Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
On a side note, this is het privilege speaking, but I cannot imagine a sibling not inviting my boyfriend to his/her wedding as my guest. How ruthlessly cold.
If it ends up that the invitation isn't properly extended, BotB should not attend but a gift should be sent bearing only the name of BotB's man.
Maybe BOB lives in a state where he will marry his partner someday, whereupon he can invite whomever the hell he wants. Until then, he has no right to dictate the guest list.
I am straight, with a very homophobic mother. there is no way on earth I would consider her feelings and not invite same sex partners to my wedding. If she has an issue, she stays at home.
If BOTB brings his boyfriend, and his mom starts up some drama, who's fault is that? Mom's fault, of course. Mom should keep a civil tongue in her mouth for her daughter's wedding, even if she is a homophobic shrew and can't stand BOTB's boyfriend. If she is incapable of doing so, then Mom is the one that shouldn't be invited.
I'm 100% with Dan. Politely have a conversation with the sister now. Gently let her know that you both go, or neither of you go. You get all of me or none of me, not a fake me without my other half. If she can't deal with that, send her your regrets and don't go.
BOTB would only be at fault for any drama if he shows up with the boyfriend without telling sister ahead of time. She may have simply never thought of it much before. She may rightfully assume that BOTB won't bring the boyfriend. So he does at least owe her a phone call/email to clarify his intentions. Then she must decide where she stands.
A mother is demeaning her own son and expects his sister to go along with it. Blame her. Have her grow up.
A mother is demeaning her own son and expects his sister to go along with it. Blame her. Have her grow up.
My question is, does the wedding invitation say "BOTB and Guest"? If so, than his boyfriend is implicitly invited and it is no one's business whether or not he brings him. If the invitation is to BOTB only, then he should probably ask his sister before adding another guest to the guestlist.
Either way, if BOTB and his boyfriend both go, and someone starts drama, it is technically the fault of the dramatist. How the rest of the family will read the situation is anybody's guess.
Dan is right that whatever discussion is necessary should happen now, not close to the wedding.
My question is, does the wedding invitation say "BOTB and Guest"? If so, than his boyfriend is implicitly invited and it is no one's business whether or not he brings him. If the invitation is to BOTB only, then he should probably ask his sister before adding another guest to the guestlist.
Either way, if BOTB and his boyfriend both go, and someone starts drama, it is technically the fault of the dramatist. How the rest of the family will read the situation is anybody's guess.
Dan is right that whatever discussion is necessary should happen now, not close to the wedding.
And yes, family is what weddings are about, not merely the mother of the bride's intolerances or the bride's desire to control everyone under the excuse of "it's *her* day."
Families include that creepy cousin who probably has Asperger's, this hideous aunt, the flatulant grandfather who makes distasteful jokes, the uncle who got arrested for a DUI, and the teenage cousin going through a goth phase who shows up dressed like the spider queen. The bride doesn't exclude these "embarrassments" because of their potential for "drama."
BOTB should talk to his sister as civilly as possible before issuing the ultimatum, but yes, he needs to do it.
As a whole lot of feminists said in the 1970s, the personal *is* the political.
And in the long run, he may well only see his bigoted mother and spineless sister a few times a year, but he's going to want to continue a relationship with his boyfriend, who may not appreciate being sacrificed on the alter of "the bride's day" to appease a bigoted, blackmailing bully.
The boyfriend's name should be on the invitation envelope itself, not even as a +1.
Merry Christmas and Happy 2011!
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-s…
and...
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-s…
I also believe that Miss Manners has stated that a religious ceremony in a church is in a public place, and therefore no-one can be 'disinvited' from attending the wedding ceremony. I like, therefore, the suggestion that both BOTB and his partner attend the ceremony, smiling grimly, and not the reception. To be faultlessly correct, they should send the gift to the brides' parents' house before the wedding.
As a straight girl, I can't know exactly how BOTB's bf must feel about all of this....but if it were me, I would have zero interest in attending my boyfriend's sister's wedding after she had deliberately snubbed me like that. I'd support my BF if he still chose to go - it's his only sister, after all. But it's seriously rude of her not to invite him.
...and it *was* deliberate - make no mistake - unless there will only be a handful of people there, there's no way she wasn't making a Statement of her own when she chose not to extend a plus one to her own brother, and she apparently doesn't have a problem with offending his BF in the process. She should be ashamed of herself on HER DAY.
What does HER DAY mean, anyway? One day in your life when you're allowed to be a selfish, inconsiderate twit? I seriously doubt there would be a shouting match or people hurling canapes across the room at each other, just because her brother walks in with his BF. If she won't risk the possibility of even a little awkwardness, then she obviously isn't a very loving person. At least not where her brother is concerned.
To BOTB: It sounds like your sister is a real bitch. To intentionally not invite your long-term boyfriend is unbelievably rude. There is no way she'd have done that if you were dating a woman; just no way. This is either homophobia or it's cowardice, because she doesn't want to deal with your parents' issues. I don't know why you'd want a relationship with this woman, but if you do, then Dan was right, you have to call her on it. Otherwise, she and the rest of your family will assume that it's okay to treat you like this permanently. And no, you aren't the one making the drama--she is.
Power allowing, I hope to add Mama Savage's Snowballs to the celebratory baking for the crowd we're spending the big day with.
Merry Christmas Dan. Wishing you and yours a very merry holiday.
Another thing to consider is the "Golden Rule" (as in he who has the gold makes the rules). If mom is footing the bill for the ceremony, inviting her brother's SO may come with some serious consequences.
No, "+1" or "and guest" are tacky! They are much worse than tacky. Only tacky/trashy people invite someone to something as personal as a wedding when they don't even know their names and can't be bothered to find out. That means if you know cousin Ethel has a SO and you would like to include him/her you call to get their name (and address if it is different from cousin Ethel's) and you invite them by name. And this tacky new custom also makes some single people (especially women) feel like they need to find a date, preferably one with a suit and a lot a patience for boring events. It's a wedding, not a fucking prom! It's not a celebration for couplehood, except for the couple getting married. It's not Valentine's Day. You shouldn't need a date! You go, you see friends and family, you meet the new family, you dance the godawful electric slide with the old lady/geezer. And you get the hell out of there as soon as you can.
This is her wedding, and she can be a homophobic cunt if she wants to. It's not his place to dictate the guestlist, even if she is tacky enough to invite "+1"s for the straights but not him. If the brother doesn't like it, all he has to do is say he's busy or can't make it. If she is ashamed of him, she probably didn't even want him there and just invited him out of obligation. If she wants to know what he's busy with, he can say he had plans to spend the day with someone who loved him and wasn't ashamed of him, that being his significant other and not his blood relatives. And if she decides she wants him and the SO at HER wedding, he should make damn sure that Mom and everyone else will try to make the SO feel damn welcome because they may have already offended him.
And yes, homophobia is political! Don't you ever read or watch the news? But making a family power play with ultimatums about someone else's event is not just rude, it's pathetic. It's pathetic to make demands to be loved and respected by your own damn family. Tell them to fuck off. You're better off without them.
Drama sometimes happens at weddings no matter who is or isn't invited, and in truth, the bride and groom are usually too busy with the bustle day to notice it. Who knows, BOBT could bring his boyfriend, and a fight between some straight family members could break out!
I wonder if mom offered to address all the invites (as my own mother offered) and thus used that as a way to prevent boyfriend from coming. Maybe sister had thought boyfriend was on the guest list all along but mom sabotaged it?
If he talks to her, and she tries to deny boyfriend's attendance, I agree with Dan. It's either both of them or neither. BOBT doesn't have a problem, the asshats in his family who cannot accept his loving relationship with another human being have the problem.
If the sister doesn't want drama at her wedding, she should choose the courthouse. Thats the only way to 99% guarantee no drama at her wedding.
Shortly after my mom died, I lost my pitt/mastiff I'd raised from 8 weeks old. He had just turned 10. Losing him was every bit as hard as losing my mom. As I said to my friends, "My mom never slept with me. But then, my dog never gave me any money".
Try to not talk about dogs for the next few months, okay?
Merry Ho Ho Everyone!
Unfortunately, we/they may never know because I still agree with Dan's advice. Don't say anything. (At least until you get a second "clue".)
Cheers!
That said, sis really should have invited BOTB's boyfriend. He needs to have a clear conversation with her saying that he really wants to be there in love and support on this major milestone in his only siblings life, but that he would also like to bring his BF. He needs to find out exactly why he wasn't invited. Just bringing the BF will cause nothing but trouble and make him the bad guy.
Did their parents threaten to not come to the wedding if he attends with his BF? If this is the case, maybe sis just wanted so badly for her all three of her direct relatives to be there that she capitulated. It is horrible to not have your parents attend your wedding. It would put her in a horrible position to make her choose between her brother and her parents, I know some of the readers support this position, but it's not as easy as that. A daughter can love her bigoted parents, who she can't change, and her gay brother equally. Some would say that this is the time for her to make a stand, but when it comes down to it, all she may really want is her family to be there.
Did they threaten to not pay for it if they did not have control of the guest list? This is a horrible thing that some parents do.
Is she worried that her parents will go to the wedding but be so immature as to act all pissy or otherwise crate an uncomfortable environment at her wedding that she thought it best to avoid the situation all together by not inviting his boyfriend?
Or is the issue truly with her, that she is uncomfortable seeing her brother with his boyfriend.
If it's one of the first two reasons, he may want to think about going at least to the ceremony as she clearly wants him there, but is caught in the precarious position of trying to make everyone happy and doing the best she can due to the circumstances to see that she can get everyone that's important to her to be there. She should of, however, given her brother a heads up about these circumstances before the invites went out. If it's the third reason, tell her that there is no such thing as a drama-free wedding and tell her parents to suck it up and please for the sake of her and the groom to behave like adults, as their son is bringing his boyfriend or he won't come, if she really wants him there. If it's the latter reason, fuck her, don't go.
That said, sis really should have invited BOTB's boyfriend. He needs to have a clear conversation with her saying that he really wants to be there in love and support on this major milestone in his only siblings life, but that he would also like to bring his BF. He needs to find out exactly why he wasn't invited. Just bringing the BF will cause nothing but trouble and make him the bad guy.
Did their parents threaten to not come to the wedding if he attends with his BF? If this is the case, maybe sis just wanted so badly for her all three of her direct relatives to be there that she capitulated. It is horrible to not have your parents attend your wedding. It would put her in a horrible position to make her choose between her brother and her parents, I know some of the readers support this position, but it's not as easy as that. A daughter can love her bigoted parents, who she can't change, and her gay brother equally. Some would say that this is the time for her to make a stand, but when it comes down to it, all she may really want is her family to be there.
Did they threaten to not pay for it if they did not have control of the guest list? This is a horrible thing that some parents do.
Is she worried that her parents will go to the wedding but be so immature as to act all pissy or otherwise crate an uncomfortable environment at her wedding that she thought it best to avoid the situation all together by not inviting his boyfriend?
Or is the issue truly with her, that she is uncomfortable seeing her brother with his boyfriend.
If it's one of the first two reasons, he may want to think about going at least to the ceremony as she clearly wants him there, but is caught in the precarious position of trying to make everyone happy and doing the best she can due to the circumstances to see that she can get everyone that's important to her to be there. She should of, however, given her brother a heads up about these circumstances before the invites went out. If it's the third reason, tell her that there is no such thing as a drama-free wedding and tell her parents to suck it up and please for the sake of her and the groom to behave like adults, as their son is bringing his boyfriend or he won't come, if she really wants him there. If it's the latter reason, fuck her, don't go.
It's similar to the "problem" of gays in the military---the actual problem is heteros in the military beating up gays in the military. Maybe if sis didn't pander to the irrational fears of the raging homophobes in her family, this wouldn't be an issue at all.
Woman a few days ago: I don't want to invite an ex-fiance to a party, mainly because when I dumped him, he moved on with life too quickly, and I had to watch. That is, no good reason.
Advice: It's your party and invite whoever you want for whatever reason you want. Guuuuurl Power!
Gay Man Today: My gay lover of two years is not invited to a family wedding.
Advice: Fuck those fucking assholes and their fucking assholery!! You call up your sister and MAKE her invite who YOU want to THEIR party. Did I mention to fuck those fucking assholes!?!?!?! Gay people get to go where they want when they want! (/Imitating Mel Gibson in "Braveheart" now) STONEWAAAAAAALLLLLLLL!
I can also say that when my dad died, and I first told friends, they said, and I quote "I'm sorry... I think?" Before, during and after his funeral, relatives said "don't you dare feel bad about leaving." (except my crazy religious aunt who doesn't believe in mental illness and thought I should apologize, and even she's realized how much better off we all are without him). During the wake, my sane and cool aunt remarked that she didn't so much remember him "touching" many lives as "impacting" with whatever object suited his fancy.
Be happy for your mom. Maybe this affair will even make her grow a pair and get out, particularly if the two of you are grown. I know Dan says that you shouldn't reveal that you know, but if it were me? I'd have told my mom that I know when it was the right time and said "you know mom, I know dad's a piece of shit, and we're both grown. You did a good job, and if you want out of this marriage, we'll understand." Not sure what physical ailments you're talking about (my dad was truly and honestly morbidly obese-like physically impaired), but they gots social services for those kind of things, up to and including going into a nursing home, so it isn't like he's going to starve to death or whatever. Only people who have been decent human beings deserve the kind of hand and foot care that I suspect your father has been getting (and is probably why he is so abusive-need to control people to ensure he gets the care he wants).
Tell your mother that if she leaves him, you'll be fine.
I am sooo tired of people comparing sexual orientation to race! It is simply not the same situation! A person who is Black, Mexican or Asian, Can NEVER be anything but that. There is typically no way to hide you Blackness if you are African American and your eyes if you are Asian. Being in the "closet" is not really an option when it comes to race, but you can hide Homosexuality at a whelm.
This is not to say that I have anything against anyone for their race or sexual orientation, I think people should be able to love or fuck whomever they choose, as long as its within the law. I just hate that comparison; I think its lame...
Oh yeah, MOM is an intrusive douche bag, and BOTB should just talk to his sister, ask her why she failed to invite his BF to her wedding. If she doesn't like his BF because he was a douche, then respect that and leave him at home. If she doesn't like him because he's fucking her brother, and she think that's her business, don't go to the wedding. If BOTB'S BF NOT being at the wedding is more important than BOTB being at the wedding, then BOTB should take his BF to the movies on that day.
I'd love for you to help us celebrate our special day!
Love,
Sis
P.S. Bring your closet.
You may BE ABLE to hide being gay oh a whim (not a whelm), but you shouldn't HAVE to; culture should be such that you shouldn't WANT to, so it's NBD.
The only real "fact" we know is that MOM is cheating on her husband. We have one person's perspective on the relationship so we really know very little to judge that relationship.
Maybe Dad is a POS. Maybe he failed to satisfy his wife? Maybe she failed to satisfy him? We don't really know anything. As Dan points out, it sounds like he may have had good reason to call her a cheating @#!*% !
So Dan's standard advice (MYOB) is sound even though he assumes the perspective of the letter writer.
But the letter from the gay guy was a call for help- not a call for some dramatic @#!*% political action game.
It is the SISTER's wedding. I would have told the butt muncher he can make a political statement at his own wedding (commitment ceremony or whatever). He should call Sis and tell him his problem. He should even tell her, as Dan advises, that he can't go to an event like that without his lover. BUT if the sister doesn't want the drama he should wish her the best AND if he must protest for political reasons then he should send a nice and personal wedding present.
You may not remember your best friend growing up or even your first blowjob- but you will ALWAYS remember who supported you at your wedding. This is not about gay rights, it is about love for a sister.
I would think the least you can do is to show up for the wedding itself, exchange hugs, and leave gracefully before the reception.
The advice reminds me of some of the radical feminists screaming they will never put a dick inside them as a protest against rape. Nobody- well almost nobody- supports rape and few support outright discrimination against gays. But the place for protest is on the street and the ballot box, not in bed with your husband- or your sister's wedding.
Advice from a sex advice columnist who happens to be gay can be great if his advice is as good as Dans- but snowballs from a gay guy? No thanks! LMFAO.
Oh for fuck's sake.
The brother doesn't want to "protest". He doesn't want to make a political statement. He's not planning to show up at the wedding in leather chaps and a harness, waving a rainbow flag and chanting "We're here, we're queer!" All he wants is to attend his sister's wedding with the person he loves. Just like everybody else.
Denying him the right to do so is the protest and the political statement - one opposed to equality.
Parents sacrifice resources (material, psychological, etc) in order to provide an environment for their children to develop, prosper, and potentially, for those offspring having developed, to have the opportunity to provide the same for their own children, one day.
Families should accept the dying nature of the role they play.
I would never choose family over my mate. The fact that a family would dare pose such an ultimatum to its scions speaks of the toxic ways that families insinuate themselves, even today, in things far beyond their right to moderate.
I agree that no one should HAVE to hide their sexuality, race, or religion. But some people would if it was possible, just to be accepted. What I'm saying is, Homosexuals have that option, while certain ethnicities don't. I think that the comparison is weak and lame. It comes off like you're saying "They get to be black and Mexican, so why can't I be gay?" I just don't like it, is all I'm saying. To each his own....
This is why I never went through the elaborate ceremony. All the posters defending sister and HER DAY. I say Fuck That!
Instead of a chance for *family* to get together to join two people and two families, American weddings have become an ever-expanding, expensive, stress-filled, politically charged, bride-centric drama.
They do nothing positive for couple relationships, marriages, or family dynamics.
Women [and I am one, BTW] who look upon this as their one chance at a star turn need to get real. I don't think I've met a woman yet who didn't look back on their elaborate wedding and wished they'd saved the money.
Wedding occasions (if you have to have one) need to go back to being simpler, cheaper, and less formal, focussed on something enjoyable and welcoming for all participants - especially all immediate family members, gay or straight.
Life is about *people*, People, not circus exhibitions.
Sounds like pfefferneusse, which would be a spice-cookie version of this or Russian Teacakes.
MoM>>Quit snooping and go to your room! You're grounded, just like that time for being in mom and dad's bedroom where you were told not to go!
BOTB---Anyone ever watch "Bridezillas"? Oh, those bitches think it IS 'all about them'. If so, then why do the rest of those people, including the groom, have to be there?
There's a rarely discussed, or rarely fully explored, element of fucked up families and it has to do with the 'good' person in the relationship if one exists. Finn (139) gets the closest to hitting this nail on the head when they say "They felt like their mom should have left much earlier, which would have helped their emotional development and well-being. Just because she "stayed for the children" doesn't mean their life was warm and fuzzy. They weren't protected by her."
I can't tell you how complicated the emotions can get in sorting out what's really going on and 'who's to blame' and 'what is good', 'who is good', 'who can I trust' and a million other things when one person in the relationship seems to basically be good and intelligent enough to know that they should leave... and they don't and they fail in that key area - child protection.
The big question victims have for any spouse who doesn't remove themselves and their children from a damaged and damaging partner is "Why didn't you get us away from that monster as soon as you could?" and I have noticed that the amount of rage and anger can be even stronger when it comes to the partner that you feel "should have known better" or "should have gotten away sooner."
The confusion and moral/ethical twists and turns I hear coming through loud and clear in MOM's letter, which are not explicitly stated are:
- If she can see herself clear to get a boyfriend, why can't she see herself clear to get herself and us away from this fucked up situation?
- She seems to have found away to get a little relief from this situation, and I should be happy for her, but what about us? Not only do we still have to live with this person unless we're willing to run away but we have no relief from them. Not only do we have no relief from their attacks, but one of us has repeatedly defended this person from their attacks. Each time we do this it chips away at our souls a little more each day and now we're seriously questioning why we defended this person and if this person knew the attacks were justified, why didn't she protect us from them somehow too? Why didn't she defend herself? Why didn't she insist that we not defend her? Why didn't she admit and deal with the fall out? Why doesn't she just get out? Are we just cannon fodder and buffers for her too? Are we just pawns of both of these people? Is she just as fucked and evil as him but in a more socially acceptable package?
You see what I'm saying here? This is not some straightforward letter. While I agree with Dan's advice, some of the other commenters go even further. MOM, and hopefully the brother as well, should tell mom she should get a divorce and that she has their support. If she continues to refuse and the situation remains the same, they should get out themselves. No good can come from this.
"Your mother seems to have been betrayed by her entire family, including the children she stayed with (in the words of one of them) "an abusive asshole and borderline psycho" in order to protect.
Nocutename (12)"
The attitude stated above is the one that breeds and fosters and justifies these sorts of situations and I still can't believe that it still exists today.
You do not protect yourself, your children, your extended family, your sanity, your self respect, nothing by staying with a borderline psycho. People who do are typically enablers, masochists or too broken down after years of abuse to act. The children end up parenting themselves and their own parents in the process.
Instead of her defending and protecting him, he has to defend and protect her. Who's the mother here and who's the child? Do MOM's snooping actions (typically a sticky situation parents get into with with their teens rather than the other way around) and the condescending tones many noticed in MOM's email make more sense now? Does the acronym MOM seem apt now? It seems to me that MOM and the brother are the de facto parents - without the power, status, community recognition and earning potential that comes with it - and the 'parents' are their messed up teenagers, with all the respect, deference, allowances for 'the way they were raised', financial control etc. that isn't due to them given their inabilities to handle family responsibilities.
By staying in such a situation as a spouse, you expose yourself and your children to exponentially greater danger both physically, mentally and emotionally. If you can't get away immediately, make a plan and enact it so that at some point, you can escape and take your kids with you. If their mother won't get out, then the kids need to as soon as possible.
And at this point, she really ought to leave him. Seriously, if her kids are old enough to be writing to Dan Savage, they are old enough to deal with divorced parents. And I hardly think a culture that would frown on divorce would not frown on adultery. It's fine to be sympathetic to MOM's mom, but she is being at least somewhat cowardly.
Yes, the sister has a right not to have drama at her wedding, but the solution is give mother an ultimatum, not her brother. Ultimatum to parents: I love my brother and respect the man he's chosen to love. If you can't respect both of our choices in life partners, please don't come. You're only as welcome as you are tolerant.
Feeling that you have no choice but to stay in an unhappy, unhealthy situation while grasping what happiness you can on the sly is one of those dead ends that people in enabling, co dependent relationships fall into. Sometimes, it might be true, but mostly there are many other, better, choices available.
I'm not saying that an affair is necessarily the wrong move. I've seen some people use what they get from an affair to start the process of detaching from the unhealthy patterns in their marriages. More often, though, it's just more of the same pain, guilt, anger roller coaster, now with a bigger cast.
If the LW were sitting here in front of me, what I'd be saying is:
Don't want to hear about your parents and brother - what about you? Which of your own actions in this situation have been helping to promote your own personal serenity?
Keep the focus on yourself. Keep your side of the street clean.
Think about what you hope to accomplish by the various courses of action open to you, and then look at the realistic likelihood of them happening. Keep this reality based - hope is not a strategy.
Are you pursuing your own goals, separate from those of your family?
Pick up some literature instead of internet stalking. You might learn something.
LW could see that his choices are not limited to "Accept his mother" or "Reject his mother", but that he has others. "Let go of his illusion of control over his mother" would be one, where he just doesn't make a judgement, and assumes that his parents are adults well able to carry out their marriage without his involvement.
Likewise, mother could stop seeing her marriage as something she has to "fight back" in. Leaving is one possibility, another would be healing the marriage. Has she considered these choices, and settled on sexual satisfaction outside of the marriage and some reasonable emotional accommodation within? Possibly, but more likely she is just thrashing around - as others have pointed out, leaving the evidence around to be easily discovered is not an indication of a well thought out reasoned plan of action.
People in dysfunctional families often have the notion that nothing can get better because everyone else has to change in order for change to happen. They ignore the fact that when *they* change, (the only change they actually have any power over), change happens. It's not necessary for everyone to become emotionally healthy simultaneously for emotional health to creep into a family. Better choices by one family member can shift the dynamic, and start to allow clarity. The way you can tell if the choices made are actually better, is by their effect - it's not that a good choice necessarily makes things better for everyone, but that a good choice will create more space, will give others different options. A good analogy would be unpicking a knot - you know you are moving in the right direction when things as a whole start to loosen up.
If Mom is footing the bill then I guarantee you the Bride has absolutely no final say on the guest list, SO, plus one or anyone else for that matter.
I've been in a similar situation as the boyfriend. My partner's mother never wanted to meet me. After 3yrs of us living together she would call the house and politely ask to speak with him as though I was the maid answering the phone. When speaking with him she would refer to me as his "roommate" and not acknowledge we were actually a couple. All of his siblings met me and had invited me to their houses for dinners, thanksgiving, christmas, birthday's, etc. Except for when the Mother was around (she lives in a different city), I didn't exist and nobody was prepared to rock the boat on the issue for a long time. Many family events happened where not only was I not included but events with an ambiguous guest list my partner was told specifically that I was not welcome. Secretly I was happy to not attend because they are a bunch of assholes but I would go and make nice because that is what you do to be harmonious. It's his family and so left it up to my partner to deal with. He worked at it with his Mom, and so did his siblings eventually, to no avail. So my partner started to just decline invitations if we both were not included. Mom would piss and moan at these gatherings that my partner wasn't there so it wasn't the "whole" family. She never got it through her head that the "whole" family included me as far as everyone else was concerned except her. What happened to turn her around was the unexpected and gruesome death of one of his siblings. While the family was grieving together, all the siblings with their spouses, my partner was alone. Grieving alone without the one person who could comfort him the most and she was the one twisting the knife so the light seemed to finally go on. She also began to realize how much of my partner's life she was missing out on. It took close to a year after that for her to actually come to our house, but it happened.
Mom may never be ready to accept your gayness or your partner. You cannot force acceptance on her either, she needs to have her own eureka moment. You shouldn't be treated like a second class citizen especially in your own family but be careful not to destroy the relationship with your sister over Mom's issues. Let your feelings be known to your sister. If Mom is controlling the finances for the wedding then take the high road, show up to the Church, play dutiful son and brother then bail before the reception.
An alternate possibility that no one seems to have considered is that for cultural and/or religious reasons (as stupid as they may seem to most readers, even today they do exist some people) the dad has been trapped in a marriage with someone he despises. Or perhaps he just can't bear the shame and public humiliation that would ensue from having to explain the reasons for a divorce. Assuming they aren't already known by the adults of the extended family. Even adult children are often kept ignorant of a family's dirty secrets (forever or until one or more of the principals has died/the information really doesn't do the children much good at that point since they can't talk to their parents about it after their death or they only get a one sided story). That is a plausible explanation about how and why the dad has the physical and emotional wreck that he has been described as by the LW. The children may also want to take steps to validate their parentage, if they have little physical resemblance to the father and his side of the family. (What that implies does happen in about 10% of all live births, although I would suspect the dad would have made that accusation if were likely, but then actions do speak louder than words and the LW doesn't really say how the dad behaved towards the children, I would suspect quite horribly)
As to the issue of snooping by the LW. It was LW's fucking computer and the mom made the LW complicit in her cheating by using it, particularly since did not take the simplest of precautions to avoid discovery (logging off, erasing her browsing history, deleting cookies and temporary files). Did she want to be caught or doesn't really care about her children?
People (mothers in particular for their children) are often not what they appear to be ( a great big duh).
Painfully, what so many people in this culture fail to understand is that once you involve other people in an event, that event cannot be all about you. If the sister invites her family to her wedding, then the day is going to be at least partially about her family. If she doesn't want to deal with her family, if she really wants it to be all about her, then she needs to elope. You do not get to use other people as props. BOTB is not a prop. He is a human being with wants, needs, and feelings. Saying that he should paint over a vital part of himself so as to be a more appealing prop is appalling. This woman invited her brother, not a servant. If she wants her brother there, then she needs to accept him as he is. If she wants someone else there (someone not gay), then she should go hire someone.
In my opinion the sister has every right to respect her parents' wishes (even if they are short-sighted). They raised her, and who knows, they could be amazing and kind role models who happen to not have been exposed to homosexuality.
The wedding is not the time to make them uncomfortable and bothered. Also, it could be a very small wedding and each plate is pretty expensive. If she doesn't know this "boyfriend", why should he be invited? He's not family.
As far as the rules of etiquette go, established couples are usually invited together. Married or engaged couples MUST be invited together. Since in the present state of affairs, gay couples often cannot be engaged or married even if they want to be, it would seem incumbent on the part of people who profess to care for them to give *more* leeway than usual, rather than less. Not inviting the boyfriend is not only cowardly and bigoted, it's rude.
I've also witnessed up close and personal the devastating impact that mental illness, severe injury, great tragedy, and the actions of others have had on what were once loving, caring people. So I repeat, what changed the dad?
Well, I have to say I don't see being cheated on as a "great tragedy." If the dad perceived it as such he might have been better off just ending the relationship, rather than acting like an asshole to everyone in his life, including his wife.
People who behave like the dad (an antisocial psycho) can’t form the attachments necessary to have a relationship, much less induce someone to marry them. So I repeat, what changed the dad?
Christ, you are naive. Antisocial psychos get married all the time.
Quelle surprise.
There are times the Savage Love crew is no better than a Womyn's Studies Reading Group. This is one of them.
My sister felt paralyzed and didn't do the right thing, or make a decision at all. So I did the right thing. I advised my sister and my father that if he truly felt that way, I wouldn't attend the wedding, because the only way I would go celebrate their marriage was with the man I married. And so we didn't go.
Sadly, I missed watching my sister walk too close to the candles on the stairway, accidently light her Vera Wang veil on fire, and have to yank it off and stomp it out with her high heels. Oh, and marry the guy she loves too. But she understood.
It took my father another 19 months to realize what an asshole he had been and how we was missing out on a relationship with his son and great son-in-law. But, unlike some homophobic parents, he did realize it. Here's hoping BTOB's fmaily steps up to the plate at some point. But unless and until they respect his family (and a 2 year bf is family) he should abstain from respecting theirs, as a matter of self-respect.
@ 183
Oh, look, Savage Love readers are defaulting to assuming a woman is blameless for her romantic foibles, and that her actions are justified according to *some* moral code--one never really identified, I note--while the man involved is assumed to be a domineering asshole.
He's not *assumed* to be a domineering asshole - the letter writer said he was one. And letter writer's letter is all we have to go on.
/eyeroll
A boyfriend of two years is an established relationship that *should* be invited to a wedding. A boyfriend of a few months... not necessarily, whether it's a straight or gay relationship (although most people aren't so tight with the guest list that they'd not allow a sibling to bring even a new SO if they want to)
I agree with Dan's advice most definitely, but it's hard to say from the letter as-is whether the sister left off the +1 as a stance against BOTB's orientation or as an oversight of not knowing he was with someone or as a, you've only been dating a few months, it's not technically an "established" relationship that requires an invite. If it's a long term thing, he should bring it up either way. If it's a new relationship... just know that conversation is probably going to get murky. :/
I think #155 and #164 make good points. I think that really dysfunctional situations often have a 'villain' and a 'saint' but these roles can be very deceptive. For example, sometimes a family martyr sacrifices not only him/herself but also their children.
However, by snooping and being overly-involved in the family drama, MOM and his brother are being part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The best advice for MOM and the brother is simply "Get a Life." They should worry about their own romances, not their parents', especially since it sounds like they're old enough to be doing their own thing. They aren't obligated to defend their mother any more -- let her defend herself -- but should instead look at protecting their lives and their spouses/children from any potential abuse or idiotic drama.
Clearly you need to have a serious talk with your family but choose a different event, christmas, new years, kwanza, whatever, or...try this...just talk to them without a holiday or a family event as the catalyst...imagine that.
Stay out of your sister's day, if you don't want to go because your sister didn't invite your bf, don't go, because that really makes sense..."oh my sister didn't invite my bf so i'm not going to go"...that doesn't sound at all like an whining asshole does it.
Using the wedding as a platform to have a big kumbaya about YOU is beyond lame, apparently he's been waiting for this opportunity his entire life, thank god his sister is getting married or he would never be able to talk about his boyfriend!
Dan...you're usually on point but this time you got it wrong.
How could these not be great?
even if they are cheating ON pieces of shit.
some stories don't have any good guys.
If the dad suffers from mental illness then the children need to see that he gets the help he needs. Something that should have been long ago. (the operative word is if)
The children need to talk to their relatives (both sides) and their parents' friends (I know the dad probably doesn't have any, but who knows maybe he does) to find out if their dad was always an antisocial psycho. If yes, the mom had every right to find what happiness she could. What isn't justifiable or excusable is her failure in her responsibilities towards her children. She was an adult and chose to stay, they weren't and had no say about staying until they were adults. They depended on her to protect them and keep them safe, she failed them. No children should suffer being raised in an abusive, dysfunctional environment. (I know many are, but that still doesn't make it right) That they were is a justifiable condemnation of the mom (particularly if she found her own safe haven)
If no, then they need straight answers about what changed their dad. Neither of their parents can be considered reliable source of information at this point. Although they now have to question their long held belief that their dad's accusations were baseless. (The LW does not say whether their mom ever denied the accusations)
One of Dan's favorite sayings is once a CPOS always a CPOS
Don't get me wrong... i believe the bride-to-be has fallen into a black hole and isn't seeing properly. Hell, she is blind, if she hasn't adjusted to the fact that her brother is gay. BOB could ask sis if she intended him to fly solo during her wedding, but he must be willing to accept her answer, whatever it may be. Perhaps it was an oversight, however, i doubt it, since BOB states right upfront that his family does not support his sexual orientation.
When you are not accepted by your own family, BOB, it is time to cut loose and live your life on your own. You can choose your friends, but you cannot choose your family, and if they don't support you, then why keep bashing your head against that brick wall?
No matter, the rest of my #197 post stands, after BOB enquires as to whether there was a mistake made in not including BOB's partner.
BOB doesn't say how long he and his partner have been together, however, that is a moot point. I put myself in the B&G's shoes, and if it were me, i wouldn't want my brother - no matter what his sexual orientation - to go it alone on such a momentous day. These negatives are the things people remember through the years, and are the hardest to forgive.
Weddings are expensive and sentimental, and for those reasons people like to keep weddings small. They want to invite people they know well, and people likely to be around in future years. Maybe nobody's "date" is invited. Just relatives and close friends of the couple
Furthermore, this guy is only 28. Who is in a serious relationship at age 28? And he doesn't say my "partner" or "fiance" or "husband." It's just his current bf. He should count himself lucky to not have to forevermore look at the photos of that guy whose name he might not remember 10 years from now.
Also, why would you want to stress out and dramatize your sister before/at/during her wedding? Who says your sister's wedding has to be the designated Fight-a-Feud day? Some half-drunk advice columnist? If my brother gave me an ultimatum for my own wedding day, I'd think he was a jerk and I'd probably uninvite him. Then I'd cry. (My brother would never do that, though.)
Last, there is this quaint notion that people get to invite whomever they want to their own weddings. Guests don't dictate the guest list. You're a guest, act like one.
Homophobia is never okay, even for megalomaniacal brides on "their" day.
Also, the fact that gay folks can't get married in most states deserves at least a little sensitivity from our straight counterparts.
Ten years is kind of a long time.
@201 I totally agree with you. Plus I really hate the "MY WEDDING DAY" Bridezilla. Weddings are about two people pledging their love and trust in each other. Now, graduating from college, THAT day is all about you.
____________________________________________________
154 was the short remark about Uncle Ulser wishing that Dan Savage would run for President. I think you really mean Been There's long and insightful post at 155 saying he believes that MOM and his brother are really angry at their mother not for sleeping with another man, but for not leaving their father and rescuing them from an abusive psycho.
Since you apparently believe that any woman who cheats on her husband must be in the wrong, you refuse to pay any attention to what MOM wrote. MOM made it very clear that their father has always been an antisocial psycho. The fact that he married MOM's mother is NOT proof that this was not always the case. Marital fidelity isn't always easy to maintain in good marriages, and this clearly isn't a good marriage. I think the mother doesn't need to be reprimanded for cheating on her husband but rather---if "Been There" at 155 is right---for failing to protect her children by taking them and herself away from him sooner.
Also, for you and every other person who thinks there is never any legitimate excuse for cheating, please read "Sex At Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality" by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá.
You know what I hate about as much as homophobes who use words like "faggot" to my face? The many, many people who will tell me they have no problem with gay people, and have gay friends.... but please don't bring a date to my wedding.... but I don't believe in gay marriage.... but I don't like it when you talk about your boyfriend at work... Fuck you! With friends like that, I'll take my chances with the Christian right!
Basically, I think it's the sister's day, so just take a step back. If the BF isn't invited and should have been, then don't go-- but not in a huffy, "If HE can't come, I can't come!" way. Just privately and quietly explain, "I'm so sorry that I won't be able to attend, but I don't feel like it would be fair to John for me to go alone."
HeatherWasHere, BOTB makes it perfectly clear that it does not matter whether he had just met his new boyfriend, or if the two of them were in a committed relationship for decades---NO homosexual lover of the brother was going to welcome at his sister's wedding, although spouses and heterosexual lovers of other guests were. Dan Savage was right---just because BOTB's sister is getting married is no reason to tolerate her homophobia because it's "her day." Incidentally, my first cousin happens to be a lesbian, and my family has welcomed her as well as her wife into our home.