Little pink monster blog

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Exactly! And he's drinking on the job as well

How exactly do you know this?

DP but I've heard he's done this for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Why do you keep repeating that? Her post about the security cameras is about when she still lived in the home they had when they were married. She doesn’t live there anymore.

DP here but she said they were separated and the girls weren't even home. She changed all the passwords and he flipped out and showed up with the police and John to intimidate her. How can you brush that off? That's CRAZY behavior. Sociopathic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Why do you keep repeating that? Her post about the security cameras is about when she still lived in the home they had when they were married. She doesn’t live there anymore.

DP here but she said they were separated and the girls weren't even home. She changed all the passwords and he flipped out and showed up with the police and John to intimidate her. How can you brush that off? That's CRAZY behavior. Sociopathic.

Is he still doing this? My understanding was this happened at least years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Why do you keep repeating that? Her post about the security cameras is about when she still lived in the home they had when they were married. She doesn’t live there anymore.

Spying on someone via a security system when you are separated is completely effed up and a clear sign of a controlling abusive ahole. Regardless of whether the divorce was final and if they were living in the marital home.

Maybe you fall into temptation knowing spouse hasn't changed the codes. Fine. But to be found out and to show up with the cops to intimidate when your access is cut off?

Honestly that story makes me reevaluate what I thought Kane was capable of. I figured he was an egotistical jerk, but that type of behavior verges on sociopathic.

Signed a listener who stopped listening that day he laid into her on air because I have divorced parents and it left a terrible taste in my mouth. Someone not remotely associated with Natasha or Kane but someone who has known some controlling and terrible men in my life.

Who said it was ok for him to be spying on her? The question was why you keep bringing up the spying on her? Natasha’s post said it happened in the past, yet you keep writing as if it’s continuing to happen. There’s enough speculation in this thread - don’t add to it.

I was a new poster. I was responding to you seeming to act like this was no big deal and happened a long time ago so therefore irrelevant.

Given this was when they were newly separated and pre-rehab for N, I too would want to make sure I could check in on my kids when they were with their potential addict parent and would be in a total panic if my former spouse changed the passwords to prevent me from doing that

[Anonymous]

^^whoever you are, you really want us to know that she went to rehab. Regardless if it’s true, we get it. You want EVERYONE to know you think Natasha has a problem and went to court order rehab and is now clean. Completely unconfirmed at this point, but we here you.

Do you now feel validated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^whoever you are, you really want us to know that she went to rehab. Regardless if it’s true, we get it. You want EVERYONE to know you think Natasha has a problem and went to court order rehab and is now clean. Completely unconfirmed at this point, but we here you.

Do you now feel validated?

Actually I was a new poster to this thread. My point is I understand why Kane wanted to be able to monitor at that point in time. That would be entirely inappropriate at this time assuming she’s in a healthy place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^whoever you are, you really want us to know that she went to rehab. Regardless if it’s true, we get it. You want EVERYONE to know you think Natasha has a problem and went to court order rehab and is now clean. Completely unconfirmed at this point, but we here you.

Do you now feel validated?

Do you?

Why is it that you want to gloss over her past but make sure everyone knows Kane’s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Why do you keep repeating that? Her post about the security cameras is about when she still lived in the home they had when they were married. She doesn’t live there anymore.

Spying on someone via a security system when you are separated is completely effed up and a clear sign of a controlling abusive ahole. Regardless of whether the divorce was final and if they were living in the marital home.

Maybe you fall into temptation knowing spouse hasn't changed the codes. Fine. But to be found out and to show up with the cops to intimidate when your access is cut off?

Honestly that story makes me reevaluate what I thought Kane was capable of. I figured he was an egotistical jerk, but that type of behavior verges on sociopathic.

Signed a listener who stopped listening that day he laid into her on air because I have divorced parents and it left a terrible taste in my mouth. Someone not remotely associated with Natasha or Kane but someone who has known some controlling and terrible men in my life.

Who said it was ok for him to be spying on her? The question was why you keep bringing up the spying on her? Natasha’s post said it happened in the past, yet you keep writing as if it’s continuing to happen. There’s enough speculation in this thread - don’t add to it.

I was a new poster. I was responding to you seeming to act like this was no big deal and happened a long time ago so therefore irrelevant.

Given this was when they were newly separated and pre-rehab for N, I too would want to make sure I could check in on my kids when they were with their potential addict parent and would be in a total panic if my former spouse changed the passwords to prevent me from doing that

Yeah ok, so how about him watching her when she didn't have the kids? This is an effed up and sociopathic thing to do and just because he doesn't have the ability to do it today doesn't he wouldn't if he could and it does say a lot of relevant stuff about the content of his character generally that he would ever do it.

If you separate and your spouse has visitation you don't actually get to spy on them via their home security system regardless of how unfit a parent you believe them to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^whoever you are, you really want us to know that she went to rehab. Regardless if it’s true, we get it. You want EVERYONE to know you think Natasha has a problem and went to court order rehab and is now clean. Completely unconfirmed at this point, but we here you.

Do you now feel validated?

Do you?

Why is it that you want to gloss over her past but make sure everyone knows Kane’s?

You seem to be totally brushing off an unbelievable invasion of privacy on his part while highlighting a negative thing about her. To me that says you are somehow on team Kane, because I, unconnected to both of them, see how both of them have issues but cannot imagine brushing such a psycho thing under the rug. If her account is true that is totally over the line insane.

Addiction is a disease. Hers (if true) was treated in a center after which she found a new partner, got married and had a healthy baby and has secured shared custody of her children. No 'disease' makes you spy on your wife via a home security system and then bring police over to intimidate her in front of your kids. Addiction is a serious thing, hers seems to be treated and under control. Sociopathic tendencies cannot be cured. So if I was picking one of these two flaws to talk about how its relevant to who they are and how they're acting today I would say what he did is much more relevant to today than what she did.

[Anonymous]

Lol there is so much hearsay on this thread. Just because ‘you heard’ someone went to rehab or someone drinks on the radio doesn’t make it so. BTW, I heard Natasha and Kane are actually getting back together, and IJ and Danni are hooking up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she say in her post that it was his weekend with the kids. Not sure I get the full story?

Oh I'm going to assume that she didn't get them back yet... When she does there will be a staged photo op and a long dramatic post about how traumatic their experience was and how she is so happy to have them home.

She never mentions how much time they spent with their father while she was in court ordered REHAB though does she? Has she ever disclosed that truth? Nope. Never.

So what? She appears to have done the work and bettered her life. Meanwhile he's watching her on security cameras while she's home alone.

Why do you keep repeating that? Her post about the security cameras is about when she still lived in the home they had when they were married. She doesn’t live there anymore.

Spying on someone via a security system when you are separated is completely effed up and a clear sign of a controlling abusive ahole. Regardless of whether the divorce was final and if they were living in the marital home.

Maybe you fall into temptation knowing spouse hasn't changed the codes. Fine. But to be found out and to show up with the cops to intimidate when your access is cut off?

Honestly that story makes me reevaluate what I thought Kane was capable of. I figured he was an egotistical jerk, but that type of behavior verges on sociopathic.

Signed a listener who stopped listening that day he laid into her on air because I have divorced parents and it left a terrible taste in my mouth. Someone not remotely associated with Natasha or Kane but someone who has known some controlling and terrible men in my life.

Who said it was ok for him to be spying on her? The question was why you keep bringing up the spying on her? Natasha’s post said it happened in the past, yet you keep writing as if it’s continuing to happen. There’s enough speculation in this thread - don’t add to it.

I was a new poster. I was responding to you seeming to act like this was no big deal and happened a long time ago so therefore irrelevant.

Given this was when they were newly separated and pre-rehab for N, I too would want to make sure I could check in on my kids when they were with their potential addict parent and would be in a total panic if my former spouse changed the passwords to prevent me from doing that

Yeah ok, so how about him watching her when she didn't have the kids? This is an effed up and sociopathic thing to do and just because he doesn't have the ability to do it today doesn't he wouldn't if he could and it does say a lot of relevant stuff about the content of his character generally that he would ever do it.

If you separate and your spouse has visitation you don't actually get to spy on them via their home security system regardless of how unfit a parent you believe them to be.

As a drug addict she probably wouldn't use when the kids were around. The kids out of the house and her alone would be the perfect time to get high. As he was and is fighting her for custody, while successfully being able to take her kids away (which she confirmed), I'd say his fears about her inability to cope without some kind of drug(s) were accurate.

I wouldn't leave my teenage son alone if I thought he had an addict either. Especially not any capacity that allowed him full care of younger siblings (or in this case - the kane/natasha girls).

Watch Ben is Back.

[Anonymous]

But this is all on the unfounded precedent that there was a pain pill addiction (I believe those were the accusations as a result of her chronic illness) to begin with. We 100% know Kane has had periods of mental instability about it. He admitted so on camera. How is mental illness an honorable disease where actions are excusable, but addiction is not? (especially something as wicked as opioids)

[Anonymous]

I’m just trying to point out that if I use your logic, the Scenario Kane said on the radio that she left overnight with the kids would be 100% defensible on her end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But this is all on the unfounded precedent that there was a pain pill addiction (I believe those were the accusations as a result of her chronic illness) to begin with. We 100% know Kane has had periods of mental instability about it. He admitted so on camera. How is mental illness an honorable disease where actions are excusable, but addiction is not? (especially something as wicked as opioids)

Opoids addiction are well-known precursors to a spiraling path into drug overdosing, financial difficulties, and child abuse. Not only was/is Natasha an addict, but so is the man she married. Quite frankly - the parent who is NOT a drug addict has the responsibility to do all they can to shield and protect their children from the person with the problem.

I wouldn't want my daughters in that household either. The toddler Natasha conceived obviously has no choice in the matter, but the girls? Absolutely and that's why the courts ruled partially in Kane's favor. You can argue all you want that they're 'accusations' but a woman and mother doesn't lose full custody for any reason except child abuse, sexual abuse, or drug abuse.

Period.

[Anonymous]

I too can write convincing anonymous internet gossip that would appear I also am apart of their lives.