Guy Friday
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
No, I got THAT part. I was saying I was originally thrown off by the comment for the reasons other people had stated, but then recognized the meaning behind it. Trust me, if I felt like the site was hostile to me, there’s a big red X in the upper right corner I can utilize 🙂 I know exactly what you mean about BGM’s comments, and I echo the sentiments you raised; even his valid points were buried by the tone in which they were given. You can disagree with someone without calling them stupid.
I’ll admit the “this is a site for women” comment a few pages back threw me for a second, but hopefully I haven’t crossed any lines even when I have been particularly set on a given point (and I don’t think I have, but my anxiety always likes to check in 🙂 ). Hey, as long as I can raise concerns to mods if any come up, I’m good.
I mean, if his feelings were hurt, I’d certainly sincerely apologize to him. But I would hope he realized that my point was to frame my response in a way that made more sense to him, since he seemed to have difficulty understanding where everyone else’s responses were coming from. But, fairly or unfairly, he’s coming at this from a different angle than most, and that needs to get accounted for, Ron. When a 15 year old posts about how “I lost the love of my life and I’m never going to love again because there will never be another person for me!” we treat them differently here than if it was a 40 year old posting it, as well we should.
I would never say something here that I wouldn’t say directly to a person’s face; that’s just who I am.
For what it’s worth, Hunter, I wasn’t assuming you were diagnosed with anything. That’s why I asked you about it. I deal with a lot of people with spectrum disorders in my work, and I’ve noticed a lot of similarities in speech patterns and mannerisms that are often taught as methods to “blend in”, for lack of a better term. It’s relevant because, as Wendy put it:
People with high functioning autism, which I am guessing is your diagnosis, tend to fixate and obsess on certain topics; they also often miss or misinterpret social cues, get bullied as children, and have trouble sort of understanding social context and their place within that context
Now, I don’t know where on the spectrum you fall, and I agree with you that THAT isn’t relevant. But the fact that you are ON it does change the context of this considerably, because it explains why you’re having trouble understanding the issues presented here. You’ll also notice that the tone of the replies changed considerably once that information was given, not because of some pity for you or something but because criticizing someone with a spectrum disorder for misunderstanding social cues is like criticizing an English speaker for not understanding Portuguese; you can do it over time, but it takes practice and learning.
I agree with Sky’s last response. You sound like a good guy who made the choice to get involved and do what your moral compass told you was the right thing to do. What people are reacting to negatively now is the concept that you did it because she was pretty, because there are unfortunately a lot of guys out there who would only intervene BECAUSE she was pretty and because they hoped she would “owe” them; in other words, doing it for the wrong reasons. I don’t think that’s why you did it, but I think if you told the exact same story and avoided the adjectives — in other words, if the fact that she was a girl was just what it was and not the motivation for you getting involved — the criticisms would die down quite a bit. And for those that don’t, you need to just remember that nothing you do in life is going to be universally loved or hated, and you just have to decide whether the opinions of those who disagree with you matter to your day-to-day life. If they do, change; if they don’t, ignore them.
I’m going to ask this, and I don’t mean this in any way to be an insult; it’s just an observation that’s prompted my question:
Assuming the person in that video is you, Hunter, have you ever been diagnosed with any kind of spectrum disorder of any kind? Your mannerisms and speech pattern remind me a lot of many people I’ve seen with those disorders, and if it was true it would put A LOT of what’s gone on in this thread into a greater context.
You don’t have to answer this at all if you don’t want to. I’m just curious.
I’m not even sure I buy that the boyfriend actually refused to marry her solely because of the son. I mean, every other aspect of what she’s telling us has been proven to be warped; why wouldn’t that be as well?
Nice! Me too! I even still have my ResNet sweatshirt (because I was the nerd who got everyone hooked up every year during move-in 🙂 )
Though what do I know, I only went to BU and I study frozen pizza and hair care for a living.
See, but there’s SO. MANY. BUs. OUT. THERE. How do I know if you went to the same BU I went to? Randomly name drop my mascot and hope you nod in recognition? Because that’s hella awkward. Way to ruin my Friday night, Kate. Have you no shame?!
Honestly, she’ll probably be a great lawyer. Seems like she has the right attitude (PDX816 – I kid, I kid! Sort of)
You better be 100% kidding, friend-o 🙂
and special note to abby, as someone who has spent 10 plus years working with attorneys, shame on you. you’re actions are the reason why I have to defend the amazing people I work for, because shitty, unethical attorneys give all of them a bad name.
Amen. And as someone who has spent 10 years AS an attorney, let me enlighten you as to a few things:
1.) The Character and Fitness portion of every state bar requires the acknowledgement of these kinds of things, only they do it so subtly that you don’t even realize what they’re asking for until it’s too late. I almost got my law license held up for a month for failing to note a one day suspension with pay I got at a job I had in HIGH SCHOOL. Trust me: they scour the internet looking for stuff, and you’re never as anonymous as you think you are.
2.) Assuming you do graduate and pass the bar (which is a big if these days, and getting into law school isn’t a guarantee of that), if your mentality is this there will come a time when you’re going to be before a judge on a case and they’ll ask you to think on your feet, and you’ll be stumped, and you will lose your case because you took the shortcut. Period. End of story. There is absolutely no way around rolling up your sleeves and doing the work.
3.) Having said that, did I share outlines of the coursework in law school? Sure. do I borrow/copy/reuse other people’s motions? You bet. Do I have templates I resuse? Absolutely. But those templates are constantly updated and double-checked to reflect changes in the law so I don’t look stupid, and in fact that’s what I usually do the week between Christmas and New Year’s each year. I do it because there are a lot of cases on the docket, and I don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time, and most of the stuff that’s boilerplate is information the opposing party isn’t disputing anyway (ex: “this is the case law that sets the rule we need you to apply, Judge”). That’s a world away from what you’re suggesting be done, abby.
Also, let’s be real here: you’re not in a Top 100 law school. You’re Tier 3, at best. I don’t have to know where you go to know that, because the admission criteria is self-selecting, and you don’t get in to a Harvard or a Yale or a Michigan or a Georgetown with the mindset you have. Or at least you don’t make it more than a year without washing out.
I’m coming in to this post not to feed the troll, but just to remind people who didn’t go through the entire original thread that the mother of the child and this LW’s live son have already AGREED that he shouldn’t be a part of this child’s life; that is to say, she’s not looking for support from him, and he’s not looking to pursue visitation or decision-making say-so. This woman is a sick and disturbed grandmother who believes that thrusting a child on her son — who has acknowledged he cannot be the parent this child needs and, again, is not demanding placement or custody — is going to somehow “cure” him of his issues, to the point where she was prepared to withheld emotional/financial/etc. support as he worked on his sobriety. We can quibble about whether it’s beneficial or not to have the child’s mother move the court to establish a child support order (since visitation will be tied to it), but frankly I think it’s commendable for the guy to recognize that he’s not in a healthy place to be around this child and to be mature enough to have this conversation with the mother and come to an agreement with her. So I think the attacks on the son are a little unnecessary here because he’s not the one picking this particular fight, you know?
I’ll repost what I wrote in the other thread:
“It’s not her child. It’s just not. And nothing upsets me more as a lawyer who regularly takes cases like this in juvenile and family court than to see grandparents trying to claim that “they know better than the parents.” It reeks of condescension. And, honestly, this LW doesn’t want the child to SUPPORT the child; she wants the child so she can “start fresh,” so she can SAY she has the child. That’s disgusting to me. Again, the presumed parents — and by that I mean the mother and the son who has been identified as the father — have agreed on the healthiest way to raise the child for the time being, and she needs to honor that whether she likes it or not. The fact that she won’t is harmful to the child, and it’s inexcusable. Period. Point blank.”
Most of us know that a drug addicted criminal parent is not fit to raise an innocent child.
And, frankly, the point you’re missing, CanadaGoose — and the point that, to me, is the most important aspect of this, and why I personally am harsh to this LW — is that her son has already indicated that he is aware that he is unfit to raise this child at this time, and he’s not asking to be involved in the child’s life. He and the mother of the child have agreed upon it. And now the grandmother is demanding that he do so, and is frankly heavily inferring that she would condition her support for his recovery on his compliance, which as you’re well aware is completely counter-productive to his sobriety and stability.
It’s not her child. It’s just not. And nothing upsets me more as a lawyer who regularly takes cases like this in juvenile and family court than to see grandparents trying to claim that “they know better than the parents.” It reeks of condescension. And, honestly, this LW doesn’t want the child to SUPPORT the child; she wants the child so she can “start fresh,” so she can SAY she has the child. That’s disgusting to me. Again, the presumed parents — and by that I mean the mother and the son who has been identified as the father — have agreed on the healthiest way to raise the child for the time being, and she needs to honor that whether she likes it or not. The fact that she won’t is harmful to the child, and it’s inexcusable. Period. Point blank.
Frankly, it astounds me that this view of mine is even vaguely controversial.
I can’t speak for other people, but personally I don’t like to advocate for forced sterilization, because let’s be honest here: the times when people call for it tend to be in response to people who are poor. I’m not saying you specifically mean it that way, but by and large if the person in question is rich and a crappy parent very few people would advocate for a vasectomy/tubal ligation no matter what he/she did. If population control arguments were more egalitarian, I suspect people wouldn’t be as offended by them.
