"I Am Adam Lanza's Mother"

[JB Books]

Well, I'd say it was easier to hide the fact you abuse your kids in say, rural 1930's Arkansas than in 2012 OKC or Tulsa with your kid in public schools. I won't even say 'hide' - it was easier to abuse kids and have no one mention it/call you out on it. People knew, but they didn't talk .

I'd definitely agree with this point.

My proof? The commonly-held belief that abuse/neglect/bad parenting didn't start until the late 20th century, like the post I replied to. That's a good job at hiding something if I ever saw one.

I certainly never meant to imply that nothing bad happened before the late 20th Century. Of course bad things did happen and many, many times the bad actor got away with it. However, the family breakdown across all demographics intensified in the late 20th Century.

I'd also say it was more difficult for a woman to leave an abuser in an era before women were educated and able to seek employment/support themselves. It's objectively easier for a woman to find employment and support herself/children financially in 2012 than it was in 1932. Not saying it's not still difficult; I'm just saying that there are a few logistical options now for what once almost an impossibility. Plus divorces were unheard of.

You are right again.

 

[Billybob]

Now, the prevailing philosophy is "If I can get away with it, I'll do it." We are a nation of narcissistic, immature brats.

Now I'll agree with you 100%.

As for how relationships/marriages were in the past we must admit that it's possible women used to be more careful who they married because there wasn't an easy way out like now.

 

[RidgeHunter]

If that's how you really feel then why did you even open or post in this thread? Was it some urgent need within you to denigrate those of us who do attempt to understand? Perhaps you should focus your critical eye inward.

Why did I open the thread? Because I left for a kayak trip before sunrise on Friday morning, and when I came home and surfed the internet I hadn't the foggiest fawk who Adam Lanza was. The only news I'd heard regarding the shooting until yesterday evening was a text message that popped up on my phone when we drove back into cell service that alluded to a 'big school shooting back east".

Why did I post? To see what my thoughts look like in print. All I initially said was I was at a loss for words re: this shooting, something that has been said in some way or another by many people in recent days. You asked why I typed that and I gave you somewhat of answer. Worth what you paid for it. Actually you asked a snarky rhetorical question and I gave a snarky answer - you knew I wasn't implying we should not have an open dialogue about the underlying issues. Yet that's what you implied, so I took that side in a roundabout way for the benefit of advancing your discussion in the way you steered it.

I'm not meaning to denigrate anyone anymore than you are meaning to denigrate me. And with that, I'll close with the antithesis to your emoticon of choice.

 

[Glocktogo]

Why did I open the thread? Because I left for a kayak trip before sunrise on Friday morning, and when I came home and surfed the internet I hadn't the foggiest fawk who Adam Lanza was. The only news I'd heard regarding the shooting until yesterday evening was a text message that popped up on my phone when we drove back into cell service that alluded to a 'big school shooting back east".

Why did I post? To see what my thoughts look like in print. All I initially said was I was at a loss for words re: this shooting, something that has been said in some way or another by many people in recent days. You asked why I typed that and I gave you somewhat of answer. Worth what you paid for it. Actually you asked a snarky rhetorical question and I gave a snarky answer - you knew I wasn't implying we should not have an open dialogue about the underlying issues. Yet that's what you implied, so I took that side in a roundabout way for the benefit of advancing your discussion in the way you steered it.

I'm not meaning to denigrate anyone anymore than you are meaning to denigrate me. And with that, I'll close with the antithesis to your emoticon of choice.

I was honestly questioning what you meant because I didn't understand it. I offered no emoticons with my question. It was you who mistook my question as rhetorical when it wasn't. It certainly wasn't snarky (which is still there for you to check). Your response however was snarky. I could pass that off as you having a bad day, but with intent not being evident in cyberspace unless you spell it out, (and apparently even when you do), how am I to know what your real motives and intent are.

It's not like you're unknown in the realm of satire!

 

[JB Books]

It's not like you're unknown in the realm of satire!

He is the undisputed king of satire and frankly, one of the best writers I have seen.

Ridge, you ought to make some money with this talent!

 

[RidgeHunter]

I was honestly questioning what you meant because I didn't understand it. I offered no emoticons with my question. It was you who mistook my question as rhetorical when it wasn't. It certainly wasn't snarky (which is still there for you to check). Your response however was snarky. I could pass that off as you having a bad day, but with intent not being evident in cyberspace unless you spell it out, (and apparently even when you do), how am I to know what your real motives and intent are.

It's not like you're unknown in the realm of satire!

I don't know the meaning or intent of a good number of my posts until after they're posted. It's kinda like when an artist won't tell you what a painting or a song means.

Sometimes I post things just to get people to elaborate further so I can see where they're coming from. Maybe you just did that with me.

I'd like to to elaborate about thoughts on mass shootings, but brevity is (clearly) not my strong suit and I don't think I could adequately summarize my position. So you were right in that I probably shouldn't have posted my drive-by thought in this thread without the intention of supporting it. Oh well, not gonna stop doing that now.

Nah, it's a good day. I'd rather still be at the river, but I can deal with it. My writing style rarely reflects my actual mood. I have bad days, but there is never a link between them and me being an ass on the net.

 

[Glocktogo]

I don't know the meaning or intent of a good number of my posts until after they're posted. It's kinda like when an artist won't tell you what a painting or a song means.

Sometimes I post things just to get people to elaborate further so I can see where they're coming from. Maybe you just did that with me.

I'd like to to elaborate about thoughts on mass shootings, but brevity is (clearly) not my strong suit and I don't think I could adequately summarize my position. So you were right in that I probably shouldn't have posted my drive-by thought in this thread without the intention of supporting it. Oh well, not gonna stop doing that now.

Nah, it's a good day. I'd rather still be at the river, but I can deal with it. My writing style rarely reflects my actual mood. I have bad days, but there is never a link between them and me being an ass on the net.

You'd think as much of an ass as I am, I'd be able to recognize that MO!

Seriously, I told a coworker today that I need to be o a beach somewhere sipping Mojitos and reading a good book. On the river with a fishing pole would work too. It's been a hard month on all of us, but I'm not gonna lose my head over it. Here's to keepin the faith!