Lori Alexander 60: Queen of Woo

[Lgirlrocks]

8 minutes ago, Lisafer said:

Cannibalism was the first thing that sprang to my mind...but you're right, we'd be poisoned.

Plus there isn’t much to eat. She’s skin and bones.

[klein_roeschen]

1 hour ago, Lisafer said:

Omg can you imagine having a harridan like that for a mother-in-law? 

Well, I work at a pharmacy and we have a few options on stock to help one deal with it. Depending on the number of toilets in the house, I recommend a tasteless laxative in her soup

 

[delphinium65]

1 minute ago, klein_roeschen said:

Well, I work at a pharmacy and we have a few options on stock to help one deal with it. Depending on the number of toilets in the house, I recommend a tasteless laxative in her soup

 

Must...not...make joke...about 2 pounds of poop  a day...or about people who are full of shit...  

[Briefly]

On 1/17/2019 at 4:25 PM, Petronella said:

You quoted my post, so I assume your “I think it does matter” is meant to be in response to me, but I never said it didn’t matter.

I did say that it’s foolish to claim that fixing spelling and grammar errors is proof of people reading here. That happens over and over, on many threads.

I just think it makes sense to focus on the *valid* reasons there are for asserting someone reads here, and to not get derailed by focussing on someone fixing a typo or the like as “proof.” I think this is important precisely because it does matter.

Edited to add: I’m not desperate to keep talking about this semantic stuff, but I feel like this post was accusing me of saying something I hadn’t said. Same with the person who quoted my post saying that spinster can be an insult by “still contending” that she thinks it’s an insult. I’m just...well, really baffled! Why are people replying “but” to things I haven’t said?? Even directly quoting the things that didn’t at all say what they’re responding to? This has been a very weird day on FJ for me...

I misread what you posted, because I thought you were saying it didn't matter if she reads here and I didn't get that you were just discussing grammar corrections, so I apologize.  I certainly did not mean to insult you.  I just think it matters that she reads here and we know it, because of the things she has said/done that are harmful.  If someone is googleing her, they might find this site and hopefully see just how bad she really is so that they are less likely to take her advice.  That is what I was referring to.

13 hours ago, SongRed7 said:

Ken speaks again! He seems to go silent for a while then comes roaring back.  I don’t know what I was thinking, but he’s awful. According to this ladies, if you have a bad marriage it’s because one of two reasons-  and both are your fault! 

 

Ken Alexander: You bet!  The primary reasons Christian young ladies end up in a terrible marriage is either they chose badly, or they chose well but their expectations are through the roof. So the ruin their relationship trying to get their husband to fulfill their perceived needs and desires. Definitely parents must be teaching their children to make wise choices and choose only godly young men with potential. Then rest in that choice and allow him to grow up as he leads.

Covering all his bases, I see.  Either she chose badly and it's her fault or she chose well but it's still her fault.  Upshot is that it is always the woman's fault, according to Ken.  He is so dense!

[wallysmommy]

I also apologize for my statement regarding spinsters.  Sometimes what's in my head doesn't quite translate well into a response.  I think you all have great points and I feel lucky to have found people who are willing to speak up against the false teachings of Lori and her ilk to share and debate ideas with.  I have learned much from all of you in my time at FJ.

[Coconut Flan]

Carry on here: