Ahhh crap...now my son doesn't want to go to Church!

[_beastie]

As an aside, what do you think about calling someone after male anatomy (or was it a nickname for Richard)? I find the c word more offensive somehow myself, but I never use it and I don't hold women in contempt--we just don't communicate very well.

My reaction is based on my own experiences, which may be regional/cultural, I really don't know how the C word is used in other parts of the country. But where I live, it's used only in the most hateful sense - a pejorative term that carries a vicious - and even, yes, misogynist - tone about it. The term, due to its history, conveys utter contempt not just for the targeted female, but for all females.

OTOH, the other genitalia based pejoratives are not quite as loaded, in my part of the country, at least, and are often even used in a joking, friendly manner. Although their origins are the same, it seems that common use has softened those terms a bit.

I haven't seen that softening with the C word. I have a quite visceral reaction to it. It always feels vicious to me. Every woman I know agrees with me, so I conclude I'm not unique.

I often agree with antishock's comments, but I think his interpretation of alter idem's comments were unwarranted, and his "reciprocal" attack disgusting.

[_antishock8]

Goodness sakes, what a twit! (This isn't MADB, anitshock, and if you're going to trash my post with a rude one-liner, you're going to get a slap right back). And why you had to turn it into just one more chance to attack the church, I have no idea. My remarks were in general to all faiths-not just Mormonism, but apparently you couldn't read past "Mormon" and had to react in your typical knee jerk fashion.

I don't know, but I suspect I hit a nerve (as Wade pointed out). Sorry, but them's the breaks. When people get married, they tie themselves to the desires of another person. Whether it's where to live, how to spend vacations, how to spend money, or save it or what to do on a Friday night, that's part of being married. And some people don't figure out that if you consistently fight against or ignore the desires of you spouse, you'll find yourself in an unhappy marriage and if you keep it up, you'll find yourself divorced. That's life and you can think it's sucks, but it won't change it.

If a person does not want to be tied to someone else's desires, hopes, dreams, goals, then they absolutely should not get married. And anyone who would suggest to a person to ignore the feelings of their spouse because they don't share those feelings, is giving very bad advice which will only cause friction and misery.

Oh, my! What a dumb c***! I'm sorry, but if you're going to direct a personal attack at me, be prepared for it to come right back atcha.

That being said, that little spiel you just gave about tying yourself to another person goes both ways, honey. He should be free to not force his kid to go to church, and she should honor that if that's what he wants to do. Funny thing is I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be the case... And we all know it. Just how supportive would she be if he wanted to quit the Mormon church and take his non-believing kid with him? Hmm? HMM???

If he listens to YOU, he can be miserable, just like you. But that's what you want--you want others to be as miserable as you are. It validates your choices. You've got serious issues when it comes to women; your misogynous rant about advice I gave to someone else--it wasn't even directed at you!!-- and then using that kind of epithet against a woman--Get some help.

Oh my, you're very upset. I guess you shouldn't attack someone personally if you're not ready for someone to respond. You're probably not used to that... You know... A man standing up to you. You probably don't like much, do you?

First, you tell him to cede his power over to his wife because... I mean... How else can he be happy unless he complies with her religious edicts?

Second, you insult someone personally, and then act amazed that he would give it right back to you.

Third, you make all sorts of terrible assumptions about me.

Fourth, you give me what I can only assume is your very unprofessional opinion to "get help" because you think I hate women because I tell a man to stand up for himself.

Baby. I got news for you. If there were ever a case of a pot calling a kettle black this is it. You sound like a peach.

Here are the differences in your advice and mine:

1) You tell him to be something that he is not. I tell him to be true to himself.

2) You advise him to continue to make his kid miserable. I tell him to put his kid first.

3) You advise him to be a liar. I advise him to be truthful.

4) You advise him to give in to his spouse's wishes. I advise him to stand up for himself.

Frankly, I don't think Cinepro is the only one that needs a healthy dose of introspection. If these are the fruits of the Mormon church, then no thanks. Not for anyone.

[_Moniker]

Cinepro, I just want to wish you luck. I understand it's a complicated situation. I'm sure you'll make the right decision for your son and your family. :)

[_antishock8]

Oh, my! What a dumb c***!

I find this particular insult particularly repellent and usually lose quite a bit of respect for any man who would feel comfortable using it.

Well, thank god I don't need your respect to get up in the morning. I'd be beside myself.

That being said, I was deliberately vulgar in my response; I probably could have used a different insult for the same effect. I was being deliberately provocative in order to underscore the effect of an ad hominem.

Oh, and I make it a point to read your posts because I'm not sure anyone does a better job of it than you. I'm not sure what to make of that since you're a female and I respect you. I must be feeling very conflicted right about now...

[_asbestosman]

Fourth, you give me what I can only assume is your very unprofessional opinion to "get help" because you think I hate women because I tell a man to stand up for himself.

Well, as a male I'll give you a hint. This:

You're probably not used to that... You know... A man standing up to you. You probably don't like much, do you?

smacks of misogyny. Good grief. Gender has nothing to do with it. All marriages require lots of compromise in order to work. You don't just "stand up for yourself" or even "give in to your spouse's wishes." You lay your concerns out on the table and then discuss them. Cinepro has done this and both he and his wife would like their child to attend church.

In my own case, sometimes I end up doing what my wife wants and sometimes she lets me do what I want. That's how marriage is preserved. But even then there are some dealbreakers. If my wife joined the KKK, it'd be game over. Should church attendance be such an issue? That's for Cinepro to decide with his wife, but in general I think ultimatims are bad. That said, there are some issues I will never budge on, but for the most part I am able to discuss and reach a joint decision even if one side (sometimes her and sometimes me) isn't exactly excited with the decision.

[_Yoda]

I was being deliberately provocative in order to underscore the effect of an ad hominem.

WTF?

You came out guns blazing attacking her first! You consider this quote ad hominem?

And anyone who would suggest to a person to ignore the feelings of their spouse because they don't share those feelings, is giving very bad advice which will only cause friction and misery.

Where is the personal attack? She is stating that she doesn't feel your advice is valid. She is attacking your IDEA, not YOU.

You, however, counter with this:

Oh, my! What a dumb c***! I'm sorry, but if you're going to direct a personal attack at me, be prepared for it to come right back atcha.

Now, THAT was ad hominem.

I normally enjoy and admire your posts, antishock, even though I don't agree with you all the time.

In this instance, however, you crossed the line.

[_antishock8]

Fourth, you give me what I can only assume is your very unprofessional opinion to "get help" because you think I hate women because I tell a man to stand up for himself.

Well, as a male I'll give you a hint. This:

You're probably not used to that... You know... A man standing up to you. You probably don't like much, do you?

smacks of misogyny. Good grief. Gender has nothing to do with it. All marriages require lots of compromise in order to work. You don't just "stand up for yourself" or even "give in to your spouse's wishes." You lay your concerns out on the table and then discuss them. Cinepro has done this and both he and his wife would like their child to attend church.

In my own case, sometimes I end up doing what my wife wants and sometimes she lets me do what I want. That's how marriage is preserved. But even then there are some dealbreakers. If my wife joined the KKK, it'd be game over. Should church attendance be such an issue? That's for Cinepro to decide with his wife, but in general I think ultimatims are bad. That said, there are some issues I will never budge on, but for the most part I am able to discuss and reach a joint decision even if one side (sometimes her and sometimes me) isn't exactly excited with the decision.

That was my point in the first place. Cinepro is compromising some very fundamental and deeply held issues with his spouse. He's being urged to continue to be deceitful to her, and give in to her "in order to be harmonious and peaceful". That's terrible.

Secondly, I wasn't the one that made this about gender. I wasn't accusing the other two posters of being either a man hater or self-loathing, nor was I urging them to get help for their terrible advice or imaginary anti-male bigotry.

I would be very interested to know if Cinepro could actually stop going to church, withdraw his son from a church he clearly hates, and still have a "peaceful and harmonious" marriage. If not, it seems to me that it isn't Cinepro who should be compromising since he isn't insisting his spouse continue to do something she hates to do.

Think about the message you're sending to him. I mean... Think about it. It's pretty messed up.

[_antishock8]

I was being deliberately provocative in order to underscore the effect of an ad hominem.

WTF?

You came out guns blazing attacking her first! You consider this quote ad hominem?

And anyone who would suggest to a person to ignore the feelings of their spouse because they don't share those feelings, is giving very bad advice which will only cause friction and misery.

Where is the personal attack? She is stating that she doesn't feel your advice is valid. She is attacking your IDEA, not YOU.

You, however, counter with this:

Oh, my! What a dumb c***! I'm sorry, but if you're going to direct a personal attack at me, be prepared for it to come right back atcha.

Now, THAT was ad hominem.

I normally enjoy and admire your posts, antishock, even though I don't agree with you all the time.

In this instance, however, you crossed the line.

How is it possible you missed her ad hominem. Y'all bunch of man haters. That's all it is. And you're unhappy with your lives. You just want me to be miserable just like y'all are. That's all I got.

[_asbestosman]

Secondly, I wasn't the one that made this about gender. I wasn't accusing the other two posters of being either a man hater or self-loathing, nor was I urging them to get help for their terrible advice or imaginary anti-male bigotry.

I think it became a gender issue when you read Alter Idem's post telling Cinepro to have the child support his mother as an admonition that a woman's opinion on parenting was more important than a man's. Anyhow, moving on.

I would be very interested to know if Cinepro could actually stop going to church, withdraw his son from a church he clearly hates, and still have a "peaceful and harmonious" marriage. If not, it seems to me that it isn't Cinepro who should be compromising since he isn't insisting his spouse continue to do something she hates to do.

I don't think Cinepro hates the church, but giving advice to lie for the sake of marital harmony would be problematic. For one thing, I think children pick up on it faster than adults. Adults tend to be better at living in denial.

[_beastie]

Well, thank god I don't need your respect to get up in the morning. I'd be beside myself.

That being said, I was deliberately vulgar in my response; I probably could have used a different insult for the same effect. I was being deliberately provocative in order to underscore the effect of an ad hominem.

Oh, and I make it a point to read your posts because I'm not sure anyone does a better job of it than you. I'm not sure what to make of that since you're a female and I respect you. I must be feeling very conflicted right about now...

I make a point of reading your posts, as well, and respect you, too. That's part of the reason your comment bothered me so much.