Saturday, November 25, 2006

More Rudeness

Wow - I was taken to task on my last post about something I chose to write about. And the truly amusing thing was that it wasn't because I was wrong, but because I had the utter nerve to write about it in the first place. I will not apologize for what I wrote, nor will I respond other than this post. Frankly, I don't give a damn about the whole Anne Stuart thing. It's silly (oh, there I go again). She doesn't need me to defend, just as no one else needs me to defend them. Anyone who wants to take a crack at me in my comments, in a way that allows only a post for rebuttal, have at it. That's the beauty of this country. Say what you want. No, I don't like it. I think it exposes stupidity for what it is, but if it makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

I originally commented because I was answering something that, while it wasn't a blatant lie, was a very well-spun half truth. And instead of anyone saying, 'Hmm... maybe it isn't all us-against-them' people responded by saying 'we won't apologize until Miss Snark does'. No one said, well maybe there is a possiblity that so-and-so might not be the most unbiased opinion out there. No. That was too much to ask from blind followers. How third-grade is that? I was polite, and I was responded to in very snotty and condescending tones. But hey, that's ok. I really don't care because it matters very little in the ultimate scheme. And if the only way someone can validate themselves is by being snotty and condescending, then I suppose I should pity that person. Maybe. I don't know. After this is posted, I won't even think about it. Instead, I'll go on with my life, which keeps me pretty busy. The link to the original blog will be severed and that will be that.

I also posted that entry because I've grown weary of people bandying about the First Amendment argument when people say something others don't like. And apparently some people still need that entry. It's sad that someone had to attack because they did not like the example I gave. Although I have to admit that I'm flattered that someone actually thought I had enough readers to fan the flames. And that is an exact quote. Wow. I didn't realize how powerful I was until then. But I will say this, I am sorry I ever went over there, because I didn't say anything to start an argument. That was hardly what I wanted. Yet, sadly, some people know no other way, can see no other point of view but their own. Sad, yes, but not surprising.

By the by, I did have the opportunity to hear Miss Crusie speak at a recent conference and I enjoyed her talk very much. I am sorry that so much bickering had to take place on her blog. I'm also sorry that the person who thought to bash me on my own blog thought it was their place to scold me. If my opinion troubles you so greatly, maybe you should look inside yourself and wonder why I've struck such a nerve. You might be surprised by the answer.



December Quinn said...

What I found most amusing was the savage way they dismissed the snarklings for being too savage.

And Yoffa. Yeah. Had she offered a decent apology instead of blaming other people for her actions, things wouldn't have gotten so bad, I don't think. Not that she deserved, in any way, to get death threats--but I doubt that was actually a snarkling.

That Yoffa thing was all over the net after Miss S posted it--and I'd never seen Yoffa there before, either.

Bottom line for me--I'm never buying a book by Jennifer Crusie. Not because she stood up for her friend, or disagreed with Miss S, but because she was deliberately insulting to me and quite a few people I like who enjoy reading and comment at Miss S. I'm sure she doesn't care, being a bestseller anyway, but it makes me feel better.

Kim said...

That was what really bothered me - it was a case of if you read Miss Snark, you weren't worthy of common consideration. If your opinion differed, you were wrong, pure and simple and it was all right to be as rude as possible, as long as you were rude on the "right" side.

Ah well, what can you do?