Advice Columns

Yeah, most of the older folks I know are still working because they have to. Has this lady not heard any news since before 2008?

(There's also plenty of older people who would like/need to work but can't find jobs, but I guess they're not relevant.)

I have a real tendency to roll my eyes when someone says "I'm not in (situation) yet, but when I am, I'm definitely going to do THIS and THIS." It's good to have goals, but the absolute certainty of those people that their plans will be followed to the letter and won't have to be changed by, y'know, life always bugs me.

I have a coworker whom I love dearly, but every once in a while she gets cranky and is all, "Some of these old ladies need to retire already!" And I'm like, "Uh, these 'old ladies' are like ten years older than you. You'll be cool when some young chippy comes along and says that about you in ten years?" People need to mind their business, man. Advice columns would be less interesting for it, but the world would be a nicer place.

That reminds me of a Rod Serling teleplay from the 60's - I never saw it, but it was a bit like Logan's Run.  Basically, once you reached a certain age (60, I think), you were "retired" (permanently).  Everyone was cool with that until the Head Guy's son took power and announced that he was going to lower the "retirement" age to 50.  His father, the former Head Guy, said nervously "Um, you know that I'm 50, right?", to which his son said calmly "Yes, I know."

If ever someone needed to DTMFA it's Prudie's first LW. Jesus.

Also, is it just me or was Prudie a little trigger happy declaring LW2 "morbidly obese"?

That's pretty straightforward - the letter writer says she's 100 pounds overweight, and the NIH considers anyone that overweight to be morbidly obese.

That first letter is a heartbreaker and also, the very definition of DTMFA. Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaat an asshole.

I agree regarding the morbidly obese bit, but I did think Prudie was piling on with the bit about the mom "obviously no expert in good eating habits and nutrition." Obvious to Prudie's crazy ass, maybe, but it is possible for an overweight person to have good eating habits and nutrition.

jstilwe wrote:I agree regarding the morbidly obese bit, but I did think Prudie was piling on with the bit about the mom "obviously no expert in good eating habits and nutrition." Obvious to Prudie's crazy ass, maybe, but it is possible for an overweight person to have good eating habits and nutrition.

Super valid.

Jordan Baker wrote:If ever someone needed to DTMFA it's Prudie's first LW. Jesus.

Also, is it just me or was Prudie a little trigger happy declaring LW2 "morbidly obese"?

Wow, that first letter is horrifying. DMTFA and sue his ass for child support like whoa.

As for the second LW, if she states she's 100 pounds overweight, according to the admittedly imperfect BMI chart, over 60-80 lbs overweight is morbidly obese. I had to look this up, I don't know if Prudie bothered or just applied it to mean "a lot".

...Shaving only one leg so you can feel like a man is sleeping next to you?

OK.

I thought "shaving one leg so you can pretend you're not alone in bed" was just an old joke (though I first heard it as something a guy would do to pretend a woman was sharing the bed).

And for #2: honestly, the daughter's habits seem like a path to an eating disorder (and there's something really sad and alarming that she won't be seen eating at school--I'd worry about bullying, honestly, way before diet). Like, I agree seeing a counselor is a very good idea but a nutritionist? Not so much. The never-taking-off-the-hoodie and the bingeing-then-sleeping after school sound like emotional/psychological problems, not diet ones.

Re: the first letter: if anyone started praising God when I started bleeding, especially from something like a miscarriage, I would be making them bleed. From multiple locations. And also probably praying myself, to ask for forgiveness and a sympathetic jury.

I'm with you, Poubelle. Prudie's focusing on the weight when she should be focusing on the fact that this girl doesn't feel like she can eat - or doesn't feel like she can eat at school. I don't know if she has problems meriting talking to a nutritionist; but regardless, that's clearly not the only thing going on. And it's not "micromanaging" for her mother to be concerned about the fact that her daughter refuses to eat lunch. Nor is it a sign of her own poor nutrition knowledge. It's depressing that the assumption is that an overweight girl can't have an eating disorder; she can only diet more or less healthily.

What does DTMFA mean?

I agree with  Prudie on LW1 - if her husband was that adamant about not having any more kids, why didn't he or she (or both of them) get sterilized?  It takes two to tango.

Edited to add: whoops, apparently her husband had a vasectomy which didn't take, and she was unable to find a doctor who'd perform a tubal ligation on a woman her age. My mistake.

Shalamar wrote:What does DTMFA mean?

Drop The MotherFucker Already.

I cannot fathom staying with someone who literally praised God I was having a miscarriage in the middle of a damn grocery store. What a chucklefuck that guy is. I hope she gets therapy for herself.

Right? He sounds like just an asshole.

I didn't like Prudie's response to that letter too. She seemed to be dismissing that mother's concerns because her and her daughter aren't thin.

Kiran wrote:I didn't like Prudie's response to that letter too. She seemed to be dismissing that mother's concerns because her and her daughter aren't thin.

The more I read of Prudie's columns, the more I wonder why people bother to write to her. She's so rigid and judgmental about so many things and she honestly seems to think that everything is a matter of simple choice. Addictions or mental issues of any kind are always treated as the person "choosing" to be that way and of course they should just stop doing that. Problem solved.

It seems clear to me that this girl is experiencing some kind of emotional/mental issues with food and yeah, nutritionists alone can't fix that.

I agree with  Prudie on LW1 - if her husband was that adamant about not having any more kids, why didn't he or she (or both of them) get sterilized?  It takes two to tango.

Edited to add: whoops, apparently her husband had a vasectomy which didn't take, and she was unable to find a doctor who'd perform a tubal ligation on a woman her age.* My mistake.

This guy sounds horrifying for the way he treated her miscarriage so I'm on board with the general DTMFA sentiment.

But as for the vasectomy and the tubal ligation thing, the LW was pretty clear about having wanted the first pregnancy AND the current one so I'm confused. She obviously wants kids BUT doesn't want to have them with this guy (which I wholeheartedly agree with) BUT she wants to save the marriage? These things can't exist in the same space.

*Somewhat OT, but really? A doctor can tell you that you're too young to have this done? How is that any of their business?

Oh, for sure. Doctors refuse to sterilize women all the time because they think the woman is too young, doesn't have any/enough children, and doesn't know her own mind regarding her preferred family size. It's common.

Planned Parenthood would've done it for her, though. The fact that she didn't go there after her regular doctor turned her down tells me she didn't really want it, or she would've kept trying. Which actually means her doctor had a point when he told her no. You should only have an irreversable fertility procedure if you want to, not because your husband is pressuring you.

I hope she gets every penny of child support her baby is owed from that jerk. And if he would fall to his knees singing hosannas because she miscarried, she might want to be on her guard that he doesn't try to push her down the stairs or anything.

*Somewhat OT, but really? A doctor can tell you that you're too young to have this done? How is that any of their business?

Yeah it's a legitimate problem. Many doctors believe that people will change there minds, and so are reluctant to do it if they haven't had children. It's more than conscending and sexist because men who don't have children have a much easier time getting a vasectomy (though the procedures risks and complications are different).

She obviously wants kids BUT doesn't want to have them with this guy (which I wholeheartedly agree with) BUT she wants to save the marriage? These things can't exist in the same space.

This, the grocery store story (she wouldn't immediately know if she lost the child), and a surprise vasectomy baby make me sort of skeptical of the letter.

Yeah, I used to work with someone who was 100% sure that she didn't want kids. Her husband also didn't want kids. But because they were in their mid-20's, they couldn't find a doctor who was willing to perform a tubal ligation. Her doctor kept saying "You're young; you'll change your mind." >:(

That is so condescending and infuriating. And yet I can't hear stories like that without thinking of how my dad wanted to get a vasectomy when he was in his early 20's but couldn't find a doctor willing to do it. Good thing for my brother and me, eh?

Dear Carolyn, how can I possibly love my grandchild when my son and daughter in law have given him both of their last names?

Wow.

VodouDoll wrote:Dear Carolyn, how can I possibly love my grandchild when my son and daughter in law have given him both of their last names?

Wow.

You know, once in a while I feel like an advice columnist is missing the mark when they give really sharp answers--that they're minimizing the real pain being felt by the writer.

And then you have a case like this, in which case the only possible response is "what the fuck is the matter with you?" Because, seriously, what the fuck is the matter with this woman?

I am glad that Caroline did call the son out for encouraging the grandson to call the grandmother something she is not comfortable with but the thing about the last name being an issue and the fact that both of the issues are making her resent her 8 year old grandson is kray kray.

Agreed, but if the LW doesn't want the kid calling her by her name then she can take it up with the boy herself - "Honey, I'd rather you not call me Angie, let's come up with something else together." - but she'd rather snub him and withhold affection. Even if his parents changed his last name and he called her Grandmother from now on it wouldn't change that she's a small, petty person who'd withhold love from her own grandchild because she doesn't like his name and won't bother using her words to adjust what he calls her. And she calls herself a "warm person!"

I wonder if this means she wouldn't love her grandchildren by her daughter as much as grandchildren by her son because the son's kids would have her last name and the daughter's kids wouldn't.

biakbiak wrote:I am glad that Caroline did call the son out for encouraging the grandson to call the grandmother something she is not comfortable with but the thing about the last name being an issue and the fact that both of the issues are making her resent her 8 year old grandson is kray kray.

Yeah, the last name issue is insane. I don't think of my close family members by their last names until I'm address U.S. mail! They're just Aunt/Uncle/Cousin So'n'so. I can't imagine harboring resent towards a grandchild based A) on that and B) a thing the kid has absolutely no control or choice regarding.