Gossip

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op

That’s why I said things that were done to you or things you witnessed.

We get it. You want people to tell you it's not gossip and you should totally badmouth people to others.

You call it badmouthing, but what’s the difference between that and the truth? Should you hide the truth to protect someone’s feelings?

Didn’t the me too movement start by some people telling some true stories? Those women didn’t have it in them to tell the aggressor in the moment, but in so glad they finally spoke up and ‘badmouthed’ him.

And I do know what the dictionary or google definitions of gossip are. I was interested in how people perceive it.

I’m ok to accept that I don’t behave optimally sometimes. I’m ok with that. No need for you all to try and act like saints.

If all people would behave like they wrote the world would be so much better.

Your crusade is in another thread, sweetie. "Me too" is about telling the story of your own experience, and very rarely gets used to out an aggressor by name. Telling Sally that Suzie's potato salad tasted off at the picnic isn't a "me too" moment, it's gossip.

For most women, the things they have to "me too" don't get verbalized, or can't, directly to their abusers, because doing so makes them unsafe. Telling Steve's mommy that he's a playground bully has limited social repercussions, and is unlikely to put you in harm's way. The social repercussions are less than telling Stacy, Sally, and Suzie about Steve kicking your kid last Sunday.

If it's your truth, speak it to the source. If it's your "truth" about someone you're still in relationship with but not willing to speak directly to, and you choose to say it behind their back instead, it's probably gossip.

See how this works?

[Anonymous]

Use THINK before you speak.

T is it True?
H is it Helpful?
I is it Inspiring?
N is it Necessary?
K is it Kind?

If you can’t satisfy all of these letters, keep it to yourself.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, but I am over the kindness. Teach your kids and yourself to respect others, not to be "kind" which is a pretty empty gesture.

This person with the burgers is being gossiped about and I doubt she has hogged all the food at every cookout she has been to and don't know why this person keeps talking about it.

[Anonymous]

Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

Let people tell whatever stories about themselves they want to tell, pp. This dynamic you've created (in your head) where you play the alleged martyr by keeping quiet about the great injustice, only to then go about spreading the gossip later, is pathological.

What if the person, instead of throwing a "hissy fit" as you suggest, simply responded "Oh, thanks! I didn't know" and all was well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

If your SIL acted this way I would say her actions spoke for herself, much like yours are. Pot meet kettle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

Let people tell whatever stories about themselves they want to tell, pp. This dynamic you've created (in your head) where you play the alleged martyr by keeping quiet about the great injustice, only to then go about spreading the gossip later, is pathological.

What if the person, instead of throwing a "hissy fit" as you suggest, simply responded "Oh, thanks! I didn't know" and all was well?

You answer my scenario first, then I’d answer yours.

[Anonymous]

Only a full blown gossip would discuss technicalities of gossip and try to excuse them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

Well if it's all so serious then just take it to the grave I guess. If this person is so unstable that you can't say it without making a scene then don't, but that, still doesn't make it cool for you to bring up if someone is mentions they think SIL is nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

If your SIL acted this way I would say her actions spoke for herself, much like yours are. Pot meet kettle.

1. The burger example was totally made up. Oversimplified.

2. This topic shouldn’t be that deep, but you’re misusing that idiom.

While you question me because I’m telling the truth, your logic doesn’t apply. I’m stating what she’s doing. I didn’t take the patties.

To definition is as follows: It means a situation in which somebody accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares, and therefore is an example of psychological projection,[1] or hypocrisy.[2] Use of the expression to discredit or deflect a claim of wrongdoing by attacking the originator of the claim for their own similar behaviour (rather than acknowledging the guilt of both) is the tu quoque logical fallacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:41, no the information is almost never necessary, but I’m feeling like why not say of it irked me enough?

I don’t want to put an example, because the examples are too specific. But think of something like, oh I met your sil. She seems so nice. And I’m like, mmmh, she takes all the burger patties at a cook out.

This is so trashy. If it "irks you" enough to say something, then say it to the person responsible for the behavior so they can adjust.

Saying it behind their back to someone else is the definition of gossip. Grow up.

I'm 100% going to think less of you if I say I like your SIL and you respond with something like that. Pp is right, grow up.

You will 100% think less of me, which I may or may not care about, but you’ll also now notice when you’re around her, and maybe you’ll make sure to get a burger patty before she gets to it.

Is your SIL fat? If she were thin I would not find it believable she ate so many burgers so I wouldn't be worried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

Let people tell whatever stories about themselves they want to tell, pp. This dynamic you've created (in your head) where you play the alleged martyr by keeping quiet about the great injustice, only to then go about spreading the gossip later, is pathological.

What if the person, instead of throwing a "hissy fit" as you suggest, simply responded "Oh, thanks! I didn't know" and all was well?

You answer my scenario first, then I’d answer yours.

I already did: Let people tell whatever stories about themselves they want to tell, pp.

If the person in the wrong wants to throw a fit about being told the problem, let them.
If she forces her husband and kids to leave, let them leave.
If the in-laws get butthurt and choose to take it out on the grandkids, let them.

Let people tell on themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

Well if it's all so serious then just take it to the grave I guess. If this person is so unstable that you can't say it without making a scene then don't, but that, still doesn't make it cool for you to bring up if someone is mentions they think SIL is nice.

But it's not that deep, or that serious, because OP is plenty willing to talk about it, just not to the person's face.

If talking to the person's face would be drama, finding out they'd been talked about behind their back is likely to be drama++

Why hang around people who are this much fscking drama?!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like say that there are other people who didn't get food instead AT THE MOMENT instead of talking about it for years

What if the person would get hurt from you pointing out that other people haven’t eaten yet and throw a hissy fit about it? Would you subject everyone at the event to that?

Let’s say if you say that to your sil she’ll force her husband and kids to leave the event, and your in laws would give you an attitude because their son and grandchildren left, and they won’t interact with your kids appropriately and then your kids are hurt. …

If your SIL acted this way I would say her actions spoke for herself, much like yours are. Pot meet kettle.

1. The burger example was totally made up. Oversimplified.

2. This topic shouldn’t be that deep, but you’re misusing that idiom.

While you question me because I’m telling the truth, your logic doesn’t apply. I’m stating what she’s doing. I didn’t take the patties.

To definition is as follows: It means a situation in which somebody accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares, and therefore is an example of psychological projection,[1] or hypocrisy.[2] Use of the expression to discredit or deflect a claim of wrongdoing by attacking the originator of the claim for their own similar behaviour (rather than acknowledging the guilt of both) is the tu quoque logical fallacy.

Oh, little buddy...

Your hypothetical of SIL freaking out and acting uncouth instead of handling her business like an adult is exactly what you're doing with your gossip trollop nonsense: making a problem where there needn't be one instead of acting like an adult.

Now read PP's comment again, because they hit you with some real talk and you need to hear it, Pot.