The Most Active Threads Since Friday

Many of the most active threads over the weekend were ones that I've already discussed and, therefore, will skip today. The first new thread among the most active was titled, "NFL quarterback's wife tells podcast she slept with his backup to make him jealous" and posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. The original poster embedded a TikTok clip of Kelly Stafford, wife of Matthew Stafford, the quarterback for the NFL's Los Angeles Rams, discussing her early relationship with Mathew. It isn't often that a thread on DCUM makes me downright angry, but this is one of those times. What upset me is that this thread was not posted in good faith and misrepresents the facts to serve the original poster's personal agenda. I am not sure exactly what motivated the original poster, but perhaps jealously. At any rate, in the TikTok clip, Kelly implies that while in college she and Matthew had an on again and off again relationship, saying "I hated him, I loved him" while Matthew was just trying to date casually. Kelly goes on to say that at one point she dated the back-up quarterback who lived in the same dorm as Matthew. She says that she did this to "piss him off" and "it worked." Seeing her car there, Matthew jumped in her car as she was leaving and told her that the backup quarterback was not right for her. It was left unsaid, but we can deduce, that this led to Matthew becoming serious about their relationship. They went on to get married and now have four children. Kelly obviously meant this as a cute and funny story. But the original poster is apparently outraged by this and made it a personal mission to disgrace Kelly to the fullest extent possible. Posting well over 20 times in the thread, the original poster described Kelly as "trashy", "jersey-chasing", an "idle rich housewife", having hit the "bimbo lottery", "shameless and shallow", and a "whore". In addition, the original poster repeatedly accused both Kelly and Matthew of being serial cheaters and also suggested that Kelly's mother had advised her about how to manipulate Matthew. The original poster did not bother identifying herself as the original poster and, as such, her numerous follow-up posts may appear to most posters as coming from different posters. But, having the ability as I do to distinguish the original poster's posts and read them all at once, they paint a picture of someone with a deep-seated psychological problem. Just for the record, in the TikTok, Kelly only said that she "dated" the backup quarterback and didn't detail what level of intimacy may have occurred. The original poster insists that Kelly and the other player had sex, which may be the case but certainly was not confirmed. Moroever, the original poster also made it sound like this occurred while she and Matthew were married, which it obviously did not. Basically, this thread was one person's effort to exercise her own rage over the fact that another women had reached a point in her life in which she could comfortably laugh at earlier behavior about which she may not be particularly proud. Personally, I can unequivocally say that in this thread Kelly Stafford comes off looking considerably better than the original poster.

The next most active thread that I haven't already discussed was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. Titled, "Things people are sometimes proud of but shouldn't be", the original poster listed a few items that are outside an individual's control but about which people are often proud. Among the things listed were being tall or, for a women, super tiny, being born in the 70s, traveling extensively as a child, and having a doctor as a parent. I guess it is my destiny to be angry this entire morning, because I don't like the premise of this thread either. First, I've never, not once, heard of anyone being proud of being born in the 70s. However, as with the other items on the list, if someone wants to be proud of it, why rain on their parade? I don't have a single one of the characteristics listed by the original poster, but I certainly don't begrudge those that do for feeling proud about them. For the most part, this thread is an exercise in moralizing and being judgemental. As with being born in the 70s, it is not clear that anyone is even bothering to feel proud about many of the items listed. Later, posters just started listing things that are within a person's control and, for which in many cases, they could legitimately be proud. It was just that the posters personally didn't appreciate those things. As such, most posts in this thread simply reflect the personal values of the individual posters. Because one poster doesn't value something, they seem to to think that others shouldn't have pride in achieving or obtaining that thing. This is simply a failure to recognize that we are all different in many ways. People value different things and we should all be thankful for that. Otherwise, the world would be excruciatingly boring. Even worse, many of the posts simply listed behaviors that they don't appreciate. For instance, one poster listed men excusing their own short-comings by saying their wives handle such matters. One example is a man saying that he can't load a presentation because his wife handles the technical support in their house. Would anyone actually feel proud about this? Moreover, that is completely within the guy's control. This poster obviously missed the assignment. People who miss the assignment would be my own contribution to this thread, but that would also be missing the assignment. But, just to play along sort of, should people be proud of the country in which they are born? For instance, should those of us born in America be proud to be Americans? Our place of birth is certainly not something that we control. And, if we are not supposed to be proud of this, has anyone told Lee Greenwood?

Next was a thread titled, "Travel with kids or when retired?" and posted in the "Travel Discussion" forum. The text of the original post didn't really correspond to the subject line. I expected that the original poster would compare the advantages and disadvantages of traveling with kids to those of traveling while retired. Instead, the original poster simply said that she had just returned from a very grueling trip (no indication that it was with kids) and is so tired that she can't imagine how older people can take such trips. She is under the impression that physical decline and health problems makes significant travel impossible for retired folks. Continuing the theme of the day, I am not happy about this thread, though I am not as upset as with the previous two. I am bothered in this case because I think the original poster has a sort of hidden agenda that she does not completely disclose. In her very first follow-up, she provides a perfectly reasonable explanation for how older folks are able to travel. As she says, "I’ll just do easier trips during retirement - so no sightseeing marathons, beach trips when it’s 110 degrees in Greece etc." Plenty of retirees follow exactly this strategy so I am not sure why this is a mystery. In addition, as other posters point out, those who have been able to save significantly for travel are often able to afford luxury accommodations. First class airfares, nice hotels, personal drivers, and private tour guides. As a result, their trips are far from grueling. Moreover, the original poster seems to have ignored the most important reason many wait until retirement to travel: they finally have time. It is not clear that the original poster has a job, but for most people, having a job greatly hinders how much they can travel. Once they retire, that constraint is removed. The original poster didn't address the "traveling with kids" alternative mentioned in the thread's title, but there are vast differences traveling with children depending on their ages. Nobody looks forward to intercontinental air flights with crying infants or interrupting their vacations for daily naps, but travel with older tweens or teens is a completely different story (providing you can get them away from their friends and telephones). This may be the point in life in which the original poster currently finds herself and her interest in traveling at this stage is understandable. Still, her perceptions for traveling later in life ignore a lot of reality. For every poster who describes their parents traveling extensively at older ages, the original poster insists that the elderly will be infirm, incapacitated, or even dead by that time. As often happens in the Travel Forum, posters engage in what, if they were men, would be called a manhood measuring contest. In this case, what is being measured is their travel experience. Posters question the original poster's travel experience and knowledge with some proclaiming their own experience makes them significantly better informed on the topic. As a result, the thread devolved into an argument about who has done more or knows more about traveling.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Expectant and Postpartum Moms" forum. Titled, "Frustrated with DH over names", the original poster says that with eight weeks to go before giving birth, she and her husband are having a difficult time agreeing on a name. They know that they are having a daughter and have come up with lots of names, but her husband has vetoed almost all of them. Of the few remaining, none of them stands out to the original poster. She is frustrated with her husband because he has come up with many rules for names that is making coming up with one difficult. She says that previously she had no idea that he cared so much about it. The original poster provided a long list of names that have been ruled out and a shorter list of ones that remain possibilities. At least this thread is not going to make me angry, though it is not exactly captivating me either. Baby name threads are a constant in this forum with poster after poster starting threads on the topic. Based on the replies, it is not uncommon for men to turn out to be quite difficult when it comes to choosing names. A number of posters describe their own difficulties to trying to agree with their spouses on a name, turning what should have been an enjoyable experience into an ordeal. I guess it is normal for people to react to names based on their own personal connotations. For instance, the original poster's husband has ruled some out because they were used by relatives or friends and another because of how it was once pronounced in a television show. But, normal or not, the original poster's husband, as well as a few of the other men described in the thread, do seem to be taking this to an extreme. However, one poster argues that anyone should be able to reject any number of names for any reason. The original poster and her husband should keep trying until they agree. Other posters propose various strategies such as the original poster listing three names that she likes and having her husband pick from those three. Based on the original poster's experience so far, that strategy is not likely to be successful. Other posters suggest waiting until the baby is born. They think actually seeing a baby will make connections to names more concrete and, even if not, the parents will have so much on their hands that they will be motivated to choose a name and less picky about it. Throughout the thread, posters offer suggestions of other names as well as opinions on why various names are good or bad. Personally, I think the original poster should simply encourage her husband to keep suggesting names that he likes until he comes up with one that she also likes. He will either suggest one that she likes eventually or will get tired of the entire exercise and just choose one of her suggestions.