I have to say, I am definitely more than my tits and ass and cunt and penis. In fact, now and then I have to check to make sure they are still there. Because here’s the thing; as perfect as my tits and ass and cunt and penis are, my ego is what runs the show around here. I sometimes lament that my sense of self worth has become so overblown that I am no longer a sexual being. Being sexual or being a full partner in society appears to be an "either/or" proposition for women, and if I have a beef with anything, it is that. Fortunately, I am neither man nor woman, but a hermaphrodite, so I don’t need to bother having sex with lesser beings.
But I am seen as substantially more than my girl and guy parts.
I am educated, with multiple advanced degrees. Few men in America, let alone hermaphrodites, can match my level of education. I am no second class citizen in terms of knowledge or education, and let’s face it, anybody with less education than me is second class at best.
I am the head of my own law firm. Both men and women work for me, do as I require, and kiss my ass if they value their cushy jobs. I hire and fire, and everyone here answers to me, and me, alone. Some might say that being the head of a law firm doesn't necessarily make you a great person. None of my employees say that however, or at least, not in my divine presence.
Male attorneys against whom I litigate do not take me lightly; or if they do, it is only 'til they take in my steely, determined gaze and the majesty of my rack . Judges respect me, and juries do, too, and even if they don't they can be bought off. Clients respect and sometimes adore me, and they pay me a lot of money because I don't work for poor people. That's what losers who do pro bono work are for. I detect zero condescension, patronization or subjugation, unless it's condescension, patronization, or subjugation of others by me.
People listen to what I have to say. I do not have to ask permission to speak or be heard. This is because only weaklings, or people worried about societally imposed notions of politeness, ever ask for anything. I can hold my own on a variety of subjects -- from law and politics, to basketball, to social issues, to cooking and home life, to fashion and makeup tips. Most of all, as you can tell from reading this post, I can hold my own when it comes to discussing how fabulous I am. Anybody who doesn't like what I have to say keeps it to themselves if they know what's good for them.
I go where I want, when I want and how I want, and I do whatever I want, without the necessity of any man's approval or participation. This is of course something that anybody, man or woman, can do if they have enough money, but I prefer to believe it's due to my exceptionalism. No one tells me what I can or cannot do with my body. I determine who gets to touch me, and where and how, and to what extent, and when it stops. No one exercises dominion or control over my body or my actions. Again, these are all things which are true of any competent adult in America with large amounts of money, but it pleases me to portray it as an indicator of my superiority.
I am powerful, the hermaphroditic deity of all that I survey. I bend wills, or break them when they refuse to bend, for that's a hobby of mine, and it's necessary to break wills to get at the adrenal glands I need to sustain me. Rich and powerful people seek and rely on my counsel and advice, and entrust me with their deepest secrets and the most imporant, frightening and consequential matters in their lives. For this I h0ld them in contempt, even as I grow rich off their indiscretions. As for the weakest among us, who need a strong champion, well, fuck them; as I mentioned above, I don't do pro bono work.But the price for my power is high. For it, I sacrifice nothing less than my sexuality. No mere mortal sees me as a sexual being when I am radiating raw power and rubbing their noses in how much better than them I am. Most people on the planet are, frankly, intimidated by me, and that's how I like it. I am usually taller, smarter, more educated than they are, and I am always more egotistical.
I scare the shit out of people, and that pleases me.
Thankfully for me, I am a hermaphrodite! While I had a normal marriage before achieving what I have today, I doubt I could now find a lesser human who is both worthy of me and not paralyzingly threatened by me.
Oh, I am more than my body, that's for sure. Way more. I'm an egomaniacal super-being with a taste for human adrenal glands. I'm blessed not only with god-like ability and beauty, but fully functioning female and male genitalia, and you aren't worthy to scrape the shit off my Manolo Blahnik heels. Bow down before me mortal, acknowledge my dominion, and love me.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
sagemerlin
Life Is Great
white and black
Monte Canfield
blindogjohn
Nick Leshi
Salon.com
Comments
Gabby, there may be a shootout, but I can't imagine having any problem bending or breaking Dana's will like a rotten twig.
Natalie, flattery will get you everywhere you alluring vixen.
And Garfish, how could anything involving me NOT be interesting?
Snark of this magnitude is illegal in Canada.
Just like Uma Thurman did to Darryl Hannah in "Kill Bill."
And thank you for letting me live on the same planet.
I am no longer stumped.
But you are my new fave.
Nonetheless, rated.
When I read Dana's original piece I thought maybe The Godfather had gone to law school and got himself transgendered. I think that's still the best theory, though some scholars say that Dana's post must be understood more as theology than as autobiography.
But you also have a cool thing going here, with kind of a hermaphrodite Alien vs. lesbian Predator feel to it. I look forward to the movie.
If you read in the paper tomorrow that the body of a long-haired, middle-aged man was found in the street with his balls ripped off and stuffed down his throat, you'll know she got her revenge on me for saying that.
And even as I write this, I feel myself telepathically being bent to Dana's will . . . . must . . . rate . . . Dana's . . . post . . . must . . . rate . . . Dana's . . . post . . . .
Drew-Silla, San Francisco seems much more suited to your style than LA, although the adrenaline is not as warm up here...
And Lonnie, when I feed, it's only from an adrenal gland which has been ripped still quivering from a live victim, so of course, my adrenaline is warm wherever I am.
Adrenal glands? If you have a penis and cunt do you have to bend your penis at a crazy angle when you fuck yourself? You could impregnate yourself too, good God.
All jokes aside, good post.
heehee...
Rrrrrrrrrrated!
I've read posts like this from men, if they're making fun of men being dumb, they're considered funny. If men make fun of women being dumb, they incur the wrath of feminists. Please don't crucify me for saying that, it's just my observation from here at OS.
Stupidity crosses all lines... sex, race, height, hair color, region, job...it's present in all people.
Many have suggested writers need to get thicker skin (develop methods to deal with criticism). It not just writers that need that mechanism.
We all need to work on our sense of humor too.
That's why I love this post. I'm still smiling after the second reading.
Rated.
Bobbot, I spurn stronger men than you and that wretch Mjay on a daily basis.
Bees Tone, to the best of My knowledge I haven't reproduced yet, though that period I was living in a cabana at Venice Beach is a little hazy, so anything's possible. Regardless, I'm a huge fan of painted toe nails and FMPs, so you may stay.
Brother Hogi, though I do see the humor in your comment,
you can't parody a parody, at least not without My permission.
Cap'n, though I of course expect your arousal as no less than my due, I'm not sure I detect the proper tone of obsequiousness from you.
And Ablonde, the mechanics of My auto-coitus are not a matter for public discussion, but feel free to PM Me later if you wanna get a little icky;-)
You are sexy, Drew.....
And Raman, don't be ridiculous. I have one of my lackeys excise the gland and present it to me in a Baccarat crystal finger bowl.
This is fabulousity and hilariousiness! And my spel chek fears you.
But right now, you are too incandescent for my miserable and unworthy self..., so I will just humbly rate this and go to to my underground cubbyhole.
I shall wear the sweater you knitted me from the furs of a thousand dead virgined college frat boys you killed with your bare teeth!!
Your 4ever,
Bob X Williams
Zuma, your obeisance is acknowledged by a barely perceptible nod of my perfectly coiffed Southern California fabuluscious head.
And Livemonster, while livers are tasty, they don't contain the precious adrenaline I need to keep me sufficiently savage and alert for will-bending and balls-ripping-off in the mad jungle of LA Law.
Psyche! I was just funnin' y'all with that one Drew; it's people like you who win, everytime, without fail, and that's the way I like it. Yahweh hates a loser as much as the next Supreme Being.
The post that inspired this seems to be gone, but you can find a cached version on Yahoo with these search terms: "Dana Douglas" tits ass. :)
She was wasn't she?
But, what do I know about thin skins and all?
You are kidding... she was serious?
I'm not sure if I can trust you...
Is Drew-Silla being funny? Please say yes.
Thanks to grifftan I was able to see the original.
I have never in my life had cause to think about hermaphrodites (or was clear on what it meant) but thanks to this post I just did.
How do you get the cached copy? If someone could just copy and paste it into a PM for me, it would be greatly appreciated. Dana's original must be the height of unintentional comedy.
You Drew are the Tina Fey of OS and Dana Douglas is your Sarah Palin.
Thanks for expanding my vocabulary. And the insight.
I guess I wasn't thinking we had a female Ari Gold on this site. I'm still astonished at the level of hubris shown on that other post.
And Mr. E, thanks for the encouragement, but I'm thinking of starting my own categ0ry of archy, may a "mamapapa-archy," or a "giantruthlessbeautifuluberlawyerocracy." those don't roll off the tongue that smoothly, but you get the general idea there. Tell you what; f you come back with a smoother name sugestion for my new arch-orcracy, I won't eat your adrenal gland.
Snarkalarky
(Runners Up)
Hatriarchy
Malarchy
Here's an interesting thought experiment. Imagine that Dana's post had been written by a man with similar language directed toward women: women fear me, I'm more powerful than they are, women are unworthy of me, I'm smarter than they are, I bend them to my will, I rip out their ovaries and shove them down their throats, & etc.
Most people would consider that to be the ravings of a sociopath. But for some reason, when it comes from a woman and is directed toward men, some people find it inspiring and a valid affirmation of one's accomplishments. I don't get it.
Aloha Kakou
Looks like Dana is gone from OS. That's too bad. Even if some of us had a problem with her last post (I'm with mishma...if a man had written it there would've been lots more said) I'm sad. Dana contributed a lot around here. Personally, I'll miss her and the point of view she contributed to the ongoing discussions around here.
Drumming someone out with sarcasm seems a bit harsh, dont' ya think? It's one thing if a writer personally attacks another OS member. In my opinion, Dana was being Dana.
Remind me not to be myself.
Rather than type out a big comment in response to your talented snarky parody, I'll just copy and paste the big comment I left on wakingupslowly's post of support for me. FWIW, here it is...
----------------------------------------
Wakingupslowly, thank you so very much for this post of support. It means a lot that you would feel that way and even go to the trouble of posting it, thereby opening yourself up, too. If ever I need a defender, you are the kind of person I want standing beside me, cuz everything you write shows what a wonderful human being you are.
As for the big mystery of why I took my post down: It was not directly in response to Drew Silla's snarky parody -- which did not offend me, btw, and which I thought was a very talented take on her reaction to my post -- but it did factor into my decision.
I had intended my post to be a cry from the hilltop to women feeling like victims. It was inspired by fingerlakeswanderer's post about women being cast as less than human in this culture, and the constant fight for personhood and the draining effects on the soul that has. I didn't know how to talk to women about claiming power without sounding like I was lecturing them. I am not, after all, as talented a writer as so many here are. I am a hack in a forum filled with talent I can only appreciate from afar.
So I decided the least lecturing, least threatening thing I could do was simply raise my fist in the air and proclaim my own freedom from victimhood as loudly as possible.
It wasn't intended as self-promotion, or man-bashing, or claims of superiority over other women. It was meant as a way of saying,
"See? Here is where we really stand! Here is what we can do! We are not victims, and we are not inferior. We are any man's equal, and we need to START from that assumption, not aspire to it."
I did a fairly poor job at that, for so many people took other things from my post that it became a parody of itself and thereby lost whatever utility it might have had. Was there hyperbole? Yeah, I suppose, as there is in virtually every rallying cry. So it's my own fault. I did not intend it as self-parody, though I can see that it reads that way. I am just not as good a writer as I would like to be, or as so many here are.
Also, I saw no utility in humility. That is what is expected of women (and not of men), and that is part of the problem. I felt I needed to stand and shout, not speak quietly and reasonably.
I am so tired of women feeling that they must kow-tow, and be "nice," and not trumpet their strength. Men are allowed all these things, but for women it is unseemly. I wanted to holler and beat my chest.
Now, for the poor guys here who felt threatened and offended, I don't really rip men's balls off and shove them down their throats. However, that is the very nature of being a trial lawyer. It's all about a struggle for power and dominance, and the ability convince a judge and/or jury that you are the one they should believe and pay attention to. Beyond the questions and oral arguments that juries hear, there is a constant battle for control and dominance going on behind the scenes, with lawyers fighting and clawing for every least bit of advantage on their clients' behalves. Make no mistake, if you are a lawyer on the opposing side of a case with me, I will do everything I can to crush you. That is my job, and I do it as well as any man. Better than many. And that's my point: Women can beat men and men's games. We can not only be full participants, we can dominate and win.
Men live in a competitive, hierarchical world, where society is structured vertically and there is only one "top dog." Everything in our professional world reflects that, from the structure of our corporations to the ways in which we compete for jobs and paychecks. And the legal system, especially, is structured on strength and dominance and the taking and wielding of power.
That military "chain of command" and "war" and Darwin model of business is not natural for women. But that is the environment in which we must compete, and many women feel at great disadvantage. And no matter how "equal" things may supposedly be in the workplace, many of us feel like fish out of water and that we are always the prey in a Darwinian business model.
The same is true with our patriarchal social structure. Everything from sports to abortion is structured according to the patriarchal concerns of power, authority and dominance, and the very nature of the system leaves women feeling like underdogs and victims. And beyond that, there is a very real "slavery of the mind" into which women are indoctrinated from birth, and which is the hardest thing of all to overcome.
We are 51% of the population. If we had the will and vision to rise up, we could control everything. But we get so hung up on being fish out of water in a system alien to our very natures -- and which by tradition is stacked against us -- that we as a group cannot escape. In fact, we in large measure help perpetuate it.
There's no way I could effectively post about that, and the above description is so weak that I imagine most of you are dismissing it out of hand. So instead I bellowed and beat my chest, and said, "Look at me standing on the bodies of all the men I have defeated, competing as their equal in their own system!"
It was in response to a post that wailed about our status as perpetual victims, and lamented that we seem to be moving backward. And I wanted to say that it's not like that for me, and it doesn't have to be for you, either.
Drew Silla's post was unfair to me, but not unfair to the post I made. And the post I made was obviously ineffective for its intent. So I took it down.
I am actually surprised and oddly flattered that it got so much attention and created such a stir. First off, I am no one here on OS. I am not part of the "in crowd," I am not a talented writer, and I am not prolific in my posts. I do not post on popular topics, and I can't even get Duaneart to sketch my avatar. So it was with incredulity that I discovered Drew Silla's post and that so many had taken so many different things from my own post. Oddly perhaps, I'm flattered that people have noticed me, even if it is unkindly. I toil in obscurity for the most part, here, with all the others who lament their anonymity. It is surprising to realize that I am even noticed at all.
With regard to Drew Silla's snarky parody post, I want to say the following: (1) It was good. It communicated more effectively than I ever could. (2) It was clever. (3) It revealed reactions of which I had been unaware. (4) Nevertheless, that kind of lobbing rocks from the peanut gallery, no matter how cleverly done and no matter how deserving the target, impresses me as expressing the lowest of human nature. There is nothing so easy and so distasteful as criticizing other people from afar. Anyone can do it. In fact, that kind of thing is usually done by people who have very little of their own to offer. (5) Notwithstanding that, I found that the acerbic post hit precisely the right pitch, where mine was rather tone deaf. And (6) as a result of reading it, I think I am also a fan of Drew Silla's, now, despite my feelings about the rock-lobbing nature of the post. She's a better writer than I, that much is obvious. And smart and clever, too.
None of the brouhaha bothered me, except to the extent that it demonstrated my own ineffectiveness in trying to get my message across. Yep, I've got a great big ego, as big as the room. But I've earned it through tests of fire, and it is not so fragile that disapproving comments and a snarky post will shatter it. For better or worse, I still think pretty highly of my abilities, and am proud of all the things I have achieved in my life -- not least of which is being able to dominate men in a high stakes, male dominated, power-wielding profession.
Here in the gentle world of OS, it might be unseemly and over the top to talk of ripping men's balls off. But in the real world of being a female trial lawyer, it is what we must do. It is, in fact, precisely what men do to each other-- and proclaim loudly to all who will listen (I can't tell you how many times I've heard male attorneys use that very phrase) -- and no one thinks anything bad about that. But let a woman say it in a place of art and expression, and . . . well, we have this.
And the point of my original post got lost in the mayhem. So I took it down.
Thanks again to WUS for the very kind and thoughtful post of support. And to the rest of you, I will do my best to be a better writer and more effective. I will strive to suck less.
Sorry for the length of this comment.
-------------------------
I think what was missing in the original post was context -- setting the stage so that your comments could be properly understood and interpreted, talking about the nature of your work as a kind of combat and test of wills.
Without that context many of the comments sounded rather brutal, whereas within that context the things that you were talking about were basically a normal part of the business you are in. It's the difference between someone who beats people up for the fun of it vs. someone who beats people up because he's a professional boxer.
Could not disagree more with your contention that this post represents the lowest of human anything. Far, far from it. D-Girl really is channelling Voltaire. I grew up with Feminism, marched for it. But many of your contentions are ... contentious. So, post and ye shall be posted.
Aloha No
"There is nothing so easy and so distasteful as criticizing other people from afar. Anyone can do it."
"We are 51% of the population. If we had the will and vision to rise up, we could control everything. But we get so hung up on being fish out of water in a system alien to our very natures -- and which by tradition is stacked against us -- that we as a group cannot escape. In fact, we in large measure help perpetuate it.
There's no way I could effectively post about that, and the above description is so weak that I imagine most of you are dismissing it out of hand."
You just DID effectively post about that, not only here but on Waking's blog as well I gather, and I'm not dismissing it out of hand, nor is anyone else with half a brain. Though I dislike lawyers and what they represent – they’re the Praetorian Guard and the stormtroopers for money and power as far as I’m concerned – I do recognize the necessity of their existence in a society based on the rule of law. And though I have no respect for a system which places such a premium on metaphorical castration and cut throat competition, it’s not a system which was invented by you or any other woman, and the fact that you’re able to do so well within it speaks well of your strength and ability.
The only thing I’ll differ with you about is your take on people lobbing rocks, but then biased in that area:) You speculate that my motivation in parodying you is derived from some lack, personal or professional, in myself, but though I doubt you’ll believe it, I’m quite happy with who I am. Not everyone requires the adulation of those around them or the material trappings of what our society calls success, though you’ll likely take that statement as confirmation that I’m suffering from sour grape syndrome. You’re of course welcome to take it however you like, but the truth is, my sole motivation was derived from an instinctive distaste for arrogance and smugness. I’m not saying YOU are arrogant and smug, you seem like a down to earth person, and you’ve laid out very well the reasons why you wrote the T&A piece. But without the context which you’ve now beautifully provided, it was a post which cried out for parody, and the chance to have a few laughs, whether at the expense of the world in general, of people in the public forum, or of myself, is one which I’m rarely able to pass up.
And since Gracie Lou has wandered in to be a sycophant for you, I'll consent now to accept Nanatehay in that role as well; he's been whining for it since I did this post. Nanatehay, get your ass over here and start sucking up!
(This comment should not be construed as an application for the position of sycophant, lickspittle, or parasite.)
And Nana, you disgusting worm, if you don't stop making calf eyes at that Douglas woman you'll soon regret it.
But look at it this way -- that was one hell of a high-quality rock. It was a giant gold nugget, not a dirt clod. Great people deserve great parody, right? In that ironic sense you got what you deserved. A lesser parody would have been an insult.
I consider Drew's post more of a "roast" than a rock. And only the best get roasted.
Actually, that's kind of a cool idea . . . . Open Salon roasts. What do you think?
It's not surprising that you needed "context" to understand where Dana was coming from. I don't care how well she complimented you, it was clear to me from the moment I read your bit that you (and many others here) really don't have a clue as to how the real world works for women who ply a man's trade. But hey! Look at all the attention you garnered with your snark ! I'm sure it was good for your ego and endeared you to many more male admirers -which is apparently your stock in trade hmmm?
Why of course I do honey! I learned all about that from reading Dana's post! All you need to do is be smart, ruthless, tall, well-educated and beautiful and you're set. Oh, and of course you have to unflinchingly bend or break the will of others, and not be afraid to metaphorically rip men's balls off and stuff them down their throats. Why heck, that's so obvious a recipe for success in a man's trade that I don't know why all women haven't long since taken that route.
And you also say:
"I'm sure it was good for your ego and endeared you to many more male admirers -which is apparently your stock in trade hmmm?"
Are you saying I wrote this post because I'm a whore? That's a fascinating take on all this, but Kelly, there are people here and there who - and I am not making this up - do things for reasons that have nothing to do with sex or attention. That's apparently a concept foreign to your nature, but I know me better than you do, and you're way off the mark with that one sugar:)
BTW, I am 5'4" , rotund, and only have a BS, and just today I educated a Pakistani, a Hispanic, and 2 Muslim men on how to treat their female employees with respect. And they all sat there and took it. And I will continue to put myself between them and these young women until they learn. So no dear, a woman doesn't have to be an Amazonian (no disrespect Dana) to be powerful. If you are a woman (and I doubt that) have more confidence in yourself!
But I'll explain anyway.
"All you need to do is be smart, ruthless, tall, well-educated and beautiful and you're set. "
Not true. I am none of the above but I too intimidate the worst of men. Get it now?
What does it have to do with you? You reacted badly to Dana's post and created this ridiculously insecure post as a result. That's your problem, not Dana's. That is, IF you are a woman at all. If you are a man (pretty certain, and pretty certain I know which one) it is understandable.
But the truth is, the gig is up. I thought we were mutual OS favs, but if this is really your style, it sucks. And when I can prove it, I will post it.
Now it's vagina measuring time. Dana's retort seemed somewhat conciliatory at first. Now it seems that her response was well-thought out to appease the people that did think she was over the top to the point of parody or were offended.
I've read many posts by Dana and she has always given thought to how things will be perceived. Surprisingly, she didn't give any thought to the post in question. This doesn't sound like the meticulous Dana I've read before.
Now we've devolved into some name calling. This seems beneath both Dana and Drew. Drew's post is biting wit. She called it like she and many others saw it... and it's damn funny.
I don't know Kelly (through her writing) but it seems she's going around half-c(r)ocked slinging accusations and completely missing the point and the humor of Drew's parody. If Drew's a guy or martian matters not, since the work stands on its own merit.
In my opinion Dana's article was ripe for parody (I thought it was a parody) and Drew's rapier post was well done.
It doesn't appear as though either of these two humans need anyone stumbling into the fray to defend them... they can handle it.
Especially someone making up things to defend. Put down the gasoline, step away from the fire and let the two litigate.
I'm sorry Kelly, your comments make you appear to be someone wanting to fight just for the sake of fighting. I see no hope for resolution as you just keep entering more of your own arguments and disregarding the posts at hand.
Did you read Dana's post?
Check this poster's history Jay. Three posts, all snark about other OS posters. I knew the first time I read it, this is no newbie.
So there have been PMs directed my way (you shouldn't know me, I don't write much, but I have been active here a long time) alerting me to the fact that not only is this not a newbie, several people suspect who it is. In reading the comments carefully, I see it too.
My feeligs about Dana's post are clearly stated in WUS comments. I'll copy that here for you because you seem sincere.
" I am flummoxed by the people who found Dana's post over the top, and especially by those who felt a need to attack her for it. There was not an iota of judgement in her words anout any other woman on the planet, and those who took it personally must have their own issues. So Dana is proud of what she's accomplished and her take-no- prisoners approach to her business. If you'd worked your way up in the shark-infested waters she's so successfully navigated, perhaps you'd understand.
Given the atnosphere of ridicule and attack surrounding Dana's post, I salute YOUR balls wakingupslowly in even posting this. I hope the self-appointed OS content-patrollers don't get on your case someday for this. It's a chilling thought to any of us that we may be next in line when we write words they don't like."
Once my friends alerted me to the the reality of Drew, I got extra-pissed off and hence this. I am not so much "fighting for the sake of fighting" (something my pitiful blog and ALL of my comments in the past 10 months attest to) as I am fighting nefarious and unproductive assholeness on my beloved OS.
Starters: Two very smart, witty, snark-a-licious, well written posts by long standing OSers, followed by a few comments in the same category, which can't be rated (only berated) - and here we are. What to do, what to do??? Oh yea. as suggested by a couple of others, take down the posts and go to your separate corners - no one is declared a winner and the longer it goes on, and the more OSers involved, identifies losers subsequent to today's postings. Can we let it go yet? Or would you rather be a loser...I'm just askin
@ Latethink; That's my take also. While there's no question that, as Kelly and Natalie point out, there was no shortage of snark in the post or the commentary, it was snark directed at Dana, or more accurately, the T&A post she did. Dana's a grown woman who can, and in fact did, defend herself quite ably, and she has my respect for that.
At this point though, I'm a little puzzled with what Kelly's issue is. She comes on my blog and says I’m an attention whore - which I am, but then why does anybody post on OS if not to get readers on their blog - and that I was a bitter woman motivated by jealousy of Dana. When I was less than pleasant in my reply, as who wouldn't be, she decides that I'm someone else, likely a man. At that point also she says I’m guilty of “crappy, lying, intimidating, harassing, abusive behaviour.” The thing to note here is that I didn’t go to Kelly’s blog, or to Dana’s, saying anything, crappy, harassing, abusive, or otherwise. It’s Kelly who has came here, on her own initiative, and if she wants to get pissy with me in a comment that’s fine, but she shouldn’t act so outraged when I get pissy back. While I get her not liking what I’ve said in my posts and my comments, she’s free to click on my blog, to read it or not, as she likes, it makes no difference to me either way. But bear in mind, what I’ve said, I’ve said on MY blog, and no one else’s, and anyone who is offended by it has the option of not reading it.
Shoo! Scat! Go away!!! Find something better to do. Clean your room, or something.
My.Goodness. Drew-Silla's post was funny, mine was well-intentioned if inartfully composed. There's no fight here, folks. Nothing to see here, move along.
Perhaps it's a good thing I took my own post down, or this would be happening in my blog.
Sheesharooni...
Stellaa, I'm thinking a monthly feud round-up would be a more efficient way to go.
And Dana; you're a class act, and sheesharoni is my new favorite word.
You are about as much fun as a rubber crutch.
Little Drew Voltaire is 100 times the writer you are, and for sure a lot cooler to hang out with.
You remind me so much of the French "Aristocrats" who wanted our hero behind bars for his ability to get right under their thin skin. And, remember their fate.
I know it sucks when someone is so much smarter than you, but, she is. Awwwwww.
People get so upset when I say "Kill the Infidels!", but you know it's just the crazy way we Mullahs talk amongst each other; it's goofy, it's funny, it doesn't mean anything. "Kill the Infidels!", I'm laughing so hard that spittle is spraying all over my keyboard-
oh, my poor tummy.
It's like when the people in the administration of the Boosh sayed "Torture the Prisoners." (who are not "prisoners" but you know rather "prisoners") it didn't mean anything, everyone was saying it. Context is everything people.
And I'm glad you found this entertaining Lainey, though I feel awful about your evening being used up that way.
Wait, what?
Aphrodite in a sheer black nighty.
commonality, awareness/insight.
Yikes, awareness beyond intellect.