OK

SSK here, NOT KM: This Might Take A Few Moments To Read:

(I wrote the following in response to the very few numbnuts who took K to task for writing that he was "hurt" by the, again, very few numbnuts who have been attacking K AND each other. I print it here because it took me a long time to write, and I'll be damned if it's going to go ignored):

First, because I know it will piss this poster off,: GUSTYPIP OR NIPS OR FLIPS OR WHATEVER wrote:

gustynpip wrote (oh, look, I was almost right the first time. It won't happen again. carry on):
"Being "hurt" is all to often a passive aggressive form of manipulation.  One that works phenomenally well.  Feel free to disagree with me, but to me this is a classic example of it."

Editorial comment right off the bat: When a poster writes "All to often", believing that "to" is the correct word TOO use in this particular way, and in reality this word is erroneously used in this sentence (this particular error in usage drives me INSANE), tends TOO make me turned off TOO anything else the writer has TOO say; making such an egregious error in writing leads me TOO believe that the writer has nothing of note for me TOO (okay, I'll stop) be entertained or informed by in any writing after that egregious error. (And yes, I make typos, we all do, but that particular error is all TOO [one last shot] often made because the writer thinks "to" is correct in that sentence; it ain't.)

It also tends to make me amazed right down to my non-designer boots, that this poster is now going on to make judgments about the diarist, such as saying that one is "'hurt' is a manipulative, passive/aggressive (that diagnosis always comes with a forward slant, sweets) behaviour." Hah? If your are, say, standing on my foot, and my foot hurts, and I ask you to "remove your foot from my foot, as my foot hurts what with your standing on it", is that "passive/aggressive" of me?!

Jinkies. The guy asks for eine bieshien fershtentence every nine years, and gustynippy pippy  comes charging out of the woodwork to make a judgement about his mental status being "passive/aggressive" AND THEN gets angry at MBNYC for DOING THE SAME THING to GutsyHips!! (And, with only a background in advertising, I am willing to bet MBNYC is a country mile past GuppyLips  in being able to correctly diagnose someone's mental state.)

Now, the reason I am getting so broiled about GutterDips (and, really, anyone else) attacking the diarist for posting a query for giving peace a chance:

We happen to use the same computer. And live in the same  house. And sleep in the same bed. (And we're both too stupid to figure out how to get me a separate site on DK, so there ya go.)

My husband has been writing and airing his views publicly for a very long time, ever since I, irritated as hell with his hollering at Faux News and Mr. "Oh, Really??", told him to shut the fuck up and go write his feelings into an article and send them to the LA Times. (The editor published the very first  thing he sent them, and K was a Sunday fave from that day on.) He has developed quite the shell, that deflects the (often undeserved) crap that shoots his way;  crap comes with being in the public eye, and airing one's opinions in a public arena. He's quite the stoic about it most of the time. I'd say 99% of that time.

I, however... am not so quick to stay silent when my quick has been cut. And my quick? Is him.

He takes the shit that flies. He really does. He agrees with me, and anyone else who has been published (yes, I am also late of the LA Times, the LA Daily News, and, the first time, when I was 19, the LA Herald-Examiner. Talking about "late": alas, the LAHE is gone these 30 years now [whoops, my age has been calculated!]) that when you put your name to a thing and are lucky (or un) enough to have it made public, shit can fly. If an Op/Ed writer (or any kind of writer; Stephen King got his share of shit when he first began, especially with that travesty called "Cujo"; [I was in that group. Come on, Steve, really, taking a sweet doggy and making him a ravening killer in two chapters, just because your kid needed a roof over his head and food to eat??!]) gets shit writ to her/him, the writer can A) ignore it, B) clash with the writer of the shit, or C) Attempt to engage, every nine years, with his audience in a calm, rational way that cramming crap down one another's throats is probably not the best way to get our message out, and really does make us sink to the level of our opponents, and get shit for THAT.

But, and 2: I choose D: Jump in and defend your husband from the assholes who would judge his mental status and attack his views, simply because he asked for, as I said, a little understanding.

Got my Irish was up there, GummyTips. And having come full circle, by mentioning the fourth or fifth bastardized name of the original poster who ticked me off so badly:

We get the to meat of the matter: DON'T FUCKING JUDGE MY HUSBAND'S MENTAL CONDITION BASED ON A VERY RARE PLEA FROM HIM FOR A LITTLE PEACE AND QUIET!!

Thank you for your time.
SSK not KM.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.