by Tdarcos » Tue Apr 07, 2020 6:17 am
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
That was a really unnecessary attack on AArdvark's writing, Paul.
Why was it "an attack"? I did not say "they are the worthless rantings of a no-talent hack," I said they were boring. If making an honest critique of something is an "attack," then the dishonest comments you made about my writing represnt "trench warfare."
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
Also, since a poll started as I was writing this message I'm also raising my hand because AArdvark's stories are great.
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
TWO PEOPLE ON A THIRD DATE: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT
Brian, clearly you did not read the item. Your comments are all wrong. Or you're trying to make the woman look like some sort of even more entitled character who thinks the world revolves around her. (Reddit calls this type of woman "Karen.") Let's see just how far down the rabbit hole this goes, err I mean lety's see how many ways you got this wrong, shall we?
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
Disrespected woman: "You know, I really almost deceived myself for a moment into thinking you might be the one for one moment of utter stupidity, but you always manage to find a way to remind me of your many douchebag-like qualities before an evening is complete. Now you seem to think you can pressure me into having sex with you by threatening to put an end to our little outings. It's not going to work.
At which point he thanks he for the evening and walks out. End of story, which is what he said he was going to do. Which you would have known if you'd actually read it. Clearly, as he noted in his comments, if she's this mad, she's not interested in a romance with him, he's not interested in drama, so he's going to leave before she rants. But let's continue with your fantasy.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm Do I really need to remind you that I've been paying for all the food because you said you'd already spent your Social Security check this month?
Where do you get the idea the guy is over 65? That is the only way someone gets "social security," (If he was getting Social Security Disability, it's probably not likely he's just getting up from the couch and walking normally.)
There is nothing in the article that implies anything you're talking about, as the typical date involves a man taking a woman out at his expense. In my head I saw the guy (and the girl) as late 20s to mid 30s. And again you keep raising
non sequiturs. If she was paying for the dates then it wasn't a one-sided situation, why would he break it off in the first place? The date would be costing him nothing and he would be getting something out of it. In that case he simply would have continued to go out with her at her expense and found another girl without saying anyting. The story is supposed to be of the standard dating scenario: an ordinary man invites a woman out, and the usual practice is the man is paying for it or (if the woman says so) the two are going Dutch. Your idea appears to be a
non sequitur it does not follow from the story, "and veers off into Wichita, Kansas," otherwise known as "heading for la-la-land."
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pmYour tedious and meandering conversation has certainly not given me any sort of return on my investment so far. That you think you're even in a position to demand anything from me is outrageous.
Again, you clearly didn't read the story. He never demanded
anything. What was the line he used?
It's neither blackmail nor extortion. I'm not entitled to anything. Neither are you. You have the absolute right to decide with whom you will choose to have sex, or to decide you won't have sex with someone.
There is no 'demand' here, not on his part. She wants him to stick around and be her 'emotional tampon,' giving her attention, validation, paying for dates, and everything else, while he gets nothing. And that she's told him this isn't going to change. Clearly, it's she the one who's demanding attention from him, while offering him nothing in exchange.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm I'm not a struggling actress and you're not Harvey Weinstein
Absolutely. Weinstein used drugs and/or force. All this guy did was say to her either she could decide to have a romance with him or he'd find someone who would. No force, no threats of "you'll never work in this town" just simply that he won't continue a one-sided dating arrangement when she's precluded any chance of anything further.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm -- there's a certain physical resemblance there, I grant you, but you'd need to lose at least three hundred pounds to really pull the look off."
Come on! Get real! If the guy was 300 pounds overweight she'd never have gone out with him in the first place. Use your brain to face reality and stop jumping off into la-la-land.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
Coercive man: "Let's not get hysterical here. I thought you were mature enough to be able to handle a mutually beneficial relationship between two consenting adults..."
This discussion ain't taking place. Either she chose to change her mind and begin a romance with him, or he walks out the door to find someone who will.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
Disrespected woman: "Just shut up. SHUT UP for one second in your life."
Coercive man: "No, you shut up. If you're not going to give me what I'm here for, I don't need to hear a single word more of your idiotic drivel."
You're in la-la-land again. In the original story, he let her say her piece and did not interrupt her.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
A familiar burning feeling convulsed through the coercive man's body as shoe met balls. He fell to the floor clutching his stomach.
Can you try exiting la-la-land for a moment? If a man is kicked in the nuts, he grabs his nuts, because that's where it hurts. He'd only be grabbing his stomach if he was gut-punched.
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
The disrespected woman then marched confidently out of the restaurant, only pausing to exchange high fives with restaurant patrons as they chanted, "You go, girl!"
First of all, the story took place in her apartment, unless you think her bedroom was somewhere in the back of the restaurant. Again, this shows you didn't read what I wrote. Second, do you really think the other patrons are going to be cheering on a woman who hit a man below the belt for no reason except she didn't like what he said? Maybe slapping him on the face would be tolerated, but I doubt this would. She'd probably be asked to leave and never come back.
So let me get this straight. He never so much as laid a finger on her, while she kicked him in the nuts, and you have the nerve to call
him coercive?
bryanb wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:06 pm
Meanwhile, the coercive man rose unsteadily to his feet and pointed a crooked finger towards the disrespected woman, glowering in unfathomable rage.
Coercive man: "That's assault according to Maryland Code Section 3..."
Waiter: "Don't be such a douchebag. Do you need some ice?"
More likely, he's still on the ground, in pain, using his phone to dial 9-1-1. This represents not just regular assault, but assault and battery. Mandatory arrest, police have no discretion, if there is an assault of this type reported, the man or the woman committing it
must be arrested. And there is
serious jail time. Virginia Code 18.2-57 declares it a class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and/or a fine up to $2,500. In Maryland, where I no longer live, that's second degree assault under Maryland Code 3-203, which carries a maximum penalty of
ten years in prison and/or a fine which is also up to $2,500. If you're going to kick someone in the nuts, you'd better not do it in Maryland.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
That was a really unnecessary attack on AArdvark's writing, Paul.[/quote]
Why was it "an attack"? I did not say "they are the worthless rantings of a no-talent hack," I said they were boring. If making an honest critique of something is an "attack," then the dishonest comments you made about my writing represnt "trench warfare."
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
Also, since a poll started as I was writing this message I'm also raising my hand because AArdvark's stories are great.[/quote]
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
TWO PEOPLE ON A THIRD DATE: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT
[/quote]
Brian, clearly you did not read the item. Your comments are all wrong. Or you're trying to make the woman look like some sort of even more entitled character who thinks the world revolves around her. (Reddit calls this type of woman "Karen.") Let's see just how far down the rabbit hole this goes, err I mean lety's see how many ways you got this wrong, shall we?
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
Disrespected woman: "You know, I really almost deceived myself for a moment into thinking you might be the one for one moment of utter stupidity, but you always manage to find a way to remind me of your many douchebag-like qualities before an evening is complete. Now you seem to think you can pressure me into having sex with you by threatening to put an end to our little outings. It's not going to work.[/quote]
At which point he thanks he for the evening and walks out. End of story, which is what he said he was going to do. Which you would have known if you'd actually read it. Clearly, as he noted in his comments, if she's this mad, she's not interested in a romance with him, he's not interested in drama, so he's going to leave before she rants. But let's continue with your fantasy.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003] Do I really need to remind you that I've been paying for all the food because you said you'd already spent your Social Security check this month?[/quote]
Where do you get the idea the guy is over 65? That is the only way someone gets "social security," (If he was getting Social Security Disability, it's probably not likely he's just getting up from the couch and walking normally.)
There is nothing in the article that implies anything you're talking about, as the typical date involves a man taking a woman out at his expense. In my head I saw the guy (and the girl) as late 20s to mid 30s. And again you keep raising [i]non sequiturs[/i]. If she was paying for the dates then it wasn't a one-sided situation, why would he break it off in the first place? The date would be costing him nothing and he would be getting something out of it. In that case he simply would have continued to go out with her at her expense and found another girl without saying anyting. The story is supposed to be of the standard dating scenario: an ordinary man invites a woman out, and the usual practice is the man is paying for it or (if the woman says so) the two are going Dutch. Your idea appears to be a [i]non sequitur[/i] it does not follow from the story, "and veers off into Wichita, Kansas," otherwise known as "heading for la-la-land."
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]Your tedious and meandering conversation has certainly not given me any sort of return on my investment so far. That you think you're even in a position to demand anything from me is outrageous.[/quote]
Again, you clearly didn't read the story. He never demanded [i]anything[/i]. What was the line he used?
[size=85]It's neither blackmail nor extortion. I'm not entitled to anything. Neither are you. You have the absolute right to decide with whom you will choose to have sex, or to decide you won't have sex with someone.[/size]
There is no 'demand' here, not on his part. She wants him to stick around and be her 'emotional tampon,' giving her attention, validation, paying for dates, and everything else, while he gets nothing. And that she's told him this isn't going to change. Clearly, it's she the one who's demanding attention from him, while offering him nothing in exchange.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003] I'm not a struggling actress and you're not Harvey Weinstein[/quote]
Absolutely. Weinstein used drugs and/or force. All this guy did was say to her either she could decide to have a romance with him or he'd find someone who would. No force, no threats of "you'll never work in this town" just simply that he won't continue a one-sided dating arrangement when she's precluded any chance of anything further.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003] -- there's a certain physical resemblance there, I grant you, but you'd need to lose at least three hundred pounds to really pull the look off."[/quote]
Come on! Get real! If the guy was 300 pounds overweight she'd never have gone out with him in the first place. Use your brain to face reality and stop jumping off into la-la-land.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
Coercive man: "Let's not get hysterical here. I thought you were mature enough to be able to handle a mutually beneficial relationship between two consenting adults..."[/quote]
This discussion ain't taking place. Either she chose to change her mind and begin a romance with him, or he walks out the door to find someone who will.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
Disrespected woman: "Just shut up. SHUT UP for one second in your life."
Coercive man: "No, you shut up. If you're not going to give me what I'm here for, I don't need to hear a single word more of your idiotic drivel."
[/quote]
You're in la-la-land again. In the original story, he let her say her piece and did not interrupt her.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
A familiar burning feeling convulsed through the coercive man's body as shoe met balls. He fell to the floor clutching his stomach. [/quote]
Can you try exiting la-la-land for a moment? If a man is kicked in the nuts, he grabs his nuts, because that's where it hurts. He'd only be grabbing his stomach if he was gut-punched.
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
The disrespected woman then marched confidently out of the restaurant, only pausing to exchange high fives with restaurant patrons as they chanted, "You go, girl!" [/quote]
First of all, the story took place in her apartment, unless you think her bedroom was somewhere in the back of the restaurant. Again, this shows you didn't read what I wrote. Second, do you really think the other patrons are going to be cheering on a woman who hit a man below the belt for no reason except she didn't like what he said? Maybe slapping him on the face would be tolerated, but I doubt this would. She'd probably be asked to leave and never come back.
So let me get this straight. He never so much as laid a finger on her, while she kicked him in the nuts, and you have the nerve to call [i]him[/i] coercive?
[quote=bryanb post_id=107464 time=1586218003 user_id=2003]
Meanwhile, the coercive man rose unsteadily to his feet and pointed a crooked finger towards the disrespected woman, glowering in unfathomable rage.
Coercive man: "That's assault according to Maryland Code Section 3..."
Waiter: "Don't be such a douchebag. Do you need some ice?"
[/quote]
More likely, he's still on the ground, in pain, using his phone to dial 9-1-1. This represents not just regular assault, but assault and battery. Mandatory arrest, police have no discretion, if there is an assault of this type reported, the man or the woman committing it [i]must[/i] be arrested. And there is [i]serious[/i] jail time. Virginia Code 18.2-57 declares it a class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and/or a fine up to $2,500. In Maryland, where I no longer live, that's second degree assault under Maryland Code 3-203, which carries a maximum penalty of [size=150]ten years in prison[/size] and/or a fine which is also up to $2,500. If you're going to kick someone in the nuts, you'd better not do it in Maryland.