Bitch on the Blog

December 27, 2009

Burned at the stake

Filed under: Uncategorized — bitchontheblog @ 03:46

Ashok, since you are set on a lawyer’s path and – by definition – should therefore be objective, cooly detached and dispassionate about your client and the other party’s plight I chose your blog as the platform to voice my view with regards to Conradgate. However, you ruled that no one involved should be named (interesting take for a lawyer): I therefore use my own platform.

The good Conrad made allusions as to corks to be popped. My maths teacher once opened a bottle of champagne. Instead of holding the head of the bottle away from him – hardly takes Einstein to work out that law of physics – he managed to let the cork hit him into one of his eyes. The sad result being that for the rest of his life he made his pupils’ lives a misery. It wasn’t our fault that he was such an idiot. But that’s bad mood for you: It distorts perspective.

At this point the judge in Ashok’s independent court will ask me to get to the point instead of wasting time on poetic licence.

Your Honour: I put it before the court that Conrad has not only tried to assassinate my character. He has defamed me, my name and my reputation amongst his, admittedly rather small, audience.

Why should this be so, you may ask, since all I did was raise the “lever” of Conrad’s “intelligence”.

Learned Court: My stringing words together  is not appreciated on all blog playgrounds. Unless one’s circle sports roughly the same IQ as one’s own or higher you will be ostracised.

Let me put it another way, for the dense: You, Conrad, remind me of two boys who, travelling back home on the train after school, were sitting behind me. I was about ten or eleven years of age. They pulled at my beautiful long curls. OUCH! Reasoning? Apparently my hair was too perfect to be ‘real’ and therefore was deemed to be a wig which, naturally, had to be pulled off. They pulled once, they pulled twice. The third time I turned round. They never did it again.

That which sets us apart has potential to make enemies. It is how wars start. You accuse me of flaming. Flame what? You can’t flame wet wood. Conrad,  leaving some of your entourage aside, the only person flaming was you with your diatribe entry. Read what you wrote. Then decide how much of it applies to yourself.

I know I am sharp with words, my tongue, both lubricated by my brain, but I am always considered. I spend time and thought on my comments. It’s not my fault if some of you don’t appreciate, can’t comprehend what I am trying to convey. I never asked anyone to agree with me; all I did, what should be done in any discussion, was to contribute my point of view.

Learned council: A much higher literary authority than Conrad said of me: “Acerbic, witty, but never rude”.

‘Acerbic’ is not to everyone’s taste. Granted. ‘Witty’ is not always recognized. Conrad, that is no reason to throw up and be sick all over one of the guests on your blog.

Your main bugbear, Conrad, appears to be, often cited by you, that I don’t “reveal much” about myself. Early on you even sent me an email asking me questions (which I ignored as irrelevant to the purpose of your blog). If only you weren’t so impatient you’d find plenty about me on the platter of your and your friends’ blogs. Anyway, what’s the rush?

Conrad, I had no idea that in order to contribute some intelligent comment to a conversation I had to hand in my passport, provide character references and pot my life history first. I am not saying you are one, however, you are displaying symptoms of being a control freak. You stab your finger at me. 

As to Grannymar: My god, haven’t I known girls and women like her when I walk into a room or – heaven forbid – open my mouth. Hers is a mindset I don’t understand, never have. There is plenty to go round for everyone without backstabbing another female on the block/blog. In one of  her comments addressed to me she jealously ‘defends’ her consortium ‘family’ like a cat does seeing another off  HER ”patch’. If that is your idea of ‘family’ I dearly hope that, in another life, I won’t be adopted by either of you or come back as your daughter-in-law.

As an aside, Grannymar, and to help you deal with being so possessive of your ‘friends’: Don’t include links to them on your blog only to then jump down my throat when I follow them up and have the audacity to comment on their thoughts.

You, Conrad, accuse me of deception. You say that my name might not be my name, that I might be a man (what’s wrong with being a man?). Needless to say that sweet Grannymar has joined your chorus;  she, at least once, viciously hitting me below the belt (since I am not a man it didn’t hurt that much).

Conrad, how do you know that Ursula is not my real name? As it happens it is; blame my Grandmother who registered my birth and went against her daughter’s (my mother’s) wishes. And if that second chromosome had turned into a Y, yes Sweetheart, I’d be the man you make me out to be. Possibly gay and chasing you; obviously I wouldn’t chase Grannymar since I have no wish to join hands with her, nauseatingly often cited, toyboys.

You say I am making personal attacks. In the same breath you accuse me of deception : On what grounds, Conrad? If that is not a personal attack I do not know what a personal attack is.

Come to think of it (not that the question occurred to me till you planted that destructive seed of yours in my mind): How do I know that you are Conrad in need of leverage? For all I know you might have eight fingers, as many heads as Hydra and dance in the moonlight; you might even be a big elephant in a small china shop. Would it matter? No, not to me: I don’t want to have your babies just an intelligent conversation. I thought that’s what blogs were about when comments are invited.

If ever there was a miserable witch hunt you, Conrad, and your second in command, Grannymar, conducted it – and didn’t you just enjoy the drama of it. Both of you and those who joined in, unreflecting, kicking the shit out of me, go and look into your own broom cupboards before throwing around dirt and dust.

When, in the wake of your accusations, I tried to explain something about myself you then accuse me of pulling the ‘sympathy’ card. There is no pleasing you, is there? Other than pleasing YOU. Since you appear to have certain tendencies which I shan’t name here it might give you (and the ever ready with her needle grannymar) pleasure, and please do enjoy the moment, that indeed you did manage to make me cry – briefly. Precious water and salt wasted. Still, we are all human, aren’t we, Conrad?

You, Ashok, say that I might consider “writing myself”. THAT IS what I did on the consortium’s blogs.

Grannymar, in a fit of hysteria presumably borrowed from my own ‘drama queen’, even called for the cops. Grannymar, let me tell you: Character defamation  is a punishable offence. I don’t want to eat into your pension so I won’t press libel charges.

Ashok, I do not know what is going on within the dynamics of some of the consortium and its commentors. You say you won’t use words like ‘venom’ or ‘spite’. Though you do. I might be a tough boot when challenging other people’s perceptions but I am not venomous or spiteful. I have looked over some of my copy again. I can’t see what is offensive. All it proves is that communicating via the internet, without knowing each other in flesh and spirit, you do so at your peril. People will either appreciate your prose and/or give you that wonderful British “benefit of the doubt” or they’ll try to tear you apart.

If the purpose of the consortium’s comment boxes is to be part of a mutual admiration society then, yes, some of  the consortium’s blogs I should not have commented on.

Ashok, you have asked me to apologize to the consortium. What for? Having contributed some wit and thought to some of your blogs? Ok, my apologies. Won’t happen again.

As much as I’d love to, I can’t go to into every single commentator’s name popping up on your blogs. It has been an education and an insight into all your characters: Those who said nothing staying as neutral as Switzerland; those who unthinkingly joined the witch hunt and jumped on the band wagon; one cheerful monk who, in her subtle way (largely unnoticed by Conrad), tried reason and hinted at the possibility that there is more than one way of looking at the same scenario; one bike hike babe who spoke up for me and is now paying the price; and those sitting on the fence just like some kids and a few grown men who cheer on a fist fight without getting their own hands dirty.

Ashok, on a side note, don’t hedge your bets. It does not inspire trust. You, Ramana: Don’t reprimand me only to then delete a perfectly good response of mine for none of your readers to see. It’s censorship at its worst. But then people burn books too when it goes against their interests.

All those members of the consortium whose blogs I haven’t commented on: Sorry. Or maybe you just had a lucky escape.

I have met (number unspecified) remarkable people via the consortium’s blogs and for that I am grateful.

I have misjudged some of you as worthy of my attention – and for that I only blame myself.

I would have liked to continue the conversation, not least with some commentors who made me shake my head, made me smile and – over time –  had me intrigued in equal measure (not least Baino, Looney and Nick). Deb – and please don’t blow your top – stop hanging your flag into other people’s wind: You’ll sail much better under your own steam.

Some of you were so very keen for me to start my own blog. One aims to please.  No censorship here. Say it how you see it. It’ll sort the squeamish from the supercilious.

Bonfires welcome,

Ursula

Advertisements

29 Comments »

  1. Congratulations on your blog! I love a good conversation and you’re a talented writer. As we all know, my style is a bit different from yours but that’s what makes life interesting. I’m looking forward to reading more.

    “Lovely post”, Ursula! 😉

    Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 27, 2009 @ 17:55 | Reply

    • “Et tu, Brute?” Even you, Brutus or rather Cheerful Monk. Traitor.

      You darken the threshold of my virgin blog with ‘lovely post’ and then, as my very first commentator, top it with one of those despised – by me – smilies! Comforting to learn that there is a mischievious side to your saint.

      Jean, I am floored: 5 responses and two smilies already: This is what I get for my pains. Bloody hell. Though I note Conrad had decency to spare me one of his.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 06:18 | Reply

      • Oh, yes. Trouble was my middle name when I was working. My sister-in-law asked me why I worked so hard. “Because I like to cause trouble and when I work hard they let me get by with it.” I had a great time and was never bored. 🙂

        Sorry, I do love smileys.

        Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 28, 2009 @ 08:05 | Reply

  2. You are so smart & write so well.

    Comment by LOVE — December 27, 2009 @ 18:29 | Reply

  3. Ah, just when I was wondering if you had cast the unfortunate curse of your absence on my blog, I hear from you and from the bottom of my heart, I am glad. My response is available on my blog 🙂

    Comment by Ashok — December 27, 2009 @ 19:11 | Reply

    • Ashok, I have to consider a few aspects of your response, appreciated both in your immediacy and eloquence, at leisure before responding to the strands you picked up; and will do so on your blog.

      To take up one [strand]: You say that you feel I ‘confuse’ and ‘confront’. I don’t confuse deliberately. Confusion is in the mind of the recipient, not the sender. However, and you are right, confront I do. To be continued …

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 06:55 | Reply

  4. Ursula,
    You write “…those sitting on the fence just like some kids and a few grown men who cheer on a fist fight without getting their own hands dirty.” I assumed you were trying to stir people up to have some fun with verbal swordplay. Do you object if some people choose not to indulge or else watch the scene with amusement?

    Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 27, 2009 @ 22:37 | Reply

    • Jean, there is little I object to.

      What I don’t like, never have, never will, are people who indulge in the misfortunes of others (hence my reference to ‘fist fights’). There have been occasions when I have intervened, at considerable risk to my straight teeth and Jewish nose, in fisty cuffs both on the playgrounds of my childhood and, later on, between grown men. I do not like by-standers, those who just watch. Take a stance, verbally or physically, or walk away is my motto. Those who, as you say, prefer to oogle “the scene with amusement” should go to the theatre and, if performance warrants it, give a standing ovation at the end of it. So much more civilized than cheering on a dog fight.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 07:13 | Reply

      • Why do you assume people watching are cheering the fight? They might just be trying to figure out what the fuss is all about. Another of the mysteries of the universe.

        I assumed you picked fights because you enjoy sparring, like dogs play fighting. If you don’t enjoy it why do it? I don’t understand how your provocative statements on other people’s blogs are fighting for some noble cause. What am I missing?

        Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 28, 2009 @ 08:02 | Reply

  5. Good for you, Ursula! Now you have the chance to express yourself any way you see fit. This home is YOURS.

    I congratulate you on starting this.

    Comment by Conrad — December 28, 2009 @ 00:50 | Reply

    • Conrad, your apology as to your defaming my character is graciously accepted (insert sarcastic smiley for those who don’t get the subtleties of human intercourse).

      My blog is not a ‘home’ as you put it. It is a playground and play I will. Hard. And then I’ll go home.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 06:31 | Reply

  6. No censorship here. Say it how you see it. It’ll sort the squeamish from the supercilious.

    Bonfires welcome,

    How come my comment not posted? Quid pro quo? Good for you.

    Comment by Rummuser — December 28, 2009 @ 15:06 | Reply

    • No it is not good for me, Ramana. I do not do ‘quid pro quo’, and I am always as good as my word. I have checked and double checked: Apart from the above there is no other message from you. You may be so good as to send it again.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 15:36 | Reply

  7. Nothing but just to compliment you on your blog and to say that I wished you well with it.

    It may be stuck at your spam queue!

    Comment by Rummuser — December 28, 2009 @ 16:10 | Reply

    • Thank you, Ramana. Let’s hope my new toy won’t break any time soon. My nerves are in tatters already. At the moment I am trying to work out what to say “About me” (that most irritating part of a blog). For Conrad’s benefit I am sorely tempted to just keep it blank. I might do a Jackson Pollock and throw a paint can at the canvas.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 17:06 | Reply

  8. Wow! I have more power here than I do on my own blog.

    Comment by Conrad — December 28, 2009 @ 19:06 | Reply

    • It’s my USP (unique selling point), Conrad: I am an enabler, a facilitator. Such a pity that I need to observe some sort of decorum; otherwise we’d have even more fun.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 20:25 | Reply

  9. Conrad, how important is power to you?

    Comment by bikehikebabe — December 28, 2009 @ 19:36 | Reply

    • bhb, I am joking. Ursula knew that.

      And, Ursula, you are now the definer of decorum. It’s the beauty of having your own blog.

      Comment by Conrad — December 28, 2009 @ 20:31 | Reply

      • Conrad,
        Your “Ursula knew that” sounded like a put down of BHB. Did you mean it that way? You may have been joking but it sounds as if she was asking a real question. Now my curiosity is aroused too.

        Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 28, 2009 @ 21:31 | Reply

      • Conrad, In the immortal words of Spanish waiter Manuel of ‘Fawlty Tower’ fame: “I know nothing” (insert Spanish accent) which is a rather useful default mode. Even Socrates subscribed to the notion.

        I shall sleep on the decorum bit and might rev it up a bit. Still, I do not wish to upset those of a sensitive dispositon; there are cultural differences to be observed and tenuous links with some of my fan club to be strengthened rather than severed for good.

        U

        Comment by bitchontheblog — December 28, 2009 @ 22:41 | Reply

  10. Conrad, in the past when you’ve put me down you’ve said you were joking & I didn’t get it. (“It’s my dry sense of humor.”- Your humor is never dry!)

    That was an honest question. How important is power to you?

    Comment by bikehikebabe — December 28, 2009 @ 21:50 | Reply

  11. I was not putting bhb down.

    She misconstrued what I was referring to. “I have more power here than I do on my own blog.” referred to the fact that I was the central focus of the initial article on Ursula’s blog and that she said to Ramana that, referring to the About Me part, “For Conrad’s benefit I am sorely tempted to just keep it blank”. She was poking me in the ribs and I poked her back. She then returned it with, “It’s my USP (unique selling point), Conrad: I am an enabler, a facilitator. Such a pity that I need to observe some sort of decorum; otherwise we’d have even more fun.”

    I’m not going down the path on this one just to satisfy your curiosity.

    Comment by Conrad — December 28, 2009 @ 22:44 | Reply

    • Ever the optimist I am:

      Conrad, will you be gracious enough to concede that your last sentence (“… just to satisfy your curiosity”) in response to BHB is snarly?

      Let me give you a little lesson in emotional intelligence: If Bike Hike Babe feels that she has been ‘put down’ by some of your comments please do not dismiss her sentiment. A recipient’s feelings are as valid as those of the sender; evidence supported by the sensitivities displayed in response to my own presence on the consortium’s blogs.

      Part two of lesson: Don’t accuse the other person of ‘misconstruing’ when you, the sender, might have made yourself better understood. Communicating, even with those close to us, is like a steeple chase: The odd hurdle will fall. No need to trip each other up on top of what is a tough race.

      Not that you did have to answer her rhetorical question since the answer is self evident.

      U

      Comment by Ursula — December 29, 2009 @ 13:34 | Reply

  12. Conrad, I’ve noticed from your comments that you like power & like to be an authority. well DUH! SO DO I! (So Do I) SO DO I.(emphasizing) So does everybody except monks & Cheerful Monk.

    Comment by bikehikebabe — December 29, 2009 @ 20:37 | Reply

  13. Dear Congregation, as predicted by poor Grannymar this blogging lark is doing my head in. And we are only on day what? Two, three? I wrote such a considered reply to Conrad which should have made an appearance after his and before BHB’s last only to find that wordpress now ‘presses’ me to approve my own comments. Which, under the circumstances, is not such a bad idea. However, where is the damn thing? I have had issues with wordpress before – don’t ask. Still, better than blogspot which is a little dowdy (sorry, blogspotters I still read you and we can’t all wear Calvin Klein or Armani).

    What I just adore about the comment box is where it says “You are the author of this post”. COME AGAIN: Really?

    Tracing my tracks.

    U

    Comment by bitchontheblog — December 29, 2009 @ 21:07 | Reply

  14. Ursula,
    Thanks for giving us a heads up. We’ll be eagerly watching to see your reply. 🙂

    And bless you for saying it’s okay for me to use smileys. You can’t imagine how it tears me up not to use them. 😉

    Comment by Cheerful Monk — December 29, 2009 @ 21:41 | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: