This thread has been very, very interesting to read and although I like to think of myself as a pretty understanding person, hopefully it will remind me that often, circumstances impact how other people behave in ways that won't necessarily be obvious to us. We moved to a new home about a month ago, and noticed that our across-the-road neighbors had quite a bit of random yard furniture and building supplies stuffed into their front porch. It does look rather messy, although it doesn't bother me much (our neighborhood tends to be pretty casual). It was only about a week later that I realized these neighbors were having a new garage built, and had torn down their old garage. Now, I'm sure that's where the front porch items came from and I bet they'll make their way back to the new garage once it is complete. Had I judged my neighbors harshly based on first impressions, I would have not only been unfair to those neighbors but also would have denied myself a potentially good neighborhood relationship. One thing that I do think is interesting is that some people in this thread have mentioned not wanting to form closer relationships with neighbors specifically because they don't want to be held to higher standards of behavior or maintenance (as opposed to simply wanting more privacy, etc.). I'm sure that there are plenty of examples where this is the case, and neighbors will bully their "friends" into conforming with how THEY believe the neighborhood should look and behave. But, I think that more often than not, it's the other way around, and people will be more understanding of individual circumstances when they better know the people involved. My office actually had a workshop-type meeting at work this week led by a professional workplace consultant (not sure of her official title), with the intent to "improve office civility" that touched on this very point. The consultant brought up the example of what happens when someone cuts us off in traffic. Our first reaction, usually, is "What a jerk! That moron doesn't know how to drive." But if we then notice that it's actually a friend of ours, or something that we know and think well of, then we might decide that "There must be something wrong; perhaps he or she is late to something really important, or there's some emergency, or he or she simply made a mistake" or something along those lines. In other words, if we don't know a person, we are more likely to attribute poor behavior to the person him or herself. But if we do know a person, we're more likely to attribute poor behavior to an accident, emergency, or mistake. Of course, that's not the case in many situations, but perhaps it's worth thinking about. If I were in OP's position, I probably would put some effort into rebuilding relationships with my neighbors on a one house at a time basis (although I certainly wouldn't kill myself trying to make nice). But that's just because I enjoy my home more, and feel more comfortable in it (and especially spending time in the yard and garden), when I feel like I have a good relationship with the surrounding families. OP is certainly under no obligation to do so, however--this type of thing is so individual.

Maryv & others, You can find how to join on Facebook. See you there. There are now 124 members since the website was posted on Facebook. I hope there are more from here who join also. Barb Here is a link that might be useful: Jennifer Chiaverini's Facebook Page This post was edited by gram999 on Thu, Mar 21, 13 at 12:26

There's one more point I want to make about the "is it or isn't it an insult?" type of comments that could, theoretically, go either way. Once you mention the back-hand jabs as a problem, and lay it out there on the table as an issue, you run the risk of having *everything* that *everyone* says run over with a fine-toothed comb and *searched* for snide meaning. In other words, the hyper-vigilance to it ---all around, on everyone's part--- can go too far. It all depends on your intention and goal when you raise the issue. Unless you make a real point, to yourself, to DH and to SD, that you are raising the issue in the interest of probing beyond it to find out what the real issues are and resolve them openly & honestly, it will quickly turn into a tit-for-tat game and a constantly hyper-vigilant, hyper-sensitive atmosphere. I've been on both sides of this. As I said before, my SM is the queen of this back-hand insulting jab thing. And a few times, I admit, I've been tempted to resort to it myself with her. Again, because I have felt so powerless to say *anything* is even remotely an issue (b/c the invalidation and banishment was so hard the very few times I ever dared to speak up about anything) and out of hurt & anger in being so unable to speak up freely. It's stinky behavior, regardless. The few times I've done it I've known exactly what I was doing (and I know she did too) and I felt momentarily satisfied, but in the long-run I just felt a sense of sliminess and dread at how she would retaliate... It's a no-win game. But the worst part is when you start getting your words twisted around and recited back to you, with new nasty meanings read into things you REALLY, TRULY didn't mean to be insults. This happens when the person now feels like THEY, TOO can complain and put YOU in the position of looking like the mean double-speaker. The end result is that now NOBODY feels comfortable saying anything, for fear of how the worst possible meaning will be read into it. This is why it's so important to have the right goals & intentions before you make an issue out of anything... it isn't JUST to be a mature cooperative person, it's also to protect yourself from someone who may not be ready to quit playing games, who, in fact, may get the idea of escalating the game. Unless the underlying issue is resolved which has one or more parties feeling like they have to resort to these games, the game will go on... whether you say something to DH or not and whether he does/says anything about it or not. The game will last, basically, as long as the real underlying issue lasts. The only way, in that case, to be the bigger person (as well as cover your ass) is to learn how to call her out on her words in a way that simultaneously: -is nice (hence you don't come off like a prickly princess looking for a fight) -gives her the option of telling you what her issue is in a straightforward way (that means no guilt trips, power trips, punishments, banishments, shaming or invalidating when/if she ever dares to speak honestly about her feelings) -responds to her feelings/needs/issues with some offer of either a compromise, if possible, or just empathy/understanding her plight if compromise isn't possible -keeps gently but assertively questioning the precise meaning of the words in her jab until they're clear -ultimately makes the back-hand jab no fun for her because she'll realize that each time she does it she has to go thru this whole process of explaining what she meant, which she will not be able to do very well if it's an insult -hence it will be embarassing to her if it's an insult she meant, and frustrating that she can't "win" at that game, and she will have to quit it. But hopefully she'll learn that honest communication is better becasue she has nothing to fear from it The thing is, though, that if it turns out to be NOT a jab, and with time if you see that the jabs are stopping, then it's only fair that you ease up on the calling-her-out and questioning-her-every-word tactics. The hyper-vigilance should only last as long as it takes to get the truth to come out, safely, with no punishments or retaliation attached to it, and the issue finally resolved. The way I see it, this is the only way to keep it from escalating (or going even more "under the radar", as the case may be). If YOU become a model of honest, open communication and do your part (you can't do all of it youself) to make it clear that she has no reason to have to resort to low tactics, the situation should improve. That said, DH and SD need to do the same. If everyone's not ready to give up the game (including if the DH likes the game b/c it's less confrontation), it will go on (which is why this kind of dynamic is so rampant), but it can at least be made LESS BAD if any one person adjusts their reactions and has the right intentions.

Sometimes , things that we wouldnt even blink twice about with our own kids, become major irritants with stepkids. Most stepparents, whether they will admit it or not, are occasionaly guilty of the double standard, regarding their kids and their partners kids. Those of us who accept that the inclination and tendency exists to view the same action differently depending upon whether our birth kids, or our stepkids do it, are better able to guard against reacting to it, and thus have less tension over the little things. OCcasional lapses arent going to destroy things, but a lifestyle of different standards certainly will. About a month ago, husband and I were out shopping and came home to find one of my birth sons and his gf in our hot tub, eating bbq steaks that we had taken out for dinner ourselves . I could tell it bothered my hubby although he didnt say anything. Later, after the kids left, I asked him why he was bothered. My husband was wise enough to admit that it bugged him that my son and his gf just showed up, ate our food, and made themselves at home without us there....but he was also wise enough to realize that he knew it was his problem, it wasnt a big deal, and that he fully admitted that if it were HIS kids that did it, it wouldnt bother him at all. Even though both hubby and I dont sweat the small th ings, and even though we both try as much as we can to treat the others children like our own, and even though it doesnt really bother either of us if the kids come home anytime without letting us know, there are still times when one of the kids trigger a response that is probably just human nature, since they arent our birth kids. ITs not what they do, its how we react, or choose not to react to it, that counts.