That’s a far cry from the complete stereotype you started with, so at least thank you for that.SaturdaysVoyeur wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 9:51 amYou're picking nits that aren't even worth picking. Most of us---not all, I know!---believed the Silliest Story Ever Told long past when it should have been obviously false. That ought to instill a little humility for the human capacity to cling to nonsense for emotional reasons.
Clearer now? No....no, of course not, is it? Because I think you just want to pick nits with me for some reason.
It’s called “expressing my disagreement with someone’s stated position during a conversation because it’s a point that’s meaningful to me,” though, not “picking nits not worth picking for no reason.”
Thank you. No it wasn’t clear, which I why I commented.No, "sneering mockery" referred to the handful of posts made since this thread was resurrected. I was not referring to the entire reaction to her for the last decade, or even to the entirety of this one thread. I'm not really sure how it could have been interpreted otherwise, but now I've spelled it out.Lem wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 8:19 amYou’re really not getting my point. When I said “sneering mockery” doesn’t accurately describe how her posting history played out, I meant it in the same way you originally used it. You’re saying “sneering mockery” described how she was treated, I am saying no, that’s not accurate. Many, many people here listened carefully and thoughtfully to her story, gave her the benefit of the doubt for a long time, and interacted with her in good faith, a position she rarely reciprocated.
If you want it couched as a playground fight, I’m not interested.Couldn't you mix it up a little? I know you are, but what am I? Takes one to know one? If you like it so much, why don't you marry it? Or are you just going to stick with: "You obviously haven't read the thread!"
I don’t agree, for the same reasons Drumdude mentioned. But if it is as you described, then he’s vulnerable, too, right? Calling women “vulnerable” but not men when describing such situations is just the flip side of the gendered commentary that you described earlier.I don't think it would be fair or kind to treat him that way either, but I do think it's pretty weird and obsessive to be on such a rampage against your former employer for so long. Or to have expected your employer to tell you anything about his sex life in the first place. Or to contact the total stranger your boss had this affair with. Or to paper the Internet for years with accusations about your former boss.
It's weird. In some ways, much weirder than continuing to obsess over a former lover who dumped you.