Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Thoughts?

BNE said:
the grandma doesn't owe either child anything technically n she can gift as she wishes, but the only connection to the grandma is via Candy's husband. The grandma is communicating where Candy n Candy's firstborn stand. Candy is spineless n not putting her child 1st by allowing that. She should've never entered that situation.

Disgusts me.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but not everyone is as attentive when it comes to these things, admittedly there is no way she would've known this was gonna before she married the new husband. She didn't know the grandma was going to be inconsiderate, but before going to such extremes as divorce I think they should talk it out first and see where it goes.
 
Not the same but I met my 3 brothers on my fathers side as an adult . One time my oldest brother was having a get together at his house and my paternal grandmother refused to come because I was there. Like it was my fault. To this day she refuses to meet me. At first it hurt and I was an adult. I can only imagine that it hurt both kids to the core for different reasons. Everyone was wrong in this situation but at the end of the day the man should be able to control his mother and not let her affect his home. But I hope that the child that received the gift understands why they can't keep it and the child that didn't get it understands why they didn't.
 
MeanieJosh said:
I see your point, but not everyone is as attentive when it comes to these things, admittedly there is no way she would've known this was gonna before she married the new husband. She didn't know the grandma was going to be inconsiderate, but before going to such extremes as divorce I think they should talk it out first and see where it goes.
Click to expand...
imo theres no better reason for divorce. snubbing her eldest is a perfectly valid reason. if it continued n the grandma was still welcome in the house, Candy's husband was condoning it. By staying, Candy is accepting that treatment n the message it sends. Shes failing as a parent to her oldest. That's the issue, idgaf bout the shoes they can stay or they can go.
 
BNE said:
imo theres no better reason for divorce. snubbing her eldest is a perfectly valid response. if it continued n the grandma was still welcome in the house, Candy's husband was condoning it. By staying, Candy is accepting that treatment n the message it sends. Shes failing as a parent to her oldest. That's the issue, idgaf bout the shoes they can stay or they can go.
Click to expand...
PM me let me help you by tearing down that wall of pain with words of encouragement and postive thoughts.
 
BNE said:
imo theres no better reason for divorce. snubbing her eldest is a perfectly valid response. if it continued n the grandma was still welcome in the house, Candy's husband was condoning it. By staying, Candy is accepting that treatment n the message it sends. Shes failing as a parent to her oldest. That's the issue, idgaf bout the shoes they can stay or they can go.
Click to expand...
Trini, it's not past the point of no return yet, she can try and work it out with the g-ma. If that fails then it she should motion for divorce on but before then would be an overreaction imo
 
MeanieJosh said:
Trini, it's not past the point of no return yet, she can try and work it out with the g-ma. If that fails then it she should motion for divorce on but before then would be an overreaction imo
Click to expand...
what is there to work out? if it happened repeatedly, surely that ashy tramp can swallow arsenic?
 
y'all wld probably sell ur kids for a piece of ass n menthol cigarettes. ole hoes/niggas before my own blood ass heathens.
 
BNE said:
what is there to work out? if it happened repeatedly, surely that ashy tramp can swallow arsenic?
Click to expand...
But it doesn't say that she confronted her husband or her mother in law about the behavior, she's just letting it happen. If anything both candy and her husband are being doormats.........
 
Grandma isn't obligated to do shit for a child that's not related to her. My grandmother didn't have to do half the shit she did for my brothers, but she did. I mean I got more than them, every time she got me something. My brothers weren't getting something. This situation was basically my granny accepting my two younger brothers.

Now as far as me, I was the child from a previous marriage. My stepdads family accepted me, I was like 2-3. When my two brothers came along, of course their grandmother went over and beyond for them and somethings I wasn't included in. I was cool though.

Grandma is not responsible for picking up on shit that the others parent or grandparents are lacking in. Would it be thoughtful, yes but she ain't gotta do a damn thing for that child.

So to say a grandma isn't obligated to do for either of the kids is a stretch because if granny ain't obligated to do for her own blood, she for damn sure ain't obligated to do shit for a mf who ain't no kin to her.
 
MeanieJosh said:
But it doesn't say that she confronted her husband or her mother in law about the behavior, she's just letting it happen. If anything both candy and her husband are being doormats.........
Click to expand...
u r right, they r both being doormats but Candy's transgression is greater cuz its her who has a duty to her eldest. she's failing. returning some shoes aint gon fix that.
 
Thotful Insight said:
Grandma isn't obligated to do shit for a child that's not related to her. My grandmother didn't have to do half the shit she did for my brothers, but she did. I mean I got more than them, every time she got me something. My brothers weren't getting something. This situation was basically my granny accepting my two younger brothers.

Now as far as me, I was the child from a previous marriage. My stepdads family accepted me, I was like 2-3. When my two brothers came along, of course their grandmother went over and beyond for them and somethings I wasn't included in. I was cool though.

Grandma is not responsible for picking up on shit that the others parent or grandparents are lacking in. Would it be thoughtful, yes but she ain't gotta do a damn thing for that child.

So to say a grandma isn't obligated to do for either of the kids is a stretch because if granny ain't obligated to do for her own blood, she for damn sure ain't obligated to do shit for a mf who ain't no kin to her.
Click to expand...
Candy's still at fault for sticking around.
 
BNE said:
u r right, they r both being doormats but Candy's transgression is greater cuz its her who has a duty to her eldest. she's failing. returning some shoes aint gon fix that.
Click to expand...
But you don't think that she can resolve the situation? It seems that she's finally had her fill of the bs, and is ready to confront the g-ma, give her a chance trini
 
Forget Granny for a second. These are children we are talking about. How can anyone be happy seeing a child not happy. This child is in your family because of marriage and you have them on ignore? And then we wonder why these times are so messed up. We have adults purposely doing things that they know are going to hurt a child. I am not saying treat them both the same but people really don't care about a child because they are not biologically connected to them. Society is doomed!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top