"Once you get over your resentment that your friends have paired up, you will surely realize that expanding your social circle brings more pleasure to your life."

There is literally nothing in the letter -- not one word -- that suggests resentment of her friends. She has small space, wants to see a group of people, and doesn't have room for all their spouses. I don't disagree that there's no polite way to hold a dinner party and not invite spouses, but there's absolutely no hint that this is what's at issue. It would be nice if there could be one week of letters that didn't rely on the ancient, cobweb-laden stereotype about the world being made up of happy couples and the single people who are out to jettison their happiness out of jealousy.

"Resentment" maybe has too harsh a ring. Is there a word for a mild level of resentment? She wants things to be the way they were, not the way they are. It's not that she's jealous her friends are coupled up, but she is clearly jealous she will have to "share" them if she wants their company. Totally natural, something we all go through, growing up, I think.

I also thought "resentment" was too strong of a word. The LW really has no way to invite just her friends and no spouses/significant others at the same time. If it really is just a space issue, why is having a formal dinner vs. some other event that big of a deal?

Why not just have a cocktail party or a less formal meal (where you can eat in the living room)? If her grad school friends are all female, then there's an option of a girl's night out.

Or, if they really are close friends, just be honest and tell them the situation. I guess I just have doubts that the dining room table size is the real issue. I think she probably just wants to reminisce with her friends and relive those days. If they really were close friends, then the LW should have a better idea on how to broach the subject than Prudie does.

Nice post, KB01. You sum up very well several issues I had with the letter. I don't know if "resentment" is the right term, but something is off about the LW. It seems to me she's locked in on having things just so and has completely blinded herself to reasonable alternatives: It just has to be a sit-down dinner, even if her place won't really accommodate that; it's got to be the entire gang from school all at once, even if it means spouses get left out.

Again, not sure if resentment is the right term, but wouldn't a person normally have an interest in meeting the partners of old friends? She says her group has basically fallen out of touch, which means this invite out-of-the-blue with a bunch of strings attached is going to look really odd. I'd guess attendance will be very poor, or somebody will jump in and do it up right at a restaurant or something.

If she only wants buddies who are dingle or at least act dingle, she needs to make new friends. These folks have other priorities than their old college drinking buddiy.

You are correct that we don't know the reason why she doesn't like the partners of her friends but she the letter does have many clues that she doesn't wish to open her heart to these partners.

For example, say says 'most of whom I'm not especially close to'; Well when people partner up IF you wish to retain close relationships with those people you have to open up to their partners. Again, I don't know why this women wishes to be cold to these people but she clearly wants to keep them out of her life.

My guess is that the stereotype FITS like a glove in this case but yes, that is an assumption. Regardless the women should invite fewer couples so that she can become closer to her friends partners.

I fail to see how you can know that the fact that she's not close to her friends' partners speaks to her not making an effort as opposed to their not making an effort, or simply to the fact that they've fallen out of touch. She didn't say "I want everything to remain exactly as it was." To me, the question was, "I'd like to see this group of [for instance] ten people; they're generally in couples now; I simply don't have room for twenty people. Is there a solution to this problem?" Jumping to the conclusion that she's trying to keep people from moving on makes no sense to me. I think Prudie let her own resentment color her response to a pretty straightforward etiquette question. All that was needed was "It's tough for a person who has limited space, but unfortunately, most couples assume their social invitations are all shared, and you're likely to make people uncomfortable if you try to issue social invitations to them individually." As I said, it seems to me that this snotty "single people are jealous of me because I'm married" attitude seeps into every letter like this that she answers, and I wish she'd knock it off with that agenda and just answer the question.

If an former or casual friend contacted me and wanted to visit with me, yet made it clear that my husband wasn't welcome - especially if there were other men invited - I doubt I'd want much to do with this alleged friend. When I've gotten together with old friends, our current loves inevitable come up in conversation, and if we were to spend much time with each other, I'd expect all of us to at least make an attempt at making friends of the newer people.

If she wanted to do this, she'd invite a few of her friends and let them bring a guest (spouse or otherwise), but stress that they are welcome to come alone. When they notice the others aren't there, explain that she didn't have room for everyone, but intends to invite the others to her next gathering. That's why it appears she just wants to keep things like they were in school.

Maybe she still has the hots for one of her own crowd, who is now in a relationship, and wants to be around that person with just the old crowd to remind him (or her) of the feelings they once had for each other.

The LW does make 3 comments that to me do imply she what to keep things as they were. That she is a single person and that she isn't willing to accept that people parnter up AND that their partners are important to them.

AGAIN, if the LW really cared for her friends she would want to get to know these partners (and of course vise versa). As one GROWS UP, one has to move along with the changes. That is the point Prudie was making and it is right on. She should invite 4 of her friends with their partners. That would be 9 people and if she can get someone than there would be 10. Out of one of these parties should could mention she wants the larger group to get together and maybe one of the others would host that. (of course this assumes she really is OK with getting to know that partners and frankly I don't think she is, but yes, this is an assumption).

Note that your advise isn't usefull since the LW already was aware that it was rude NOT to invite the partners. Note that if this women had basic common sense she wouldn't of even written the letter! Thus Prudie did have to assume and give advise that was more than just common sense. I feel there were enough clues in the letter for the assumptions. Ok, Prudie could of been a little more gentle, by hey then we wouldn't have as much fun depating the reply then!

Hey neato, what is "dingle?" LOL. I totally want to act dingle right now.

"The LW does make 3 comments that to me do imply she what to keep things as they were."

It's interesting that you don't explain what any of them are.

As for the advice to invite four people, this is exactly her question -- is there any way to avoid entertaining four people she knows and four strangers, when she'd rather entertain eight people she knows. It's just not this big of a deal, and inferring resentment is silly and unnecessarily judgmental, as far as I'm concerned. I know it's hard for married people to believe that all their single friends don't envy them, but very frequently, it's true.

All she's trying to do is figure out how to parcel out limited space to the people she actually wants to see, as opposed to people who probably will be bored to be there anyway. Anything else you're bringing to it, I would respectfully suggest ... you're bringing to it for reasons of your own.

"Maybe she still has the hots for one of her own crowd, who is now in a relationship, and wants to be around that person with just the old crowd to remind him (or her) of the feelings they once had for each other."

Okay, now you're writing fiction. Come on.

Alisonjane33,

I am not sure that what he is saying is that far from fiction. Here are some of the comments that she made:

"If everyone brings their significant other (most of whom I'm not especially close to), there's no way we can all fit at my small dining-room table. Is there any tactful way of phrasing an invitation to politely convey: "Your boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse is not invited?" ..." I'd just hate to forgo inviting friends I'd like to see in order to make space for significant others who aren't significant to me."

If these are such dear friends to her, why would she not want to include their significant others? She made it a point to point out that she was not especially close to their significant others. Why is that? Are they all so repellant that the sight of them causes her physical illness?

She also mentions the fact that they have been out of touch. I can't see how this would be a good way to get back into touch. What would the invitations say? "Save the Date! : Let's get together and catch up! Please note that due to the lack of space, your insignificant partners can not attend. My bad, see ya soon!" It has been mentioned before that if she wants to see them, but the size of her dining room is an issue, then make reservations to a nice restaurant.

I admited I'm making assumptions but as you noted that are not 'far out' ones. Note that I have jams and while we invite everyone (partners), the reason for the get together is to play music and the partners know this. But we also have parties and then it is just musicians that have to NOT play music (not make it a jam), expect for a few songs. In other words the purpose of the get together is respected by all.

The LW does make it very clear she (could be a he I guess), isn't interested in getting to know the partners. To me that is a sign of immaturty.