Proper etiquette for hosts regarding guests who can't live without 'the game'

[LilyM]

That says it.

The thing is, OP, You know that your family is going to want to watch whatever game is on. This doesn’t come as a surprise to you.

But if suddenly you hide your TV or unplug it or whatever, your family is going to revolt. And really, I don’t blame them. What if it wasn’t the TV, but a touch football game or horseshoes? What if every time the family gets together they have this game? But this time, for once, you want to play cards or watch TV or just talk?. What if you didn’t tell anyone, but instead you just bought cards? How would your family feel?

If you want to change what the family has always done, you need to let them know ahead of time.


Vs the adults in the living room?

Someone who is so little interested in anything other than sports that they would rather watch a game on the idiot box than spend a few hours in conversation and interaction (as in real interaction, giving their full attention to the person beside them) with their nearest and dearest is, in my book, NOT an adult. Not really.

 

[Seeker1961]

Wow…do you all feel better now that you’ve declared your moral superiority?

I’m a sports fan, love watching all of them. It’s the way I relax. I don’t NEED to watch them, but I do enjoy them. I also enjoy sitting around with friends while the game is on. Some of us are able to talk to others and have a game on at the same time…it’s called multi-tasking.

It’s your house and you get to make the rules but I think there is more going on here than whether or not the game is on.

 

[EasterJoy]

To my mind, the proper ettiquette is “give and take”.

If there is really “THE” Game…fine, you schedule around it, if it is at all possible. If you have a place in the hosting house where the game-watchers can wander to while the non-game-watchers take their leisure somewhere else (and to where those whose team is being shelled can retreat), so much the better. If you have no TV, though, you don’t need to apologize. Tell them to bring their radios and an earbud, if they’re that addicted, because you can’t offer what you don’t have.

If you have guests who have to watch three games straight for each of both weekend days, then you plead, “I’ll move the celebration around so you can watch whatever is really important to you before you come over, because we don’t have a TV, but throw me a bone here. It is impossible that they’re all THE GAME.” Sports lovers can work their social life around special games, yes, but sports addicts all have to visit a dry town once in awhile.

When there are 30 people, you schedule around actual games that people are playing in and you schedule around what Grandpa or Grandma likes, and everybody else who just has to see something else is out of luck. They’re going to have to read it in the newspaper or trust in the earbud. That is about as accomodating as you can get, practically speaking.

Someone who is so little interested in anything other than sports that they would rather watch a game on the idiot box than spend a few hours in conversation and interaction (as in real interaction, giving their full attention to the person beside them) with their nearest and dearest is, in my book, NOT an adult. Not really.

As it turns out, your book is not the only one on the shelf, thanks be to Heaven.

Can we please remember that some people would rather have their toenails removed with a pliers and no painkillers than to get an undiluted dose of the kind of “real interaction” that typically comes from “a few hours in conversation and interaction” with their immediate relatives when there is not some benign source of outside distraction?

Republicans and Democrats can sit together in the same room for three hours with no bloodshed, if there is a ballgame on. The Capitalist can lie down with the Socialist, have a beer, get excited about the same thing, can even be on opposite sides of something without being enemies about it for a change, and the only one who gets called an idiot is the poor referee.

The chatty get more time to be chatty when the non-chatty have a game to watch, too. Sometimes, having the ballgame on works very well, if no one gets too absolutist about it.

 

[Cat]

I have a different perspective on this after last week.

Last Tuesday (Oct. 16, 2012), I drove my 83-year-old father to the hospital, and sat with him while the doctor told him that he has terminal cancer.

We discussed all the options, including a course of chemotherapy that will give him 2-3 years. He seemed quite accepting. He’s an intelligent man, and like all of us, knows that life does not last forever. But no one wants to be given a death sentence.

He has not called me “honey” in years, decades.

I didn’t sleep that night, and I still haven’t cried. I think once I start crying, I won’t stop for many hours, and to be honest, I don’t have the time for that much crying.

So my perspective is–you don’t get that much time to spend with your family and friends, so enjoy the time that you DO get and…accept them for who and what they are.

There is no use trying to make them behave according to your tastes/ So ENJOY THEM, especially the ones that have to drive for several hours to see you, while they are with you, and accept and love and appreciate them for who they are. Be grateful that at your house, they feel comfortable to be themselves.

They’ll be gone soon enough, much sooner than you ever thought possible. You will turn around to go to the kitchen to get another plate of appetizers, and when you return, there will be empty spaces and those dear ones will be gone from this earth and you will regret with all your heart your resentment and inner criticism of their personality quirks.

You will remember your post on CAF and think, “Why did I write that? What was I thinking, anyway? I’d give anything right now to have good ol’ Cousin NFL Superfan back again sitting in my family room watching the game!”

Yes, OP, it comes through loud and clear in every post that you have written–you look down at people who love sports. What is the use of that? There is no “sin” in enjoying sports. So why condemn something that you clearly “don’t get?” Why not just accept that many people do enjoy sports? Why not just get a kick out of it and have fun watching them have fun? Why be so negative?

Not everyone enjoys long, lovely conversations with relatives and friends, especially in large groups. My husband used to hate doing get-togethers with my family because of all the talk talk talk and it seemed to him that no one stopped to listen (he was wrong).

Conversations that involve everyone at the party only work if you have a huge house with a very large “gathering space” that is conducive (good acoustics, not too “live”) to everyone joining in the conversation. A lot of times, the older people (or even younger people) can’t hear well when there is a large group.

And some people just don’t like talking about anything very “deep” in a room full of near strangers, even if they are family.

When it comes to a baptism of a baby, honestly, how much talking about it can people do? Once you get past, “Wasn’t the baby cute when they cried while the water was pouring onto them?” and “Wasn’t the christening gown beautiful? Good ol’ Aunt Persimmon stitched it all by hand, bless her heart!” --there really isn’t a whole lot more to talk about unless you want to get into a theological discussion about the significance of baptism–and to be honest, I think that would be more volatile than talking about the election, especially if you have relatives and friends who are not Catholic.

I think that when you do an “open-house” type get-together, you have to expect and plan for people breaking off into several smaller groups. That’s the way open-houses are, and to me, that’s part of the fun! I would really feel uncomfortable at an Open House where everyone was expected to just sat in a circle and look at each other and carry on a conversation with everyone else.

That’s the kind of thing that women do at Bridal and Baby showers, and maybe it’s fun for women. (I’m a woman and I don’t mind it.) But I think a lot of men feel very very uncomfortable in such a setting. (Most men don’t have Groomal Showers.) And teenagers and children would be horribly uncomfortable.

So I think you should just let the groups happen and enjoy them! As the hostess, circulate from room to room and group to group and make sure that everyone is having a great time.

I like your idea of the 'sports bar" in your family room–that’s the idea! Go for it!

If you’ve ever watched National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation, you’ll remember a scene where Clark is trying to convince his wife that having the whole family stay with them for Christmas will be fun. She says something like “Sparky, you build it up in your mind and then you’re so disappointed when it doesn’t turn out the way you expect.”

Perhaps you’re doing this. I would suggest not doing it. If you have a specific “plan” for your party–e.g., a “conversation circle”–then you should invite the people that you know will enjoy this activity.

My husband and I often have figure skating parties. We invite our friends over to watch figure skating for hours at a stretch. We don’t invite people who don’t like figure skating. Why would we do that?

But if you’re doing an open-house type party, then it’s really hard to say, “This is what will happen at my party,” because open-houses are “open.”

If you want to try a family get-together without a TV, fine–let people know in the invitation, and no doubt, some people will decline your invitation, while others will tape the game, or just read about it the next day. But why do that? Why exclude family and friends just because they don’t think or act like you?

What’s more important–the party, or the people at the party?

Family get-togethers are so much much fun, so precious, and they go so fast.
Before you know it, all those crazy relatives and friends are dead and gone. Please don’t fuss about them. Don’t judge them. Just enjoy them. Please.

 

[Morwenna]

Wow…do you all feel better now that you’ve declared your moral superiority?

Hi Seeker,

First let me say … I LOVE your sig line!

As for the “moral superiority” remark … well, to be fair, there were some in the “it’s-just-plain-wrong-not-to-show-a-game-at-family-events” camp who hinted at moral superiority as well. Human nature, I guess?

For myself, it isn’t about “moral superiority”, at all … it’s more about trying to bring another perspective to light (one which is less common in our society, to be sure).

I’m a sports fan, love watching all of them. It’s the way I relax. I don’t NEED to watch them, but I do enjoy them. I also enjoy sitting around with friends while the game is on. Some of us are able to talk to others and have a game on at the same time…it’s called multi-tasking.

I will gently suggest that no matter how well-intentioned, or how capable of multi-tasking someone might be, the focus is not going to really be on the other person, but on the game, for the most part. Also, some soft-spoken people, or people with hearing difficulties, may have trouble communicating in competition with the TV … and some shyer folks may not even approach those who are watching something on TV (feeling that they’re intruding). So, you may miss out on getting to interact with those three sets of people (and there may be others I’ve missed, but those are three that come quickly to mind).

I don’t think anyone is asking others to give up watching sports altogether (like a permanent Lenten sacrifice? ) … but simply once in awhile, for special occasions, to lay aside hobbies and interests, and spend time focusing on their families. I don’t think that’s too much to ask, do you?

.

 

[Cat]

Hi Seeker,

First let me say … I LOVE your sig line!

As for the “moral superiority” remark … well, to be fair, there were some in the “it’s-just-plain-wrong-not-to-show-a-game-at-family-events” camp who hinted at moral superiority as well. Human nature, I guess?

For myself, it isn’t about “moral superiority”, at all … it’s more about trying to bring another perspective to light (one which is less common in our society, to be sure).

I will gently suggest that no matter how well-intentioned, or how capable of multi-tasking someone might be, the focus is not going to really be on the other person, but on the game, for the most part. Also, some soft-spoken people, or people with hearing difficulties, may have trouble communicating in competition with the TV … and some shyer folks may not even approach those who are watching something on TV (feeling that they’re intruding). So, you may miss out on getting to interact with those three sets of people (and there may be others I’ve missed, but those are three that come quickly to mind).

I don’t think anyone is asking others to give up watching sports altogether (like a permanent Lenten sacrifice? ) … but simply once in awhile, for special occasions, to lay aside hobbies and interests, and spend time focusing on their families. I don’t think that’s too much to ask, do you?

.

Refer to the boldface (mine) above.

Here’s the problem–“YOU don’t think that’s too much to ask.”

But OTHERS think it’s too much to ask.

We don’t all think alike.

I could and usually do give up a football game because I am often busy with other things.

But when it comes to synchronized skating competitions that are within driving distance–YES, I think it’s too much to ask for me to give them up. YOU may not think this way, but YOU are not ME.

Our two daughters grew up in a house where EVERYTHING stopped when figure skating was on TV. EVERYTHING.

It’s still like that, only now we try as much as possible to see figure skating live rather than on TV.

I remember when we lived in North Carolina (not exactly a figure skating mecca back in the 1980s), we attended a party given by someone in our church. It happened to be during the Winter Olympics, and specifically during the Ladies Long Program event.

When we called to RSVP, we asked if it would be OK to turn on the TV and watch the Olympic figure skating during the party. Our hosts said, “Sure! Sounds fun.” We made it very clear to our hosts that we would be watching the Ladies Long, and they seemed just fine with that. So we said yes, we will attend.

Well, when we arrived at their house, we said howdy do, handed over our hostess gift, grabbed a few appetizers, and headed downstairs, where we promptly turned on the TV, plopped ourselves down on the sofa, and watched figure skating.

I don’t think our hosts quite expected the level of fanatical, single-minded raw devotion that they saw in us that night! (Remember, this was Tar Heel country, where people overturn cars after a big win! Our hosts thought they knew what “sports fan” meant, but they had never been around figure skating fans!)

Many of the guests had never really watched figure skating and they kept making inane comments, which we would respond to by explaining what was happening, and that just seemed to confuse the other guests, who up until that evening, had no idea that figure skating was even a real sport! We certainly educated people that night!

Our hosts were good-natured about it–I think they were kind-hearted enough to be “amused” by the level of fandom. I think that they probably told themselves afterwards that we would never be invited back to their house during a figure skating competition!!

My point is–we’re all different, and what you think is very logical may be completely illogical to others.

 

[Morwenna]

Refer to the boldface (mine) above.

Here’s the problem–“YOU don’t think that’s too much to ask.”

But OTHERS think it’s too much to ask.

We don’t all think alike.

I could and usually do give up a football game because I am often busy with other things.

But when it comes to synchronized skating competitions that are within driving distance–YES, I think it’s too much to ask for me to give them up. YOU may not think this way, but YOU are not ME.

Our two daughters grew up in a house where EVERYTHING stopped when figure skating was on TV. EVERYTHING.

It’s still like that, only now we try as much as possible to see figure skating live rather than on TV.

I remember when we lived in North Carolina (not exactly a figure skating mecca back in the 1980s), we attended a party given by someone in our church. It happened to be during the Winter Olympics, and specifically during the Ladies Long Program event.

When we called to RSVP, we asked if it would be OK to turn on the TV and watch the Olympic figure skating during the party. Our hosts said, “Sure! Sounds fun.” We made it very clear to our hosts that we would be watching the Ladies Long, and they seemed just fine with that. So we said yes, we will attend.

Well, when we arrived at their house, we said howdy do, handed over our hostess gift, grabbed a few appetizers, and headed downstairs, where we promptly turned on the TV, plopped ourselves down on the sofa, and watched figure skating.

I don’t think our hosts quite expected the level of fanatical, single-minded raw devotion that they saw in us that night! (Remember, this was Tar Heel country, where people overturn cars over after a big win! Our hosts thought they knew what “sports fan” meant, but they had never been around figure skating fans!)

Many of the guests had never really watched figure skating and they kept making inane comments, which we would respond to by explaining what was happening, and that just seemed to confuse the other guests, who up until that evening, had no idea that figure skating was even a real sport! We certainly educated people that night!

Our hosts were good-natured about it–I think they were kind-hearted enough to be “amused” by the level of fandom. I think that they probably told themselves afterwards that we would never be invited back to their house during a figure skating competition!!

My point is–we’re all different, and what you think is very logical may be completely illogical to others.

Yes, I’m very well aware of that Your perspective is certainly more widespread (in America) than mine, so I’ve encountered it many times, and am very familiar with it … but I do thank you for taking the time to respond.

My point was to speak up for the *other * side, whose perspective isn’t as often expressed … I spoke up in the hope of letting people know what they may be missing. If you don’t believe that you’ve missed out on any special, irreplaceable time with relatives (particularly those you don’t get to see as often), then that’s wonderful, and I’m glad for you, truly! (This is meant sincerely, not sarcastically!)

My response was based on what I’ve seen and experienced during my lifetime, and even though you (strongly ) disagree, it’s still valid and based on real, lived experience.

.

 

[BettyBoop416]

People who can’t enjoy a party unless they are watching “the game” might as well stay where they are, parked in front of the box, because they rarely have anything intelligent to add to the conversation anyway. Meanwhile, their other family members are having fun without them. It’s the way of the world. Some ladies bring an infant that has to be set up in the pack-n-play and provided a private place to nurse and change. Others bring children that need coloring books, cupcakes, kickballs, and a Disney movie. Others bring a socially-stunted, adult screen gazer. A good hostess accomadates all of these scenarios if she wants her friends to keep coming.

It must be magic coming to your house.

 

[Jala]

I think there is a false dichotomy here The only two choices aren’t “opting out” via TV, or enduring “mindless chitchat”.

There is a third option, which I alluded to in my prior post: the (lost?) “art” of conversation.

“Conversation” is not discussing the weather, nor is it mindless chitchat. Conversation means learning to “draw the other person out” … discovering their interests, hearing the stories that they have to share. Is it always easy to do? No, but it’s important!

It may begin (for some of us) as “dying to self” … focusing on someone else instead of what we want to do, or what we want to talk about … but before we know it, we may find ourselves really becoming interested in the other person’s life, opinions, and perspective.

I may have a different outlook than some here:

My grandparents and great aunts/uncles all died when I was still too young to appreciate them as people, who had a unique history and unique stories to tell. How I would love to have had the opportunity (as an adult) to hear the stories of their lives: how things were in their childhood, young adulthood, to hear their life’s adventures, large and small. I never got that chance, and it’s something I’ll regret for the rest of my life.

For those of you who are lucky enough to have older relatives still living, please be aware of what treasures they are! They have so much to share with you, if you’ll only take an interest in them, and take the time to draw them out!

I’m willing to bet any amount of money that at the end of your life, you’re not going to look back and regret missing a certain game on a certain day (in fact, I’ll bet you won’t even remember that missed game) … but, you may very well end up regretting time you missed with relatives who have since passed on. :sad_yes:

Sorry for the long post … but I think this is a very important topic, and is worth a bit of reflection.

.

After 20+ years, I already know pretty much all there is to know about everyone. They are family; I see them fairly often, phone them, email them, etc. Whatever “new” goings-on there may be certainly does not take up 6 hours worth of conversation.

I’ve tended to assume that it’s just me being anti-social, but it isn’t. “How’s work/school/the kids/the dog?” is good for half an hour of conversation, tops, for all of us. In fact, the game and/or commercials are MORE likely to bring up new topics of conversation (“hey, that commercial reminded me…”)

Jala

 

[ThyKingdomCome]

We’ve been elected this year to host the family’s Thanksgiving. That involves no less 34 (yes, you read that right) people in our little house. Half of these 34 are die-hard football fans. We have a tv, but no bunny ears and no cable… just netflix. :bigyikes: Thanksgiving without the game!

I dread this. I am going to have angry brother’s-in-law, I know it.

Do they know about your tv situation? I would think that since you’ve been elected, people must know what they are getting into. If not, given the traditional nature of football on Thanksgiving, it would be sensible to let them know ahead of time that you won’t have access to the game, so they can plan accordingly. You could even (if you’re able within reason) offer to adjust the time of dinner a little earlier or later to be more convenient for them. Other than that, I would certainly hope that people wouldn’t behave badly enough to make you feel bad. Hospitality goes both ways.

 

[Morwenna]

After 20+ years, I already know pretty much all there is to know about everyone. They are family; I see them fairly often, phone them, email them, etc. Whatever “new” goings-on there may be certainly does not take up 6 hours worth of conversation.

I’ve tended to assume that it’s just me being anti-social, but it isn’t. “How’s work/school/the kids/the dog?” is good for half an hour of conversation, tops, for all of us. In fact, the game and/or commercials are MORE likely to bring up new topics of conversation (“hey, that commercial reminded me…”)

Jala

Jala, you are truly blessed to have such a close family! My comments really referred back to the OP’s post, where he had folks visiting, who they didn’t get to see very often (a lot of us on the forum are in the same boat as he is, unfortunately … families scattered over many states, or even multiple countries!)

.

 

[ThyKingdomCome]

Wow…do you all feel better now that you’ve declared your moral superiority?

I’m a sports fan, love watching all of them. It’s the way I relax. I don’t NEED to watch them, but I do enjoy them. I also enjoy sitting around with friends while the game is on. Some of us are able to talk to others and have a game on at the same time…it’s called multi-tasking.

It’s your house and you get to make the rules but I think there is more going on here than whether or not the game is on.

Moral superiority? I must have missed the person who said that watching sports is bad or inferior. And I must have missed the part where people declared that getting together to watch a game with friends is bad.

In fact, no one is talking about THAT scenario at all. What is being criticized is the behavior that some people have of going to other people’s houses, for parties that are being thrown for other people’s reasons, and demanding that their hosts change their plans so that they can watch tv in the middle of a party that was not a “let’s watch the game” party. If you’re going to label it moral superiority to want to have your party go the way you planned, then I guess you wouldn’t mind it if the tables were reversed. Next time you have a bunch of friends over to watch a game - how would you like it if one of your guests decided he was sick of sports and demanded that you turn off the game you’d been looking forward to and cater to his every whim. Would you be morally superior to tell him “we’re here to watch a game - my party, my call.” ?

Watch the double standards. The issue is not the value of sports. The issue is the etiquette behind a host getting to make the decision about the activities at her own party vs. the etiquette of guests demanding it be done their way.

 

[Allegra]

It must be magic coming to your house.

I’m not sure what to make of that. Are you being sarcastic? I think most people enjoy coming to my house. Unless of course, they require cable TV. They know the food will be good at least.

 

[Aggies08]

Put the game in another room.

Too bad for them if they don’t get to visit with you. Let them isolate themselves.

 

[bluerose]

FWIW…

Whether there is a TV or not is moot… I’m betting at least three of the people present will probably have an iPhone or SmartPhone or something that will be able to, if not broadcast the game, at least keep the fans up to date on the scores.

 

[Seeker1961]

Moral superiority? I must have missed the person who said that watching sports is bad or inferior. And I must have missed the part where people declared that getting together to watch a game with friends is bad.

In fact, no one is talking about THAT scenario at all. What is being criticized is the behavior that some people have of going to other people’s houses, for parties that are being thrown for other people’s reasons, and demanding that their hosts change their plans so that they can watch tv in the middle of a party that was not a “let’s watch the game” party. If you’re going to label it moral superiority to want to have your party go the way you planned, then I guess you wouldn’t mind it if the tables were reversed. Next time you have a bunch of friends over to watch a game - how would you like it if one of your guests decided he was sick of sports and demanded that you turn off the game you’d been looking forward to and cater to his every whim. Would you be morally superior to tell him “we’re here to watch a game - my party, my call.” ?

Watch the double standards. The issue is not the value of sports. The issue is the etiquette behind a host getting to make the decision about the activities at her own party vs. the etiquette of guests demanding it be done their way.

Guessing you stopped reading after the first line and missed the part where I said “it’s your house and you make the rules”

And yes, I did read a tone in those posts that those who choose to watch sports are using their time in an inferior way than those who do not watch them.

.

 

[maryjk]

Guessing you stopped reading after the first line and missed the part where I said “it’s your house and you make the rules”

And yes, I did read a tone in those posts that those who choose to watch sports are using their time in an inferior way than those who do not watch them.

.

As did I. Those that want to watch TV aren’t as intelligent or aren’t grown ups. Or at least that is what I read.

 

[Allegra]

Guessing you stopped reading after the first line and missed the part where I said “it’s your house and you make the rules”

And yes, I did read a tone in those posts that those who choose to watch sports are using their time in an inferior way than those who do not watch them.

.

The issue isn’t how they use their time. They could decline the party they don’t want to attend and stay home and watch the game. Or, they could attend a game watching party. Where it becomes a matter of rudeness is when such people accept the hospitality of others, take up space on their couch, eat their food, drink their drinks, and virtually ignore them and the other guests, refusing to participate in conversations or party games, and shattering the peace with sporatic outbursts of screaming, cheering, and occasional profanity.

 

[ThyKingdomCome]

As did I. Those that want to watch TV aren’t as intelligent or aren’t grown ups. Or at least that is what I read.

You are taking this idea:
“those who are incapable of socializing without watching tv, even when they are at someone else’s party, have a problem”
and
“someone who demands their whims be met at a party I’m throwing, even if it goes against what I want to do, is being very rude”

and turning it into:

“people are calling me stupid because I like watching sports.”

There’s a difference.

(and btw, I am someone who likes watching tv a lot. particularly the shallow kind. and I’m pretty smart - even the people who know what kind of tv I watch think so.)

 

[Aggie414]

I guess I don’t see what the big deal is. To me it’s a way of bringing people together. Most men, I think, aren’t going to sit around chatting about the weather. They will sit around and watch the game and talk and be together that way (I’m usually right there with them). In most situations, the women will gather in the kitchen and chat. It’s not right or wrong. It’s just a different way that men and women (generally) interact.