Dear Prudence: My SIL is being a little unreasonable

[cereta]

Dear Prudence,
I don’t get along with my sister-in-law. She adores my brother and makes him very happy so I try to be friendly when I see her, but now that we’ve moved back to his hometown and she lives just a few miles away, it’s gotten much harder. She criticizes my taste in furniture, my clothes, and my cooking. I try to deflect the comments, but she will not let it go. Recently, my husband and I adopted two rescue dogs and posted pictures of them in Facebook. I then get a text from my sister-in-law telling me that I have to change the names of my dogs because she is going to use those names for her kids, and that she is now pregnant but I can’t tell anyone. This is ridiculous and I don’t know what to do. Do I just ignore her and hope it goes away? Share the text and get raked over the coals for spoiling the pregnancy surprise? Post tons of pictures of my dogs and refer to them as my babies? I have to live with this woman in my life and I don’t want to hurt my brother but I am not changing the names of my dogs.
—Changing Names, Keeping Boundaries


This is a sister-in-law for the record books! I’ve heard of plenty of fights over baby names, but I’ve yet to come across the dog-versus–unborn baby combo, where the dogs in question have already been named and the baby does not yet exist. I almost—almost—admire her ability to mine conflict from a seemingly peaceful landscape. As tempting as it might be to start rubbing Ruby and Synthesizer in your sister-in-law’s face, I think gentle nonengagement is the road to hoe here. “We’re not going to change the dog’s names, but congratulations on your pregnancy! What exciting news.” Don’t get drawn into an argument or an explanation for your behavior, because what she’s asking is so absurd that the only response it merits is a flat refusal. There is a nonzero possibility that this pregnancy is invented solely to try to get you to do what she wants, which is why she asked you and not your brother, and why she’s swearing you to secrecy now. Perhaps I’m being paranoid, but your sister-in-law has already displayed a propensity for the irrational, and it’s quite a coincidence she favors the name of both your pets, not just one. Plenty of dogs have human names and vice versa; your sister’s children, whenever they come into being, will have to share their names, no matter how unique, with any number of other humans and animals. They’ll be just fine.

Comments

[misbegotten]

Hahahahahahahaha!

Our pets are our babies, and yet it didn't even occur to my sister that she was naming her daughter the same as one of the cats.

There is a nonzero possibility that this pregnancy is invented solely to try to get you to do what she wants

That is one of the strangest comments I have heard from an agony aunt. :P

[torachan]

That is one of the strangest comments I have heard from an agony aunt.

It's exactly what I was thinking, though. I just really doubt the SIL is pregnant or if on the off chance she is, that had those names in mind at all before seeing them used for the dogs.

[misbegotten]

I think it was probably an attempt at humor that fell flat for me.

I just really doubt the SIL is pregnant

I had not even considered this. Wow. That makes SIL even more twisted than I initially read it.

[torachan]

I mean, who knows! It was just my first thought because "I'm secretly pregnant and had totally planned to give both of those names to my kids!" is so bizarre that my first reaction is to disbelieve all of it, not just the part about the names.

[misbegotten]

I can see it. You've persuaded me. Wowsers.

[cereta]

You know, I will admit to being a tad miffed when my brother's family named a dog "Lucy" (they rehomed her a month later for Reasons), although that was partially an ongoing thing wherein my siblings make negative effort to remember or respect my preferences. (Long story redacted to: they're the sort who deliberately send me mail to "HatedNickname Husband'sLastName" when they know I don't use either. They don't even remember that I changed my middle name or that I use it as my primary name.)

And I admit that I gave my mom the side-eye when "Lucy" showed up on her list of potential cat names. She went with "Molly."

And I will even admit that I would have been annoyed if someone in my family had, while I was pregnant and having told them the name we chose for the small fanperson, given a pet that name.

So taking all that into consideration, even I think SIL is being unreasonable, here. I find myself wondering if she actually even wanted to use those names (I mean, one name I could get, but the LW just happened to pick multiple names SIL planned to use? I call shenanigans). SIL sounds like someone who wants reasons to complain and cause conflict. Poor LW.

[misbegotten]

SIL sounds like a right pill. But I still think Prudence was being a bit (forgive me!) catty. "Plenty of dog's have human names," irks me. They have names. Full stop.

Having said that, I wouldn't want someone in my immediate family to name their pet misbegotten. It is just weird.

[cereta]

Parts of Prudie's response were a little weird. I can see where she's getting the "I doubt SIL is pregnant," but it's an odd assertion to make. I'm personally more doubtful that SIL had actually planned to use not one but multiple names the LW gave to dogs.

Breaking this down more for my own clarity than anything else ;):

I think (and I am admittedly biased, here, on accounta it happened to me) that it's reasonable enough to be irked if a family member gives a pet a name that already belongs to a person in the family. I think it's reasonable to be irked if someone were to give a pet a name a family member has already announced they plan to give a soon-to-be-born baby. I could even see being irked if, for example, I've been saying emphatically for years that if I ever have a son, I'm naming him Leo, and then a family member names a cat Leo. That last one is borderline, but with all the possible names you could give a cat/dog/goldfish, choosing one you know a family member/close friend wants to give a child is kind of a jerk move.* Demanding someone change a name they've already given to a pet just seems to cross a line, although that's colored by the context of SIL's other behavior.

*Although oddly, I would not necessarily object to said person giving a human child that name if they have similarly strong attachments to the name. I acknowledge that this is not consistent.

[shirou]

Your footnote doesn't seem odd to me. I have always had pets, and I have loved them, but pets are not people. Sharing a name with a pet and sharing a name with another person are not the same thing. I despise the practice of claiming names when it concerns humans, but my feelings on pet-naming are about the same as yours. I would definitely find it weird if my parents gave a dog my name or the name of one of my immediate family members (wife, children).

In different circumstances, I could see one person asking another to reconsider a pet name because the first person was planning to use that name for a conceived but not-yet-born child. Phrased in a non-demanding way, that would not be unreasonable. In the LW's case, though, the SIL's pattern of deceit and manipulation would incline me to ignore her request.

[delight]

I just need to appreciate "Ruby and Synthesizer," in part because Synthesizer is a great name for a dog.

[melissatreglia]

My mom's cat and my boyfriend are both named James. We get a lot of laughs out of it.