Why? S/he never said anything about you being hysterical. What the hell are you babbling on about?
Let me ask you a question. Where have I posted such horrible things about kids in this thread? Seriously, I want you to give me the examples because I didn’t. Show me where I’ve been bitter, twisted and intolerant (I assume that’s what you mean and not intolerent). If you’re going to accuse me, I want to see what it is that brought you to this decision.
Seriously, tell me.
Since you’ve decided to come in and play Captain Save-a-ho I’ll give you a clue, what I said in post #1017 was SARCASM. I have hardly been hysterical or over-the-top in my opinions in this thread so I was being sarcastic. Her “you don’t know where you’ve been hysterical?” response led me to ask her to point those instances out since she seems to believe I have been.
What’s wrong, did curlcoat leave you guys alone who still want to fight so now you’re going to pick anyone who has any negative thing to say about kids? Awwww, I’ll fight with you if you really need it to get through your day.
That isn’t what she said. Go back and re-read it. She was asking where you got the idea that she was accusing you of being hysterical.
Tell you what, try going back and reading it again. She asked me if I wanted to lead a bitch brigade. Is that a positive thing in your world? In this thread I have been pretty reasonable about kids and presented an opposing view that doesn’t demand they be seen and not heard. Although this is the pit I have refrained from swearing and calling (most) people names and being inflammatory. I realize that’s not as flashy and fun to fight with as a radical view, but it’s my view. So either she still has a hard-on for me because I pointed out that she tried to present herself as better than curlcoat by demeaning her profession while alluding to being first class or she thinks I’ve been hateful about kids.
If it’s because I pointed out that she is a jackass, then she’s just butthurt and I can ignore her stupidity. If she believes I have (as it seems calm kiwi also believes) been a bitch about kids, I want to know where.
Reasonable people who make accusations generally have information they use to back up their claims.
In other words, you now realize that she didn’t accuse you of being hysterical and are having a hard time admitting that you misread what she wrote.
I don’t really care how pissy the two of you have been towards each other throughout this thread. I’m sure neither one of you will lose sleep over it. I was just wondering why you repeatedly asked her to back up something she didn’t say, and was combing over older posts to find out if I had missed something keturah wrote.
I get through my day without recreational bickering just fine, but I appreciate the offer.
I’m going to break this down in caveman terms for you, perhaps that will help:
UGH!
- Sleeps with Butterflies makes “poor dear” comment to the delicate Ellen Cherry.
- Keturah accuses Sleeps with Butterflies of “campaigning hard” to be the LEADER of the junior bitch brigade which any caveman with two firing brain cells can see this is an insult.
- Sleeps with Butterflies can’t imagine how “poor dear” is campaigning hard for anything let alone the leader (in this thread? really? the leader?) of anything. No rational person could think “poor dear” is that hardcore so there must be more!
- Sleeps with Butterflies posts sarcastic response to keturah because she knows she hasn’t been horrifically offending that it must be just having a differing opinion that causes such ire.
- Keturah responds with “not sure where you get hysterical?” as if she’s surprised that SWB doesn’t already know. Then she oddly states that SWB hasn’t expressed any opinions on the topic. Knowing she has, SWB questions if she has read the thread.
- Labrador Deceiver decides to stick his wet nose in to see if he can stir shit up even more by grasping onto one word “hysterical” and ignoring pretty much everything else.
- Wheel good, fire bad.
Everyone up to speed?
- I don’t care. Has nothing to do with anything I’ve typed.
- See above.
- See above.
- See above.
- SWB misunderstands.
- Following your example from page 15, it would appear.
- Fire good. Cooks beast.
Context has everything to do with it, but if you don’t care then it doesn’t surprise me that you just want to argue.
If I misunderstood her, then explain to me what she meant in her response. Oh I know that you can’t say for sure because you’re not her, but you chose to get involved so please let me know. You’re positive that I have misunderstood, so what exactly did she mean in response to my sarcastic comment?
I mean, if you’re going to keep playing along then the least you can do is provide information rather than just play “last word!”
Missed the edit window.
On page 15 I addressed RickJay with examples of my own about how children (regardless of causing damage or not) shouldn’t be allowed to trespass. I entered the conversation, provided information, exited the conversation.
That’s quite different than what you are doing. You came in and picked one little thing out of a discussion and provided nothing but blather. Page 15: examples and information (exchanging ideas, you know - messageboard stuff) You : swooping into things that you (by your own admission) don’t care about except to say “you misunderstood!” when I don’t believe I have.
Get the difference or do we need to break it down some more?
You don’t get it. I am not taking her side in all things Sleeping With Butterflies. I was simply pointing out that you two were talking past each other on that one aspect of your discussion. The others are of no concern to me. When you argue several points on a public board, it stands to reason that some people may take issue with one of them alone. That is all I did. Whether or not she overreacted to something you said, or whether you overreacted to something Ellen said is something I don’t really care to get involved in.
If you don’t like that I became involved at all, that’s fine too. However, you’ve jumped into discussions that didn’t involve you, at least once or twice in this thread alone. It happens all the time, and isn’t something that should bother you.
I get what you perceive to be the difference, but that doesn’t change the fact that you addressed only one of Rick’s points. Really, who the fuck cares?
If you don’t like being corrected, be wrong less often.
You still haven’t let me know where I was wrong. You seem to be crystal clear on the idea that I have misunderstood what the first class chick was saying yet you have not told me what she meant. You’re sure I don’t know what she meant, but you still haven’t said what her response really means. If I’m wrong (as you’ve said several times now) explain how.
She called you bitchy, and you responded with a bunch of nonsense about hysteria. Do you honestly think the two things are synonymous with one another?
Sleeps With Butterflies, here’s the sequence of events (because I’m sitting here waiting for a phone call with nothing else to do):
You know you’re my girl and all, but I think you misinterpreted keturah. She was agreeing with you that she didn’t think you’d been hysterical. You seem to have taken her response as sarcastic, like “What, you don’t get where you’ve been hysterical?” when I think she really meant, “I don’t get where you think I’ve called you hysterical.”
Hope that clears it up and we can back to our on-topic sniping. 
Thank you, Rubystreak.
Scientifically, we’re all chimps, or a subspecies thereof. We just like a more upscale name for it.
We now return you to the previously scheduled infighting.
You still don’t get it. At all.
She said I was campaigning hard to be a leader of a bitch brigade in response to me saying “poor dear”. Now, unless she has the thinnest skin on earth there has to be more to it than that. HAS TO. No sane person could have that response to “poor dear.”
So I wrote a sarcastic response. You know, as in "Oh gosh I guess having a differing opinion makes one a super bitch (you know, LEADER of the bitches) around these parts because all I said was “poor dear.” You know sarcasm as in “I guess I’ve just been hysterical and terrible all through this post to be a super bitch.”
The first mention of hysterical was by me in a SARCASTIC way.
She comes back with a question. “Not sure where you get hysterical?” Her question was in response to my sarcasm regarding me being hysterical. Perhaps she’s missing a word or two? If that is a statement (as Rubystreak seems to think it is) then it is missing several words and has one too many question marks in it. What question is she asking? She then says I’ve never even expressed an opinion in this thread which demonstrates that she hasn’t read the thread or can’t absorb information. She also seems to be fine with me having a differing opinion (or so she says in #1018) so we’re back to it either being me saying “poor dear” or something else I’ve said in the thread. So I am really misunderstanding that there could be examples she needs to provide to ascertain where this horrible bitchiness occurred?
So we’re back to my original request (to her) to provide me with what I’ve said in this thread that would make me leader of the bitches. Is it really “poor dear” or is it something else I’ve said or is it just that I pointed out that she is a snotty bitch who uses other people’s jobs (and questions people’s disabilities) to try to feel superior. See what I did there? I called her a bitch and then cited two different reasons why.
Is it really wrong to ask someone who clearly hasn’t read this thread to provide examples of her accusations? It isn’t about “hysterical” as you two want to make it about… it’s about what she’s basing this bitch brigade thing on.
She called you bitchy. You responded with a bunch of nonsense about hysteria. I am amazed that you have just spent 5 paragraphs trying to get around those two facts.
No shit.
No need to get so hysterical about it.