I have no opinion one way or another regarding Dangerosa’s posts about her children, but the “good intentions” part now seems like hypocrisy. This is a good ole Pit PILE ON. I’m pretty sure she got the message about 199 posts ago.
Yes, thanks to BanquetBear’s insistence that he needed cites.
There’s always the option to ignore and just stop posting. I know you started this out of concern for the children, but now you’re complicit in the devolution. I am as well, so I’m bowing out of this shit storm.
Probably for the best.
Oh for heaven’s sakes. Sarahfeena et al who were critical of **Dangerosa **have been civil and polite from the start, as were Manda Jo and others who disagreed with them. The pile-ons only started when BigT started his usual net-nanny routine and dragging up stuff that doesn’t belong here, and then when …Banquet Bear caught up his torch.
BTW, this is a really good post and I’m quoting it so it doesn’t get buried in the back and forth.
Because he’s a fucktard, shithead, asshat. He always has been, he always will be. Once he gets his jerk, asshole claws into a thread, call it a loss…because he will continue spewing his asshole, arrogant opinion all across it from then on, defending his (oftentimes pompous, bigmouth) two cents until the other person throws their hands up in the air and gives up due to not wanting to debate any longer with a complete and utter clueless nincompoop who can–in no way, shape, or form–ever admit he’s in the wrong or mistaken about something.
I’ve seen it from him time and time and time again and no doubt I’ll see it a million times more again. I’m just glad he’s finally decided to make one of his asshat, stupid stands in the Pit for once so I can call it out, finally.
Banquet Bear, you’re one of the biggest jerk douches on this board, in my opinion. But, by all means, quote this post and try to turn the tables around on me by insulting my history or tell me how I’m wrong…it doesn’t matter, because I won’t be back to see what you’ve replied with anyway.
The Dope will not let us scan for ‘son,’ but Google did.
As I was compiling my previous post, I skimmed a lot of posts by Dangerosa and something started to mentally tug at my attention. Let’s see if I can break it down.
In posts from more than ten or so years ago, she seems to love both kids with an equal amount, i.e. LOTS. From about '10-'12 there are some dark clouds on the horizon and there are also some continuity errors when one looks at posts and compare the narrative; mind you, it’s nothing suspicious, probably memory playing tricks on her.
BUT
She’s often posted about parenting in IMHO. She weighs in and most of the times I found her advice to be good, wise and to the point. I skimmed threads where she and Sarahfeena are like two peas in a pod, posting back to back.
SO
To be generous and give Dangerosa the benefit of doubt, my conclusion might be - might - that when she posts here about her own kids, it’s a way of venting her frustrations about how hard it is to be a mom to two vastly different teenagers. And it’s quite possible - possible - that venting here is a safety valve that doesn’t spill over in how she actually handles her (now almost grown) kids. That could maybe - maybe - explain the disparity in how the describes her two children. Some hyperbole for effect and getting the point across.
BECAUSE
If she truly, really are as biased in dealing with her kids, it’s no wonder her son has ‘been immersed in drugs since the age of ten’ while her ‘asexual lesbian glittering daughter’ is a free spirit worthy of worship at the age of 14. I cannot fathom being such a horrible person in real life, and at the same time giving out such good advice about parenting for closing in on two decades.
HOWEVER
**
The BigTard lecture series on Internet Conduct**™ did not only derail this thread, but - as always - did nothing to improve anything at all.
Like I said, I’ve known Dangerosa a long time, and what I’ve seen has definitely been a more recent development in her communication here. I think she’s absolutely given great advice about parenting, and I truly do not think she would knowingly do anything to hurt either of her children. Maybe it is just venting here, and I’m hopeful that that’s all it is. I am also the parent of two children who are very very different from each other, and being in a situation where you have two kids who require different parenting styles is very very tough. I think I would want to know if it became apparent to the people I socialize with that it seemed like I was favoring one over the other.
…I think we’ve only interacted a couple of times on this board? About five times? But this was my last post to you.
I meant that. I was wrong. I was out of line. I apologised. I don’t know what else you want me to do.
…get off your sanctimonious arse. You started this pit thread. You were too lazy to back your accusations up. You actually claimed it was impossible to back up. Don’t blame me because you claimed it was impossible to do what people eventually managed to do. I’m not the only one troubled by this thread. I think xenophon41 said it much better than I.
Having read this “pattern” I’m still not seeing anything problematic. Certainly nothing worth starting a thread in the pit. Dangerosa says she gives her daughter an adult onsie for christmas in a thread about onsie’s. This troubles you? This is part of a pattern?
LOL, I’M sanctimonious?
Actually, I was thinking I wanted to rescind my accusation that the purpose of the thread was to day “You suck, Dangerosa”. That may still be how she experiences it, mind you, but I think I’m buying into the premise that it was intended as an ‘intervention’.
Whatever. As I said earlier, you’re not going to accept anything.
Holy fucking shit. You’ve somehow eclipsed BigT as the object of scorn in this thread. Congratulations!
Oh wait, I’m sorry.
…Congratulations.
Is that better?
I didn’t see that before, thanks for pointing it out and saying what you did. Now you’ve made me feel bad for my last post in here, although to be fair, it wasn’t just because of your posts in that other thread the reason I thought what I did. Not wholly, anyway…because I think I deserved most of what I got in that thread anyway (that prompted your posts in it).
You do seem to be an overly more arguementative type that I have seen in many, many threads, but I have to admit I was surprised at how you replied to this post here, so I’m sorry that I was as harsh in it now as I was. I should have done without the name calling. I apologize.
…lol. Keep fucking that chicken, BigB. 
Is it poor form to make one’s first post in a thread on page 5? I hope not.
Anyway, I have some words for Banquet Bear, who seems utterly unable to entertain the notion that those who see troubling patterns in Dangerosa’s posts are legitimately concerned.
Banquet Bear: I note that many of those people who support the OP’s concern share, at a minimum, one of these characteristics:
[ul]
[li]They adopted a child.[/li][li]They were adopted themselves.[/li][li]They parent one or more children with notable emotional, academic, behavioral, or other developmental issues.[/li][li]They have two children who are very different in terms of abilities, temperament, or other significant areas.[/li][/ul]
You are demanding that others respond to your questions, so let me ask a question of you. I trust that you’ll be as thorough in giving an answer as you insist that other posters are: How many of the above characteristics describe you?
I ask because I have zero trouble understanding why the “pattern” of Dangerosa’s posts might be more readily visible to some people than others. If a poster has the perspective that is provided by fitting into one or more of the above categories, that poster might be more sensitive to nuances that other posters, not as insightful because of the lack of shared background, miss.
I fit into two of the above categories, and yes, I think that Sarahfeena, Green Bean, ITD, and others have a point. I also wish nothing but the best for Dangerosa and her kids, and I have no trouble believing that these other posters do as well.
Interesting, CairoCarol…I actually personally fit into 3 of those 4 categories. I think you have a very very good point.
This should have been directed toward BB.
From you? Never.
And you can also add for me:
[ul]
[li]They grew up witnessing blatant favoritism in their parents or grandparents.[/li][li]They have had substance abuse problems themselves.[/li][/ul]
I think that’s what first caught my eye. I don’t obsessively keep meticulous notes about the various posters, but we know Bricker is a defense attorney, etc., etc.
So, when something happens that you are interested, you notice. For example, in the post from 2011, Dangerosa does something which, IMHO, totally rocks.
My bolding.
I love that. I really wish that my parents had cared that much about us enough to devote their time to something for building our character. Totally cool. That sticks in your mind.
Then later (2013) you run into something like this (on a thread about gear, and hence the points about helmets)
My bolding.
And this mental image of a devoted parent who goes well out of their way to support their child doesn’t seem to be the same person who wrote that.
Hockey does take parental dedication. More so than becoming a scout leader in order for the daughter to experience character development? What about learning teamwork on sports teams? Learning to apply oneself? Learning discipline?
It’s possible that the boy gets that from baseball, but still why is it so important for her to become a girl scout leader to support her daughter but not take the time for her son?
And then you start to notice that it’s this way pretty much every time the children are mentioned. Simply going by the posts (which we have repeatedly stated you can’t do) the girl gets a lot of support and her accomplishments are valued and celebrated but the boy doesn’t.
As I’ve said, I really do as well.