ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 153 Comments

Coffee Break: Coverack Rain Coat

This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

light blue rain coat

I may be in the market for a new rain coat soon, and I'm eyeing these colorful coats from Seasalt Cornwall for a possible replacement.

First, let me back up — based on advice here I've been happy with Eddie Bauer's Girl on the Go rain coat for years. I just pulled it out for a rainy spring day and… I've misplaced the hood. Grumble! This is one of my main reasons I wear a rain coat because my thick hair takes forever to dry if it gets a bit wet. (I also like to stash lip gloss and lightweight gloves in the pocket.) I'm still hopeful I'll find the hood somewhere in my stuff, though…

In any event, I'm already thinking about what I'd want in a new raincoat, and color is definitely something on my list. Spring can be really dreary some days, so a colorful coat can be a great, easy way to lift your spirits. I'm not familiar with the brand (Seasalt Cornwall) but they have a TON of rain coats in lovely colors, both saturated and muted.

I think I like this pale blue organic cotton blend raincoat, but they also have some nice teals and medium blues calling my name. Lovely!

The pictured coat is $338, available in US sizes 4-18.

Sales of note for 4/24:

153 Comments

  1. My mother-in-law desperately wants to get both of her children (including my spouse and their sibling) and their families together to go on a vacation. We have a 3-year-old who we have never travelled with internationally before – for many good reasons. She’s an ultra-sensitive kid who doesn’t handle ANY discomfort or change of routine well. We have also never travelled with my in-laws – also for good reason. Small doses are generally best, and I wouldn’t say any of us get on smashingly well together. It’s more just tolerable.

    My spouse told MIL that we’d prefer something in-country, something for just a few nights, something over a school holiday period when we won’t need to take extra time off work. But MIL keeps upping the ante on her preferred plan- “If you are all willing to go to exactly the all-inclusive resort I’ve chosen in the Riviera Maya between February 10 – February 17 next year, I’ll pay for everyone to go. But only if we all agree on those details.” I don’t want to go to Mexico with my daughter just yet, not to that resort (which is well below the standard of accommodation we would seek out for ourselves), or at that time. My sister-in-law is likely to agree because a free vacation any time, anywhere, of any type is important to them – they don’t have the finances for anything else. My spouse is giving me strong “we should just suck it up and do it” messaging, but we’ve proposed many good alternatives that work for us and I have real concerns related to safety (food, etc.) and security of staying in a cheap resort. What would you do?

    1. I’d have a conversation with your husband and make it clear this will not work for your family and that you expect HIM to decline without putting the blame on you. If he won’t do that you have a husband issue, not a MIL issue.

        1. Yeah, I’m generally in favor of the “spouse deals with their own family of origin” rule, but I think it’s a little unfair to say you have a husband problem if won’t take the fall on this one. He wants to go on the trip!

          1. It doesn’t sound like he *wants* to go, just that he feels like they need to go, which is worth exploring.

            like – does need to go mean the whole time, or just a long weekend? That timespan includes President’s Day holiday so you could do a 3-4 day weekend and take only one extra day off.

          2. Well maybe wants to do it out of obligation, but I’m not sure there is a huge difference in this instance. Either way he wants to say yes to the trip.

          3. Whether it is out of obligation or not, OP’s husband wants to say yes to the trip.

    2. I would stand firm. Maybe send your husband by himself as a compromise?

      2. Really!? This seems horrible to do to her husband. I’d be furious if mine tried to pull that.

    3. honestly, I’d probably just go and chalk it up as doing one for the family (especially if your spouse wants to go — it seems like they should have a say, too). Also, having just had a death in my immediate family, I am really valuing big family vacations we took together previously, even if they felt like a headache at the time.

      But if that is a definite no for you, could you and your spouse and kid stay at another nearby resort? are there upgrades you could pay for that would make you happier? Or could you counterpropose another all-inclusive (or US venue and pay part)?

      1. I’d probably go, too. Of course grandma wants this trip at least once and it’s probably a huge deal for her to be able to pay for everyone. It sounds really generous and you don’t come off as great here.

      2. I agree and would go too. I went with my husband and MIL and our 3 kids to his family reunion in the middle of nowhere (which meant it was expensive and a pain to get to). Was it the best week I ever spent on vacation? Definitely not. I would have rather used precious time off for something else. But sometimes it is important to do things for the sake of family. And this was important to my MIL which means it was important to my husband.

      3. This. You’re doing this for your spouse as much as your MIL. While this doesn’t sound like a great vacation, it also sounds like something that is a one-time deal. Also, your spouse wants to go and it’s meaningful to him. I’m sorry to say that you may need to suck it up.

      4. Why not propose the higher cost resort, but tell MIL you will pay for your family (thus freeing up funds for her to cover the cost for herself and SIL)? Seems like you want to take the free vacation but be disgruntled that MIL won’t pay for something more costly. Pay for it yourself and try to get her to switch to your preferred resort!

          1. +1. This is what I would do because then you also have the freedom to cancel if you need to (which is always a risk with small children and illness). I’d feel far worse canceling and leaving someone else on the hook for the costs and I also don’t want to feel pressured to travel with the flu or COVID or whatever.

        2. This is a good suggestion. I’d look at Finest and Dreams resorts for properties that are a step up from Sandos but don’t break the bank. I think you could probably get 2 rooms at one of those resort chains for the cost of 3 rooms at Sandos. Or pretty close, anyway.

    4. what is the resort? can you say, we are available over presidents day weekend, but cannot take any additional time off from work and offer an alternative location?

    5. Is it actually a cheap resort or are you being unreasonable because you don’t want to do it? Those are the vibes your comments are giving off. You need to discuss this with your husband—you don’t get to have the final say.

      2. Definitely this. The kid is probably not the only one who “doesn’t handle ANY discomfort or change of routine” well.

    6. Is there any option for DH to go alone or with the kid, without you? Or if you go, can you discuss with him in advance carving out some solo time for yourself, for the spa or whatever else interests you, to make it more of a vacation? If his parents are even halfway involved with their grandkids, there should be more opportunity for breaks for you both than on a normal vacation.

      We went to a terrible Mexican all-inclusive with my in-laws a few years ago. We travel frequently and I was not terribly worried about safety, but otherwise had some of the same issues: the resort was waaaay below the level we’d book ourselves (food and drink were awful, pools were dirty) and I don’t enjoy spending time with my in-laws. It was not a pleasant week for me, but I think it meant a lot to my husband that we went, and not to be all cliche ~carpe diem~ but his father had a stroke the following year and now can’t travel, so in hindsight I am kind of glad we went.

      1. Yeah, this whole thread makes me sad.

        My SIL really disliked all of my side of the family, and honestly didn’t want to share her daughter (my niece, the only grandchild) with us. rShe refused to come to the not fancy but fine all paid for trip that my sweet Mother planned for all the family to travel for a week to a nice ocean side location. My brother felt stuck and they came for one day and left. My Mom was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer soon after and died. My brother and SIL separated several years later.

        Sometimes the things people complain about on these threads just seems like such a waste of life.

          1. This is unfair. OP has said that she’s offered up alternative ideas that work better for them and they’ve all been shot down. She’s not dodging every possible opportunity for family time. But boy, there is no thread that invites judgment like any thread involving obligations to family. It’s been wild lately.

    7. I’d go but I’d pay for my own resort elsewhere. Indeed I have done exactly this in the same circumstances and it works out well – we have space and our standards and family gets their vacation.

      1. At an all-inclusive resort? At a regular hotel, I agree this is a great strategy. But all-inclusives generally don’t let non-guests on the property. There’s a chance (but no guarantee) that they could purchase a day pass to MIL’s resort, but a week of day passes for a family of 3 will be $$$$ even at a dumpy resort. And then they’re sort of back in the original situation of spending most of the day at the cheap resort. I don’t feel like this solves anything and would just be overly limiting.

        1. Yeah you’re going to seem like the bougie and the other b word wife if you do that.

          1. I don’t even care about seeming bougie. I just think that with an all-inclusive resort this isn’t a practical solution because people normally spend much of the day chilling at the resort and there’s a good chance they won’t even be able to access each other’s resorts. It’s not like a regular hotel where you can invite your family to come hang out at pool even if they’re staying at a different hotel. And all meals are normally at the resort too, so you can’t meet for brunches and dinners at restaurants.

      2. But then how will everyone hang out together during the day? A lot of resorts, particularly all-inclusives, do not let non-guests use the facilities.

    8. Part of raising children is putting them in situations that aren’t always comfortable. Part of being a good adult, too. I don’t think you’re being as reasonable as you think you are here. But it’s for you to work out with your spouse.

      1. Agreed. This trip does not sound fun to me, but avoiding travel because your 3 year old is sensitive is a huge red flag. Many 3 year olds are highly emotional, sensitive and hard to travel with. It’s your job as a parent to put them in situations that aren’t easy for them so they can learn and grow. Coddling them to this degree is really not beneficial to your child – or yourself.

        1. We’re not in a position to judge what’s right for OP’s child. OP is. In my experience, people are often the perfect parents to other people’s kids.

          1. I mean, OP and her husband make the final decisions, but it doesn’t give them God-like judgement capabilities.

          2. But random commenters on the internet don’t have God judgment either. They are in the LEAST informed position of anyone in this little story to decide what would be the best move for OP and her child. Also? Getting food poisoning at a poorly regarded resort isn’t character-building.

        2. We do put her in situations that aren’t comfortable for her so that she can learn and grow. This is a child who needs occupational therapy to tolerate wearing socks or shoes, who at over 3 cannot enter public bathrooms without panic due to high ceilings and loud toilet flushing. A week in Mexico is well, well beyond what I think a reasonable challenge would be for her, and frankly would not be a vacation in any way for us as her parents.

          1. You don’t need to defend yourself to the mob, OP. That doesn’t sound like a vacation at all and your in-laws also need to take some steps to accommodate here.

          2. there are a few all-inclusives that are considered autism friendly – maybe those would be better (whether she has a diagnosis or not)?

            for the public bathrooms can’t tell you how many years i traveled with a pack of post-it notes in my purse to put them over the automatic flusher. i know it can be a fight but maybe get her some really cute ear defenders also. like these:
            https://www.amazon.com/homicozy-Protection-Cancelling-Headphones-Toddlers/dp/B0C2VKQJ78/?th=1

            Not saying she’s autistic, just as the mom to an autistic child with similar sensitivities these are things we’ve adapted with for traveling. We traveled a fair amount when he was 3 because he had so few words he couldn’t really express his extreme discomfort; pretty sure he has PTSD from a trip to kalahari where I took him in the ladies’ bathroom and all the sounds of flushing, showering, hand dryers, hair dryers, swim suit dryers…

          3. OP, I truly mean this kindly. The trip is 10 months away. So much can change in that time frame with a 3yo! My daughter was also terrified of public restrooms at 3. By the time she was 4, while she didn’t *love* them, she would use them without a fight. And the good news, at a resort in Mexico, your daughter can be bare footed most of the time. ;)

          5. Thanks Anons at 3:38 and 3:59 – really valuable advice that I truly appreciate. I didn’t actually know autism friendly resorts were an option. Also, it is true that lots can change.

          6. It’s definitely on a different price level than Sandos for sure, but Beaches is famously good for autistic and neurodivergent kids. They have resorts in Jamaica and Turks and Caicos.

            I will say though – kids can surprise you. Mine is not neurodivergent that we know of but was an extremely difficult toddler and preschooler who had tantrums that were probably at the 98th+ percentile level in terms of length and intensity. Travel has always been surprisingly easy. We did start early and do a lot of it, I don’t know if that helped, or if it was just luck. But there are situations she totally rolls with while traveling that would completely freak her out at home.

    9. She’s 3 so this is the time to travel without having to worry about school holiday periods! I am sympathetic to all of your concerns and would probably not like doing this either, but also agree you should suck it up. An all inclusive where you have your own space, don’t have to prepare or agree on meals, and can meet up at your convenience is probably the best kind of family vacation in this instance.

      1. +1 . I do sympathize with some of this, including most fundamentally not enjoying in-law travel, but I also think the laundry lists of reasons you can’t go weakens your position a bit and makes it feel like you’re grasping at straws for reasons not to go. A 3 year old can miss “school” without a second thought. Suggesting they have to go over a school break is silly.

        1. Most parents of young children are struggling with limited time off. I would probably do this trip as long as the safety was OK enough, but wanting it to happen over a school or daycare closure week is more than reasonable, especially if MIL is presumably retired.

        2. My daughter is currently 3, but will be 4 by time of the travel and in school. She starts school this September. Because she will not have passed her 5th birthday by next March or next summer, she is NOT eligible to enroll in most camps offered in my city (for regulatory reasons relating to staff ratios – I live in Canada and this varies by region). This means we will have to use lots of vacation weeks next year to cover childcare until she is eligible to attend camps during school breaks. The resort is a Sandos one where a google search brings up media articles about ~1,000 Canadians becoming sick in 2025 and permitting issues related to food safety. In response to comments about the standards – we suggested going somewhere for a shorter period of time (3 nights) instead of a full week. Staying within our own province at a cottage-type resort in the summer for 3-4 nights is comparable or less expensive than what MIL wants to book, while being a more luxury accommodation experience. She is very set on Mexico for one week for reasons I don’t fully understand.

          1. Because resorts in Mexico (in my experience) are lovely and warm. Canada doesn’t strike me as warm.

          2. I would not go to that resort, but if they pick a better one (even at the same price point), I probably would. I’m absolutely not going to apologize for not spending limited vacation time somewhere with a truly bad reputation for food safety incidents, especially with a young child.

          4. Isn’t this trip in February?? I think they’re saying Mexico is much warmer than Canada… in February.

          5. I think the food safety issue needs to come across like a “oh no this isn’t the resort for any of us!” kind of thing, it was too good to be true.

            Right now it’s kind of coming across like, we value our safety and health more than poor people do.

          7. The point is, the trip doesn’t NEED to be in Feb and actually, that doesn’t work as an ideal for anyone except MIL.

          8. OP I was sympathetic initially because cheap Mexican resorts with in-laws aren’t my vibe either, but you’re starting to come across as BEC about your MIL. Wanting a tropical vacation in Canadian winter doesn’t make her a monster. Suggesting a lake cottage trip in the summer – while perhaps a lovely vacation in its own right – isn’t a substitute for the kind of trip she wants. Come on.

          9. I really don’t know what BEC means, but moving on from that. I never said wanting a tropical vacation in winter makes you a monster. She goes on one every year and still can next year too, even if we do something else with the extended group in the summer instead. She is retired and has enough money for three nights at a cottage resort in addition to something in the winter. It’s weird that you are making it more extreme and either-or than it actually is.

          10. OP–is it possible that you are approaching this trip (and this discussion) with more hostility than you mean to?

          11. Ok I’ll rephrase: “wanting a tropical vacation during Canadian winter with her kids and grandkids isn’t wrong.”

            Whether or not she can afford two trips isn’t really the issue. She wants her family on *this* trip. While both might be perfectly nice trips in their own right, a Canadian cottage vacation in the summer isn’t a substitute for a Caribbean beach resort all-inclusive winter getaway, and if you can’t see that, you’re being deliberately obtuse.

          12. With all of this additional info- blame it on the OT. That the practitioner doesn’t think this will be good for your daughter but some alternatives are…

          13. OP, I think between making an adult super happy and making things tolerable for a 3 year old who needs OT to wear socks and shoes, I’d go with making things tolerable for the child.

            A vacation that’s more local, without massive food safety issues, sounds like a wonderful compromise if she wants kiddo on the trip. Your husband going without you + kiddo sounds like a great compromise if her priority is the Mexican all-inclusive in February.

          14. I personally would not blame it on the OT, frankly that sounds bonkers to even have one for a three year old. If you’re cool with a lot of side eye go ahead.

      2. I’m guessing that they also have an older child. The three-year-old is presumably the one harder to travel with but the older child the one affected by the school calendar.

        1. eh I doubt there’s an older child. This post has major first-time parent energy. Cat may be right about daycare closures and PTO though.

          3. This came up on the moms board earlier – there is definitely a contingent out there that loves to sneer at “first time moms” for any little thing, even things that 99% of people would find reasonable like “plz can we book somewhere that isn’t known for food poisoning guests.”

          4. Nobody said she was unreasonable for wanting to avoid food poisoning. This entire sub-thread is about the school calendar comment

          5. @3:45: That is a total misrepresentation of the conversation on the mom’s board. There was one overly sensitive poster who took another post out of context. No one said anything negative about first-time moms.

          6. The point is that there’s a negative comment about first-time moms here in exactly the vein that was mentioned over there.

          7. Except there wasn’t a negative comment posted there at all. One poster incorrectly reacted because of her own hangups, not because of anything that was said.

      3. “school holiday periods” for a toddler = weeks when daycare is closed and parents need to use PTO anyway.

    10. My immediate reaction is that I’m with your husband; it sounds like this is a lifetime family trip for his family, and it sounds like the alternatives that work better for you don’t work for everyone else. It doesn’t sound like it’s going to be an annual event, so I’d be willing to suck it up because it’s his family and he wants to go and it’s just the one time.

      Cheap doesn’t always mean unsafe, so I’m also not sure how substantiated your safety concerns are about this particular resort. But it sounds like the family trip can only ever be a place that’s below your standards, because it’s a compromise with different budgets. Maybe this plan is not the plan, but are your proposed alternatives actually feasible for everyone?

      I feel travel is always a bit of an adventure where we make memories however it goes. I do definitely prefer to stay near rather than with my in-laws when I can.

      1. This is a good point—will you always use your standards to refuse this kind of trip? And do you think that is fair?

    11. I think the alternative is to stay in a beach/lake house that you choose and pay for. Based on your description, it seems like separate rooms at an all inclusive might be better for your sanity than staying under one roof with these people.

      1. +1 that all-inclusive resorts (and cruises) are about as good as it gets for extended family trips. Everyone has a separate living space, the trip is paid for upfront, there’s no cooking or cleaning, there isn’t much decision-making, people can easily separate for activities during the day and come together as a group for dinner. I would take a cheap resort over a lakehouse any day, especially for an extended family trip.

    12. I have a prickly relationship at times with my own MIL, so on the one hand I get your position, but I actually think she’s doing her best here. She’s not “upping the ante” by making a declaration about time and place – she’s making a definitive plan so that people can either be in or out. Otherwise, group plans are never made. Someone’s got to do it. And frankly, unless the safety issues are real (as in, there’s been an incident or there’s a an actual threat, not just amorphous ones), I’d probably swallow my pride and go. I have a ND kiddo, and an all-inclusive is going to be about the best option (at least for mine). Lots of food options, including really basic ones like plain noodles, and the ability to work around kiddo’s schedule. It’s fine if you don’t *want* to go, but I think you need to be the bigger person here and give this gift to your in-laws and husband, and likely your kids, too. And then tell your husband you plan next trip.

      1. This! And OP, if you really do not want to stay for the full week, at least consider going for 4 nights or something.

      3. It sounds like OP is frustrated because MIL, who isn’t a busy working parent with a high-needs toddler and limited PTO, is calling the shots without considering how much harder travel is for OP. MIL sees this all inclusive as affordable and easy to coordinate, while OP sees it as the worst possible trip for their circumstances and more unpleasant than fun.

        I’m with OP here. If MIL wants to make memories with the family that can happen at the equally priced, closer location over a school break like OP proposed. MIL isn’t entitled to a trip at an international resort.

        1. Eh, I think the person who is paying gets to call the shots. OP’s family can say no, if they want to, and it sounds like the real issue here is not the MIL but that OP’s husband wants to say yes to the trip and she doesn’t. But it isn’t crazy for the person paying for the trip to pick the resort and dates.

          I say this as someone whose parents treat us to a lot of trips, but mostly on their terms. Sometimes I have pangs of wishing they would be a little more flexible with scheduling, because they’re retired and not confined to school schedules and we work and have school age kids. But ultimately it is a gift, and the person giving the gift gets the final say.

          1. It doesn’t sound like the OP asked her to pay or is unable to pay for her own family. This doesn’t sound like a gift at all to the OP, except a gift to the MIL!

          2. I didn’t say OP was unable to pay or was mooching off her MIL. But it doesn’t change the fact that MIL is still giving a gift and has more say in the terms of the gift than the people who aren’t paying.

          3. If OP was clamoring to go on a free family vacation or this was posed as optional I would completely agree. But in this case it sounds like MIL is the one who wants the trip and OP will be guilt tripped if she declines. I don’t consider that a gift.

            I feel for OP because I’ve been in a similar position. Matriarch declares we’re going on a family trip, picks a time that’s horrible for our inflexible schedules, chooses a location and lodging that are deeply unappealing…but it’s “free” so we’re jerks if we say no. The all inclusive part sucks for OP because she can’t stay at a different hotel- there’s no middle ground to make the trip tolerable. If there were more room for compromise (destination, timing, or resort) then OP could make it work.

          1. Or OP can go with the group and what her husband wants. Sometimes you compromise. Next time he’s doing something that wouldn’t be his ideal choice. I don’t see this as all that different as spending a holiday with in-laws when you would rather not. Five other adults are in this.

      1. She said it’s Sandos and there was a food safety incident so sounds like Sandos Playacar. It’s over $400 a night for their dates (admittedly, a holiday week in the US which creates inflated pricing). It’s definitely not a fancy place, but also not bargain basement pricing. There are cheaper options like RIU Palace.

    15. Her threat is that if you don’t go, she won’t pay? So what? If you don’t go there isn’t anything to be paid.

    16. I think people are being unfair to OP because she does not want to stay at a resort in an unsafe location that has had food safety issues in the past. I would not go on this vacation even with my very favorite people in the world. Surely there is another affordable all-inclusive in a warm location that is safer.

      1. I don’t disagree, but most of the comments are not criticizing her for wanting to avoid this specific resort. She has a long list of reasons she can’t go on this trip that have nothing to do with the specific resort.

        Your last sentence (“Surely there is another affordable all-inclusive in a warm location that is safer”) is key. She doesn’t have to go to THIS resort. But the substitute is a similarly priced tropical all-inclusive. Not a cottage vacation in Canada, which is a completely different kind of trip.

    17. Obviously you suck it up and go. It mean something to your ILs and apparently your husband.

    18. FWIW, I think your concerns are all valid! I have a typical 3 YO but she does not travel well. She barely sleeps and simply does not poop when we travel, and so inevitably gets sick for several days upon return from even a weekend hotel trip to see in-laws. We canceled our spring break plans this year because we dreaded the lack of sleep and follow up illnesses. We spent just one night away instead, and lo and behold, she was sick immediately upon return. None of our friends–or even our family–understand how grueling it is to manage this constipated, sleep deprived three year old who seems totally sweet and delightful when not traveling. “Just suck it up and go” is really hard to do when I have precious PTO available and I’ll burn several days on the other end dealing with illness!

      In your shoes, I would agree to go a Mexican resort for 4 days (like Thurs to Sun) that doesn’t food poison people. Seven days is way too long for a vacation with extended family, IMO, and too long out of routine for many small kids.

    19. Take a step back and ask yourself honestly – if this was a trip your mother was planning for your family of origin, all other details staying the same, would you say yes? Would you be more flexible? Would you even entertain the idea more willingly? Not asking if your mother WOULD, but if she DID.

      Marriage is hard and humbling and sometimes means compromise. If he wants to go and spend time with his family, I’m of the opinion that you should go. If God-forbid something happens with any member of his family soon after the trip, it could be devastating for your marriage.

      2. But maybe OP’s mother is much more considerate and great to spend time with. You can’t really remove the human factor here – of COURSE someone might be willing to endure more inconvenience if the promise of a wonderful trip with someone you get along with is waiting on the other end. But it’s a lot to ask if you don’t get along that well with someone, they’re not being that considerate of your own preferences, etc.

          1. No, in marriage you sign up for compromise. That might look like going a different week, for a different length of time, or a different resort/location.

          2. Noooo, when your spouse and his family all want to do something, you don’t ask them to change for you. You compromise and go.

        2. I dislike my in-laws intensely, and even I recognize that holding your in-laws to a different standard than your own parents is unfair. She doesn’t have to like her MIL. This is really about her husband, not her in-laws. The point is that her DH wants to go and it’s not fair to deny him that opportunity if she would say yes to a similar invitation from her family.

      3. Yeah, my in-laws are the so-called Christian form of MAGA and I have to put up with their garbage once in a while because I don’t want my husband to have a heavy load of guilt when they’re gone. It’s my gift to him. But in terms of regular visits, he does most of that himself. We’ve taken our kids to visit them all, but it’s not an annual thing. It’s a once in a while thing.

        Using OP’s trip situation as an example, I’d probably suck it up, bring along an ipad for the flight & give the kid unlimited screen time. My son had “sensory integration disorder” and an occupational therapist at that age, so flights and hotel rooms were NOT FUN, but much more manageable with the portable DVD player and over the ear headphones we bought out of desperation before we boarded our flight home!

    20. How concrete are the alternatives your husband has suggested?
      If your mil is shooting down any alternatives, that’s one thing; but if your husband is just saying “we’d rather it be different”, it might be worth him coordinating with his sister (figure out what she needs/her kids’ school schedule/whatever else) and propose 3 concrete alternatives: this resort in Florida these dates, this alternative resort in Mexico these dates, etc. And yeah, if money is an issue for sil and not for you, have him find a way to quietly propose paying for his family so all of you all can do something that works

      I get that it’s inconvenient and not your favorite thing, but I’d go out of my way to make this work, since it’s important to someone my husband loves. Only you know whether the proposed trip crosses the line from “not my idea of a great trip” (go) into “truly dangerous for my kid” (don’t go).

    21. Pay to upgrade to a better room or cottage and bring in the things you need to keep things calm for your daughter: your own fridge so you can prepare her usual breakfast, stock enough bottled water and juice, etc.

      3. Preparing your own breakfast is not really a thing at all-inclusive resorts, but they have pretty much anything you could want on the breakfast buffet and if there’s something you really want that they don’t have, they can probably arrange it. The in-room fridge will already be stocked with bottled water & juice (and milk if you request it). There’s a reason a lot of families go to all-inclusive resorts, it really is an “easy mode” vacation.

  2. Duckfooted readers – help. My foot is too narrow in the heel and mid-foot for a wide width shoe. But my foot is too wide in the toe box area for a normal width. I purchased the Vionic Chardonnay in a wide and it is comically large everywhere except the toe area. I want something with a closed heel, block heel or wedge, 1.5-3” max heel, open toe is fine but not peep toe (always pinches), for summer to wear with bare legs and dresses. Help?

    1. I’m sorry I see this so often here but what is a duck foot? Do you have arches or no? As a high arched but wider in the front with narrow heels person, I tend to just avoid slip in shoes and go for styles with ankle straps.

      1. This. I don’t have high arches or wide enough feet to need wide width shoes, but they’re still wider through the front and very narrow through the heel (this is what people mean by duck foot). After years of slipping shoes, blisters, and a closet full of shoes I never wanted to wear, I’ve really just given up on finding shoes that will stay on my feet until they have laces or straps of some sort to help adjust the fit.

      2. Maybe I should say, “Triangle shape”. Meaning the outline. I think I have normal arches.

        1. Yes, this is the normal descriptor. I hate when people hear describe themselves as having “duck feet”. Why do that?

    2. I think wide toe box is the search term you want. A Walking Company or similar store might have some shoes you can try on.

    3. Ideally you want something with a bit of give in the forefoot (so like spandex details). i feel like these used to be pretty easy to find but now are maybe harder.

      I have a similar foot (but with flat arches) and have liked Fly London and Born in recent years for sandals. not familiar with this brand but there’s a velcro strap across the toe area — NAOT also has the velcro feature.

      https://www.simonsshoes.com/products/lamour-des-pieds-mahiya

      not sure if this would look ok with dresses but
      https://www.simonsshoes.com/products/pavlova-sandal?variant=42002446286871

      1. Also medium to wide forefoot, high arch, and narrow heel here. (also Morton’s Neuroma! Fun!)

        I wore Fly London as my office shoes for years for this reason. They’re somewhat funky but passable and my fussy feet could handle them. My job involved a lot of walking between buildings in lower Manhattan, so no Louboutins or Jimmy Choos for me. I actually got a lot of compliments on my shoes, so….

        I am happy to WFH now and I’m sitting here with happy feet in my Haflinger wool clogs.

        1. I should also mention that my narrow heels mean that regular pumps and slip on shoes don’t usually work for me. I walk right out of them. I need some sort of strap to keep my foot in the shoe. Lifelong problem!

          1. Try a heel pad around the back of the shoe some time. Opened a whole world of shoes for me.

          2. I have those and I also have the ball of foot pads to push my foot back. But the real solution is wearing shoes that have a mechanism built in to keep them on my feet.

    5. Castaner wedges work well for me. The tie keeps the shoe on, and the canvas has a bit of give.

    6. The brands that work well for me and my duck feet are regular width Cole Haan, Jack Rogers, and sizing down a half size in Naturalixer and Seychelles.

  3. Why not propose the higher cost resort, but tell MIL you will pay for your family (thus freeing up funds for her to cover the cost for herself and SIL)? Seems like you want to take the free vacation but be disgruntled that MIL won’t pay for something more costly. Pay for it yourself and try to get her to switch to your preferred resort!

  4. late in the day, but – if you’re catholic, do you believe in everything? if you are a cafeteria catholic, what’s on your tray? i left the church when i realized there was nothing left on my tray anymore — love is love, women should/can be church leaders, yay birth control and the right to abortion, etc. curious b/c of this morning’s thread about catholic weddings.

    1. Raised culturally catholic, ended up at Anglican and Episcopal churches as they are serving the tray you are describing. Know plenty of people that made a similar migration.

      1. When I joined the Episcopal church, there were about a dozen people in our church’s membership class. There was one former Methodist, one former Presbyterian (me), and about 10 former Catholics. Our current priest (and his wife) were raised Catholic.

    2. Just the Apostle’s creed, same as Catholics for generations for me. It’s a pity a lot of bishops are wrong and have bad politics, but their politics aren’t mine and it’s not like it’s some kind of religious requirement to agree with them.

      1. But right now I do appreciate the church’s opposition to state sponsored euthanasia.

          3. Does everyone here watch the Pitt? I’ve cared for three immediate family loved ones as they were dying, and SPOILER the way Roxie left this world is how they all eventually went. A little more morphine stopped the pain and also stopped the breathing. So we do have euthanasia already, we just don’t talk about it. And I’m sorry for everyone who has to suffer for a long time before getting to that point.

            If you’ve never been in my shoes, you don’t know.

          4. It’s entirely possible that it’s not ethical to pay someone else to kill you because you want to die.

            It can also happen that there’s something else that people want more than dying, but it’s not being offered.

            It’s a,so strange to me that people who aren’t religious are so certain that death provides relief from suffering without any evidence of this at all.

    3. I don’t know a single Catholic on board with the church’s birth control teachings. Not a one.

      1. It’s always been this way too. People who define the church by its pronouncements from on high just seem out of touch to me. Leadership pushes in one direction, often against the prevailing culture, and ordinary people balance it out.

        I always think of the when the church championed celibacy at a time when forced “marriage” was still common. Did most people end up choosing celibacy? Of course not. But the idea that “no” was a legitimate answer did gain legitimacy.

        1. It’s because there are other churches you could switch to that actually line up with the beliefs you have (and probably have fewer large scale pedophilia scandals).

          1. Most of those churches have hardly any history, and if they have a future I hope it’s through healing schisms, not proliferating them. But my relationship with any church isn’t about looking to switch to one whose official party line matches up with my beliefs. A more correct set of beliefs would not make me comfortable in a religious setting that is organizes around beliefs and that people join because their beliefs lined up.

        2. right but the church’s opposition to abortion has turned millions of people into single issue voters and thus republicans. the church’s opposition to celibacy gave millions of men the idea that “no” was not a legitimate answer. the ordinary people “balancing it out” are still calling themselves catholics, giving more credence to these pronouncements with numbers as well as with any money they give the church.

      2. Hard disagree. I know a lot Catholics who are on board with control of women full stop. They’re just not the same people who are willing to engage in an open discussion of their beliefs with people like me. Which is fair. But please don’t pretend they don’t exist. Also just because people are what I might call hypocrites doesn’t mean they’re against the church’s stance. They might see their own use of birth control as a failing; they don’t necessarily disagree with the church’s stance.

        Frankly as someone who has grown up surrounded by Catholics, the idea that people are having these sort of intellectual debates about their faith rings especially hollow. It seems like a few commenters here struggled with reconciling their faith and their other intellectual, spiritual and political beliefs. Most Catholics I know simply don’t do this. They accept the church’s teachings full stop and very often use them for political justification for policies that hurt women even if they themselves don’t follow them. Or they simply accept and don’t focus on them. A particularly devout friend has explained that while the church’s position on things like birth control might seem unpopular to an outsider there is a significant portion of the local church’s most vocal supporters who are passionate advocates for what we would consider regressive social policies. This jibes with the increasing appeal of Catholicism to the increasingly misogynistic American political right.

        1. I agree, there is a major lack of intellectual curiosity (OP/former catholic).

          i’ve never thought catholicism held much appeal for MAGA though — i think they like the “baby jesus loves you” flavors of christianity where they can quote bible verses completely out of context and church leaders can say more or less whatever they want to because the church doesn’t have the history and dogma that catholicism has. where fire and brimstone waits for OTHER people but not you because baby jesus loves you!

          1. I think jd Vance would disagree. The dogmatic and the hierarchical nature of the church Catholic Church plus the constant displays of grandeur coupled with the misogynistic policies are probably appealing to authoritarians. Whereas those pesky Protestant sects might actually call on their followers to be more Christ like and occasionally allow them to arrive at progressive political positions. Plus your little whitewashed church has no gold. MAGA wants gold.

    4. raised episcopalian.

      About everything that’s left on my tray is the idea that you should be kind to other people.

    5. I was raised Catholic and left it all behind when I realized I basically have no faith, but my sister is still Catholic and is trying to change the church rather than giving up on it. She’s pro choice and pro woman and wants to be part of the solution, as she puts it.

      That said, she doesn’t give the church a lot of money. But she is a fan of the new pope, and superficially, I feel like I like the guy. Not least of which because he does Wordle with his brother every day.

      Signed, Wordle Nerd

    6. Yes, I’m Catholic, and yes, I believe everything*. But it’s not that I agreed with the Church on all the “issues” you mention, so therefore I became Catholic – it’s that I I believe the Church is what it claims to be (divinely instituted to teach, sanctity and govern), and therefore I have changed my position on “issues” to match its teaching (including putting the time and academic effort into making sure I understand the Church’s logic). But if I believe the Church possesses the authority to turn bread and wine into *actual literal God*, it’s not a huge leap to believe it also has the authority to teach on moral issues.

      *caveat: everything the Church actually teaches dogmatically or doctrinally, which isn’t the same thing as “everything the internet thinks the Church teaches).

Comments are closed.