Issues trying to get future son-in-law to come on vacations

[MamaBelle4]

Maybe OP should ask fiancé where he’s always wanted to go and plan a trip there. Honestly I wasn’t even basing this on a trip to any certain place, but more of what sounds like fiance’s generally negative attitude.

The future SIL has said (according to OP), he can't afford a trip right now and doesn't accept handouts. Providing for yourself and having pride and fiscal responsibility is not a negative attitude.

We’re talking about (free) vacations here though. She’s not asking him to convert to a different religion or go out and buy a Ferrari he can’t afford. Like I said before it just seems like some huge personality differences. I will say that I think his feelings on money sound like a red flag but everyone has their own opinions there.

He doesn't want to accept such a generous offer. It makes him uncomfortable. Surely he isn't required to completely disregard his feelings.

And, I fail to see how wanting to pay for things with your own hard earned dime could possibly be a red flag. He doesn't have a problem with the finance going.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I certainly wasn't equating a trip to the Ozarks to Disney, or any other trip for that matter. My point is that for many families, some of their fondest memories are made on vacations they take together. Whether its because they are experiencing new things together, spending time together in a place where they know no one else, have no interruptions with school/work, etc., or whether its because its just quality time together. Just as you describe on your Ozark trips. I would guess this is how the OP feels and why its important to her, and she probably feels her SIL is missing out - as is the rest of the family - when he doesn't join them. I agree that the OP needs to respect that at this point after several declined offers, but it doesn't diminish or negate the void OP and family will feel as he continues to not participate in something important to them.

It's a bit funny that you missed my entire point. You thought..that my memories were because it was a trip?

TBH you missed my point. It was because that's where my grandparents lived. When they moved up just outside of our metro we stopped going to the Lake. It wasn't until years later after I had met my husband (then boyfriend) that I even went back.

While we didn't swim nor fish anymore after they moved we still played Farkle with them, we still created memories..memories I have still because my grandfather has passed and at the age of nearly 85 my grandmother isn't presently in the best frame of mind.

But sure..it was because of going to the Lake..

 

[cabanafrau]

No I don’t think that. We’re talking about (free) vacations here though. She’s not asking him to covert to a different religion or go out and buy a Ferrari he can’t afford. Like I said before it just seems like some huge personality differences. I will say that I think his feelings on money sound like a red flag but everyone has their own opinions there.
There have been a lot of things I’ve tried and places I’ve visited and experiences I’ve had because of people in my life. If I had chosen to stay in my comfort zone and never take chances on anything I would have missed out on a lot.

All of it goes both ways IMO. Personally I'm skeptical on the basis of three vacation invitations alone in the time where this couple is dating or engaged. I wonder if one of them had been accepted what the pressure to accept the other two would have been like?

Disney trips and Hawaii would be much more my preference over camping and fishing, by a longshot. I wonder if Disney and/or Hawaii are as unappealing in their own right to this future SIL as camping and fishing are to me? I've done more than enough camping and tried fishing. I frankly don't care who needs me to do those things to speak their love language, I do not intend to do either one again in my lifetime as they would make me miserable.

I think vacations can be great bonding experiences. I also think vacations and travel can bring a lot of potential pressure -- even among people who already know each other well and have great relationships. I can also look back and appreciate that many, many of my fondest memories with different people happened on fairly ordinary days -- the time a group of us had a completely bonkers waiter while out to dinner, a BBQ where a legendary bocce match went down, etc. Why isn't that a sufficient start at this point for OP?

Frankly it sounds like OP is attempting desperately to plant a flag, mark out territory to indicate that this SIL needs to fall in line and start marching how and where it's always been done in OP's family. How much space or consideration is being given to the fact that what is happening is a branch on that family's tree is growing out in a new direction? It will be part of the same tree, but it can't really grow if it doesn't have space, light and air to do so.

 

[nkereina]

I suppose if you were invited to use your limited vacation time to go on a camping and fishing trip by family to be a part of their lives, meaning skipping the Disney trip you enjoy for a wilderness adventure that you don't -- you're going to go. Politely. With Graciousness?

I know you were quoting a PP, but I've lived this scenario. My in-laws did a camping week and invited DH and me, my sisters-in-laws, nieces & nephews, etc. 10 in total. While DH and I do not care for camping and would much rather spend our vacation time at Disney or anywhere else, we agreed to go and had a good time. For us, it was more about spending valuable time and experiencing new things with our extended family than it was about what we were actually doing. I agree that your point does have some validity, but sometimes in marriage we need to sacrifice. And I feel funny saying sacrifice when it comes to vacation, but you catch my drift.

 

[nkereina]

It's a bit funny that you missed my entire point. You thought..that my memories were because it was a trip?

TBH you missed my point. It was because that's where my grandparents lived. When they moved up just outside of our metro we stopped going to the Lake. It wasn't until years later after I had met my husband (then boyfriend) that I even went back.

While we didn't swim nor fish anymore after they moved we still played Farkle with them, we still created memories..memories I have still because my grandfather has passed and at the age of nearly 85 my grandmother isn't presently in the best frame of mind.

But sure..it was because of going to the Lake..

I think you missed my point. Apparently we aren't communicating well. If your trip happened to be where your grandparents lived, then the same sentiment still applies. You were away from home, together with loved ones, having fun with no school/work obligations. Right? While the time there may not be your fondest or most meaningful memory, its still a memory nonetheless. You don't seem to put importance on trips together which is fine, but the OP does. Your Farkle time together is OP's Disney time together. All I'm saying is that the OP shouldn't feel less validated because of that. It's still disappointing to her and the family, even if she accepts and respects that SIL won't join them.

 

[quandrea]

Apparently there are some who believe that he should abandon his feelings, opinions and preferences to the point where he learns an entirely different love language and becomes part of the collective -- graciously and politely doing what the hive wishes. Sounds like a recipe for a happy union!

Textbook definition of enmeshment. Thinking/doing anything other than the family group is not understood, nor tolerated.

 

[cabanafrau]

I know you were quoting a PP, but I've lived this scenario. My in-laws did a camping week and invited DH and me, my sisters-in-laws, nieces & nephews, etc. 10 in total. While DH and I do not care for camping and would much rather spend our vacation time at Disney or anywhere else, we agreed to go and had a good time. For us, it was more about spending valuable time and experiencing new things with our extended family than it was about what we were actually doing. I agree that your point does have some validity, but sometimes in marriage we need to sacrifice. And I feel funny saying sacrifice when it comes to vacation, but you catch my drift.

I've sacrificed things/compromised many times over the years in my marriage -- as has my husband. There are limits. Camping would be one for me. It's no secret to my husband, family or those who know me well. I did a lot of camping trips growing up, many two weeks at a time. It got very old. I don't find it enjoyable, relaxing or comfortable and wouldn't even if it were with my husband and everyone else I enjoy most in life. The fact that I wouldn't participate in a camping trip shouldn't be a measure of how much I love and appreciate each and every one of those people. I'd gladly invite them all over to our house for a great BBQ and enjoy spending time with them.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

If your trip happened to be where your grandparents lived, then the same sentiment still applies. You were away from home, together with loved ones, having fun with no school/work obligations. Right? While the time there may not be your fondest or most meaningful memory, its still a memory nonetheless.

Nope you're still not getting it. Frankly I'm not sure you will. You think the destination was the salient aspect rather than it being simply where my grandparents lived. The fact that you place such importance on the destination by means of saying away from home, having fun with no school/work obligations, etc is more telling that you missed my point. I guess when they lived 45mins (but just outside the metro) as opposed to 3+hrs from my mom's house that still qualified as the destination being the most salient part?

You don't seem to put importance on trips together which is fine, but the OP does.

You must have missed my comment not too long ago that my husband and I like to travel. But simply put I recognize that memories, as I said before, are what you make of them.

Your Farkle time together is OP's Disney time together.

ok..

All I'm saying is that the OP shouldn't feel less validated because of that. It's still disappointing to her and the family, even if she accepts and respects that SIL won't join them.

The point I and other were attempting to make is that there are so many other ways of including someone.

I don't think it's wrong nor do I think I've said it's wrong that the OP vacations with their family. What is wrong is expecting everyone who may be and is joining the family as if they have to do it that way. If you (general you) can't get beyond that people create and make memories in different ways..

 

[Hikergirl]

I would be most alarmed at the intent of the words used by your Future Son in Law to describe your family's love language (which is clearly Disney and spending time together!):

Pity
Stupid Little Trip
Handouts

... how is that in any way the attitude of the man you want your DD to spend her life with? This would be a deal-breaker attitude for my family.... yeah they are adults and can do their own thing... but when family members invite you on their dime, simply because they want to be a part of your life, unless the activity is like, base jumping, YOU GO. POLITELY. WITH GRACIOUSNESS. You don't have to be tied to each other during the whole WDW vacation, but at least ONE nice TS dinner together.... that's not so hard is it?! I guess it is...

So you have a problem with this guy's way of describing the OP's family "love language" but you are Ok with the expectation that you just shut up and go because someone else is paying?
Ugh, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near a family with that kind of "love language". Maybe this fiance should run for the hills now before its too late and he is married and then there is no getting away from any expectations and demands.

 

[QueenIsabella]

Maybe. I wish someone would annoy me with trips to Hawaii

I wanted to address this a bit, with my own perspective.

When we first married, my IL's were living in the Marshall Islands--2100 west of Hawaii. They were allowed to go to Hawaii every 6 months, then on a big trip once a year. So, they invited their sons and DILs to Hawaii. ILs rented a condo on the Big Island and made all other arrangements. They paid for everything. We went on this trip (actually, three, total), because there was simply no other way to see DH's parents.

On the first trip--we were miserable. We got the room with twin beds. MIL was peeved that we pushed them together. MIL had her own itinerary, which include no down time, no beach time, and only the sights SHE wanted to see. And they rented a minivan, so you had to go with them or stay home. There's much more, but you get the jist.

Fast forward 2 years--FIL is on Oahu and diagnosed terminal. We flew out on my birthday for 2 weeks with them. This was non-negotiable, full stop. We actually had a nice trip this time--we stayed in a nearby hotel. In mornings, FIL would have treatments, and we would do what we wanted. After lunch/nap time, we would go over and spend the afternoon and evening with the ILs. Despite the circumstances, the trip was a lot of fun. although lower-keyed than we might have chosen under different circumstances.

A month after our return, we had to fly back to Oahu because FIL had passed. Again, non-negotiable, and although this trip was very somber, there actually were a few pleasant and funny moments.

If I never go to Hawaii again, I'm fine with that. I had promised DH we'd one day take our kids, and we may yet do that. But, it wouldn't be my choice.

I realize my circumstances are pretty unusual, and I'd be the first to say that there is much to appreciate about the 50th state. But, my experiences are such that I also understand why a gift trip might not be as welcome as you'd think.

 

[Hikergirl]

Then why wouldn’t he go to Hawaii? And then on top of it belittle them by saying he doesn’t want to participate in their stupid little trips? Sounds like he’s having a massive pity party for himself.

Because he doesn't want his future in laws paying for him to go.
What is so hard to understand about that.

 

[sam_gordon]

She’s not asking him to convert to a different religion or go out and buy a Ferrari he can’t afford.

Why is it ok that you consider buying an Ferrari too much of an extravagance and that's ok, but the fiancee saying a trip to Disney (or Hawaii) is too much of an extravagance is wrong?

 

[LAB81018]

Textbook definition of enmeshment. Thinking/doing anything other than the family group is not understood, nor tolerated.

Couldn’t the same be said for him as well?

Finances are the number one cause of marital strife and suggesting that the OP encourage his daughter sit down and have a discussion over her future husbands’s financial philosophy (how big is his student loan debt anyway? 20k or a future mortgage) and how they will mesh their individual financial situations into a healthy family isn’t overstepping. I would have hoped they would have had this discussion before this point, but many couples don’t.

The future son-in-law’s attitude is commendable unless he holds on to those ideals to the point of cutting off his nose to spite his face.

I do agree that the OP needs to back off. On the other hand, maybe his choice of words were due to frustration, but they still make me uncomfortable (father used to call me stupid, so excuse me for finding the wording concerning.)

 

[Skellingtonj]

Because he doesn't want his future in laws paying for him to go.
What is so hard to understand about that.

I agree. I don’t get why some people are so offended by this. He says no end of story.

 

[cabanafrau]

Couldn’t the same be said for him as well?

Finances are the number one cause of marital strife and suggesting that the OP encourage his daughter sit down and have a discussion over her future husbands’s financial philosophy (how big is his student loan debt anyway? 20k or a future mortgage) and how they will mesh their individual financial situations into a healthy family isn’t overstepping. I would have hoped they would have had this discussion before this point, but many couples don’t.

The future son-in-law’s attitude is commendable unless he holds on to those ideals to the point of cutting off his nose to spite his face.

I do agree that the OP needs to back off. On the other hand, maybe his choice of words were due to frustration, but they still make me uncomfortable (father used to call me stupid, so excuse me for finding the wording concerning.)

I absolutely would be questioning my daughter about how well she knows and agrees with his financial philosophies -- and many other areas of life. As a parent I would not feel a moment's guilt to be a nudge about encouraging them to make sure they're on the same page about how they want to approach many areas of life.

I think the SIL's purported words should be considered with a grain of salt.

 

[NCDisneyMom]

We are going to WDW in August and we have been all trying to get him to come on trip including our daughter. She has even said that she and him could around Orlando and do other things if he doesn't want to go around WDW. They got into a huge fight and he said that doesn't want our pity or us spending a lot of money on stupid little trip.

Everybody is throwing up red flags over the SIL calling it a "stupid little trip". However, I went back and read the snippet above, and frankly, I don't blame him. He has now been invited on a 3rd trip, after making his point clear that he does not want to take a gift trip. According to above "we have been all trying to get him to come on trip including our daughter". All? How many people have been on this young man's case about taking this trip? I'd have probably called it more than a "stupid little trip" at that point.

For example, my husband loves Vegas. I don't. It's just not my thing. He goes once a year...either by himself or with friends. If he and his buddies started bugging me about going to Vegas, even though they know I don't want to, I'd probably tell them to take the Vegas Strip and shove it where the sun don't shine. Same with Disney...he has no desire to go ever again (he would go when our kids were little). Now, the kids and I go by ourselves. If we bugged him about going, he'd have very choice words, as well. Everyone has a breaking point, and this SIL has probably been pushed to his. I blame that comment on the OP and anyone else trying to convince him to go.

 

[quandrea]

Couldn’t the same be said for him as well?

Finances are the number one cause of marital strife and suggesting that the OP encourage his daughter sit down and have a discussion over her future husbands’s financial philosophy (how big is his student loan debt anyway? 20k or a future mortgage) and how they will mesh their individual financial situations into a healthy family isn’t overstepping. I would have hoped they would have had this discussion before this point, but many couples don’t.

The future son-in-law’s attitude is commendable unless he holds on to those ideals to the point of cutting off his nose to spite his face.

I do agree that the OP needs to back off. On the other hand, maybe his choice of words were due to frustration, but they still make me uncomfortable (father used to call me stupid, so excuse me for finding the wording concerning.)

You missed my point. I’m for the son in law. His viewpoint is not being respected, his boundaries are being violated. He’s done nothing wrong. He simply has a different set of expectations.

 

[luvsJack]

Do you think people who get into relationships with controlling people do it on purpose? Like oh yeah, I can’t wait to have a pouty partner who doesn’t want to go on a vacation bc someone else is paying for it!
No one is asking this man to take out a personal loan and go into more debt for this trip. If his money issues are this deep rooted then I’d be worried.

Not wanting to go on a trip that someone else paid for does not make him "pouty". Some people just don't like that and there is not one thing wrong with it. You obviously don't have any problems letting someone pay your way on vacation, and that is fine too. But someone could look at that and called you spoiled. Does that make it so?

 

[Disneylovingmomof2]

Not wanting to go on a trip that someone else paid for does not make him "pouty". Some people just don't like that and there is not one thing wrong with it. You obviously don't have any problems letting someone pay your way on vacation, and that is fine too. But someone could look at that and called you spoiled. Does that make it so?

If one day I have the problem of people wanting to take me on vacations I’ll be ok with being called spoiled

 

[cabanafrau]

If one day I have the problem of people wanting to take me on vacations I’ll be ok with being called spoiled

Do you reserve the right to accept or decline the invitations as you choose?