To not want to share a room at age 27?

[Tangw]

Every year, our extended family rents a big house and we spend a week together. Always rent the same house.

Growing up, I have always had to share a room with a younger female relative. This hasn’t happened for a number of years because usually someone in the family can’t come for whatever reason, so me or the relative gets to have the spare room.

This year, everyone can make it which is great. But that means that I have to share a bedroom for the week. AIBU to not want to share at this age?

I'd be happy to share a room with a female relative on holiday. If you're not, either don't go or find somewhere nearby to stay.

It’s one week……….you'll be in the room for 8hrs…….I don’t see a problem unless your roommate has a nightly dose of severe flatulence 😂

Again, what? Weird rules to make up. One person per bed space is the default, surely. And sharing with a sister, mother, cousin, friend is all fine. Personally, I'd not like to share with a stranger, so I'd not choose to stay in a hostel, and when travelling solo, at the researching stage I'd request and pay for a private room if it was something like a hen where I wouldn't know everyone - even if that meant having to pay double for a 2 person room to myself. But, I'd generally expect the default position of people close enough to go on holiday together, (especially family) would be that it's one bed space per person, and people share so that the rooms are full to their designated capacity. So 2 in a double/twin room, 3 in a triple room, 4 in a 4 person family room etc.

Totally depends if you are paying or not.
We have an interesting scenario for our extended family uk holiday. In previous years we ( DH, DS and myself) have picked up a lot more of our share of the accommodation cost, but now everyone ( apart from two DCs who will be sharing the best room with their DPs) have been asked to pay an equal share. Some people get huge en-suite room that we actually paid a lot more for and 3 of the young adults share effectively 2 rooms. Will be interesting to see if anyone pushes back on the basis of not such a good room .

@TheHerboriste Well yes, I’d prefer my own room with an en-suite too, but it depends whether I and the rest of the group can afford a holiday home that offers that.

I’d also prefer to stay in a five star hotel rather than a three star…but I can’t usually afford it. 😂

What if some of the rooms feature king-size beds? Easily fit three people. So could a queen at that.

Again, arbitrarily assuming couples get privacy but singles don't is obnoxious and underscores that solo people are second-class citizens. If the objective it to do it as cheaply as possible, there is no reason that couples can't share their space, too, to reduce costs.

Otherwise assign one room per household, regardless of who makes up the household.

So an ultimatum for a solo person is OK? Suck it up for don't go?

What if the ultimatum were: "This year we are splitting up couples. Rooms A and B will be for women, Rooms B and C will be for men. Three per room. Double bed and a single airbed on floor. It's much cheaper this way. Take it or leave it!"

Good grief.

Of course the number of bed spaces determines the number of people that should sleep in the room.

A single person wouldn't be expected to hop in with a couple, because it's a bedroom for 2, with 2 bed spaces and fully occupied, not a bedroom for 3 with 3 bed spaces. Now don't get me wrong, I'm as open minded as the next person, and if the couple want to invite the single in to their already fully occupied bed, then that's up to them, but of course the default wouldn't be to put three people in a bed designed for 2, any more than it would be to expect 2 people to share a single bed. A two person room with two bedspaces is designed for two people to share - it's that simple.

No one is giving any perks or preferences to people based on marital status. EVERYONE is expected to share. If anyone doesn't want to share they should a) mention it as a non-negotiable at the planning stage and be prepared to drop out if they can't be accommodated, b) expect to pay more for a 2 person room to themselves than they would do if they were sharing a 2 person room with another occupant.

The people not suffering your fate don't care about your fate. It's sad but not uncommon even in families.
Personally I would either not go, or find somewhere else to sleep and just go for the other bits. Their reaction to that will show you your relative status in their eyes. Perhaps your birth family is better than mine but I wouldn't hold high hopes.

Otherwise assign one room per household, regardless of who makes up the household.

@TheHerboriste Well, that could still result in needing extra rooms, it all depends how many separate households are going.

Perhaps this extended family holiday is simply getting unaffordable now that everyone needs their own space.

The OP hasn't returned to answer who is paying for the holiday home anyway, so I suspect it's not her.

Is there a big garden? Take a tent.

@mrsm43s Your rigid thinking about how two unrelated singles being thrown together is no different than married couples sharing "two spaces" is exactly what I am trying to highlight.

People are more than warm bodies being slotted into spaces. Forcing a solo to share a room with someone they don't live with is a lot different than "married couples are just taking up a two-person room too." For quite a few people it is a vastly different proposition and shouldn't be waved off and dismissed with "don't be precious."

If a solo person is precious for wanting privacy, then so is a married person. Let the marrieds share, too. King beds can accommodate three, or couples can be broken up and slotted into bunkrooms, or an inflatable bed placed on the floor in the couples' rooms.

Each household should get its own room and pay the same rate as any of the other households. How many people they each decide to cram into their rooms is their issue.

But she's always expected to share
It's someone else's turn now

When you suggested another property did you also do the research and find it? If you want to change a long standing tradition you stand the best chance by making it easy for them to say yes to. Find somewhere better and cheaper and pitch it, and/or offer to take on all the admin.

Fair enough if you feel you've outgrown sharing, but YWouldBU to expect others to guess you feel this way and to go out of their way to find a different house just because you are now 27. Finding these properties that work for everyone is quite tricky and I completely understand why the family just goes back to the same place.

King size beds are designed for two, as you are well aware.

Holiday homes give a stated occupancy. It's two per double/king bed, one per single bed (and often 2 on a double sofa bed which is frankly rather a squeeze).

How those beds are distributed across the rooms tends to vary, but it's very rare that I've seen a double/king plus a single in the same room, but if there was, I'd expect 3 in that room. Or a family room with a double/king plus bunks (which I'd expect to be occupied by 4 people).

But mostly it's one double or king bed per room, or one or two single beds per room. So generally everyone has to share, regardless of their marital status, unless they are lucky enough to get the single room with one single bed in it.

The couples are sharing TWO people to a two person room. They are not getting a private room each. They are not asking anyone to do anything that they are not doing themselves. Asking them to have a third person in a two person room/bed is not reasonable.

I can actually see how this moved from two teens/children sharing a room (ok) into 2 adults sharing, which probably none if the other (older) adults do, as if nothing has changed.

You do have choices though.
You can see if someone else could share with your relative and you get a room fur yourself.
You can decide not to go.
You can take somwthing else nearby

Id also reach out to the other relative to see if they feel as uncomfortable as you are. The two of you having an issue with it might have some chance to move the needle.

I agree with this if there are other people who have a room to themselves without sharing who could reasonably share in place of OP and her DCousin. I suspect, however, that everyone is sharing 2 to a room.

@OuchyEars Surely it's nothing deeper than the additional cost?

My quick search of holiday homes in the area we like to visit showed that adding an extra bedroom increased the weekly rental cost by several hundred, a thousand in some cases. Not everyone has that extra to spend on accommodation.

I’ve been in that situation before - didn’t want to share a double bed with a friend as I wouldnt sleep well and would fidget. I slept on sofa cushions on the living room floor and was very comfy.

Many, many vacation villas have two double beds per room, or a king and a sofa bed, or otherwise are marketed with more than two-person occupancy per room.
I have seen villas in warm places that even have bunk beds in the corridors between bedrooms, or two sets of bunk beds in a double room.

Three average-size people can easily fit in a king. Needs must on holiday, don't you know? We can't expect the same accommodation and privacy as we'd have at home!

You're saying that married people get to choose who they room with, but singles don't, they take what they get. Why should that be?

Again, the "two per room" thing overlooks that two people from the same household is not the same as two people randomly thrown together. If random roommates is ok for solos, it should be OK for marrieds, too.

If the consideration is to rent a place with enough separate bedrooms that married people get their preference, but not enough bedrooms that solo people get their preference, that is patently unfair.

Rent a bigger place. Single people shouldn't be shoved just anywhere with anyone so that everyone's overall cost is lower. If cost IS the key consideration, everyone should bear that burden by sacrificing privacy and preference.

Sharing on holiday can happen at any age as a way of saving money. It doesn't mean anything except that on this occasion you don't have a partner with you.
If you really hate sharing you could miss the holiday or else identify a space for you or your younger roomie to sleep on a sofa or airbed.

How much would you save by going DOWN a bedroom? Put three people in each room instead of two, randomly matched. Use inflatable beds on the floor. Imagine the savings! Who cares if married people would prefer a room to themselves, so would solos. We can't have everything!

Without further explanation from OP, this was my assumption. There are, say, 8 rooms and 16 people are going. So 2 people are allocated to each room.

That was the reason that I made my original response; if OP doesn't want to share, assuming there are two people allocated to each room, then she needs to pay the difference between getting a larger rental or she alternatively needs to stay someplace else on her own.

When did sharing become so unacceptable? We see it frequently on here. It isnt seen as ok for siblings to share, everyone wants there own house not a flat share, cant share on a hen weekend etc.

Are you paying? If not you accept what is offered or you dont go.

If you're paying the same amount as the other adults, I don't think it's right they should just assume you'll always be okay sharing a room, particularly if everyone else is sharing with a spouse or partner.

It's not unreasonable to want privacy if you're paying your fair share, but as they're unwilling to rent a larger house your options are limited. You could make the case that you shouldn't have to pay as much as the others, under these circumstances, if that would make it more acceptable to you, but I suspect the won't like that idea, either.