Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To have found this conversation at wedding a bit daft

39 replies

user1485342611 · 25/06/2017 11:50

My friend's daughter got married yesterday. She's 31 and hasn't lived at home for a number of years.
My mother, who was also at the wedding said to my friend "well, that's one of them off your hands"
and my friend replied something like "yes, I'm delighted she's found someone who'll look after her".

The daughter is a highly intelligent, outgoing, capable lawyer.
Her mum also has a really impressive, very responsible job and has certainly never needed 'looking after' by her husband.

AIBU to think this conversation harked back to the 1950s?

Not a big deal or serious issue I realise. Just curious what others think?

OP posts:
BigBairyHollocks · 25/06/2017 11:51

Meh,just meaningless wedding chatter,I wouldn't think anything of it.

Saiman · 25/06/2017 11:52

I get what you mean.

But dh does look after me and i look after him.

My mum and dad arent 1950s but were happy i married a decent person. They were happy i had someone to share my life with.

Highalert · 25/06/2017 11:52

Yep sounds like wedding small talk. I wouldn't give it another thought.

SilentlyScreamingAgain · 25/06/2017 11:53

Most weddings are one tired cliché after another but it's nice to see everyone in a hat.

treaclesoda · 25/06/2017 11:54

I would have assumed she meant 'looking after' in the emotional sense. As in someone to be a support and a friend in life. Just as she would 'looking after' her
husband in that way. It would never occur to me that they meant 'looking after' in the sense of providing money or being the head of the house or some similarly archaic view.

LittleBooInABox · 25/06/2017 11:54

Everyone wants their kids looking after. It doesn't have to mean financially. It could mean emotionally, and with everyday things.

YABU to give it this much thought.

Original poster
user1485342611 · 25/06/2017 11:58

Thanks for replies.

I think the reason I found it a bit awkward was because my friend's sister, who has never married, was standing beside her. I just wondered how it made her feel. She's got an interesting job and lives alone in her own property.

Anyhow, probably way over thinking it. I don't normally analyse dull small talk but this just caught my attention for some reason.

OP posts:
Gizlotsmum · 25/06/2017 12:00

Surely looking after in those terms is supporting her, being a companion and being there if things get tough. Not 1950's little woman type thing?

WaahImTellingTheDorchester · 25/06/2017 12:00

Mum of perfectly adult capable daughter who hasn't needed her for any of this stuff for years is indulging in the being needed fantasy.

Friend making appropriate noise in return.

Saiman · 25/06/2017 12:01

So is the issue that they seemed to be living in the 1950s or it was insenitive to the sister?

Thats 2 separate issues.

TSSDNCOP · 25/06/2017 12:01

Was there no champagne at this reception to distract you OP? Weddings are a giant fun, cliche filled, whoops-fest. I had all the factors the bride had, my DH does look after me just like I look after him. What's the point of a marriage without that?

AlcoholandIrony · 25/06/2017 12:02

The same awful chat comes up at weddings time and again. I don't think anyone really means anything by it. It's unfortunately what people do.

RebelRogue · 25/06/2017 12:10

I find your mum's comment more offensive sorry.
This idea that girls/women are a burden to be transferred upon marriage is archaic and demeaning.

CrownOfPrawns · 25/06/2017 12:10

It's perfectly simple. Parents want their children to be happy.
I find it quite strange that you don't get that.

quizqueen · 25/06/2017 12:15

So why did your mother say that the friend's daughter was off her hands now when she hadn't lived at home for ages? That comment was just as old fashioned in today's climate. It's your own mother that you should be asking what her views are concerning the wife role in a marriage, surely. The mother of the bride was just giving a polite reply indicating that she approved of the match.

sadsquid · 25/06/2017 12:23

People reiterate naff cliches that don't reflect reality. It's not something I would say in a million years, and I'd be pissed off it I heard it at my own wedding! But lots of people don't give this stuff much thought. It's a wedding, they do the same wedding small talk their families probably trotted out at their weddings. It's a load of rubbish but I wouldn't take it to indicate anything more than the vaguest, most lightly-held actual opinions.

keepingonrunning · 25/06/2017 12:27

I read it as your friend meant the groom is a deterrent to opportunists and ne'er-do-wells, just by his presence in his wife's life.

keepingonrunning · 25/06/2017 12:32

I would think your own mother's comment was tongue-in-cheek cliched small talk.
Alternatively perhaps she knows of some friction between friend and daughter and there is a weightier meaning to her comment.

Original poster
user1485342611 · 25/06/2017 12:37

Sorry, there seems to be a bit of confusion. I found both my mother and my friend's remarks equally 1950ish.

I know they were just a cliche but I was imagining how I would have felt if I was my friend's sister standing there listening to a conversation that effectively seemed to be implying she was still not 'off her parents' hands' and leading a lonely life with no one to look after her.

Anyhow, I realise it was just thoughtless small talk. It just got me thinking on this occasion. My friend's sister may not have even registered the conversation, as she's probably used to hearing cliched stuff like that at weddings.

OP posts:
Notknownatthisaddress · 25/06/2017 12:38

This idea that girls/women are a burden to be transferred upon marriage is archaic and demeaning.

This ^

The whole conversation was a bit daft and outdated. But it was probably like that when they were younger. Seems odd to say it though when the lass has been gone for years anyway!

Most young women I know refuse to have the dad 'giving them away,' as they're not a possession, and they will NOT say 'obey' to their husband in the wedding vows. I didn't, and that was the mid 1990's. Fuck that. I don't obey anyone.

WorraLiberty · 25/06/2017 12:38

Well you know, married couples do tend to look after each other, especially in old age.

I don't see why her mum being glad about that, is so unusual? Confused

Birdsgottaf1y · 25/06/2017 12:39

I use the term settled, when talking about my adult DDs.

There has been times when they have been single and they rely on me more than they do when they are in a couple. So do the Mother and Father of my DDs DP's.

I agree that i would find your Mother's comment strange.

Catminion · 25/06/2017 12:41

The comment was a bit archaic, then again if the DD had gone out with a self centred shit previously, perhaps it was a reference to having someone dependable.

LilaBard · 25/06/2017 12:43

I dont think yabu at all. I know a woman who is about to hit 40. Like your friend she is intelligent, extremely successful, funny, great fun to be around, and very beautiful as well. She has also never found the right guy, and this is what her mum fixates on. Every time I see her mum and talk gets round to her, it's like a pity party. Like her mum thinks shes done nothing with her life simply because shes single. Makes me want to scream! I don't know them well enough to say anything though so I don't knowing it bothers her. It certainly bothers me.

1ofthesedays · 25/06/2017 12:49

meh

every (normal) parent hope their kids find the right person to share a life and grow old with. Yes it's a cliche, but still true. It doesn't mean they can't be independent and successful in their own right.

It would sound worst about a man finding someone to "look after him" if you are really reading too much into it.

Really not worth batting an eyelid.