Diogenes, a word about your behavior..

Actually, it wasn’t-it was an insult to Diogenes, saying that if he’s this much of an asshole, perhaps things aren’t so pleasant for those around him.

(Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic:
Again, I’m not saying it’s not bad. I’m saying it’s not AS bad as losing a real child.)

What exactly is it you are arguing against here? I would agree with that quoted sentence by Diogenes.

I don’t know what you call it, but there wasn’t a fetus, apparently.

No, it doesn’t. Technically, I suppose it would count as a failed pregnancy which didn’t spontaneously abort. El?

I already suggested this. He’s not listening to us. Maybe his wife needs to read over his shoulder some more.

I can’t speak for Diogenes, but to me it’s delusional. It’s like a guy boycotting the 7-11 because his Lotto ticket didn’t pay.

I get extremely tired of this line of reasoning here at the Dope. He didn’t word the thread title the way you think it should have been worded so you were a jerk in the thread. Uh-huh.

Can you give an example of an approved title for that thread? One that is short and describes how the OP was feeling?

There must be a translation issue here. That can be the only expanation for this exchange.

Yeah, I figured you’d say as much.

You really are an asshole, Dio.

Meh, after the guy’s nth pitting for this kind of thing you just kind of roll with it.

Enjoy,
Steven

I said I thought he was 'coming off as self-absorbed," not self-righteous.

As I said in the other thread the “man up” and “self-absorbed” comments were made in reference to how he said he was treating his wife, not to how he felt about the loss of the pregnancy.

My point is this: getting so personal in a first post is unusual. And I did say that I could be wrong.

For the record.
I was implying that IF DtC only had contact with 3 people (clearly not the case, as DtC has pointed out), then it would be limited human contact. It would not matter who those 3 people are, human contact would still be limited. It doesn’t mean they are limited people, or whatever the hell you got from it. I was simply saying that 3 people is not a lot of people. Period. He straightened me out on it.
This is just weird.

Yes, because people who are grieving NEVER lash out at each other and act like assholes.

:rolleyes:

I thought he was deceptive in how he worded the thread title and that he was deceptive in an emotionally manipulative way.

Please explain to me what the difference is between losing a fetus at 12 weeks and finding out at 12 weeks into the (normal-appearing) pregnancy that the fetus stopped developing 10 weeks ago.

You’re right. My apologies.

Where did you say that in the other thread? I took you to mean no such thing.

(Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Again, I’m not saying it’s not bad. I’m saying it’s not AS bad as losing a real child.)

What is your problem with the above statement by diogenes? I would agree with it.

In all seriousness, he could have been a long-time lurker. That was my guess, anyway.

I think of some you still don’t get the point. This has nothing to do with human contact or empathy-- it’s all about rigid political ideology. Abortion rights must be defended at all cost, and we cannot allow someone to refer to a fetus (or embryo, or whatever) as a “baby”, a “child”, or even an “unborn child”. No matter that we, as a culture, would never allow elective abortion at 8+ months pregnancy. That almost full term fetus simply cannot be called a baby (undorn or otherwise), on pure ideological grounds. Therefore, we cannot allow to stand the idea that someone might grieve for this fetus in the same way one might grieve for a “real” baby. The English language must be purged of such terms, and humans must be purged of such emotions. My worldview is truth, and anything contrary to that truth must be squashed.