Carolyn Hax

[inlovewithnight]

Dear Carolyn:

Since the holidays are approaching again: I have a brother who will give some nieces and nephews gifts in front of those he is currently trying to snub. The nieces and nephews are as young as 2 and up to 20-plus.

It's not as if money is an issue, or not having time to give gifts to those he wishes before the rest of the family arrives. He does this deliberately.

We are all past the stage of doing anything to change his obnoxious behavior, but what should be the reactions of the parents? In the past, if my children received gifts in front of those who didn't, we politely refused them.

This brother is an obnoxious, racist boor, yet one sister and brother insist on inviting him.

Sometimes he has made a point of inviting them all out to "help" him at his car, and then giving gifts to just a couple of kids while asking the others, "What do you think of that? Pretty nice huh?"

-- C.

When someone's bad behavior is that cartoonish, that jaw-dropping, that hard for even your more typical vindictive person to comprehend, the bad actor stops being the main problem. The people who allow it to happen, year after year, to children as young as 2, become the real story.

You're asking me a question you have already answered: The way the parents "should" react is to refuse the gifts politely. They do this knowing it will reduce the youngest children to teary rubble, shouldering the responsibility of explaining why it had to be done.

Eventually, as their kids get older, the parents "should" teach them the importance of not granting any leeway to such hostility -- and that's exactly what this random-rewards, annual holiday mind-suckering is: the uncle's hostility (with a side of attention-seeking).

Not only is it the parents' collective responsibility to ensure that not one of this uncle's selective gifts is accepted, but it's also incumbent upon the older nieces and nephews to speak politely for all of them in one voice: Take your ... whatever it is, elsewhere.

That this apparently hasn't happened is a hint that your brother isn't an antisocial outlier, but instead just an extreme manifestation of general family dysfunction. If indeed that's the case, then your original answer -- refuse those gifts -- is the entire answer.

You simply represent your own family as your conscience demands. You can't make your other siblings grasp that not only is this brother behaving awfully, but they also are complicit for offering up their kids' feelings for him to toy with, year after year.

That doesn't mean you can't say something if you haven't already -- you can, and owe it to all the kids to do so. Best to pose it as a question and not an accusation, though: "Wouldn't it send Brother a message, and our kids, if we all refused his selective gifts?"

Their response will be the second part of my response, in that your brother's ... eccentricity will be a window into your extended family.

I suspect, though, just by your asking a question you answered yourself long ago, that you already know what you'll see. The question then becomes, is the dysfunction contained enough to brush off, or corrosive enough to avoid?

[source]

Comments

[inlovewithnight]

What is going on with this guy that he has an identifiable pattern of behavior that involves "trying to snub" various children?

I disagree that it's incumbent on the older children to model behavior, here; it's entirely on the adults to have pulled him aside and stopped this years ago, and the fact that they didn't (including the LW) is really troubling. "My family won't be coming to gatherings if Brother is invited." If the other siblings value "togetherness" and lack of confrontation more than their kids, then let them actually have to make a choice.

[vass]

I'm trying to imagine how it would feel to be Kid C in this scenario:

Uncle D: Here's one for Kid A, and one for Kid B. Aren't they great? What do you think, Kid C?
Parents A and B: I'm sorry, Kid A can't accept that because you didn't bring a gift for Kid C.
Kids A and B: *hands gift back*

It's nice to be stood up for, but also not-nice to feel like not only do you pointedly not get a present from your uncle, but also your cousins have to give their presents back because of you. It's actually because of Uncle D, not Kid C, but when I was a kid I would not have understood that distinction. Kids A and B probably don't either, and might be mean to Kid C about it if Parents A and B didn't make it very clear they're not allowed to (or even if they did.)

Could the parents who object to this behaviour host Christmas at one of their homes, and invite everyone but Uncle D?

[recessional]

For my money, I think it's really important for the parents to have talked about this stuff with kids A and B beforehand, in detail, (assuming, of course, they're old enough) explaining just how awful the behaviour is, why it's hurtful, and that Uncle D is trying to use them (A&B) to hurt C. And then enable A&B to refuse on their own behalf however they like. It involves the kids in the process and becomes something they get to make choices about themselves, instead of making it something adults are Doing To Them. (And in this case, rather than being The Reason A&B Are Robbed, C actually is the one stood up for, by xer cousins included.)

I personally would also have reserve presents of my own for all the kids, even just small treats or whatever, to reinforce that, but I'm pragmatic like that. But, like. I know my response to being told as a child of 8 years or older that I was being deliberately used to hurt a cousin would be to flatly refuse the present; the treat would just soothe the sting of, well, it sucks refusing free stuff when you're a kid.

It can get a bit tricky with younger kids, but. Older kids should be involved in moral and ethical stuff pertaining to them as much as they can understand.

Granted, I also firmly think the much simpler answer is "I and my children will no longer be attending anything D attends for these reasons" and then weathering the family storm, but I'm hardline like that.

[vass]

Granted, I also firmly think the much simpler answer is "I and my children will no longer be attending anything D attends for these reasons" and then weathering the family storm, but I'm hardline like that.

Yeah, this.

[recessional]

My honest reaction at this point is "inform the brother and sister who insist on inviting him that they can have him at their gathering or you." It sounds like the LW has already otherwise cut Jerkface out of xer life, which from the sound of it is entirely deserved, so personally I'm inclined to draw that boundary harder.

And frankly, I think we're also past "polite" refusals and well into permissible Extreme Bluntness. And also into the realm of explaining to every child old enough to understand it just how hurtful the behaviour is and why it's Not Okay. There's nothing one can do about the two year olds, who have enough on their plates just figuring out fine motor skills and when to pee, but kids eight and older are old enough to understand this stuff, to understand why this is Uncle D being a jerk and why they shouldn't play the game.

[amadi]

There is no reason for the letter writer to expose their children to this kind of horrible and abusive behavior. That they continue to do so, annually, knowing what's to come makes me question them, as well as the siblings who insist on inviting Uncle Jackass to come play his disgusting reindeer games.

This shouldn't be a burden for the children to bear. This shouldn't be something that needs to be explained to them because it shouldn't be something that they should ever even be anywhere near.