No one has said that the OP should be free from negative comment, bricker. If anything, we are now trying to get Shayna to calm down enough to realize that everyone is entitled to their individual opinions and those opinions do not always need to be backed up by concrete proof. Especially opinions about something as untangible as emotions.
We’ve sort of moved on from the “what business is it of yours” debate.
No. There is the sense that demanding proof of a subjective experience is silly, and getting so worked up that a person is banging their head on the wall in frustration is a bit of an overreaction.
Julie
No, Rick, don’t you know? This is now all about how “passionately” I feel about the subject. twickster is perfectly within her “rights” to use the Pit as an outlet to trash-talk a supposed friend behind their back, but I need to “calm down” if I feel strongly about what a two-faced, disingenuous, rude, hateful snot she presents herself as with her ugly rant. And by the way, if by nearly the end of page 2, when I and several other people have asked and asked and asked again for some kind of answer or clarification to back up the OPer’s claims and we don’t have one, so I’m ready by that point to pound my head against a wall in frustration, I must have been lying about having been calm up to then. And I’m apparently not allowed to call her on the basis of her rant, either – it’s not a court of law, so asking even once is out of line – I have to just accept it at face value. Afterall, asking people to back up their assertions is never done at the Straight Dope.
Amazing.
Then, of course, we have the continual misinterpretations and misrepresentations by the lovely and talented CanvasShoes and Lezlers. I tell Ms. Shoes there’s nothing about this thread that’s “hurting” me, yet she persists in asking how it’s hurting me. Odd. I (and others) repeatedly ask how twickster knows the bride doesn’t love her new husband and is only using him as a “sperm donor,” and Ms. Lezlers gets it in her head I’m asking for “proof” of opinions and emotions. Odder still. Ms. Shoes claims that “several people throughout this thread HAVE tried to explain it to [me]. Clearly, and in several different “speaking” styles,” but when I review the thread to try to find even one of these supposed answers, and provide a recap showing they don’t exist, she throws in a little ad hominem about how “important” this whole thing seems to be to me and how I’m keeping notes of each and every post. Hmmm, which is the better approach to discussion, reviewing the words actually written and referring to them before responding, or making shit up as you go along? [thinking, thinking]. I think I’ll stick with my way, thankyouverymuch.
And then there are these broad, gross and completely incorrect assertions being flung around, about how I’m the only one expressing confusion as to what the big deal is about people having a strong desire to marry and have a family and seeking out like-minded people to share their lives with. The only one! <gasp!> Everyone else – you read that right, everyone else – sees this as being about someone only marrying someone for the purpose of having kids. Which, btw, still has not been established that that’s even what this particular bride did, but again, we’re apparently not allowed to go there. This is merely a Pit rant, afterall.
This thread disgusts me. But you know what? If I am the only one in the whole wide world who doesn’t see the problem with a person wanting children and seeking a partner who feels the same, and if I’m the only person in the whole world who finds the attitude presented by the OPer to be a vile, disgusting affront to “friendship,” I’ll gladly and proudly stand alone. The idea that trashing a friend and their new husband behind their backs is perfectly acceptable, so long as they’ve “behaved appropriately” in public is both shocking and appalling to me. And no, I’ve never, ever spoken ill of a friend behind their back while being all nicey-nice to their face. Ever. To do so would instantly remove me from the pool of people entitled to the honor of the term “friend.”
That’s all from me in this thread. Have a nice day, hon.
there is also a sense of asking for substantiation of an opinion and getting damned little in return.
Canvas sweetiekins, I noticed the “a”. Of course, silly me, given that your comment was in a thread where the OP claimed “a” woman married a sperm donor, and given that I haven’t noticed the OP back down in any real manner from that claim, silly me, I thought you were talking on topic.
For the record I would also think that “a” person who went to some one’s wedding where they thought it was a sham wedding 'cause the bride only wanted a sperm donor wasn’t some one I’d want to have as a friend. But of course, that’s only an extraneous comment and no one should take it as relating to anything in the OP.
Ahhhh, her OP just gets worse and worse by the day.
You’re asking people to provide proof for what their opinions are. It’s the same thing as asking someone to provide proof for why they believe that they love their partner, or dislike their job.
Second. I did answer your “why” do people feel that way. And offered to give my personal reasons, if you were so inclined to be bored by them.
I do? Where? I’m merely surprised by the melodramatic speech and frustration you’re displaying. It doesn’t seem to be that big a deal to be getting so riled up over.
We are trying to answer your questions. Again, I asked you “what is it, specifically, that you want to know”?
Why we PERSONALLY don’t agree with a person marrying for kids only? Or just in general why people might not agree? (the second one I answered).
No, actually, all of us, including the OP have said that we DON’T know this for absolute fact. No one, but the couple knows either way.
Gotta love the way you complain about ad hominem with same.
Perhaps it would help if you would clearly state what it is you want to know. You’ve asked “how do we KNOW for a fact that the couple doesn’t “love” each other, etc”. Several people have said, in their posts, “We don’t know, NO ONE knows but the couple”.
How is that not an answer to your question?
Well, just to clear it up for you once and for all.
Those of us who are in disagreement with the (for the sake of saving space) “sperm donor” approach are NOT saying (as you’ve claimed we are) That:
“We think people shouldn’t look for someone to love and have children with”.
What we ARE saying (and have been saying all along, in spite of your misunderstanding, or misinterpretation) is:
“We don’t think that women should use her desire to have children as her PRIMARY reason to have a relationship with a man”.
We’re not expressing disagreement with what you describe here at all, but again, that’s NOT the scenario about which we’ve been arguing.
Well Gosh wring, then perhaps it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch for you to realize that this had branched out into a discussion of the practice of some women to DO just that of which we were complaining.
There are two separate issues here.
Both of you are getting them confused.
The first is:
Do we (the detractors) know for a fact that the two in the OP married for kids rather than love?
No, we don’t. No one but the couple knows what their motives were, and that INCLUDES those saying indignantly “you don’t know that they’re not in love”. You also don’t know where that couple really stands.
Two, that as was brought up due to our feelings of the woman in the OP that we disagree with the somewhat mercenary behavior of those women that DO seek out men strictly for their procreational abilities.
No more, no less. You guys are getting way too emotional over this.
It’s no different than any other debate in which two people have opposing viewpoints. Doesn’t mean we think those going for kids only are “bad, or evil” or whatever.
Canvas “Proof” is not the same thing as “substantiation”. They really are two different words, with two different meanings.
I would not ask for “proof” of some one’s opinion. I would assume (barring some evidence to the contrary) that most people will say what their opinion is.
However, asking for ‘substantiation’ means “how did you come to that belief”.
For example : I have a low opinion of Bush. I’ve come to that opinion based on his actions wrt Iraq, his positions on abortion, the economy, foreign policy, judicial nominations etc. You may agree or disagree w/my assesment about why I have a low opinion of Bush, but without the demonstration of why I have that opinion, there’s really nothing to argue about.
and, we’ve attempted, over and over, to get teh OP to address “why do you believe that your friend did not marry for love”.
Once again, too, you issue the ‘you’re getting emotional’ over this.
:rolleyes:
Annoyance is not, repeat, not ‘emotional’. I find it annoying that when I ask for substantiation ("what evidence is there to lead one to believe that she’s not marrying for love?, other than the ‘she really wants a baby’, which does not preclude the potential that in addition to really wanting a baby, she also loves the guy to distraction), you come in and misstate my (and Shayna’s) objection, by using the word ‘proof’ going on blissfully as if your comment was actually responsive to mine.
like this:
me: “what day is it today?”
you: “It’s december”.
me “I didn’t ask what month, I asked what day is it, you know, like Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday”.
you: “silly, I already told you it’s december”
Etc.
annoying. Like a fly buzzing by at lunchtime.
Closed at the request of the OP.