On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:02:54 -0600, _TR_  wrote:

>Cloaked wrote:
>
>> Point taken.
>>
>> Sounds not too far off my ex actually.
>
>You haven't gone by the name of Dickless Davey recently, have you?  (Just
>kidding.)
>
>> My ex loved to declare that women were "superior" to men.
>
>Yep.  A feminist.
>
>> Yet she never failed to spend my paycheque - and more - on an ongoing
>> basis. And if I was ever unemployed, did I ever get it in the ear!
>
>Feminist sotto voce marriage vows:
>"What's mine is mine.  What's yours will be ours.  What's ours will be
>mine."
>
>> Yes, the consumate manifestation of the femminist lie: "We are all
>> equal, but you have to take care of us!"
>
>Indeed. It's remarkable that the poor things can't see the inherent
>contradiction in such a position.  But that's feminism for ya!
>>
>> There is a part of me that would indeed like to take a peek at my ex's
>> life - just out of morbid curiousity. Love to see how that superior
>> femminist is getting by these days. ;)
>
>I believe that I understand what you're saying, but if you would permit me
>a bit of unsolicited, simple advice, perhaps just for the sake of the
>lurking majority.
>
>If you're motivated by vengeance, then consider this:  The most painful
>emotional wound you can inflict upon a manipulative ex-(whatever) is
>through the brutal application of sheer apathy.  Forget about her.
>Literally.
>

Well I would not want her to know I was looking! ;)

The reality is, I could not give a flying fig about her. The last time
we talked was, IIRC, shortly after the divorce??? Or was it just
before??? Not sure. But that was back in 2000. Have not see hide nor
hair of her since.

And, God willing, I will never bump into her sorry a$$ ever again!

>She (in your case) would be delighted to know that you're still affected by
>her manipulative endeavours.  If you deny her the opportunity, she'll need
>to expend energy to find a new target.  Manipulative people don't like
>expending energy.  They want other people to do it for them.  Deny her the
>means, and she'll suffer.
>

Interesting. That would make her co-dependant then. The shoe fits
pretty good!

>Such is the case with our mascot Carol Ann.  She divorced Dickless Davey
>years ago.  Now she no longer has the means to manipulate him, and no other
>self-respecting man will have anything to do with her.  She must now try to
>indulge her manipulative compulsion through Usenet.
>

Yes my ex no longer receives "spousal support". I imagine it was very
difficult for her coming to terms with the fact that not even the
courts would allow ongoing lies and manipulations - that there was an
"end" or limit to her bullshit.

>She's shown over the years that she lacks the ability to debate (ask her
>about "castle law", "Manitoba", "convicted
female rapists" and you'll get
>an angry response.  She was compelled to change her name many times as she
>"debated" herself into an inescapable, self-contradicting position.
>
>I quite like having her to kick around, no matter what Usenet alias she
>chooses.  She gets her little feelings hurt soooooooo easily!  And with
>regard to PR, Carol Ann does for festering feminism what Jim Jones did for
>another group of religious cultists.
>
>
>TR II
>

nasty!

>
>
>
>>
>> _TR_  wrote:
>>
>>>Cloaked wrote:
>>>
>>>You haven't been arguing with an informed person.  The poster you know as
>>>"Hyerdahl" is Carol Ann Hemingway, one of Usenet's
more credibility-
>>>challenged participants.
>>>
>>>Hyerdahl, and all her previous aliases, like to rail against marriage,
>>>claiming that she has a "life partner" to which she
was never married.  Yet
>>>very same sick brain who denies ever being married proudly
proclaimed, when
>>>she was posting as Carol Ann Hemingway about eight years ago,
that she had
>>>a "difficult divorce" to her husband, one David
Hemingway, affectionately
>>>known in these parts as Dickless Davey.  Carol Ann, or
"Hyerdahl" as you
>>>know her, depends upon alimony from Dickless Davey, so perhaps
you can see
>>>the inherent bias in her arguments over money paid by government decree
>>>(and you'll never see her arguing in favour of women paying men).
>>>
>>>Carol Ann doesn't get out much.  She stays shut within her
hovel, consumes
>>>romance novels voraciously, takes them seriously and likes to
declare that
>>>life *should* be like one of her tales of eternal female victimhood and
>>>eternal male obligation.
>>>
>>>Take her ramblings seriously if you choose, but doing so accomplishes
>>>nothing.
>>>
>>>TR II



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/1/05 9:34:48 PM ---