This Weekend's Most Active Threads

Today I'll look at the most active threads over the weekend. The most active thread has been around for a few days, having been created on December 15. Titled, "SAHDs are not lepers" and posted in the "General Parenting Discussion" forum, the thread picked up momentum over the weekend, gaining an additional 9 pages of replies. The original poster describes several incidents in which he has been treated suspiciously when simply doing normal things as a stay at home dad. Unfortunately for the original poster, the replies did not get off to a good start as the first response was simply a list of statistics showing that men commit most of the listed crimes. While a few posters did sympathize with the original poster, by and large those responding either theorized that his behavior was creepy or that the original poster simply gave the impression of being a pervert. Later in the thread some posters, including other stay at home dads, did offer support for the original poster. However, much of the debate then turned to the fact that these were likely white men who had not previously been in situations in which they were considered suspicious or prevented from doing normal activities. They were told that they should accommodate themselves to the situation just as members of other groups are forced to do. In other words, "you might not be a leper, but you are a member of a group that contains lots of lepers and just like other groups prone to leprosy, you should walk around ringing a bell." This is a guilty until proven innocent mentality that shouldn't be acceptable regardless to whom it was directed. But, unfortunately, in the world in which we live, it is fairly common.

The second most active thread over the weekend was titled, "Sister recently said our Stepdad sexually abused her" and was posted in the "Family Relationships" forum. As the title says, the original poster's sister recently disclosed that their stepfather had sexually abused the original poster's sister by groping and touching her and that their mother had helped create opportunities for such behavior. The sister told the original poster this because the original poster has children who will be around the stepdad and mother. The original poster is planning to rent a cabin on a lake with his children and his mother and stepfather this summer and wants advice about what to do. Most of those responding suggested cancelling the trip but the original poster suggested that the risk would be minimal because he and his wife could prevent their children from being alone with his stepfather. This resulted in many posters accusing him of being a troll. Moreover, it provoked attacks by many of those responding on the original poster himself. He was accused of acting just like his mother to enable child sexual abuse. He was further criticized for doubting his sister's truthfulness and of being naive about his ability to protect his children from his stepfather. Many posters shared personal experiences or the experiences of friends with sexual abuse, many times involving step fathers.

The third most active this weekend was a thread in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum titled, "Carolyn Hax - can someone be a good person if they don't love dogs? WTF". The original poster describes a letter submitted to Washington Post advice columnist Carolyn Hax in which the writer says that she is dating a guy who is great other than that he is indifferent to dogs. The writer loves dogs and considers this a red flag and a sign of a potential character flaw in her boyfriend. The original poster doesn't like dogs and is insulted by the suggestion that she might have a character flaw. To the contrary, the original poster suggests that the writer is the one with a character flaw for thinking not liking dogs is a red flag. I'll be honest and say that I just don't have it in me to read 9 pages of people posting about liking or not liking dogs. If having a dog is important to you but is a deal breaker to a potential partner, then there is a compatibility issue. You either accept that you can't have a dog or not. I see no reason to involve either Carolyn Hax or DCUM. At any rate, a sure sign of a character flaw is not liking cats (though those with allergies can be forgiven).

The last thread I'll discuss is another in a series of what seems to be daily posts about early decision (ED) college acceptances. This thread was titled, "Sidwell Friends ED results amazing this year" and posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, never was so much written by so many to disclose so little. Despite 11 pages of posts, very little about the "amazing" results is actually revealed. The entire original post consisted only of "Outstanding outcomes.well done kids." Almost nothing was divulged in the thread about how many students or which schools were involved. What little data was shared did not impress most of those responding who proclaimed the students were "hooked" (if you are not familiar with that term, immediately enroll in a College and University Discussion forum bootcamp) or the expected result of a privileged cohort. To some responders, the results were simply due to parents having spent a huge amount of money on Sidwell. To others, the ED acceptances were no better than the results of local public schools and, therefore, the tuition cost had gone for naught. The thread got sidetracked into a debate about special needs accommodations, which some posters accused Sidwell parents of exploiting to provide advantages to their children. The responses in this thread would have us believe that the number of ED acceptances was not worthy of Sidwell's reputation and all of those were due to the student being a star athlete, legacy, having a parent who funded a new wing for the university's library, or having taken advantage of unnecessary accommodations for a fabricated special need. As far as I can tell, the possibility that objectively impressive results had been achieved by hard-working, studious, highly-qualified students was not considered.