To think SIL shouldn't have sold the baby stuff I gave her?

[CallaLilli]

SIL was pregnant last year so I gave her a stack of DD's clothes that she'd outgrown. As babies grow so fast it was all in good condition and only a few months old. DNiece was born earlier this year and I never saw her in any of the clothes I'd given so when I fell pregnant again I thought I'd ask DSIL if I could have the stuff back as DN has now grown out of it.

But she informs me that she has sold it all on eBay. I can hear you all saying I am BU as I gave it to her but it transpires that she sold it all on eBay soon after I gave it to her and bought other clothes with the money she made! The reason? She doesn't like putting DN in clothes that aren't made from natural fabrics or are dyed bright colours! Now if that were the case why did she accept them in the first place?

Im a bit flabbergasted tbh. I don't think I'd mind so much if she'd used them and then sold them but AIBU to think that if she didn't want the clothes she should've just said no when I offered them?

Expat, it's a term I've heard since I was a child. I am actually the least racist person you will meet. It was a term - heard often as a child - that I used to illustrate a point. Whether I should use it now, every one knows what it means, and it illustrated the point perfectly.
And, I don't get your 'continue to get personal' line. I haven't called you any names or attacked you. I have merely disagreed with you that the OP's actions were EQUALLY offensive as her SIL's. The behaviour of the SIL is reprehensible but the OP merely inquired of her SIL as to whether her little girl had outgrown the clothes she gave her as she could soon make use of them herself. Where is the harm in that? I don't see how you think the behaviour of the giver and receiver is equally poor. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Have one yourself, btw

Then they would have been a LOAN there's a difference.

and as with expat I'd not be interested in a loam. too much pressure to keep track of everything and to make sure they stay nice and don't shrink in the wash and it's panic stations every time your baby vomits as that yellow milk stain is a bugger.

And, to others on the thread, if my use of the term Indian giver offended anyone, I apologise. No racial offence was meant by it.

Asking IF the SIL still had the clothes is not the same as loaning them and expecting them back though. It's giving the clothes away and later asking if she still had them in case more use could be got from them.
For the SIL to accept the clothes, making out she would put them on her DD but then immediately selling them because they're not good enough is bloody rude.

I've heard a lot of things since I was a child. All of us have. Things that are not acceptable to use now. Indian giver as a term has racist connotations, this is easily searchable. Using a racist term to 'illustrate a point perfectly' doesn't make it any more acceptable. But carry on doing so. I will use the imaginary ignore button towards any poster who uses such terms and then when it's pointed out it's a racist term, carries on justifying why it's acceptable.

Giles, I don't expect the OP herself thought she'd be asking for them back. There is nothing wrong with saying, 'You know those clothes I gave you, if your little girl has outgrown them and you haven't given them to any one else, I could use them.
I'm sure OP would have been fine with
-they shrank
-they got torn
-I binned them cos they were stained
-I gave them to Laura down the road who's just had a girl
-I gave them to charity
But not:
-I sold them!
The OP could have done that herself.

YakTriangle, you succinctly made the point I've been trying to make.

Expat, I thought: I'll just research any term thoroughly before I use it in future. It was an off the cuff comment to illustrate a point. I explained it was a term I commonly heard in childhood, when I used it I used it with no racist intent, now I know it's racist I will cease to use it (you might look further up the thread and see my apology to anyone I might have offended unintentionally). Now I have been put in my place do you feel better? I'm sure you've never unintentionally said something others might consider offensive. Happy now?

shmooboomoo no offence taken.

Oh, and FYI, I didn't justify it. I said people know what it means, that it illustrated the point perfectly....that much is true, even if I now know it's considered racist. I don't think you can say I justified it when I apologized to anyone who may have been offended.

In the US, the term Indian giver is absolutely offensive. It involves a slur against native Americans. My parents used it and I grew up using it but as soon as I got away from home and realised what a racist term it was, I stopped.

I also grew up using the expression 'to jew someone down' (meaning to barter in order to purchase something at a lower price). Again, as soon as I got old enough to realise where the term came from, I stopped using it.

A term can still be racist in itself even if you aren't aware of the racist connotation when you use it! When people tell you it's offensive, the decent thing to do is to apologise and dump it from your vocabulary -- not try to defend the term by saying it's not racist!

Oops, cross-post, I've just seen that you have said you won't use it any more. That's cool.

Thanks ballerinabelle, I'd never dream of racially abusing anyone. It honestly was a term I heard often as a child. True, I should have educated myself as to its meaning but I hadn't, and consequently apologized here to anyone that may have been wounded by my use of the term. I used it in all innocence. Had I known it was offensive to anyone I'd not have used it, and won't any more.
When I said it, I said it in ignorance to make a point. I know better now but I resent the idea I tried to justify racism when I couldn't give a stuff about skin colour.
Thanks again,

Hi Marfisa, yes, I was blind to its offensiveness when I used it, and really did think there was nothing wrong with it. It's funny how we (or, I...not speaking for others) use expressions picked up in childhood without really thinking about what they might mean/ looking into them. Now I have had a read around it and I realise how offensive it is I won't be using it again.
I guess we heard a lot of stuff in childhood (or I did growing up in the 70s and 80s) that would probably not be appropriate now... I was ignorant, but not intentionally so, and I did apologise to any one offended. I've never heard the other expression you mentioned and wouldn't have known what it meant if you hadn't explained.

YANBU. I think it's incredibly rude to make money out of a gift. If the thing is going to be sold, it should be up to the original owner to sell it. If not, the recipient should pass the favour forward by re-donating the clothes.

Oh ffs. if you honestly expect people to hold onto stuff in definately, keep it separate the entire time from the rest if the kids wardrobe and only approved dumping ground is a charity shop here's a tip- don't bother giving it in the first place.

Giles, not the expectation to hold onto things indefinitely, just the expectation that the SIL will not accept when she will not make use of them, but will sell them on for her own gain... Like I said, if the SIL had given them to a charity shop, a friend to use, they'd shrunk etc I wouldn't have a problem (and I suspect he OP wouldn't have either).
It's the idea the OP gave them with one intention (out of kindness) and the SIL took them with another intention, to sell (not malicious per se, but not honourable or decent).

either your fine with them.going or your not though. I expect many clothes I've given have been sold off in bundles by now. id be pissed off if a load shit I'd got rid of suddenly turned up as being teh original owner only I can sell it.

I've already said I'd not have accepted in the first place but then I know how these things work tbh, people can't bare the thought if throwing their baby clothes away and assumes new mothers love bin bags of stuff brought over. cos after all babies grow so quick there's nonsense buying new stuff.

but here's the thing. some people don't want supermarket chic. they expect to have multiple kids and want stuff they feel will survive being passed down.

some people take issue with the ethics of certain manufacturers.

some people want to go the natural route.

and some people just want to enjoy buying stuff fir their baby themselves.

MN is full of threads where people have felt pressured into accepting stuff or family decide they want to buy the buggy or cot then turn up with something that's been sitting in great aunt maud's smoking shed fir decades or is the compete opposite if what the parents have in mind.

it can be extremely hard to get out of the situation when people start taking about all the stuff they had for their kids and "I'll pop it round Tuesday for you"

as I said, the second they turn up at your door with the stuff that's been sorted washed folded and packed it's already at the point where you feel you don't want them.to feel their effort has been wasted.

I personally wouldn't have accepted the clothes and at this point I'd be bloody glad I didn't cos god forbid they'd been sold on after my 4 year old grew out of them 3 and a half years ago.

and some people just use others as a dumping ground for all their stuff

personally I've found clothing handed too me as a god send. I'll be getting rid of a load soon though. 9 years and two kids later like hell have I kept everything separate nor can I remnber who got what so I guess I'm. gonna be labelled the bad guy here too

I get your points, Giles. You make some very good ones. But in this case, in the SIL's shoes, I'd have felt less embarrassed saying, 'that's honestly a lovely gesture, and I'm sure the clothes are lovely, but I can't accept as I only want to dress the baby in natural fabrics and pastels, I'm sure some one else would love them though' than saying, 'Oh, I sold them on Ebay'.
I know what you mean though, it can be embarrassing saying no, especially when the giver is well-intentioned. It's just that, in this case, I get the feeling the SIL, knowing she would not use them, saw her opportunity to make a quick buck. Just not nice imo.

I never said it was nice. and I couldn't intentionally do that.

however the facts are it's a gift and the recipient's are free to do with as they wish. nothing can be done about that and that's the choice you make when you pass it on.

I can well believe the SIL is a money grabbing cow.

but I can also believe that she had a ton of shit dumped on her by people who thought her stance on clothing and equipment or whatever was horse shit and "daisy looked so cute in this I can't wait to see it on tallulah......"

people on here have admitted to giving away pink glittery stuff bought fir them as they only wanted gender neutral stuff or exchanging Disney outfits or selling on coats given in July that won't fit by November when it will be needed. and most people are in agreement with that.

we don't know anything about teh family in question but if MN is anything to go by there's every chance the gift was never really a gift....it seeks to happen all the time.

And I can also believe fir precisely this reason hundreds of people currently have a loft full of crap because they fear the givers reaction should they ever get rid or that one day they will want ot back

I don't think Indian Summer is offensive, because it's not derogatory to anyone.

Although we now don't refer to First Nations people as Indians (because they're not, you know, from India) the term refers to a weather phenomenon, not an implied negative characteristic of a race of people.

Unlike the term Indian giver, which is clearly racist.

I doubt it Giles. It's really not that difficult. All the SIL needed to do was check with OP that she was happy for her to flog the lot. Or do any of the alternatives listed by ShmmBoo above.

I really struggle to imagine people hoarding this stuff for years because they are paralysed with fear of doing anything else. It just takes a simple question to the donor (either on receipt or later on) or, failing that, "paying it forward" somehow because that is normally the spirit in which these things are given.

Also I refuse to believe that ebay - photoing each item, sorting into sized bundles, describing each item including any flaws, uploading photos and description, finding the packaging, sorting out the postage, conveying it all to the post office and dealing with buyers trying it on for discounts on receipt - is the easiest, or only, way of disposing of baby clothes for anyone, ever.

but if it was given to you it's yours so why would you have to ask anyone.