<p>
</p>
<p>He has three kids who are 16 - 21. You’re right, he may just want to be with them that night. No good solutions to anything, I suppose.</p>
<p>Wow. Just wow.</p>
<p>It was a situation where everybody knew everybody for years. The couples proposed the dinner, not the daughters, who were not able to attend but did relay their mom’s wish. The B’day gal decided she didn’t want any men around because she didn’t have one anymore. All the women said that was not what they proposed and said NO. The dinner was fine.</p>
<p>Remind me how soon after her husbands death was the dinner?</p>
<p>If the widow/daughters didn’t extend the invite, then how could they change it?</p>
<p>Either way, I still think it’s pretty low for the couples to arrange plans for the birthday girl’s birthday without any input for her wishes. </p>
<p>It’s kind of like taking a vegetarian girl to a steakhouse for her birthday. It’s obviously not HER wishes that are important.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow…just wow…is right. This woman has lost her husband…part of a big happy group I surmise. These “friends” were focusing on etiquette of who was invited when, “disinvited”, etc., and apparently no thought is given to this woman’s feelings. Again it’s emphasized that this woman nixed the husbands because “she didn’t have one anymore.” WOW is right. With friends like this, who needs enemies?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I totally agree. Is the dinner for her or not? And if it’s for her, shouldn’t her (relatively simple and easy to execute as well as justifiable) request be honored?</p>
<p>tobin - Thanks for coming back to try to further clarify. I’m still really at a loss.</p>
<p>I’ve tried putting myself into the place of the friends, as I do have great couple friends of many years where the girlfriends are quite close. So we as couples propose a birthday dinner for our friend, including her DDs. The DDs couldn’t attend but shared that their mother, a recent widow really would prefer a girls only event. I have to add here I very much doubt the message was sent “I don’t want men around because I don’t have one anymore”. This is how you talk about a pony, not a spouse. Anyway, hearing the request from the DD’s that the recent widow, our dear friend, would rather celebrate her birthday as a girls only event, I have absolutely NO DOUBT that every single couple would agree without reservation that this is a very small thing we could do to make the birthday party honoring HER more comfortable. The other couples could go out together as a group anytime…we were blessed to still all have our spouses after all!! Total no brainer.</p>
<p>
I personally would rather be as tacky as Dollywood and honor the wishes of a friend whose birthday I proposed to celebrate than deliberately ignore those wishes. If those wishes involved not bringing my husband because my friend was struggling with the loss of hers - a no-brainer indeed, no matter how tacky anyone else might find it. Though apparently the friend did attend the celebration, for reasons I cannot fathom. </p>
<p>
This thread illustrates that it does indeed take all kinds to make a world. That is one cold comment. It’s not just that she doesn’t have any man. How about “she doesn’t have her best friend any more, the man she loved enough to commit her life to, the one she hoped to grow old with, and it’s hard, especially on her birthday, to realize all over again how much she misses by not having him here”? I mean really - what am I missing?</p>
<p>That is pretty cold. This is a (supposedly) beloved husband, whom I am guessing, the loss was devastating. It’s not like the husband was out of town.</p>
<p>Now I can see people being annoyed if she insisted forever that people should not bring their spouses to any group events. But this was her birthday celebration, to celebrate her, was it not? So the ladies organized a celebration for her without her input, and then when she requested no men, they refused? Do you not understand why people would think this cold?</p>
<p>“This thread illustrates that it does indeed take all kinds to make a world. That is one cold comment.”</p>
<p>??? They were her words, not mine. And I agree, it was a COLD comment.</p>
<p>This thread seems to have gone off on a tangent. Not that it changes things significantly, but the woman had lost her husband several years ago according to the first mention. Someone asked that question.</p>
<p>My Mom was widowed at 48 and remarried a year later, but she told me that it was very uncomfortable to be a single woman in a gathering of couples and also that married men she thought she could trust would make passes at her.</p>
<p>toblin – were you one of the women who attended, with husband?</p>
<p>I can’t think of any other way to explain the blind spot about how harsh this was. Yes, the b-day girl, the widow, has the right to say she would prefer not to have husbands present. What a callous reminder of her loss. What a <em>gift</em> her so-called friends gave her. What a slap in the face.</p>
<p>“They were her words, not mine. And I agree, it was a COLD comment.”</p>
<p>No, it was you and your friends who were cold, insensitive and downright rude!</p>
<p>It does take all kinds and it is obvious why this thread is so active. There is a lot of outrageous behavior even among so-called “friends”.</p>
<p>It doesn’t matter when her husband passed away. It was her birthday.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Methinks you misunderstood. I seriously, SERIOUSLY doubt that frazzled believes widow’s comments were cold.</p>
<p>It’s BITTERLY cold to shove couples in the face of a birthday girl who is obviously still grieving.</p>
<p>Clarification, toblin? Do you mind sharing her exact words? You’ve quoted her as saying “no husbands allowed because I don’t have one.” You’ve also said that the comment I found cold (“The B’day gal decided she didn’t want any men around because she didn’t have one anymore”) was hers. I see something of a difference in the two, particularly in the word “decided,” which seems rather flip to me. Was any consideration given to the fact that she hadn’t “decided” to lose her husband?</p>
<p>I still don’t understand the point of overriding the wishes of the person whose birthday is being celebrated, and then insinuating that she is tacky for, well, asking that it be celebrated in the way she’d like.</p>
<p>" Not that it changes things significantly, but the woman had lost her husband several years ago according to the first mention."</p>
<p>Actually, the post said “a few years ago”.</p>
<p>I wonder if the event was really just a planned get together, not actually a celebration of her birthday, but the birthday being the trigger for getting people together. Otherwise, there is no reason for such a reaction from the couples, and there can’t possibly be that many inconsiderate people. Generally people would automatically cater to the wishes of the birthday girl, whether it was a change or not. I’d bet she paid for her own dinner, too.</p>
<p>We really are beating a dead horse here. There is either more to the story…ie nobody likes the widow, they think she is better off with the spouse dead, something. No group of people are that uncaring.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this I disagree with. I know a lot of very bitter or self-centered people who very well might think this. </p>
<p>Not friends with them, just know them.</p>
<p>Semantics are semantics. It doesn’t matter how the widow phrased it, imo. Anyone with an ounce of compassion would understand. I don’t care if the husband passed away 20 years ago. </p>
<p>It’s actions that speak. The “friends” disregarded the request and brought their husbands anyway, basically rubbing the fact that she lost her husband in her face.</p>
<p>I’ve learned a long time ago to honor B-day wishes no matter if they seem silly to me. It’s that person’s special day. Period. In this case we have a b-day girl who happens to be a widow who preferred ON HER B-DAY not to have a house full of couples… and her so called friends have a problem with this?</p>