In a serene lakeside cabin meant for peaceful family retreats, tension brews beneath the surface as one woman grapples with the weight of unbalanced expectations. What began as generous hospitality has quietly tipped into a relentless obligation, leaving her exhausted and yearning for recognition beyond the endless meals she provides.
As the holiday approaches, a simple request to share the burden ignites an emotional storm, revealing deeper struggles of fairness, respect, and the invisible labor that often goes unnoticed within families. This is more than just a barbecue; it’s a battle for boundaries and appreciation in a tangled web of love and duty.
Am I the asshole for suggesting my mother in law bring more than dessert to our lake house when she invited 8 family members over for a bbq?
As renowned family therapist Dr. Harriet Lerner explains, “. . . Boundaries are a way of teaching other people how to treat us.”
The situation presented revolves around the establishment and enforcement of personal boundaries, particularly concerning property use and financial/labor contribution to social events. The original poster (OP) has established a precedent by hosting and providing the bulk of the food for several years, which the mother-in-law (MIL) has come to expect as the norm, treating the cabin as a semi-public venue for her extended family functions. The MIL’s minimal contribution (a dessert or salad) suggests an underestimation of the true cost and effort involved in hosting a large group, or perhaps an intentional avoidance of equal responsibility.
The OP’s suggestion that the MIL bring the main course and dessert represents a reasonable attempt to rebalance the division of labor and expense. The negative reaction from the MIL indicates resistance to change and a desire to maintain the status quo that benefits her. While the OP’s communication could have been framed earlier, their action to prevent financial burnout is appropriate. Moving forward, the OP should clearly define expectations *before* any event is scheduled, outlining what they will provide and what guests must bring, or clearly state that future gatherings must be potluck style or hosted elsewhere if equitable contributions cannot be guaranteed.
THE COMMENTS SECTION WENT WILD – REDDIT HAD *A LOT* TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE.
The original poster is facing a recurring issue where their in-laws expect them to shoulder the full financial and labor burden of hosting large holiday gatherings at their private property, despite past agreements where contributions were shared. The central conflict arises from the poster’s decision to assert a boundary by requesting the mother-in-law contribute significantly more to the meal, which has caused immediate friction.
Given the established pattern of unequal contribution versus the expectation of hosting, is the original poster unjustified in refusing to continue providing the entire meal and drink spread for an ever-expanding guest list at their own cabin, or did they overstep by unilaterally changing the established hosting agreement?
