An appalling claim of dinner-host 'etiquette'

[michelel72]

Dear Miss Manners: I sent out a dinner invitation to my in-laws. My brother-in-law called my husband to confirm attendance. He added that he will be bringing his boyfriend, and will require certain food accommodations because the boyfriend was just discharged from the hospital a couple of days ago after a major organ transplant surgery.

I decided to cancel the dinner, telling my husband that it is rude and entitled to inconvenience your host. If one is that delicate that he needs special treatment, then he should stay home. My husband says I’m being too sensitive and should just ignore the request. What does Miss Manners think?

That someone should be checking in on the boyfriend who just had a major organ transplant?!

Miss Manners has sympathy for the rampant abuse of hosts when it comes to inviting extra people and dictating menus. But she does not cancel dinners over them — and not for legitimate excuses such as bringing an established partner and asking to accommodate his post-hospitalization diet.

Not only are you being too sensitive, you are being actively insensitive. But you may take comfort in knowing that your husband's idea to ignore the (likely) medically necessary dietary request may actually be worse.

(Gift link to the full column)

Comments

[michelel72]

I admit this is so over-the-top evil that it seems like rage-bait, but ... it was published, and there are some breathtakingly awful people out there who cry etiquette as justification for their awfulness. A cautionary tale, I suppose.

If this is true, canceling the dinner party is probably the kindest thing the LW can do for their BIL and his boyfriend.

[jadelennox]

the only reason I think this is a bit is that it's one thing to be a dick about food restrictions or medical needs, and one thing to use random issues to mask homophobia, but specifying that this was "a major organ transplant surgery" and ALSO calling it "rude", "entitled", and "delicate" is so over-the-top that it's bait.

[minoanmiss]

I think you're right, and I want you to be right, so you're right.

[juniperphoenix]

...Does the boyfriend actually WANT to go out for dinner a few days after a major organ transplant?!

[michelel72]

It sounds like such a bad idea!

[castiron]

I don't know what the standard hospital stay is post-transplant, so it could be that the transplant was weeks ago, not days. But your point still stands. Just because someone's well enough post-surgery to come home doesn't mean they're well enoguh to go out to dinner with unsympathetic in-laws.

[lilysea]

yes, in a world where COVID is running wild, dinner parties with hosts who don't care about other people's well being sounds like a really bad idea

(because do we really trust LW to be taking good COVID precautions, and to cancel dinner if she's been exposed/had symptoms?)

[redbird]

Yes, this, and I didn't even think of it until you pointed it out. The risk of covid is a reason for people to go home from the hospital as soon as practicable, but that's very different from exposing oneself to everyone else's germs.

"Major organ transplant surgery" means immune-suppressing drugs, which make any infection more dangerous.

[leeshajoy]

Call me cynical, but I wonder if the fact that the brother-in-law was bringing a boyfriend might have been a factor here.

[carbonel]

I was just about to post the same comment. If you're cynical, so am I.

[inkstone]

+1

[michelel72]

It's entirely plausible, but I also keep wondering about some oddly vague details in the letter.

"I sent out a dinner invitation to my in-laws." So the LW invited more than just the BIL solo.

Does that mean the LW canceled a larger party over being offended by just one of the guests having a dietary requirement? If so, what did the other guests think? Were there discussions amongst all the parties between the notice-of-needs and the cancelation? (Did any of them take the BIL's side?)

Does it mean the LW invited the brother-in-law and the BIL's legal spouse (current), or spouse (former), or unwedded coparent? Is the boyfriend in place of someone else, an extra person, or other?

"He added that he will be bringing his boyfriend" -- It's quite unclear whether the LW invited the BIL-solo, the BIL-and-someone-else, the BIL-and-this-boyfriend, or the BIL-with-a-plus-one. We're told only what the LW says the husband said the BIL said. Why keep the phrasing so vague?

The LW absolutely seems contemptuous of the BIL. Is that because the boyfriend is male, was/is an affair partner, wasn't actually invited, is the third party of a polyamorous arrangement, just had gender confirmation surgery ...? (That last one seems unlikely to be called "major organ transplant surgery", but this LW sounds so off the wall that I can't quite rule it out.)

I don't know that this short letter rises to Missing Reasons, but ... why so vague, LW?

[dissectionist]

gender confirmation surgery ...? (That last one seems unlikely to be called "major organ transplant surgery"

This made me laugh so hard. As a Trans(tm), I put forth a motion that we start calling gender confirmation surgeries “sex organ transplant surgery”, because we are indeed transplanting one sex organ with another 😂

[redbird]

The only questionable thing LW's brother-in-law did was to say "I'm bringing my boyfriend and he will need this specific food" rather than asking to bring his boyfriend, and then mentioning what the boyfriend can or can't eat..

On the other hand, if this is an established partner, not "I'm bringing my new boyfriend, he just got out of the hospital," the LW and her husband should have invited the partner along with the other in-laws.

[melannen]

Yeah the way LW phrases the letter it sounds like what happened was LW said "You're invited to the family dinner party, BIL!" and BIL replied "Great! I'm bringing an uninvited guest and the menu you're going to need to serve is spaghetti in vegan marinara sauce, with a twelve-grain toasted roll on the side (here's the brand), a cesar salad - only romano lettuce! - and mango sorbet for dessert." It if was something like that, LW is in the right.

I kind of strongly suspect that is not what actually happened, though.

[minoanmiss]

... wow. wow.

[conuly]

Please let this be fake.

[princessofgeeks]

I do not understand people.