One brother gets the samovar, the other – bupkis

Dear Amy:My mother-inlaw has been handing nice antiques to my husband’s younger brother, while at the same time giving my husband broken trinket items.

I have tried to take the approach in private that we should expect nothing.

It’s hard to attend gatherings where my MIL bestows an heirloom on my BIL after years of crowing everything would go to my husband.

My BIL is sheepish, but he tends to enjoy his largesse.

He hasn’t offered to split any of the items.

We have enough money to buy our own things, but it is disappointing to discover years of empty promises.

How can I appear not to be hurt? — Upset DIL

Dear Upset: It is possible your mother-in-law believes that she is actually rebalancing her relationship with her sons.

After all, she displayed the terrible judgment throughout the years to promise all of her possessions to her eldest son. Perhaps those promises didn’t yield whatever reaction she desired (loyalty, dependence, control), and so now she is switching it up.

The effect of her behavior now is to drive a wedge between the two brothers, based on the flimsiest of reasons: i.e., who went home with the samovar.

The best way to appear not to be hurt is to not be hurt. The best way to counter favoritism is to accept it for what it is: an unfortunate and unfair attempt to manipulate.

If your husband’s feelings are hurt, he (not you) should discuss this with his mother: “Mom, give your things to whomever you like. But your blatant favoritism — first to me, now to my brother — is not good for our relationship.”