Bridezillas0522-08 : She hates me bc I am rich...

[Twik]

If it were in e-Hell classics, the original phrase would be from the letter-writer, not the poster. The letters are, it appears, not heavily edited for content, so that one can see the tone of the original. There's no sense in calling out someone who is unlikely to be reading the discussion.

I can't recall anyone here using the phrase, at least not without being called to account by other posters. It's certainly a phrase that has no business in polite conversation. "Country bumpkin" is essentially the same idea, just dressed up in Sunday best, and is likewise a vulgar stereotype.

[Hushabye]

Here's an old one, Twik, where the OP specifically asks that people not use the terms "trailer trash" and "rednecks": http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=3200.0

[the Wyffe]

If it were in e-Hell classics, the original phrase would be from the letter-writer, not the poster.

No it wasn't.  It came directly from the person who re-posted the story on the board and added some comments of their own in a different colour.  The trailer lady could also tell the difference, because she complained about the comments of the poster, not the original story.  The poster then posted again and ignored her.

Not that it really affects the debate about country bumpkin, but it's an interesting contrast.  Country bumpkin here is more of a joke.

[BeagleMommy]

The country bumpkin statement made by the LW (whether to Suzanne's face or not) bothers me as well.  I've known many city raised people I would qualify as bumpkins because they are tactless, ill mannered oafs.

I think there was more than enough rudeness on the parts of both ladies.  DH tried once to get me to be best friends with the wife of one of his friends.  She and I went together like onions and chocolate ice cream.  I always made sure I was polite and cordial when in her company, but didn't go out of my way to be buddy-buddy.  I finally convinced him that he had his friends and I had mine.  We didn't have to like the partners of our friends.

[hyzenthlay]

Three months later, I got a telephone call from John. He told me he and Suzanne were upset that Suzanne and I had not become "best friends" and would I please email her to try and instigate a friendship.

I may be sheltered myself, but I don't know a single red blooded male that would make a phone call like this.

It is slightly odd for a male to call a female directly in a couple relationship, and it's very odd for a male to want to interfere in or manufacture this need to be best friends. And to tell the OP SHE should write instead of telling his fiance to take that step?

The poor gracious writer, after months of effort and gifts, beseeched one more time to heal the rift, only to have it flung back in her face  . . . yeah, I'm just not sure I buy it.

[the Wyffe]

Yeah, I think I'd politely tell John that if Suzanne felt like that, she knew where I was.

But sadly I do know some people who would act like John and Suzanne in this case.

[Hanna]

I'm trying to figure out how one can be "effortlessly trying".
I don't think the language or writing sounds like it comes from someone that is well-to-do or well-educated.

[magdalena]

Three months later, I got a telephone call from John. He told me he and Suzanne were upset that Suzanne and I had not become "best friends" and would I please email her to try and instigate a friendship.

I may be sheltered myself, but I don't know a single red blooded male that would make a phone call like this.

It is slightly odd for a male to call a female directly in a couple rel@tionship, and it's very odd for a male to want to interfere in or manufacture this need to be best friends. And to tell the OP SHE should write instead of telling his fiance to take that step?

I totally agree it's off for the male to intetfere in this way, but I don't see anything odd about the male calling the female directly. My best friend's husband (and my husband's best friend) actually just called me an hour ago - he knew I was home, he was bored and wanted to chat. For a while we even had a set "phone date" for my DH's card game night, we'd always talk for a while on that night. And no, there's nothing to worry about 

[pierrotlunaire0]

I'm trying to figure out how one can be "effortlessly trying".
I don't think the language or writing sounds like it comes from someone that is well-to-do or well-educated.

Good point.  But it sounds so "edumacated"!

[hyzenthlay]

It is slightly odd for a male to call a female directly in a couple rel@tionship.

I totally agree it's off for the male to intetfere in this way, but I don't see anything odd about the male calling the female directly.

Well that's why I said slightly. I don't personally know any guys that would be likely to do that, but if it was just that I wouldn't have really noticed either.

[magdalena]

hyzenthlay, sorry I missed the slightly when I first read it, with that, we totally agree

[Hanna]

I'm trying to figure out how one can be "effortlessly trying".
I don't think the language or writing sounds like it comes from someone that is well-to-do or well-educated.

Good point.  But it sounds so "edumacated"!

It does.  As does "due to Vincent and my friendship with John"
and
"There were also a list of false accusations."

It sounds like she is effortlessly trying to sound edumacated.

[loner]

It's getting a little ironic now that so many posts are assuming the LW is a stuck-up cow based on her letter, when we were all so cross about her assumptions on Suzanne after meeting her several times!

Suzanne sounds like an absolute cow as well!

I was thinking that myself.  Some of these assumptions and comments about the LW are absolutely astounding, particularly for an etiquette site.

I don't think most of the assumptions are wrong.  They could be a bad reflection on the person in general, but with the regard to this letter they seem spot on.  The LW put details in the story that were unnecessary  and simply showed how great she was: great at making friends, prep-school, prestigious university, affluent families, thinking the reason she and Susan didn't get along was because Susan felt 'inferior' to her, details about her wedding (a large, black tie wedding with a ceremony in an Episcopal cathedral), and thinking her gift to Susan was so much better than the gifts Susan received from her other friends and family that it would warrant a shower invite.  She also goes out of her way to insult Susan: calling her a country bumpkin and wanting "to suspect mental instability in order to explain her actions".  I'm not trying to say that Susan is not to blame for this, but the letter writer was a snob.

[Doll Fiend]

Whenever I read one of these that the LW puts so much effort to paint themselves to be so much better than the other person I find it extremely hard to believe what is written.

And it does not matter in what way the LW is "better" than the other. Money, class, etiquette, size, diet, . . . ect. I could go on.


I have a strong feeling that Susan did less than half the stuff that was written about her. Or even nothing at all and the LW was just trolling.

[Paper Roses]

What I find interesting is that the LW brags on and on about how rich she and her fiance are, and also the friend, and yet towards the end she starts complaining about how much Suzanne and John's wedding is going to cost her. 

And I can't imagine a friend of my husband's calling him to complain that his SO and I hadn't become "best friends," and if that ever DID happen, I can't imagine DH telling me to call her and "extend an olive branch."  If she really put that much effort, time and money into trying to befriend this "bumpkin," wouldn't "Vincent" know about it?