Here’s the thing though, even if I think that a couple is headed for disaster (and I know a few), their affections don’t bother me. Even when loved ones are in relationships that I wholeheartedly disapprove of, I don’t think that anything would be “better” for me or anyone else if they kept their affections private. At the end of the day they are still together, disaster is still looming, and I still know about it.OK…so how about this? Yes, there are even family members who are closer than others, because yes, having your parents fluff your hair is not so annoying as having your uncle fluff your hair. So yes, this is not about sex, per se. Still, if the PDAs between “special people” are such that you don’t have to “change the rules” when you don’t approve of who is the chosen “special person” of some other family member, then you’ll be on good ground to be natural and welcoming when your personal visitation of “Look Who’s Coming to Dinner” arrives at your Thanksgiving table, whether it is a relationship that is objectively not moral or it is just one that you think is a disaster on the horizon. If your family member simply abides by the usual boundaries for “special persons”–after all, you have robbed them in advance of a chance to be “publically defiant” about their relationship–there will be that much more room for everyone else to look the other way and keep debates about that relationship for another day, under the charitable assumption that being “flaunting” or “defiant” is the farthest things from their minds.
In a word, scandal. If children are involved it can serve to make them more accepting of this sort of living arrangement. It was you that said you wanted to leave homosexuality out of it. That is why I picked something that applies more broadly. In public, we have to consider all that might learn from our behavior, including the most innocent. God has never manufactured floating millstones.I’m not sure why a cohabiting couple showing affection is any different than a couple that is just dating showing affection.
I do appreciate setting homosexuality aside, and I think that cohabiting couples make the perfect stand-in. Homosexuality is so contentious on these boards, even among Catholics, that it often derails the whole discussion. But everyone knows someone who is cohabiting or has done so, so the conversations are a little less heated and it’s still an example of sin.In a word, scandal. If children are involved it can serve to make them more accepting of this sort of living arrangement. It was you that said you wanted to leave homosexuality out of it. That is why I picked something that applies more broadly. In public, we have to consider all that might learn from our behavior, including the most innocent. God has never manufactured floating millstones.
I think this comment introduces a dimension of morality, as opposed to just manners. Having said that, I doubt that a state of marriage, dating or cohabitation would lead me to expect different PDA behaviour. I suppose for me, the more fundamental hurdle for physical affection (whether or not public) is a heterosexual couple. But, if I were the host, and invited a gay couple, I’d know what to expect and would thus be accepting of it. I would be responsible to ensure no guest finds themselves in a highly uncomfortable position, which may require excluding certain guests. I cannot imagine suggesting to anyone that they should refrain from any PDA, except that I might seek the agreement of the gay family member in advance, if children were to be present. [Here, I’m thinking of an event where excluding the gay couple is not reasonable.]. I would not seek a similar agreement from any heterosexual couple. Were I just another guest, I may not like the gay PDA, but would feel no right to object.I also think that if you are going to request that the gay/dating/cohabiting/other relationship that makes you uncomfortable couples don’t do XYZ, then you should also refrain from doing XYZ, that’s just common courtesy.
In a situation involving all strangers, yes. In a situation where people are known (Church, family, school, organizations) such things have a way of being discussed and kids figure a lot more out than one would think. Best not to give them any encouragement.The reason I remain unconvinced that cohabiting couples kissing or holding hands causes scandal is twofold. 1. If they are cohabiting and you know about it, then the damage is pretty much already done and it’s already assumed that they’re kissing, and 2. You can’t tell their marital/relationship status from a kiss or holding hands. They could be saving themselves for marriage, they could already be married, they could be living together, they could just be dating, etc.
I think this is where there is really a potential for conflict. In cases like this it may be better to have a family-wide agreement that holidays, reunions, dinners, etc are neutral times where the family puts aside absolutely everything to get along for 3 hours before going home and watching football. As in, no PDA from anyone.In a situation involving all strangers, yes. In a situation where people are known (Church, family, school, organizations) such things have a way of being discussed and kids figure a lot more out than one would think. Best not to give them any encouragement.
Realizing and accepting that some family members may decline the offer and simply stay home all together. As not everyone is going to be in agreement with the host family for “no couple’s handholding”, etc.I think this is where there is really a potential for conflict. In cases like this it may be better to have a family-wide agreement that holidays, reunions, dinners, etc are neutral times where the family puts aside absolutely everything to get along for 3 hours before going home and watching football. As in, no PDA from anyone.
Yep, that’s an invitation that I would probably decline.Realizing and accepting that some family members may decline the offer and simply stay home all together. As not everyone is going to be in agreement with the host family for “no couple’s handholding”, etc.
Some may politely decline, some may decline with a little “whatever”, others may decline with stronger words.
But if you yourself, and hence likely others, will decline the invitation, it is not a particularly successful strategy!Yep, that’s an invitation that I would probably decline.
But if the alternative is being in a room where there are many different ideas of what kinds of relationships are even morally acceptable and there is going to be offense taken when one person gives another a peck, but the people taking offense also want to peck, well, then your family dynamic is about to get complicated and controversial. At that point the only options are to feud, sit in discomfort and resentment, not have family gatherings, or come to some sort of agreed upon, neutral rule.
If it’s really that big of a deal, I think that a simple agreement might be best.
True, but it prevents conflict between the people that do go.But if you yourself, and hence likely others, will decline the invitation, it is not a particularly successful strategy!
Innocent hugs and affection, absolutely yes. Boys need to see Dad being romantic to Mom, and girls need to dream about finding a romantic man some day.I am starting a new thread for this topic because I didn’t want to derail the gay cousin at Thanksgiving thread. But, on that board many people expressed shock or disdain at the idea of any couple kissing or holding hands at a family dinner. This really confused me because in my family it is no big deal at all for couples to show affection. I’m not talking about making out, groping, or anything like that, but holding hands, putting arms around each other, and quick pecks are really commonplace. So are random 'I love you’s between partners.
For example, when I sit next to my husband I almost always have my arm linked under his and we hold hands. (Even when he drives I have my arm under his) My mom and her husband always rest their hands on the other’s leg when they sit, and my brother always has an arm around his wife. None of this is viewed as shocking or offensive. Even when we celebrate holidays with my husband’s family he will come up behind me when I’m cooking and give me a hug and a quick kiss after stealing a bite of food. It never occured to me that that could be construed as offensive.
I was really surprised that even little, nonsexual displays of affection are often seen as rude or inappropriate in front of family. I guess it’s just one of those things that every family does differently.
Anyway, I was just curious about other’s thoughts on the matter. What displays do you find acceptable, if any, and why or why not?
Most of our family would probably decline, too. Some might accept an invitation to an invent with that requirement, but not to our own family gathering.Yep, that’s an invitation that I would probably decline.
But if the alternative is being in a room where there are many different ideas of what kinds of relationships are even morally acceptable and there is going to be offense taken when one person gives another a peck, but the people taking offense also want to peck, well, then your family dynamic is about to get complicated and controversial. At that point the only options are to feud, sit in discomfort and resentment, not have family gatherings, or come to some sort of agreed upon, neutral rule.
If it’s really that big of a deal, I think that a simple agreement might be best.
My grandparents (when they were living) held hands, shared a kiss, etc. at family gatherings and didn’t have problems seeing their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren doing the same - married or dating.,
I suppose that for some of us, however, we are talking about some of us having grandparents who were the very ones who started the trend of **doing anything and everything in public, **
I definitely think that people who expect unmarried or gay couples to refrain from PDA should do the same, and that there would be extreme conflict if they didn’t. But as someone who’s ok with any couple holding hands or pecking, that isn’t likely to come up with me.That is fine. Keep in mind, though, that this thread was started as a jump-off from a thread about how to handle a gay cousin who was bringing his partner to Thanksgiving. That is not off-topic. A wide range of moral beliefs is what American families can expect to have within their families. My point is that in many families (if not most), the day will come when one member will decide that you do not get to decide that married couples are the only sexual partners that can indulge in PDAs of the very same kind.
Someone seems to think I believe that someone other than an all-powerful matriarch can possibly set the rules of decorum for a family. Oh, please. That ain’t gonna happen. I’m talking entirely about personal rules.
I think we all know you can’t retroactively become someone who keeps their own secrets–if people are used to having you lay all your cards on the table, they will know you are hiding something the first time you hold them close to your chest. If you want to be able to keep your own sensitive information, you have to keep your information of a certain nature private just for the sake of establishing that you have a sense of privacy. Neither can you be someone who brags about his or her prowess in a certain area without being duty-bound to patiently let someone else regale you with his or her claims to fame. If families are the place you can brag about yourself shamelessly, then they are also the place where you welcome tales of shameless self-promotion. Fair is fair.
Just so, you cannot retroactively establish a sense of decorum that would be helpful at a family event that welcomes all comers. If it is OK for a married couple to do it, that is fine, but realize that family members who think gay couple or a cohabitating couple is the same thing as a married couple will expect the same boundaries as the married couples. You cannot expect anything different, because you do not get to decide for your relatives what relationship of theirs they will hold to be the moral equivalent of yours. Well, you do, but if you do so, you do it at the risk of excluding the relatives whose sexual morals don’t meet your standards. As for myself, I’d rather avoid that can of worms!
There is a reason that meetings of foreign dignitaries are full of protocols. It is so that people with deep differences can share a civilized and mutually-tolerant meal and have a discussion over topics where giving offense is a constant danger. The more open your table is, the more you have to expect yourself to abide by stricter boundaries. I realize that none of us gets to set a standard for anyone but ourselves. What I am saying is that we really don’t get any room at all to expect others to live by a stricter standard than we set for ourselves. To be believable, we start by setting the strictest standard for ourselves.
It is like being the family that enjoys discussing religion and politics. There is nothing wrong with that, and our family does it–but our family can do it and still remain very jovial. Because of that, we don’t have to have the “religion and politics” taboo. Where minds are farther apart than ours, though, it becomes wise to make certain beloved topics taboo at the family table.
That is essentially my whole point. Taboos aren’t always a bad thing. Sometimes they are essential in the cause of peace. If a family Thanksgiving is not about that, then what? If your plan is to simply ignore it when people whose partnership is of an illicit nature engage in the same PDAs as you readily accept from married people, well, that is the other way to deal with it. That works, too, as long as no one is expecting to have their cake and eat it, too.
Then let there be conflict. Being joined in Holy Matrimony simply is not the same as burning in lust for what is unnatural. I wasn’t going to go there but when I see homosexuality being treated as normal as marriage, I will accept whatever conflict comes.I definitely think that people who expect unmarried or gay couples to refrain from PDA should do the same, and that there would be extreme conflict if they didn’t.
I’m just not that confrontational. When I was unmarried if someone told me that I couldn’t kiss my boyfriend or hold his hand, but that they would be doing so with their spouse, I would have just left.Then let there be conflict. Being joined in Holy Matrimony simply is not the same as burning in lust for what is unnatural. I wasn’t going to go there but when I see homosexuality being treated as normal as marriage, I will accept whatever conflict comes.
In this case, do you think that what your MIL really meant was that you and her son sharing a room might cause her embarrassment?…My MIL asked us if we would not share a room, since “some people” might be offended. Obviously, the answer was no…