Why has ZPG Zealot not been banned yet? He/she is a troll, no question about it.
Look, nobody can be this accidentally clueless and still be able to type. The entire thread, from the OP through every post s/he makes, is trolling. (I think it’s a she but I’m not entirely sure.) Troll, pure and simple. Jerk, pure and simple. This isn’t a case of someone who happens to have adopted a very unpopular position. She changes the angle of her stupid, boneheaded position again and again in order to continue pissing people off. Morons just stick to their guns; this is just someone being an asshole. A jerk, if you will. Which, the last time I checked, was *against the goddamned rules *here. In fact, I think it’s Rule #1.
Nah, just stubborn and willing to invent increasingly specious reasons to avoid admitting her opinions are factually wrong or unsupportable.
That makes her about as unique on the SDMB as Windows users.
I thought troll at first, too, but now I’m inclined more towards what Bryan Ekers said. Not 100% sure, but something about her rings authentic…she sounds too angry somehow to be a troll.
Well, sort of. Three posts in 2003, one post in 2004, then zippo until September of last year when she started the fortune teller thread.
Given that the '03 posts were even then railing against children, I’m inclined to think genuine, or else a very dedicated troll, in which case you can’t really tell the difference, so why try?
Weirdly, the '04 post was a random throwaway about Outback Steakhouse. Go fig.
I had never opened that thread, but I did see the title and somehow thought it was about SSM and whether the adoption forms should have other options to accommodate same sex couples. Just as well…
She thinks she’s a fortune teller. And that Americans lurk in corners waiting to *literally *snatch babies from their families. I think that says it all. Not a troll but clearly not all there mentally.
I’ve been following that thread and I agree that she’s genuine. She’s also willfully obtuse for someone who calls themselves a “wise woman.” Regardless, I don’t think she should be banned, but I could see a valid excuse of putting her on one’s ignore list if you had to deal with her much about the issue of adoption.
It’s kind of hard to tell. I mean, when she says stuff about how some people are opposed to adoption and they need to know lest they go swimming with them…or that we might assume a woman with a child of another race committed adultery, and that’s why we need to know who the adopted kids are…well, I mean…come on. Really? I mean…REALLY?
Not just rabidly anti-adoption. It feels like she’s just t…h…i…s far from declaring Incest Is Best in that thread too. 'Cause, you know, even if you divorce your cousin, you’re still family after all.
Apart from all her wacky beliefs, I can’t help but think she’s just a bit thick.
If she can’t tell that her client is terrified of losing the child she loves to the woman who gave birth to the child, then she’s just plain old stupid. Maybe the client isn’t going about things the best way, but she’s operating from a position of fear and love. That combination makes people do stupid things.
The first time I encountered anti-adoption types I thought it was trolling, too. Or really bad humor.
I am glad she is here, if for no other reason that seeing the “I’m a fortune teller” followed by guessing that another poster was an adoptive parent, followed by “Nope, I don’t have any children”.
Like the exchange one sees in college -
“I can always guess someone’s star sign. I bet you are a Leo!”
