Xanthippe_Voorhees:
You do not get “dibs” because you’re female or because you have the oldest granddaughter.
Agreed. In fact my grandmother left her jewelry to her two daughters and excluded my dad and uncle. The daughters of my aunts got jewelry but we daughters of the sons did not.
It was hurtful.
That was up to your grandmother, though, as hurtful as it was.
I’m speaking as someone with 3 brothers. There are things that my SIL’s would appreciate and want for their daughters. My brothers might not care. But my daughter should not get first “dibs” because of her age, it should be based on what means most to who.
I remember when my great-grandmother passed–with 2 children, 8 grandchildren and nearly 30 great grandkids.
More than anything in the world I really, really, really wanted this figurine. I had no monetary value (wasn’t a hummel or anything). I was a young teen. No one else cared for it but my grandmother’s sister had the notion the girls should get jewelry and the boys should get the “collectibles” from around the world.
My grandmother put her foot down. Thank GOD. I was almost a teenager, and I should have a say as to what the most important thing to
me was. It wasn’t the piece of jewelry I’d never use, it was that precious little figure.
Point is, it’s important to look at what people value no matter their gender. My very male, very manly second cousin (older than me) picked a cheap pendant that he loved my great-grandmother because she’d wear it on summer days when they’d go on picnics and he’d remember it sparkling in the sun. I saw her more in the winter months where my gran would take me and they’d talk and I’d stare at the little figure and just listen to them shoot the breeze. The pendant would have been meaningless to me and it would not be worn or have a place of honor in my home.
Meaning is important, not gender.
