That’s why, when she ran out of deodorant a couple of days ago, she decided to try out one of her mother-in-law’s perfumes instead of buying some more.
The scent was a Michael Kors perfume, and it just so happened that the day she decided to wear it, she and her husband had invited her in-laws over for dinner.
So, as soon as her mother-in-law showed up, she got complimented for smelling good. And at that point, she just said thank you and detailed how she was wearing one of the perfumes.
This led her mother-in-law to ask which one, to which she responded, “Michael Kors.” And immediately, she recalled how her mother-in-law had a super shocked look on her face. Then, her mother-in-law claimed that the perfume was very expensive and thought she would only save it for special occasions.
“I told my mother-in-law that I feared the perfume would go back if I didn’t use it and that I thought she had intended for me to wear it when she gave it to me,” she reasoned.
Still, her mother-in-law just told her that if she stored it in a cool, dry, and dark place, then it would not go bad. Her mother-in-law also said she “should know not to waste designer brands.”
Anyway, after that awkward conversation, she and her mother-in-law did not talk much throughout the rest of the evening. Plus, following the dinner, her mother-in-law texted her husband and claimed to be “very disappointed” in how little value she placed on her mother-in-law’s gifts.
So now, she’s been left wondering whether wearing the designer perfume from her mother-in-law was actually the wrong thing to do.
How could she have known her mother-in-law wanted her to save the perfume for a special occasion if it’s public knowledge that she isn’t “into” perfume? Why do you think her mother-in-law took such offense? How can she reconcile this situation?
You can read the original post on Reddit here.
If true crime defines your free time, this is for you: join Chip Chick’s True Crime Tribe