Say Anything Blog

The man apparently has more money than sense because he then appealed the decision. I don’t know what the value of the ring was but it must have been a whopper to justify spending the kind of money you’d spend on an appeal

Or he could just be bitter.

I disagree with the Court of Appeals. I think if you gave her a ring, you gave her a ring.

In most cases, I would agree with you, but in this case I have to agree with the appeals court. Yes, the man gave her the ring when she said yes. If she had said no at the time, then he would have probably pocketed the ring. That makes the gift conditional. It would not have been a gift if she had not said yes and since she reneged on the marriage, the gift should be given back.

Pawn it!!!!. Prolly get a good squirrel rifle for it.

One wonders how long until some enterprising bachelor sues his date for the price of dinner and a movie if the evening doesn’t end as he expected…

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I am thinking maybe it was a family ring .. even possibly family heirloom. If I was the guy and she kept my mom’s ring or my gramdmothers… I’d fight for it also. Now, if it was just a normal ring I’d forget it and hope she choked on the sucker.

Why would she want to keep it?

Good point, Kevin.  And Anna has a good point too.  If the ring is one-of-a-kind and has special meaning for the ex-groom he should absolutely get it back.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Why would she want to keep it?

Materialism.  Certainly not love.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Why would she want to keep it?

Come on Kevin, don’t be so silly. TO PISS HIM OFF!
But, it was given on Christmas so was it a gift?

I think the judge merely applied contract law to the situation. 

In that case he decided correctly.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

I agree Whistler, there were probably a lot of factors that are not known to the public.

I thought this was an unwritten rule anyway.  Unless he jilts her at the alter, he gets the ring back.

The engagement ring IS a conditional gift.
http://www.aaml.org/files/public/Journal_vol_17-2-8_Engagement_Ring.pdf

An engagement ring is often viewed as a contractual gift. By accepting, the woman promises to marry. And if she doesn’t hold up her end of the deal, he gets the ring back.

And since a lot of courts order court costs...why not get back what should be his?

I’m with Anna and Kenny. If you give the girl a diamond necklace and she dumps you, thems the breaks. If you offer a conditional gift as an offer of intent to spend the rest of your days with the girl, she has but two choices. If she offers up a yes and then backs out, that’s no different than a contractor who balks after accepting a deposit to remodel your house. Cough it up. A gift is a gift, although one ‘gives’ it, an engagement ring is not a gift.

You gotta consider the heirloom factor; if you give a girl a stone cut for your great-grandmother that was passed down to you, and you catch the girl catting on you, are you obliged to surrender a piece of family history because your girlfriend/fiance is a ho?

Even if it isn’t a heirloom, many rings cost the equivalent of a small car. How a piece of jewelry symoblizing a moral bind and promise equates to Rob’s hypothetical bachelor-takes-girl to Red Lobster is beyond logic.

Look, if I was an unlucky guy whose fiance kicked him to the curb, there is only one thing I’d do with the returned ring: sell it back to the jewler for a substantial loss, take the money, call up some bros and take the bros/refunded loot to Vegas.

How a piece of jewelry symoblizing a moral bind and promise equates to Rob’s hypothetical bachelor-takes-girl to Red Lobster is beyond logic.

‘Twas a joke, dude.  Chill out.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I’d tend to agree that the ring implies a contract and should be returned if the contract is broken (especially if it’s an heirloom ring), but if it costs the man only a few grand to figure out that his ex-fiance is a gold-digger instead of half his house, it was money well spent.

I’m somehow reminded of the Jeff Foxworthy (?) crack about the similarity between a tornado and a divorce being that someone’s going to lose a trailer…

Well, I think men should think about this prior to falling in love (aka testosteronitis of the brain). When you decide to become engaged, give an engagement ring that a simple non lifetime in debt, take me the cleaners, strip me naked leave me out in the cold ring, that is meaningless so if by chance things don’t work out you can still be a man and walk away with one less thing to hate about her. Otherwise, Some time during your engagement you “together” pick out the huge expensive breathtaking ring of her dreams to keep in the safe deposit box until the day of the wedding.

Well, I think men should think about this prior to falling in love (aka testosteronitis of the brain).

So, for men, love is only “testosteronitis of the brain”?  Can I conclude you believe “estrogenitis of the brain” is the real thing, then?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Calm down robert108 .. for heavens sakes!
If it were the other way around I would have used “hormonitis”.
Now, will you please lighten up and realize I am not a man hater or feminist or anything closely related (although, I am très beaucoup féminin and others around here can attest to that fact), and for the most part my dear robert108, I like to have fun while here so, please stop pointing to things I say as if it’s wrong. Fact, perhaps if you would allow a lil’ fun into your life you would understand the things I say are just that ... HUMORISTIC SARCASM!

Well, I think men should think about this prior to falling in love

How about the chicks buy an expensive toy for the guy at betrothal time.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Anna: I’m already calm, thank you very much.  Are you responsible for what you write?  After you are called on an insulting characterization, you claim it’s “humoristic sarcasm”?  Without either a /humor or a /sarcasm tag, how are we to know when you mean what you say?
I disagree with you, btw; and statistics on divorced men bear me out: love, for men, is a whole lot more than “testosteronitis” as you asserted.  Shame on you!

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Anna: Unfortunately, for reasons I cannot understand, Robert108 very, very often seems to attack people for the tiniest mistakes or for very small areas of disagreement and he seems to really enjoy looking down on others. Its too bad because is really quite intelligent and has a great deal to offer under most debate topics, but I too have gotten weary of his apparent lack of any sense of humor, he doesn’t seem to have any fun and when I have said things just to be silly or find an amusing way to say something, he goes ballistic.

You keep firing off those posts girl, you are the single most inoffensive person posting here along with Zsa Zsa and Whistler. Stay here, your sweet feminine nature, intellect and good sense of humor are all much appreciated and needed. Of course, we don’t look for the sweet influences of Whistler’s nature.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

How about the chicks buy an expensive toy for the guy at betrothal time.

Yeah, where’s this equality we were promised by the feminists?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Anna: Unfortunately, for reasons I cannot understand, Robert108 very, very often seems to attack people Since you take honest disagreement for attack, Neiman, your bias against me is well known.  What stimulates this latest personal attack? for the tiniest mistakes or for very small areas of disagreement and he seems to really enjoy looking down on others.

FYI, statistics show that divorced men have a lower life expectancy than either divorced women or men who have never been married.  This might indicate that men really mean it when they are in love.  The characterization of men in love as being “testosteronitis” is offensive to me.  In your view, do I have a “right” to be offended by this mischaracterization of love when it comes to men?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

How about the chicks buy an expensive toy for the guy at betrothal time.

Whistler: At least equal in financial value to the Engagement and Wedding Ring? I am thinking at least a Ferrari Testerosa as an expression of her loving commitment. Then it’s divorce and remarriage for me, at my age expensive toys are what are most important.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman: If you “don’t understand” something, maybe your premise is wrong.  Just a hint.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Neiman: Besides being offended by Anna’s characterization of men’s love as being “testosteronitis”, I am also offended by how she dealt with my criticism.  Instead of giving some cogent reasons for making that characterization, she chose the path of personal attack(Calm down, as if I were overwrought) and denial(it was only “humoristic sarcasm").  Now, it’s highly probable that she simply believes her characterization, and was just reciting her beliefs.  Either that, or she really was trying to be funny, and wasn’t open to hearing that not only wasn’t what she wrote “funny”, it was offensive.
If that had been the case, maybe a light apology would have been appropriate, but instead, she chose to attack my credibility, and that tells me that she wasn’t using humor, as she claimed, but was reciting deeply held beliefs about men.
I have never tried to censor her in any way; I have only asked her to stand up for what she writes, on a couple of occasions.  Her reaction this this has been enlightening.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

If you “don’t understand” something, maybe your premise is wrong.  Just a hint.

It is your wholly subjective opinion, which you havea right to, that others don’t understand the subject at hand and it appears to me that just because you think they are wrong, you doubt the proposition that forms the basis of the argument from which their conclusion is drawn.

I don’t find any fault in the basis for Anna’s agrument, nor do I see any justification for your feeling offended by her comments. The “testosteronitis” was akin to stop thinking with their penis (lust) and encouraging men to make more mature decisions about whom to marry and about buying expensive rings just to try and impress a woman they have usually known for too short a time and are marrying for mostly physical reasons. A great many men are guilty of entering into marriage and expressing their love through spending money, versus investing time and effort in making sure the woman truly is their bershert (Spelling is probably wrong), it is a Jewish expression meaning the one God created as their one and only soul mate.

Seriously, most of us here mix humor and silliness into our debating to keep from being boring and that often leads to imprecise use of language, which really bothers you a great deal. If this were all, in every point, a serious debate, then we would need to invest time in expressing our thoughts more carefully; but in this format we need to be a little less critical of each other, and rely more on our humor and trusting in the good nature of others or it is all anger and fighting without cause and it stops being fun posting here.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Mr. 108, is it really a controversial position that men tend to think with their glands and not their heads when a lady is involved?  Come on....let’s not turn a delightful reposte by Anna into an occasion for arguing about a fact we all know is truer than gravity.  :^)

(and sure, there’s estrogenitis, too, but we don’t talk about that lest we invite it to the table)

there’s estrogenitis, too, but we don’t talk about that lest we invite it to the table

Or, do we not talk about it lest we find ourselves out in the cold, with only our selves and they are unwilling to come to the table at all? Fear of offending the opposite sex is one of their greatest weapons against us guys!

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Hi ho, hi ho, it’s back to work I go!

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

It is your wholly subjective opinion, which you havea right to, that others don’t understand the subject at hand and it appears to me that just because
you think they are wrong, you doubt the proposition that forms the basis of the argument from which their conclusion is drawn.

I made no such generalized argument; you just made that up.  I was specifically replying to this statement from you:

Anna: Unfortunately, for reasons I cannot understand...(personal attack)

I simply gave a reason why you were unable to understand my reasons; you don’t know what they are, and have imagined your own set of reasons, and assigned them to me.  In other words, an incorrect premise, or a set of incorrect premises.

I don’t find any fault in the basis for Anna’s agrument, nor do I see any justification for your feeling offended by her comments.

Fortunately, I am free to draw my own conclusions in life, absent your “justification”.  I didn’t “feel” offended; I was offended, and for reasons which I enumerated.  The life expectancy stats for divorced men indicate that we probably are more sincere in our feelings of love than other groups.  I am offended by the false characterization, and then by the assertion that it was “humor”.  I find nothing funny in what she said.  What was the funny part?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Assuming the ring isn’t an heirloom, both parties would reasonably want the ring, if the jeweler from whom this ring was bought is anything like the jeweler from whom I bought my wife’s ring, either party could return the ring to the store for in-store credit equal to the amount paid for the ring. So, Catharyn could get some nice diamond earrings, or Jason could upgrade a ring for his next fiancé.

Mr. 108, is it really a controversial position that men tend to think with their glands and not their heads when a lady is involved? Come on....let’s
not turn a delightful reposte by Anna into an occasion for arguing about a fact we all know is truer than gravity. :^)

BB: I understand that to you, this is just delightful fun.  It certainly doesn’t rise to the level of physics, though, and the stats about the life expectancy of divorced men vs other groups is more scientific than a line used by standup comedians with great frequency.
While it is true that, in the initial attraction phase, male response is almost totally hormonally determined, but in long range love and committment, the opposite is true.  The strictly hormonal male response is to move quickly to the next attractive female, which we suppress for the good of society.  So, describing love for men as “testosteronitis” is not only wrong, it’s offensive(to me).

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

robert108, I apologize for my remark and I never imagined I would be insulting some one when I said it.
(I still don’t but, I’ll take you’re word for it)
Just for your helpful hint of the day ... Almost all of what I say is with humor. That is how I conduct my myself and could not have gotten through a lot of my life with out doing so.  Plus, you will not see me tag anything I say with anything but an icon.
<----- notice icon

As for a mans love for a woman...I’ve known it very well. A man’s love of a woman is when he touches the depths of her soul ... reaching the sacred dimensions of her entire being with a lifetime allness like no other. To a woman there is nothing more valuable than a man who loves her. Unfortunately, for some, this love is taken away before the entirety of their life.

Of the subject a bit....I heard Ron White and his idea for a new DeBeers commercial like the, “Diamonds...leave her breathless,” ad. Only this one’s better:

“Diamonds.....that’ll shut her up.”

Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

Anna: Thank you.  I realize that feminist propaganda, like marxist propaganda, is so insidious that most of us just accept it as true, without thinking about it.  Most of it is unconscious feminism and marxism.  For example, many people believe that when gas prices go up, the oil companies are “gouging” us.  They don’t know that, and have no facts to back it up, and know nothing about economics, but they have been bombarded with anti-business propaganda so thoroughly that they simply accept it as fact.  In the same way, feminist propaganda that is demeaning to men is widespread, even amongst women who don’t consider themselves “feminists”.  That is why I mentioned the stats on the life expectancy of divorced men.  The facts run counter to the propaganda, as usual.  IMO, the only antidote to propaganda is fact.

As for a mans love for a woman...I’ve known it very well. A man’s love of a woman is when he touches the depths of her soul ... reaching the sacred dimensions of her entire being with a lifetime allness like no other. To a woman there is nothing more valuable than a man who loves her. Unfortunately, for some, this love is taken away before the entirety of their life.

Of course, you are speaking from a woman’s point of view.  I am speaking from the man’s point of view, which you unconsciously denigrated.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

R108,

I don’t wish to seem like I’m piling on here, but really… Anna’s remarks, all of them since she has been here, have been insouciantly feminine and not at all feminist in nature.

Besides, at our age, you know perfectly well that the only way to truly win an argument with a woman is to allow her to think that she won it.

Now excuse me.  I have to go fold the laundry and cook dinner.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

“Diamonds.....that’ll shut her up.”

Where do I get them?

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

IF anyone is a feminist around here? It is me. I know the rules of giving the ring back or not. AND The rule is; IF the female breaks up with the man? She is to give the ring back. No question about it. IF the man breaks it off with the woman it is up to her disgression. Although she should give it back in my opinion.

discretion.  (I make mistakes too)

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

robert108. There is no other way to express my sincere apology for what you feel as my actions of disrespecting you as a man. I am not a mean person and I am sorry that is the only way you are able to view me as. I can’t change your concept of me and I also can’t or, will for that matter, try to change my mannerism of a conversation. Even now I know you will assert your opinion of me and elaborate on more faults I seem to possess in your view.
robert, this is me. I am nobody else. I try my hardest to see something positive in all around me and even if there isn’t, I try to lighten things up so all those involved are able to hear other viewpoints.
I have tried with you robert but, like I said, this is me and I can’t change my mannerism any more than I can force you to except it.
I allowed myself to express a personal view about a feeling of love and you took that and turned it to look tainted. It seems you just had to burrow your way into getting to me. You’ve succeeded.
I have no desire to remain here.

Um, Mr. 108, I do think you owe Anna an apology--you’ve more or less burst in upon her reverie at remembering her man who died too young.  More or less, you’re slapping a widow for (metaphorically speaking) laying a rose and a tear on her husband’s grave, if I read her note correctly.

Shoot.  I hope my wife speaks as well of how I loved her after I’m dead as Anna speaks of her beloved.  And yes, I’m proud to have spent the past 11 years in “testosteronitis” with my dear wife.  Sure there’s more to it than that, but (Genesis 2:24) ain’t no use in wedlock without a bit of it.

And a biological note; the woman has a little bit of it involved as well in her union with her man as well, so the ladies get “testosteronitis” too.

Anna… You are a sweetie! Don’t let Robert108 run you off. He is grouchy to almost everyone. He is busy arguing with libs all the time and just get’s cranky… You are a light around here, So you have to remain!

Please don’t take my Anna away

I’m not “running anyone off”!  What part of that don’t you understand?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

More or less, you’re slapping a widow for (metaphorically speaking) laying a rose and a tear on her husband’s grave, if I read her note correctly.

If giving my side of the story is “slapping a widow” something is seriously wrong on this blog.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Come back, Anna!…

In Tennessee If She Doesn’t Marry You She Has To Give The Ring Back

Is she still his sister?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

(sorry! Old joke!)

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Jeez R108,

You successfully and deeply offended the most unoffensive SABer.

It seems you just had to burrow your way into getting to me.

Anna,

Well said.

That is just R108.  He just can’t seem to help himself.

I have to go fold the laundry and cook dinner.

Don’t forget the garnish! (That B-1...really parsley whipped!)

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Anna: You have plenty of defenders and admirers and while it was sweet to apologize, I cannot recall anything you said that could possibly be offensive unless someone is trying to be offended.

I wish I knew how to insert the icons like you do, as I would get into less trouble with a few laughing or smiling ones and once in a while the one with the tongue sticking out. Try telling me how to via private email, okay?

Zsa Zsa: You are no less liked and respected around here than Anna, and this is from an old fighting man.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

That is just R108. He just can’t seem to help himself.

I’ll use Anna’s words:

I can’t change your concept of me and I also can’t or, will for that matter, try to change my mannerism of a conversation.

Anna on September 26, 2007 at 03:43 pm

Sorry you all fell for her emotional manipulation.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Jeez R108,

You successfully and deeply offended the most unoffensive SABer.

I’ll use Neiman’s words:

...I cannot recall anything you said that could possibly be offensive unless someone is trying to be offended.

I simply described the effect of her words on me, and gave the reasons why, chapter and verse.  She chose to be offended and to act the victim.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Got it.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Anna: You have plenty of defenders and admirers…

Is this what we do here on SA; group together to gang up on someone?  You’ve been played, Neiman.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Sorry you all fell for her emotional manipulation.

See what I mean, he just keeps on diggin’.

HG: I’m a relentless advocate for the truth.  Thanks for noticing.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Robert108:

Is this what we do here on SA; group together to gang up on someone?  You’ve been played, Neiman.

1. To answer your question: Yes, even against me there have been more than a few group verbal gangbangs, but it is not Standard Operating Procedure. In this case, I believe there seems to be a general agreement that Anna didn’t say anything wrong and that in the personal opinions of a few, you wholly misinterpreted Anna’s premise and her humorous (not a male hating, feminist approach) to the subject.
2. My comments to Anna were and are not about you at all, but it was solely my personal expression of admiration for Anna as a person and my defense of her original post which caused some problems here.
3. If you will notice, in my original response to Anna I expressed admiration for your intellect and your considerable contributions to the debates here. So, I have no personal malice towards you whatsoever of any kind for any reason, and in fact I am an admirer of your intellect, communications skills, persuasive manner in getting to the heart of a topic and in other ways.

In this case, as on a few others, I simply felt you made statements against Anna’s position, which I (personal, subjective position) don’t believe were justified by the facts at hand, while I sincerely respect your right to hold differing opinions and to react as you see fit.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

HG: I guess when she says:

I can’t change your concept of me and I also can’t or, will for that matter, try to change my mannerism of a conversation.

Anna on September 26, 2007 at 03:43 pm

it’s OK, but when I say the same thing, it’s no OK?  Why the double standard?  More “special rights”?

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

I believe there seems to be a general agreement that Anna didn’t say anything wrong and that in the
personal opinions of a few, you wholly misinterpreted Anna’s premise and her humorous (not a male hating, feminist approach) to the subject.

I never said she said anything wrong; I said I was offended by her unconscious misanthropy, and have supplied a reasoned argument at lesst three times.  Ignore it if you will, but that’s what I did, and that’s all that I did.
Anna could have ignored what I said, she could have acknowledged that she unconsciously offended me, or she could have gone to war against me.  She chose war, and enlisted some of you to fight it for her.
I now choose to ignore any and all of her comments, because I have no respect for her as a commenter.
My opinion is that you have been emotionally triggered, and when you come back to clear thinking your perspective will change.
I think her response was way over the top.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

R108,

Dude you are losin’ it. 

When this many well intended individuals offer you constructive criticism as they have in this post, the wise thing to do is at least consider it.  Even if you disagree there is usually something to be learned from it.  Instead you go on the defensive digging an even deeper whole and being even more insulting.  You have successfully made a mountain out of a mole-hill.

HG:

See what I mean, he just keeps on diggin’.

1. Robert108 has a little pit bull in him, when he thinks people are wrong and they or others try to defend the thought, he doesn’t let go very easily. It is, in my opinion both a fault and a virtue on his part, but I don’t detect any real meanness in his manner, just a dogged way of holding on until others admit the truth as he sees it.
2. No apologies or attempts to moderate the conversation seems acceptable to Robert108, because he sincerely wants others to agree with his position or prove him wrong using his rules of debate.
3. Robert 108 has a great deal to contribute to any debate and I have discovered in dealing with him there is a time to just stop responding and move on. The next time around he will forget the prior disagreement, holding no malice in his heart and fight the new battle on appropriate grounds with intelligence and considerable debating skills.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

2. No apologies or attempts to moderate the conversation seems acceptable to Robert108, because he sincerely wants others to agree with his position or prove him wrong using his rules of debate.

Not true.  If a sincere apology had ever been offered, especially after the first exchange, that would have been the end of it, as I have already indicated to you.
I don’t care if you agree with me; just don’t try to powertrip me or use lies and personal attack, or emotional manipulation to try to win.  If you do that, I fight to the finish.  Facts and logical argument work with me.  If you do that, I acknowledge your position, even if I don’t agree with it.  For me, it’s about mutual respect, and I got none from her.  She went right to the victim card.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Neiman,

1 and 2 I would agree with.  3 is a bit of a stretch but there is some truth in it.

When this many well intended individuals offer you constructive criticism as they have in this post, the wise thing to do is at least consider it. A million wrongs will never make a right. Even if you disagree there is usually something to be learned from it.  Instead you go on the defensive digging an even deeper whole and being even more insulting.  You have successfully made a mountain out of a mole-hill.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Robert108 very often seems to attack people ...and he seems to really enjoy looking down on others. he is really quite intelligent and has a great deal to offer.
Demon Neiman-

Demon Neiman’s [RED HERRING] can’t make up his mind....He’s trying to throw R108 a bone while at the same time calling him an abrasive condescending fuck .....
Now “THAT’s” entertainment!!!

All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind have been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth. —Aristotle ...

Robert108:
1. Misanthropy: somebody who hates humanity, or who dislikes and distrusts other people (men) and tends to avoid them. I am sorry, I just don’t see any of that, not the tiniest degree in any post by Anna ever.

2. Anna didn’t enlist me or anyone, we were volunteers because we feel she was misunderstood and engaged in a battle not of her making.

3. I respect Anna and the fact she brings humor, life and zest to any post with grace and kindness. No, she does not engage in your type of intellectual, hard core debate, that is not her style. But, she is a person of value and much needed around here when we guys get too damn full of ourselves. Like Zsa Zsa, she can nicely and directly let the air out of some pretty big egos.

Robert108: No matter how good your arguments may be or the reality of your offense, you have taken this whole thing far too seriously and hurt your image a little bit in the process. Time we all let it go.

Sadly, I have to run off to a meeting now that is always very informative, but I am lazy and would prefer the recliner and sit until time for sleep.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Robert108:
1. Misanthropy: somebody who hates humanity, or who dislikes and distrusts other people (men) and tends to avoid them. I am sorry, I just don’t see any of that, not the tiniest degree in any post by Anna ever. I described Dirty Harry as a misanthrope, remember?  I never described Anna that way, but pointed out that her characterization of male love as “testosteronitis” is misanthropic, which it is.  I also allowed that she was probably unconscious of that fact, since feminist propaganda is ubiquitous.

2. Anna didn’t enlist me or anyone, we were volunteers because we feel she was misunderstood and engaged in a battle not of her making. She made the battle by denying that her characterization of male love was offensive to me.  She refused to acknowledge my position, and attacked me in the process.

3. I respect Anna and the fact she brings humor, life and zest to any post with grace and kindness. No, she does not engage in your type of intellectual, hard core debate, that is not her style. But, she is a person of value and much needed around here when we guys get too damn full of ourselves. Like Zsa Zsa, she can nicely and directly let the air out of some pretty big egos. Speak for yourself.

Robert108: No matter how good your arguments may be or the reality of your offense, you have taken this whole thing far too seriously and hurt your image a little bit in the process. I care nothing for what you regard as “my image”.  It is an artifact of your imagination and flawed premises about me. Time we all let it go. When you and the rest stop attacking me, I will.

You just don’t get it, Neiman; you’ve been played by a professional victim.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

Robert108: Your a relentless fuck aren’t ya

This place got some characters, Thats why I enjoy coming here, I’m not gonna bash you for calling what you see as a bluff but I will give you my opinion. I sincerely believe Anna was just playing around, and I would have giving her the pot if it were me. Maybe she would think “Sucker” but I really don’t think she would.

Mojado: I’m out.  I refuse to participate in this obvious emotional manipulation game anymore.  I don’t expect anyone will have the integrity to acknowledge my being offended at the unconscious denigration of a man’s love.  I have lost all respect for Anna, and will ignore her from now on.  The rest of her unwitting cohorts have lost some of my respect, and we’ll see how that goes.  Once trust is gone, it doesn’t usually come back.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

I don’t expect anyone will have the integrity to acknowledge my being offended at the unconscious denigration of a man’s love.

Ditto..and so acknowledged… I never took the will o the wisp seriously anyway.

All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind have been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth. —Aristotle ...

Ditto..and so acknowledged… I never took the will o the wisp seriously anyway.

Thank you.

The secret of financial success:

If you can’t afford it, you don’t deserve it.  Even if you can afford it, that’s no reason to buy it.

I don’t expect anyone will have the integrity to acknowledge my being offended at the unconscious denigration of a man’s love.<