Fair enough. Strictly speaking, yes, you’re correct, the conversation has wondered off into different territory --although, as has already been mentioned, the sexual issue was introduced by the OPer herself.
By the same token, it is extremely dificult not to compare and contrast the OPers’ near-fanatical hatred of all things Disney (Disney!) with her own chosen lifestyle and the impact each one will have on her offspring. It’s like night and day…unless someone can make a case convincing me otherwise.
Must be a pretty big cross. Everybody is hopping on. I was ticked at the intimations lee made about people who use daycare when they don’t HAVE to, so maybe I’ll climb up on there with all of you.
Spiritus, I don’t care if the conversation is in the framework of two members of the bisexual Armenian undead…claiming that a woman can create sperm, and then REFUSING TO ELABORATE on what you mean by that beyond ‘it’s complex’ is inviting several people to slap on the ‘nutball’ label.
Let me provide a small playlet of how this thread could have ended happily.
lee: I was impregnated by Kelly’s woman sperm.
everyone: woah.
lee: what?
everyone: um…women can’t make sperm
(this is the crucial part)
lee: well, Kelly lives as a woman and is in the process of becoming a physical woman, so while it is technically semen (which only a male animal can produce), we refer to it as woman sperm, as to be sensitive to her emotional and psychological needs.
the wrong answer was KellyM telling us we were ignorant.
Sure, RedFury, but who the hell cares. It’s not any of our business to tell either Kelly or lee how to raise the kid, regardless of whatever contradictions we may or might not see.
Furthermore, grendel72 is right - lee’s sexual description of the conception of her kid was in pretty much direct response to an assertion by another poster that she’d dumped lots of money to get impregnated by Kelly though some in-vitro method (as an argument, somehow, against the validity of her counter-Disney stance).
That post, in turn, was the (thread) child of the original post which assumend a dichotomy between lee’s hatred of Disney, and the manner in which she lives/concieved.
(NB: I’m defending grendel72’s veracity, not his tone/sentiment)
She was refuting the assertion of another poster and did not, in fact, introduce her sexuality into the thread.
Regardless - something in the air today seems to have people oscillating between grabbing their torches and pitchforks, and nailing themselves up.
What, your intentional misreading of lees comments brought on by your lynch mob hysteria is OK, but I’m not allowed to be pissed off by the fucking vile comments made by stofski (who is the one who brought up the issue of sexuality, by the way, for all of you lying pig fuckers claiming the OP did) and reprise and Diane and …
Maybe because you were being jerks? If you quote something out of context deleting an important part of the original statement in an attempt to manufacture outrage, I’d say that is being a jerk.
Ummmm, first of all, that’s spelled with a y. Second, lee, KellyM, et. al. posted a thread months ago with their…well, we can’t say bizarre because that wouldn’t be PC…family arrangement several months ago. I didn’t comment in that thread because, well, I didn’t have a dog in that fight. I also didn’t comment in their home-schooling fiasco because I couldn’t quite put my thoughts into SDMB-worthy form. This time, however, the irony of someone banning Disney in part because of its lack of respect for the nuclear family when in the unconventional family they live in seemed to call for comment.
Sorry if you think my vile comments put me in a lynch mob mentality, but I didn’t bring up anything that the menage themselves haven’t brought up previously, and I merely tied their earlier statements into their current ones, saw them to be ironic and hypocritical, and attempted to say such in a mildly humorous way. I guess I’ll never get my membership card for the SDMB Offenderati now.
And I still think “Woman Sperm” would be a good band name.
However, don’t forget that this thread (and the original “no Disney in my house” thread) were both started by lee. I don’t know about you, but in my book, when you start a thread on a major message board with thousands of members, you should be prepared to take what comes.
Try taking your own bull fucking shit piece of advice, asshole.
It was in fact, lee, who first intimated that hers wasn’t a typically conceived child:
Nearly 4 years ago my five year plan was to get pregnant. Not easy with a sterile husband. I managed that one as well.
Fine. First thing that came to mind was a surrogate father and/or in vitro fertilization.
But then, KellyM, adds to the equation:
Having two incomes and a third parent who can (and in fact wants to) stay home works out very well for us, and in that regard we are extremely lucky. (underline mine)
The “woman sperm” bit follows a bit later. And here we are.
Perhaps you’re having problems reading because your motherfucking cross is too high?
That doesn’t describe my motivation or reaction to the daycare comments. I was motivated by the “Care enough and have the resources” implying that anyone who had the resources and put their kids in daycare didn’t care enough about them. This is a horrible thing to imply about someone elses parenting – especially if you are playing martyr about how people criticize your own parenting. Ahh, the hypocrisy.
stofsky may have initiated the issue of sexuality, but lee (the OP) extended it, expanded upon it, highlighted it, and then stretched it to the silliest extreme with the “woman sperm” comment. Again, it was an offhand comment which lee overreacted to, and in doing so, brought it far more attention than it deserved. Everything following from lee’s voluntary in-depth desription of her child’s conception is her own fault… don’t blame stofsky for what lee said.
And (so far) the most vile comments in this thread have been your own.
Holy shit, you really are up there. Got enough nails?
For the record, I read what lee had posted and asked for an elaboration, I didn’t “intentionally misread” her post, and I didn’t pursue it because this thread is enough of a trainwreck without another car. And I haven’t seen this much overreacting since that 5th grades production of Jesus Christ Superstar. So, a hearty fuck you, grendel. I’m sure it will help you feel better about yourself up there. As for the rest of this crap, I’m done.
As has already been pointed out – and very well, by both stofsky and Max Torque, I might add – this is a public message board and anyone that wirtes something for the public view might expect their views to be challeged.
Further, I had read this thread from the beginning, and other than being more than a little puzzled by the Disney-hate thing, I saw no need to comment. None of my business anyway. However, as it became a rambling wreck invoving transsexuals and three-parent families, I felt the irony was just to great to let it pass.
And once again, I have NO problem with their choices, not mine to make – but I also felt the whole thing had just gotten way too bizarre. Disney VS A three-parent, transexual, female sperm, household. And that’s why I made my initial comment.
Would y’all climb down the cross? We have a crucifixion scheduled at 5:00.
Grendel, listen dude: most of us didn’t even know about lee/Kelly’s family arrangement. For Odin’s sake, I just found out a page ago. They brought it up themselves… call me naive, but I thought they were friends/cousins/coworkers whatever.