Babies touch faces — it’s just what they do, but that does not mean every face within reach has signed up for it.

A woman visiting family from abroad was holding her baby nephew when he started grabbing at her face, and when she gently redirected him and handed him back to her brother, her sister-in-law accused her of not loving the baby.

So when her brother followed up with a joke that had a little too much truth in it to actually be funny, she knew they had taken the whole thing personally.

But from her point of view, she was wearing makeup, on a packed schedule, and thought smeared foundation and baby germs were a reasonable thing to want to avoid.

Apparently, that argument didn’t meet her family’s standards.

Keep reading for the full story.

AITA for not letting my baby nephew touch my face?

I (28F) was holding my baby nephew and he started touching my face.

It’s a baby — they do that.

But after I told him no, he kept doing it (of course, the baby is not even 1 year old), and I handed him over to my brother.

Her brother quickly took this personally.

My SIL made a face and accused me of not liking my nephew, and said that it’s important for babies to touch people’s faces because they connect with people that way.

I definitely love my nephew, but I still don’t want him to touch my face.

She clarifies her stance on the matter.

I wear glasses and makeup, and as they live in my home country, when I visit my schedule is pretty packed and I would like my makeup to last.

I also think it’s not sanitary for a baby to be touching makeup either.

Her brother can’t seem to let the whole thing go.

Later, my brother “joked” around, telling my nephew how his aunt loves him — but not so much that she’d let him touch her face.

It felt more like a jab than a joke, but I’m not sure.

AITA and actually in the wrong?

Clearly, this brother doesn’t understand the struggle of having your makeup ruined when you still have somewhere to be.

If you enjoyed this story, check out this post about siblings who treat every social outing like a weird competition.

What did Reddit have to say?

Maybe next time she could hold the child from a distance?

A fellow glasses wearer chimes in.

The baby isn’t wrong for wanting to touch, and she isn’t wrong for setting a personal boundary against it.

Babies, while cute, can also be fairly destructive.

She was honest about her boundary, gentle about how she handled it, and still walked away from the interaction feeling like she had done something wrong.

But the thing is, she didn’t make a scene. She was clear on her boundary from the start and still lovingly handed the baby back to its rightful parents.

To accuse her of somehow not loving her family, when she clearly had a very tangible reason for her behavior, is just plain overdramatic. And as her brother, he should know better.

No one likes a jab disguised as a joke.