Desperate Housewives

[stripperjonn]

Hmmm. I suppose I should have added the ingredient of "effort" to the list of pre-requisites in the last sentence of the third to last paragraph... but I thought that was apparent; the theme of the whole thing having to do with choices and actions instead of channels and volume controls. My god, Bob, you're right here in California! gimmeabreak. hehehe

[highheellover]

I agree.

[Laurieheels]

It's all just a nice way to be polite about saying people who enjoy television are small minded and petty. And obviously, that is what you're saying about me since there are things I enjoy on television. let's not play games, forget being polite or correct or whatever, come rigth out and say it already. I'm terribly sorry that I cannot live up to some perfect life, that I can't afford it, that my escapism from stress during the long cold winter isn't beyond television. But everything being said makes me feel like I'm beneath others for watching teleivison. And not a single thing in what anyone has said since I posted a few days ago has done anything to make me feel better. it all seems designed to make me feel worse, and to get me to do other things, or imply that people should do other things. There's a lot on television I don't watch that is considered popular, but still, I am looking to share a discussion about something, and any of us who might like it are being made to feel as being of less value in mental capacity that all of you who limit your television to what you consider as 'a few good shows that are rare'. Small things amuse small minds, huh? For a group of people looking to be accepted for something, some of you sure are quick to reject other things. Open minded? Accepting? Or just eager to have the world your own little ways, making the world conform to what you would like, so you are happy, but who cares about everyone else, let's be superior and say try to dash other people's lifestyles because of a few things. Nice. You know, I'm pretty happy in life except for two things. Monetary woes, and coming here to read such double standard trash. You want to be accepted for wearing heels, not being called names, not being judged? Then accept that you can have an opinion, but should not covertly try to imply that it is the correct one over other things or points of view. You may not have it both ways in this world. I don't like everything on television, but damnit, it is generally cheap entertainment for the masses, in a new form, maybe, but certainly a trend that has been going on for thousands of years. For those of us not so righ or enlightened or whatever you want to call it, it is what we have, and it brings a brief spark of happiness to our days sometimes. Don't make us feel like crap for using it.

[sendra45]

Laurieheels Sorry, But I have read the other postings and they sound just like opinions to me. We are all entitled to them and through the power of the inter net able to share our thoughts. As for Me? I am going to make an effort to watch next weeks show, then I feel that I will be able to join in your request to discuss the show, I hope you don't mind waiting until then. Nigel

[stripperjonn]

I apologize for only one thing that I said. That was the post where I said "right on gene and bubba." That is becuase bubba made the comment about simple things/simple minds, which, I suppose can only be taken as a derrogatory remark. HOWEVER, both Gene and Bubba said that they were NOT saying that they were too good for TV.....only that they had chosen other more productive ways to "spend" the time. I know that I went on and on in my reply to underscore the same point, namely, that our lives can be richer and fuller WITHOUT TV. If you re-read my post, Laurie, you will see that NOWHERE in it did I say that the entertainment provided on TV was poor, mundane, simple, or any other such putdown. All I said was that there was FAR TOO MUCH ENTERTAINMENT and available FAR TOO EASY. When gene talked about playing chess with his son or playing a game of tag, or flying a kite he was talking about how people USED to entertain THEMSELVES prior to TV. I KNOW there are many good TV shows. Millions of people watch them every day. (I happen to be a humanist, and the majority rules). The statements that I made had to do with choices, not a condemnation of YOUR choices. I only told you (SHARED) with you, my choices and my experience. I'm quite certain that you are not a simple person. If you were, you would not have the writing skills that you do, and you certainly would not be on this website and this forum. I suspect the reason you are upset is because some of what we say appeals to you and deep down you may feel that you do not have the choices that we seem to have (e.g."I'm terribly sorry that I cannot live up to some perfect life, that I can't afford it, that my escapism from stress during the long cold winter isn't beyond television. But everything being said makes me feel like I'm beneath others for watching teleivison." You are angry. What does that tell you? And what is this business of "I can't afford it?" Are you talking about money? I think you made a little slip there, revealing much more beneath the surface. Seems to be saying that if you had more money you would watch less TV? In your anger you accuse us of saying, feeling, and MEANING things that are simply not true. You also ask that we "not play games, forget being polite or correct or whatever, come rigth out and say it already." Ok. Fine. Let me ask you two questions before proceding further: 1. How many hours do spend watching TV per day, on the average? 2. How many hours of the day is the TV set in the "on" position? (whether you are actually "watching" it or not) You want to get to the point, we can get to the point. IF you are willing to stop the name calling and get down to business. Again, I apologize for complimenting Bubba for his "simple minds" remark. THAT is name-calling and you are righteously offended by it. Anyone would. But if we can get beyond past offenses on your part as well as ours, "perhaps" we can arrive at a "better place" in terms of understanding and acceptance.

[Bubba136]

stripperjonn wrote:

bubba made the comment about simple things/simple minds, which, I suppose can only be taken as a derrogatory remark.

Now, I want the record to reflect that my comment wasn't meant in any derrogatory way. I was merely repeating an oft spoken "old saying" that I've heard all of my lift. I didn't mean to offend anyone. However, if you, stripperjonn, would like to take it that way and are offended -- I really don't care.

[stripperjonn]

Laurie took it that way, I agree with her, and I don't see how it could be taken any OTHER way. If she watches TV and you say "simple things amuse simple minds"...then the OBVIOUS meaning is that TV is a "simple" thing and Laurie, therefore, has a "simple mind." I don't watch TV. ... but I don't name-call as a general rule either. You keep mis-interpreting me, and I might consider it though. hehehe I think you are just hedging. Would be better to apologize to Laurie...instead of saying you don't care how I took the comment. SHE was the one offended, not me. I only apologized for giving you and Gene the thumb's up, without realizing that part of your comments (simple minds) was a bit harsh. Let's be kind to each other. I'd prefer to help Laurie with something that seems to be bothering her, rather than just take up sides and condemn.