honestly, I don't see the LW's trying to change the rule as being rude.

This is a rule that she didn't have a say in, yet affects her very much (having to vacate her own home whenever the Men's Club is over). I see this as one of the situations where it's ok to ask, provided you accept "no" for an answer.

In fact, perhaps by asking that the rule be adapted (eg the women can stay in the house, just not in the room, etc) is simply the LW's attempt to be a peace keeper, and find a solution that makes everyone happy?

This to me is a false statement. The "rule" doesn't effect her. The rule could exist without ever effecting her. Her husband's decision to join a group with the rule is what is impacting her life.

It's the same with Aminita's scenario. The bible study group could exist for years and never effect Aminita. it would be her housemates decision to join the group that would impact the Aminita.
Amanita's housemate shouldn't say "I want to join this particular group, but I don't want to agree to the rules that all the other group members seem perfectly fine to abide by and accept".

I also find the LW's statement that "Therefore, the wives must clean and prepare" very old fashioned. To me she is assuming that the other other couple's households are managed just like her's is... wives cook and clean and husband's do "?"  I honestly don't know of very many households run this way anymore, no matter the age group. Even in my parent's generation (they'd be in their 80's) the men were more than capable to put a tray of cheese, cracker, and meet together and run a broom across the kitchen floor.

I disagree. The rule IS affecting her, regardless of whether it's the club organiser, or her husband, who is attempting to impose it on her.

And yes, it's arguable she could simply ignore the rule and stay in her house while the Men's Club meets. But that could result in ramifications for her husband (he could get chucked out of the club). The LW also mentioned that the club organiser has a lot of social clout in the retirement village. So ignoring the rule might also see the LW shunned socially.

No I'm not saying she should ignore the rule. That would be very rude in my opinion to the members of the group. I'm saying she can't request the rule be changed. And the rule only effects her because her husband joined the club. This is between her and her husband. Not her and the club organizer.

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

Tell her spouse who chose to join the club "this is unacceptable"   and/or as a member he has standing to say "I don't like this rule."

Blaming the organizer is blaming the wrong person.

[Tabby Uprising]

I disagree. The rule IS affecting her, regardless of whether it's the club organiser, or her husband, who is attempting to impose it on her.

And yes, it's arguable she could simply ignore the rule and stay in her house while the Men's Club meets. But that could result in ramifications for her husband (he could get chucked out of the club). The LW also mentioned that the club organiser has a lot of social clout in the retirement village. So ignoring the rule might also see the LW shunned socially.

No I'm not saying she should ignore the rule. That would be very rude in my opinion to the members of the group. I'm saying she can't request the rule be changed. And the rule only effects her because her husband joined the club. This is between her and her husband. Not her and the club organizer.

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

Trimmed things a bit.

What the LW is supposed to do is tell her husband she won't leave her home for these meetings.  She'll give her reasons why.  He'll give the reasons why he wants to be in the club and between the two of them they'll have to hash out a solution.  There's no need for them to address the club organizer about this. 

That's why I think it's a relationship issue.  No one is forcing the LW's husband to join the club.  It's a choice and if aspects of the club upset the wife then they must discuss that as a couple.  The LW needs to decide if this is a hill to die on for her.  The husband needs to decide if it's a hill for him.  There are certainly choices that include the LW sucking it up because it's important to her husband, her husband declining to join the club, or even the husband starting an alternative club without those rules. 

[gellchom]

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

As others have said, what she is supposed to do is to discuss with her husband her discomfort -- and I'm not saying it's unreasonable, even though I wouldn't find it more than a minor inconvenience -- that his membership in this club requires her to leave the house on the evenings he hosts.  Then they can decide whether (1) he will quit (2) she will accommodate or (3) he will ask if the rule can be changed.

But the problem is that her husband is doing something that bothers her, not that the club rules are rude or unfair to her.

Otherwise, it's like saying that no clubs may ever exist that have any rules or requirements that affect any non-members.

[lowspark]

I agree that this really is between the husband and wife. I get the feeling that the husband doesn't want to quit but the wife is pressuring him to and is looking for support from Dear Abby.

What the rule is (as has been pointed out by PPs) is not so much the issue. The issue is that it's a rule the wife doesn't like.

The rule happens to be that she has to leave the house. But it could be dues. Or that the men are going to meet at the bar and she doesn't want her husband drinking. Or that they're going to meet at XYZ restaurant and her husband won't go there when she wants to but here he is going for the club meeting. Etc.

The club has a rule. The husband is a member of the club.
He has three choices:
1. Get everyone in the club to agree to change the rule (if he either agrees that the rule is bad or just is trying to appease the wife)2. Abide by the rule (meaning he has to work this out with his wife)
3. Quit the club (which I think is exactly what the wife wants him to do)

Even if he attempts #1, if he's unsuccessful, he'll still be stuck with either #2 or #3.

What he (and the wife) cannot do (or should not do) is go against the rules by having her in the house during the meeting without #1 happening first.

[DavidH]

This whole issue is a variant on the Bunco thread.  In that case, the rule was that husbands couldn't be in the same room as the club.  Here the wives have to leave the house.  If the person in the club doesn't like the rule, for any reason including their wife doesn't like it, then they can suggest it be changed or leave the club. 

The club's rules aren't an etiquette issue in and of them-self.  I get that there are people for whom having to leave their house would be a major issue.  In that case their housemates shouldn't join a club with rules to that effect.  It doesn't make a club having that rule a bad thing or mean that no club should exist with those rules. 

[LifeOnPluto]

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

As others have said, what she is supposed to do is to discuss with her husband her discomfort -- and I'm not saying it's unreasonable, even though I wouldn't find it more than a minor inconvenience -- that his membership in this club requires her to leave the house on the evenings he hosts.  Then they can decide whether (1) he will quit (2) she will accommodate or (3) he will ask if the rule can be changed.

But the problem is that her husband is doing something that bothers her, not that the club rules are rude or unfair to her.

Otherwise, it's like saying that no clubs may ever exist that have any rules or requirements that affect any non-members.

I agree she should absolutely do this. But what the husband refuses? What if he tells her "Too bad, I like this club. The guys are coming over at 6pm. Make yourself scarce."

Is it still rude if she ignores the rule in this instance?

[KenveeB]

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

As others have said, what she is supposed to do is to discuss with her husband her discomfort -- and I'm not saying it's unreasonable, even though I wouldn't find it more than a minor inconvenience -- that his membership in this club requires her to leave the house on the evenings he hosts.  Then they can decide whether (1) he will quit (2) she will accommodate or (3) he will ask if the rule can be changed.

But the problem is that her husband is doing something that bothers her, not that the club rules are rude or unfair to her.

Otherwise, it's like saying that no clubs may ever exist that have any rules or requirements that affect any non-members.

I agree she should absolutely do this. But what the husband refuses? What if he tells her "Too bad, I like this club. The guys are coming over at 6pm. Make yourself scarce."

Is it still rude if she ignores the rule in this instance?

Yes. Her problem there is with her husband, and she needs to work it out with him. Turning the innocent club members into victims of their marital power struggle is rude.

[Tabby Uprising]

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

As others have said, what she is supposed to do is to discuss with her husband her discomfort -- and I'm not saying it's unreasonable, even though I wouldn't find it more than a minor inconvenience -- that his membership in this club requires her to leave the house on the evenings he hosts.  Then they can decide whether (1) he will quit (2) she will accommodate or (3) he will ask if the rule can be changed.

But the problem is that her husband is doing something that bothers her, not that the club rules are rude or unfair to her.

Otherwise, it's like saying that no clubs may ever exist that have any rules or requirements that affect any non-members.

I agree she should absolutely do this. But what the husband refuses? What if he tells her "Too bad, I like this club. The guys are coming over at 6pm. Make yourself scarce."

Is it still rude if she ignores the rule in this instance?

You know, I don't think she is.  I think her husband would be rude for knowingly hosting the group when he couldn't abide by the rules.  If he knows his wife doesn't want to leave the house, knows she won't leave the house, but hosts anyway then I think he is the one being rude to the group.

Now, if the wife is openly hostile while the group is there, she would be rude.  If she pushed into their conversation, yelled at her husband, stomped around, made passive aggressive remarks, etc. she'd be rude. 

[lowspark]

This whole issue is a variant on the Bunco thread.  In that case, the rule was that husbands couldn't be in the same room as the club.  Here the wives have to leave the house.  If the person in the club doesn't like the rule, for any reason including their wife doesn't like it, then they can suggest it be changed or leave the club. 

The club's rules aren't an etiquette issue in and of them-self.  I get that there are people for whom having to leave their house would be a major issue.  In that case their housemates shouldn't join a club with rules to that effect.  It doesn't make a club having that rule a bad thing or mean that no club should exist with those rules.

Exactly.

[lowspark]

So it's rude for her to ignore the rule, but also rude for her to ask that the rule be changed? So what exactly is the LW supposed to do? Suck it up and comply, even though she had no say in making it?

As others have said, what she is supposed to do is to discuss with her husband her discomfort -- and I'm not saying it's unreasonable, even though I wouldn't find it more than a minor inconvenience -- that his membership in this club requires her to leave the house on the evenings he hosts.  Then they can decide whether (1) he will quit (2) she will accommodate or (3) he will ask if the rule can be changed.

But the problem is that her husband is doing something that bothers her, not that the club rules are rude or unfair to her.

Otherwise, it's like saying that no clubs may ever exist that have any rules or requirements that affect any non-members.

I agree she should absolutely do this. But what the husband refuses? What if he tells her "Too bad, I like this club. The guys are coming over at 6pm. Make yourself scarce."

Is it still rude if she ignores the rule in this instance?

I think both of them are rude. In the case of the bunco situation, Amy (the member of the bunco club) was rude for having her husband there when she knew he wasn't supposed to be there. The husband was rude for hanging around when he also clearly knew he didn't belong.

Now, in the case of Amy, I kinda wondered if hubby had just decided that day to not clear out, or if she'd just told him that day and he'd said no. In other words, if it all sort of played out at the last minute and there she was with 11 women coming over and a husband who wouldn't budge.

But if she'd come home from her first bunco meeting, six months earlier, and said to hubby, when it's my turn to host you'll have to clear out and he'd said, "uh-uh, not gonna happen" then both of them were rude for going against the club's established norms.

And by the same token, in the case of the Dear Abby letter, both the husband and wife know the rules. It's up to them to work out if they can or cannot abide by them. If they cannot, then husband needs to let the club know. They can agree he doesn't have to host. Or they can agree that they'll make an exception when he does host. Or they can not agree to any of that and he'll need to drop out. But deliberately flouting the club's rules is rude, regardless of the reason.