Pet Peeves: Aka Things That Make You Go "Gah!"

[peacheslatour]

Quote

I won't volunteer in a kill shelter--I just can't--but the people who do should be applauded for their generosity and fortitude. 

Yeah, I couldn't take it. I washed out after six months. Then stupidly went on to become a vet tech. The last straw for me there was when some people had their darling three year old Westie put to sleep because she had developed a condition which required them to give her a pill every day. I went back to school and became an interior designer then finally a floral designer. Much happier. I too applaud those hardy souls who work with animals, I was just too much of a pussy.

(no pun intended)

[TattleTeeny]

AAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHH, it is so far beyond a "peeve" but those people who dump their pets (back) at the shelter or *&%^&%^$$#$@!#@#$$$!!! have them killed for shit reasons...ugh, I just....OOOOH, NO! I can't even articulate! My vet has dealt with euthanasia requests like that--once he told the dog's owner that he would do it, but did not and found that dog a home!

Ugh, just got a notification that a couple of cats are coming back to the shelter--one adopted back in 2005!--for (not literal) shit reasons. Fuck these fools. 

[peacheslatour]

47 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

AAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHH, it is so far beyond a "peeve" but those people who dump their pets (back) at the shelter or *&%^&%^$$#$@!#@#$$$!!! have them killed for shit reasons...ugh, I just....OOOOH, NO! I can't even articulate! My vet has dealt with euthanasia requests like that--once he told the dog's owner that he would do it, but did not and found that dog a home!

Ugh, just got a notification that a couple of cats are coming back to the shelter--one adopted back in 2005!--for (not literal) shit reasons. Fuck these fools. 

I completely agree. And may I say a word about de-clawing cats? The procedure removes the top third of the cats "finger". They just chop it right off. Can you imagine having the tips of your fingers clipped off at the knuckle? Because that's what they do. This obviously causes incredible pain when the anesthesia wears off and can cause the cat pain for the rest of their lives. Many cats personalities completely change, they may stop using the litter box because it hurts too much to dig and of course they can't defend themselves any more if they get out.  When i worked at The Humane Society we used to have people dump their cats after declawing for these reasons. If you train your cat properly and keep them stimulated, they won't scratch the furniture.

/rant over

[bilgistic]

Completely agree. As part of the adoption process for the girls, I had to swear (sign documents) I wouldn't declaw them. The adoption league can "repossess" the cats if they find out I've done anything against their policies. The girls' new vet is very familiar with the league, too.

[TattleTeeny]

Exactly! If we even hear a question about declawing from a potential adopter, it sends up a red flag (that's not to say we won't suggest a cat that came to us already declawed). But come on, people--stop prioritizing your couch over a living innocent creature you are agreeing to care for and protect for life. Instead of asking how to harm them, ask us how to combat destructive clawing (here's a hint: it involves toys/supplies, playtime, and patience).

[peacheslatour]

10 minutes ago, bilgistic said:

Completely agree. As part of the adoption process for the girls, I had to swear (sign documents) I wouldn't declaw them. The adoption league can "repossess" the cats if they find out I've done anything against their policies. The girls' new vet is very familiar with the league, too.

We had to do the same when we adopted our rescues. 

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, peacheslatour said:

If you train your cat properly and keep them stimulated, they won't scratch the furniture.

And if they do, it's not the end of the world.  I've trained all my cats the same (and provided them with plenty of play time), and it worked on everyone but Maddie, who believed the world was her scratching post.  She dutifully used all the different posts, the cardboard scratchers, and the cat tree.  (Not to mention actual trees, plus the fireplace brick.)  She also used the seats of several of my dining room chairs and the side of one of my couches.  And I wish she hadn't.  But I certainly wasn't going to mutilate her over it.

[Random Noise]

2 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

AAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHH, it is so far beyond a "peeve" but those people who dump their pets (back) at the shelter or *&%^&%^$$#$@!#@#$$$!!! have them killed for shit reasons...ugh, I just....OOOOH, NO! I can't even articulate! My vet has dealt with euthanasia requests like that--once he told the dog's owner that he would do it, but did not and found that dog a home!
 

Unfortunately people see a kitten or puppy and have that 'awwwwwww' moment. Then they take it home without thinking for a second that it won't always be that cute little ball of fur.

The place I was living a few years ago changed ownership and the new people didn't like cats. I got threatened several times about how they were having their lawyer go over the contract until I got to the point where I told them to lube up their ass and let the lawyer go for it. I've had my cats all of their lives and there was no way in hell I was going to give them up at this point in their lives.

I didn't have much for options on another place to live so I ended up buying a used RV. Fortunately I have relatives with a really huge yard so I parked some distance away near the trees and lived there with the cats. It worked out quite well since my relatives go off on business trips and I look after their animals while they're away.

The cats adapted to the new environment quite well and mastered the art of traveling from the bed to the kitchen table without ever touching the floor.

[Random Noise]

2 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

Exactly! If we even hear a question about declawing from a potential adopter, it sends up a red flag 

People that can't deal with claws on an animal should consider an alternative. Like maybe, a fish?

[peacheslatour]

I love you guys. Kindred spirits all.

[TattleTeeny]

I think some of it is just some people's innocent ignorance about what is really involved in declawing, meaning that they know it's a fairly common thing (though becoming less so, thank goodness), and thus probably assume that it must be harmless; after all, trained medical caregivers are the ones who perform the procedure. It's not surprising that a layperson would assume that those caregivers wouldn't sanction or advocate something that would harm an animal--people probably believe it's on par with neutering. But there's no excuse for a pet owner to do it once they are informed of what it actually entails. 

And, yes, there are many cats who have been just fine afterwards. But yours may not be one of them--and you won't know until it's too late. So don't do it!

[walnutqueen]

2 hours ago, Random Noise said:

People that can't deal with claws on an animal should consider an alternative. Like maybe, a fish?

Hey, even little fishies come with some problemos.  I've dealt with claws, paws , teeth, talons, etc.  One time I extracted a wormy thingy from the side of a gourami - much like the process of guinea worm extraction so prevalent before Jimmy Carter eradicated that scourge.

People that can't deal ... should consider dolls or other inanimate objects.  ;-)

[walnutqueen]

1 minute ago, TattleTeeny said:

I think some of it is just some people's innocent ignorance about what is really involved in declawing, meaning that they know it's a fairly common thing (though becoming less so, thank goodness), and thus probably assume that it must be harmless; after all, trained medical caregivers are the ones who perform the procedure. It's not surprising that a layperson would assume that those caregivers wouldn't sanction or advocate something that would harm an animal--people probably believe it's on par with neutering. But there's no excuse for a pet owner to do it once they are informed of what it actually entails. 

There isn't a self respecting veterinarian that would ever condone such a procedure, much less perform it.  At least, not in my universe.  And thankfully, not in my vet's.

People who are THAT uninformed probably shouldn't own pets in the first place.

[Bastet]

6 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

I think some of it is just some people's innocent ignorance about what is really involved in declawing, meaning that they know it's a fairly common thing (though becoming less so, thank goodness), and thus probably assume that it must be harmless; after all, trained medical caregivers are the ones who perform the procedure.

When my vet retired and I had to find a replacement, one of my interview questions (yes, after getting recommendations and researching, I interviewed my short list) was to ask if they did the declawing surgery.  All said no, so I didn't have to cross anyone off the list.

[TattleTeeny]

28 minutes ago, walnutqueen said:

There isn't a self respecting veterinarian that would ever condone such a procedure, much less perform it.  At least, not in my universe.  And thankfully, not in my vet's.

People who are THAT uninformed probably shouldn't own pets in the first place.

Well, I chalk it up to learning from mistakes, I guess--though it sucks that this mistake can't be corrected and could lead to problems* for the innocent bystander pet). I don't know about the vets but I do know a few otherwise good cat parents who never thought to dig into the details before signing up for a procedure that they mistakenly assumed was safe (sort of in the same way that people often assume that dry food is better for cats than canned). They regret it now that they know the truth, which seems to have become common knowledge in recent years.

That said, I really have no idea why vets wouldn't--or aren't required to--explain the whole entire deal to people, much less have no problem doing it. I never had to worry about that with my own vet; I never requested a declawing and he doesn't do it anyway. I wouldn't want a vet who thought declawing was no big deal.

* Like outside-the-box peeing, for example. Nature bestowing a bit of irony upon people who have their cats declawed in order to avoid the heartbreak of furniture damage, maybe?

Edited November 12, 2017 by TattleTeeny

[Sun-Bun]

This is probably a very drunken pet peeve from having just scrolled through my Instagram feed and gasped in horror at my 19-year-old niece's latest posting featuring her homely girlfriend, but WTF is up with this gross hairy eyebrow trend among the millennial chicks these days? Girlfriend seriously looks like an anxiously constipated Groucho Marx. It's just not the look and that chick needs all the help she can get. 

But it's a trend I've noticed among other gals aged 18-34 these past several years that I absolutely loathe. I'm not saying we need to go back to the overplucked pencil brow days of the 90's or the Golden Age, but goddamned if I prefer that extreme look over the extreme wooly worms I'm seeing residing on many young ladies' faces these days. And I say this as a Child of the 80's who used to admire the lush brows of Brooke Shields or early Madonna.

Sorry, but I doubt I'm alone in appreciation for a clean, feminine brow. I'm not asking for much, but unibrows and caterpillars will never be  attractive no matter *what* fashion dictates otherwise, girls---we ain't CroMagnum's anymore, for crissakes. 

[Random Noise]

3 hours ago, Sun-Bun said:

But it's a trend I've noticed among other gals aged 18-34 these past several years that I absolutely loathe. I'm not saying we need to go back to the overplucked pencil brow days of the 90's or the Golden Age, but goddamned if I prefer that extreme look over the extreme wooly worms I'm seeing residing on many young ladies' faces these days. And I say this as a Child of the 80's who used to admire the lush brows of Brooke Shields or early Madonna.

I haven't noticed any of those myself. The millennials I've seen seemingly have no eyebrows at all and what they do have appears to be drawn in with some kind of dark marker. If they had pointed ears they could audition for Star Trek.

[Zola]

1 hour ago, Random Noise said:

I haven't noticed any of those myself. The millennials I've seen seemingly have no eyebrows at all and what they do have appears to be drawn in with some kind of dark marker. If they had pointed ears they could audition for Star Trek.

I'm a Millennial I think (never actually sure what year bracket this generation belong, but I'll run with it given I was born in '93); I used to have those "woolly worms" when I was in my teens - probably trying to make a statement of individuality; or in truth just bone idle to pluck!

But then I went from one extreme to the other; and shaved my brows clean off, and pencil-lined a thinner bogus brow. But I just looked ridiculous. So now I keep my brows conformed and well and truly plucked when required. :)

[MrSmith]

8 hours ago, walnutqueen said:

There isn't a self respecting veterinarian that would ever condone such a procedure, much less perform it.  At least, not in my universe.  And thankfully, not in my vet's.

People who are THAT uninformed probably shouldn't own pets in the first place.

I don't know about that. People nowadays know what declawing a cat involves, but when I was a child and even a young adult, I didn't know what was involved in declawing a cat. This is something that requires on-going education because there's a whole new crop of future ignorant pet owners born every year. To say that people who are that ignorant shouldn't own a pet is like saying that because people don't realize how non-nutritious grocery-store-purchased pet food is shouldn't own a pet. I mean, some of the people on this forum probably still feed that. As far as I'm concerned, even Science Diet isn't much better because it's still loaded with corn, which isn't very nutritious and is responsible for allergic reactions in pets. On top of that, there are many (I would say "most") people who can't tell what's an allergic reaction in an animal and what is not. Furthermore, not only does buying more expensive pet food render unto your pet a better diet, it's actually less expensive in the long run because they eat less and they poop less, which in the case of cats means you're saving on cat litter, too. Yet people still have no problem feeding shit like Meow Mix, which is basically a colored and scented mix of corn, chicken feet, chicken beaks, bones, and whatever other offal that isn't fit for human consumption.

[TattleTeeny]

And also be careful of certain litters too! Some can contribute to respiratory issues in cats. 

Pet food can be tricky, I think, especially for good pet owners with limited funds. When I was poor and in pre-internet days, I fed my cats mass-market foods too--and I did end up with a 17-year-old cat (my sweet soulmate boy, I still miss you every damn day!). Now, with more money to spare and with a sometimes annoying need to research shit to death, I am a maniac about it (I made a vow when I took home my now four-year-old kitten bothers that I'd do everything "right")--and still admittedly probably far from perfect: sometimes I give them a few nuggets of dry food as a treat (why they love it, I have no idea--my previous cats in my poor days would flip a gasket for canned food when I could afford it!), and on a couple of occasions, after realizing too late that I was out of their canned food, have run to 7-11 and grabbed a can or two of Fancy Feast* until my Petco trip the next day. I probably don't brush them as often as I should (they have long hair), and despite cat experts' advice, I do keep their water and food dishes in one place. 

* My last cat would accept only "fast-food" canned food, even though I knew better. But my vet and I decided, after trying everything else, that it was best to just let her have it. She came to me with a few issues to begin with (she was from a horrible hoarding situation, very undersized, had only one working eye, and was practically feral), and it became more about keeping her fed and happy than it was about anything else. She eventually became a fabulous and comfortable little lap cat but I still wonder if she would have lived longer if I tried harder with the food--and if I could have changed her feral ways much sooner had I known how to inform myself better back then. 

Edited November 12, 2017 by TattleTeeny

[TattleTeeny]

PEEVE! I am filling out insurance form after form for my new job that starts tomorrow. First, holy hell, why do they give us the tiniest space to write an e-mail address?! Come on. And, second, it really peeves me that I just did this shit the day before I got laid off two weeks ago! I even asked my manager if I needed to attend the boring benefits meeting if I planned to keep everything as is. Well, that ass said yes, even though there is no way he didn't know that he'd be firing me less than 24 hours later!

Also, I am a raging ball of nerves!

Edited November 12, 2017 by TattleTeeny

[walnutqueen]

My (indoor) cats have almost always been on a vet recommended special diet.  The outdoor semi-ferals get the best I can afford - canned, dry, and lots of my meat, chicken & fish leftovers.  Since they share their feeding stations with a whole passel of raccoons, possums & skunks, there is some cheap cat food involved for those voracious critters (but NEVER Meow Mix!!!).  :-)

My peeve was always food waste.  The good thing about having all these animals is that I never have to waste any food anymore (which does tend to happen when you're trying to "cook for one").  No matter what it is, I can put it outside at night, and by the morning it is Gone, Baby, Gone.

I can hardly wait for Thanksgiving, because I know I'll be able to find turkeys for pennies on the dollar the day after.  I don't like turkey, but the critters do, and will be feasting for many days. 

[Bastet]

4 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

My last cat would accept only "fast-food" canned food, even though I knew better. But my vet and I decided, after trying everything else, that it was best to just let her have it.

The best food in the world is of zero value if the cat won't eat it.  I am very well educated about feline nutrition, and love sharing that knowledge with owners who want to feed better but aren't sure what that means, but if Riley wouldn't eat raw or a high-quality canned food (or I couldn't afford it), I'd feed her the healthiest canned food she would eat.  (And, as a PSA, among fast food/grocery store/junk food/whatever you want to call it canned cat food, the classic varieties of Fancy Feast [not the stuff with gravy or anything extra; just the classic pate] are not terrible; there are by-products and artificial flavors, but no wheat, corn, or soy, and they derive a decent percentage of calories from protein.)

Today's first world peeve: I pulled out the last bottle in my case of Bloody Mary mix (I'll pick up a bottle of Zing Zang at a nearby store in a pinch, but Red Eye is my must-have, so I order it shipped by the case since it's not available locally) and discover they screwed up when packing the case and that bottle is the horseradish formula, not the original.  Now, I love horseradish, and I don't hate it in this mix, but the original formula is perfect (it's why I stopped experimenting with making my own mix once I discovered it) and that's the exact taste I want, not this.  I'll tell them about it when I order the next case.

[TattleTeeny]

OK, in order to calm myself, I asked someone else to do my shelter shift today. Now, usually, cleaning up there and playing with the cats is therapeutic, and I'll miss the beasts this week, but now I feel less rushed and agitated. I also got me a nice new tote-style bag and a new "leave at work" cardigan. While that sounds indulgent on my part, it didn't feel like "fun shopping" (I don't think Marshall's is fun...though good prices there) but did feel like checking to-dos off a list, which is good.

Edited November 12, 2017 by TattleTeeny

[bilgistic]

I have another interested party for the TiVo. This new guy sent me one email with asking when we could meet and didn't try to dicker down the price.*

Upon my reply, he said he was excited about acquiring the TiVo since he cancelled his cable. We've scheduled to meet at a shopping center near me tomorrow evening. This outing will also force me to get the groceries I desperately need.

THAT'S how you do it, jackass first guy.

*He still may dicker at our meeting, and I'm open to negotiation, especially since I'll have the TiVo in my car and not want to take it back home.

[Random Noise]

5 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

First, holy hell, why do they give us the tiniest space to write an e-mail address?

My problem has always been the space for the name, and in particular the surname. I'm of Dutch ancestry so my surname has three entirely separate words which usually overflow the space provided.

The second part of that problem is that people who do data entry seemingly have difficulty with a surname that has spaces in it, though I'll acknowledge the fault is with the software at times. In the end, one or more words get joined together, on some occasions the third word followed by the first two, or more bothersome to me is when someone thinks one or more words is irrelevant and drop them entirely.

[ratgirlagogo]

12 hours ago, MrSmith said:

 corn, chicken feet, chicken beaks, bones, and whatever other offal that isn't fit for human consumption.

Within reason corn is fit for human consumption.  And chicken feet and bones make fantastic soup! If offal is organ meat, that's great too.   Beaks OTOH ...not so much.:)

Edited November 13, 2017 by ratgirlagogo
spelling

[AgentRXS]

On 11/6/2017 at 10:41 AM, TattleTeeny said:

I mean no disrespect to anyone here in this fun and cathartic thread who also participates in the one I am about to mention--and I'm always fine with posts that actually say something regardless of what the opinion of a TV show is--but why, why, why do some people even watch, much less talk about, The Walking Dead?

After tonight's episode, I am asking myself why I'm watching it. Wrong week for me to see THAT (and you know what I'm referring to). Not a fan of animals being featured on TV shows for that very reason.

Edited November 13, 2017 by AgentRXS

[backformore]

On ‎11‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 0:17 AM, Sun-Bun said:

This is probably a very drunken pet peeve from having just scrolled through my Instagram feed and gasped in horror at my 19-year-old niece's latest posting featuring her homely girlfriend, but WTF is up with this gross hairy eyebrow trend among the millennial chicks these days? Girlfriend seriously looks like an anxiously constipated Groucho Marx. It's just not the look and that chick needs all the help she can get. 

But it's a trend I've noticed among other gals aged 18-34 these past several years that I absolutely loathe. I'm not saying we need to go back to the overplucked pencil brow days of the 90's or the Golden Age, but goddamned if I prefer that extreme look over the extreme wooly worms I'm seeing residing on many young ladies' faces these days. And I say this as a Child of the 80's who used to admire the lush brows of Brooke Shields or early Madonna.

Sorry, but I doubt I'm alone in appreciation for a clean, feminine brow. I'm not asking for much, but unibrows and caterpillars will never be  attractive no matter *what* fashion dictates otherwise, girls---we ain't CroMagnum's anymore, for crissakes. 

Yeah, I've noticed this trend.  And much of it is fake, embellished with gels and pencils, etc.  I use eyebrow mascara, because my brows are uneven and very blonde.  but nothing like those over-done, huge eyebrows some are sporting.

I even got a notice in my neighborhood group that someone is trained in eyebrow "microblading," which I had to look up.  it's basically tattooing fine lines to give the illusion of fuller eyebrows.  

[Quof]

I had microblading because of a bad wax job years ago that left me with a permanent bald patch.  The aesthetician drew them in much bigger than I wanted. I explained that I only wanted to fill in the bald spot and generally shape the brows so they looked natural so I didn't have to fill them in every morning.  All of her other clients want the caterpillar look.  At the end of the day, everyone agreed mine were the best they had seen. 

[MrSmith]

15 hours ago, Random Noise said:

My problem has always been the space for the name, and in particular the surname. I'm of Dutch ancestry so my surname has three entirely separate words which usually overflow the space provided.

The second part of that problem is that people who do data entry seemingly have difficulty with a surname that has spaces in it, though I'll acknowledge the fault is with the software at times. In the end, one or more words get joined together, on some occasions the third word followed by the first two, or more bothersome to me is when someone thinks one or more words is irrelevant and drop them entirely.

As a programmer, I would rather deal with time than names - especially as a web developer. So many of the people I've worked for have thought 20 characters was "more than enough" for first and/or last names (either individually or together, with "together" being the more common). This drives me crazy because storage is cheap and unused storage costs nothing.

[Zola]

Have received a letter earlier this morning informing me that I must attend jury service, beginning Monday 4th December!

I have never done this before, and have spent the last hour or so going through the accompanying booklet (as well as Google) trying to understand what is required of me, what I need to do, how long it will take, and the costs involved in terms of lost income and expenses.

This jury service will last a minimum of ten working days (here in England), but this may change considerably depending on the case(s) - complicated fraud cases or murder cases could take weeks or even months!

As I am self-employed it cold mean a considerable loss of income during that period (as well as delays/disruption to my clients); and even though the government does pay a daily per diem, it falls well short of one's daily income. And should I end up in a long-winded court case I could lose hundreds or even thousands of pounds in lost income!

Ideally I would rather not bother, but I can't refuse or even defer without a very good reason - for which I have none. 

I suppose morally, serving on a jury is the right thing to do as a law-abiding citizen; but in the real world it can cause considerable problems/disruption socially and financially.  

[MrSmith]

@Zola Maybe you can get out of it on a hardship basis? Show how detrimental to income it would be as a self-employed person and perhaps they'll dismiss you? That's the only thought I have. The only time I've served on a jury, I enjoyed it and would like to do it again. Honestly, if you're going to end up distracted about your loss of income, then you won't be able to give your all to jury duty. If it was my case, I would not want you on the jury because of it. I'd rather have someone who can fully attend to their duties as a juror, and I would be understanding of someone in your position.

[MargeGunderson]

2 hours ago, Zola said:

Have received a letter earlier this morning informing me that I must attend jury service, beginning Monday 4th December!

I have never done this before, and have spent the last hour or so going through the accompanying booklet (as well as Google) trying to understand what is required of me, what I need to do, how long it will take, and the costs involved in terms of lost income and expenses.

This jury service will last a minimum of ten working days (here in England), but this may change considerably depending on the case(s) - complicated fraud cases or murder cases could take weeks or even months!

As I am self-employed it cold mean a considerable loss of income during that period (as well as delays/disruption to my clients); and even though the government does pay a daily per diem, it falls well short of one's daily income. And should I end up in a long-winded court case I could lose hundreds or even thousands of pounds in lost income!

Ideally I would rather not bother, but I can't refuse or even defer without a very good reason - for which I have none. 

I suppose morally, serving on a jury is the right thing to do as a law-abiding citizen; but in the real world it can cause considerable problems/disruption socially and financially.  

I served on a jury for the first time this year (I have been eligible for 20+ years), and wouldn't you know it, I got a murder trial. It ended up being short, only 5 days. I don't know how it works in the UK, but during the jury selection, people had an opportunity to indicate if serving on the jury would be a hardship (financial, caring for dependents, etc.). Hopefully you have the same option. 

I did find the experience meaningful, but it was also stressful, given the type of trial. All of my dreams for the following month seemed to be set in a courtroom!

[MrSmith]

53 minutes ago, MargeGunderson said:

I served on a jury for the first time this year (I have been eligible for 20+ years), and wouldn't you know it, I got a murder trial. It ended up being short, only 5 days. I don't know how it works in the UK, but during the jury selection, people had an opportunity to indicate if serving on the jury would be a hardship (financial, caring for dependents, etc.). Hopefully you have the same option. 

I did find the experience meaningful, but it was also stressful, given the type of trial. All of my dreams for the following month seemed to be set in a courtroom!

I want to get on a jury where you get sequestered. I want to see what that's like. Probably terribly boring, especially because there's no computer and no phone. Maybe I could get a non-Internet connected computer so I could do some programming. Even more interesting would be being up for jury selection for a widely publicized case! Because yes I could ignore any information that I had from news reports or anywhere else (and I really could).

[Random Noise]

18 minutes ago, MrSmith said:

I want to get on a jury where you get sequestered. I want to see what that's like. Probably terribly boring, especially because there's no computer and no phone. Maybe I could get a non-Internet connected computer so I could do some programming. Even more interesting would be being up for jury selection for a widely publicized case! Because yes I could ignore any information that I had from news reports or anywhere else (and I really could).

They might put you in that special hell and give you a Windows computer.

[MrSmith]

4 minutes ago, Random Noise said:

They might put you in that special hell and give you a Windows computer.

That'd be ok for those purposes. They can control it (its ability to connect to the Internet) and I can still do some programming (there's a version of Vim for Windows).

[bilgistic]

I'm probably going to jinx myself for saying this, but I've only gotten summoned to serve on a jury once. We waited all morning in the, um, waiting room? watching a video on repeat about how important it was to serve on a jury, doing our civil duty and being part of the judicial process. We took an hour break for lunch and came back for maybe an hour and were dismissed. I was kind of looking forward to serve on a jury.

[backformore]

I could use a little help here, understanding the godparent role. 

When I was a kid, a godparent was the person who attended your baptism/christening, and vowed to uphold the religious ideals, to support your religious upbringing, etc.  My godparents were my aunt and uncle, they never made any particular effort to be close to me or treat me any differently than they did my siblings.  It's mostly an honorary designation. 

My husband and I have been god parents to different nieces and nephews.  Now I find out that a certain family member (not blood relative, she married into the same family I did) is upset about our lack of generosity in gift-giving.  She has made references to "double presents", usually referring to OTHER family members who don't understand it the way she does, but very obviously also meaning us as well.   the way she sees it, aunts and uncles are supposed to give gifts to kids for birthdays and Christmas.  godparents are also supposed to give gifts.  SO if you are both godparent AND aunt/uncle, you owe the kids "double presents."  Basically, one of her kids has godparents who are outside the family, so those godparents only give gifts to their godchild, not the sibling.  Our responsibility, as aunt/uncle to both, is to give gifts to both, but then there's that extra responsibility to give a gift to the godchild, therefore he gets double from us.  I guess, so that her kids get equal gifts? 

The first time I heard her say "double presents"  I took it as a joke, the second time I brushed it off.   Recently (the kids in question are now adults)  I discovered that she has been harboring resentment toward us all these years,  for not showering a certain godchild with gifts on every birthday and Christmas.  (we've treated both of her kids equally). I honestly never heard that the obligation of a godparent is to come up with presents all the time, let alone this notion of double the presents because of the relationship.    We have been generous with BOTH of her kids during years that we had the means to do so, and less generous during lean years.   I have always thought that parents are the ones to give kids gifts, and anything else, from other relatives is "extra."  

Am I the only one who didn't know this thing that she insists is the traditional role of godparents?  

[Bastet]

46 minutes ago, backformore said:

SO if you are both godparent AND aunt/uncle, you owe the kids "double presents." 

That is some deep-fried bullshit right there.

Now, I know nothing of the traditional concept of godparents; I am godmother to a cousin's daughter, but it's purely an honorary thing (to start with, as an atheist, I'm certainly not in charge of any religious instruction) -- a nod by the cousin to our relationship.  I have no recollection of who the godfather is (or who the godparents to her umpteen - okay, three - other kids are), because there is absolutely nothing involved in being the godmother.

But I don't need to know in order to ascertain that this person is nuts with the double presents stuff.  Or that godparents - or anyone - ever "owe" the kid a gift.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Bastet

[Hanahope]

30 minutes ago, backformore said:

Am I the only one who didn't know this thing that she insists is the traditional role of godparents?  

I have a vague recollection that when my family lived a few houses away from my godparents, I received a Christmas present from them when my parents would have them over for a dinner near Christmas time.  I was very young, so I don't recall anything expensive, a small stuffed animal, a picture/first reader book, a small toy.  I don't recall seeing them give anything to my older sister (who is 8 years older than me), but maybe they did.  When we moved across town, I don't recall seeing them outside of church (maybe my parents went to their house, or they all went out to dinner sans kids), and I don't recall getting anything from them as I became older.  I don't know that it had anything to do with them being my "god parents" as opposed to just giving a small gift to the young child of friends when one visited near a holiday.  

I've never heard of it being "an obligation" to give "double presents" to a god child, though.

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, backformore said:

I could use a little help here, understanding the godparent role. 

When I was a kid, a godparent was the person who attended your baptism/christening, and vowed to uphold the religious ideals, to support your religious upbringing, etc.  My godparents were my aunt and uncle, they never made any particular effort to be close to me or treat me any differently than they did my siblings.  It's mostly an honorary designation. 

My husband and I have been god parents to different nieces and nephews.  Now I find out that a certain family member (not blood relative, she married into the same family I did) is upset about our lack of generosity in gift-giving.  She has made references to "double presents", usually referring to OTHER family members who don't understand it the way she does, but very obviously also meaning us as well.   the way she sees it, aunts and uncles are supposed to give gifts to kids for birthdays and Christmas.  godparents are also supposed to give gifts.  SO if you are both godparent AND aunt/uncle, you owe the kids "double presents."  Basically, one of her kids has godparents who are outside the family, so those godparents only give gifts to their godchild, not the sibling.  Our responsibility, as aunt/uncle to both, is to give gifts to both, but then there's that extra responsibility to give a gift to the godchild, therefore he gets double from us.  I guess, so that her kids get equal gifts? 

The first time I heard her say "double presents"  I took it as a joke, the second time I brushed it off.   Recently (the kids in question are now adults)  I discovered that she has been harboring resentment toward us all these years,  for not showering a certain godchild with gifts on every birthday and Christmas.  (we've treated both of her kids equally). I honestly never heard that the obligation of a godparent is to come up with presents all the time, let alone this notion of double the presents because of the relationship.    We have been generous with BOTH of her kids during years that we had the means to do so, and less generous during lean years.   I have always thought that parents are the ones to give kids gifts, and anything else, from other relatives is "extra."  

Am I the only one who didn't know this thing that she insists is the traditional role of godparents?  

Well, I can't tell you exactly what the role of godparent is, but I can tell you what it isn't.  Fairy godparent, as in granting wishes and giving gifts.

[bilgistic]

Double presents! NOPE.

Tell Ms. Buttinski that she should feel free to shower everyone with presents since she has such strong opinions on generosity.

[Lisin]

I am a godparent and have never given those children "extra" gifts. Heck, sometimes they get "no" gifts depending on when we're going to see them. You know what they do get? The knowledge that if something terrible happens they come live with us... actually they probably don't officially know that, they're young, but their parents do. We don't "owe" them anything else. Shit we don't actually owe them anything at all. I also have godparents. I couldn't tell you their names and I couldn't tell you if they've ever given me anything. My bet is that the kids don't know/care about any of this.

[partofme]

2 hours ago, backformore said:

 

Am I the only one who didn't know this thing that she insists is the traditional role of godparents?  

My godparents are my aunt on my dad's side(not even the same religion as me) and my now late uncle on my mom's side.  I've never gotten any gifts from either.  I'm also not sure that either remember that they're my godparents.

Edited November 13, 2017 by partofme

[backformore]

Thanks for all the support and opinions.  I think the issue must be the difference between "this is how my family does it," and, "this is the CORRECT way."  I needed people outside our families to affirm that I'm not an idiot.  

I was stunned to find out that all the years I was giving her kids gifts, she was upset that we weren't doing enough.  

[janestclair]

Yeah, that's some kind of bullshit there.  There is no double presents.  I only have a godfather as I was baptized in a hurry in the hospital, but I sure as hell didn't get any extra gifts from him.  My mom just knew that if something happened, he would take care of me, and also my sister, even though he was only my godparent.  My parents were godparents to a cousin of mine, and the only "extra" gift I can recall is that they bought the christening gown.  

If she's holding on to that resentment for so long that the kids in question are now adults, she has some serious issues.  

[bilgistic]

I just sold my old TiVo for my full asking price of $100. Whoot!

[MrSmith]

4 hours ago, backformore said:

I could use a little help here, understanding the godparent role. 

"double presents",

I'm with everyone else. "Double presents" is bullshit. I've never heard of it. Certainly never experienced it. Never had that expectation.

4 hours ago, Bastet said:

That is some deep-fried bullshit right there.

Now, I know nothing of the traditional concept of godparents; I am godmother to a cousin's daughter, but it's purely an honorary thing (to start with, as an atheist, I'm certainly not in charge of any religious instruction) -- a nod by the cousin to our relationship.  I have no recollection of who the godfather is (or who the godparents to her umpteen - okay, three - other kids are), because there is absolutely nothing involved in being the godmother.

But I don't need to know in order to ascertain that this person is nuts with the double presents stuff.  Or that godparents - or anyone - ever "owe" the kid a gift.

As for the role or traditional concept of godparents, there's two parts as I understand it. The first, as noted, has to do with religion and religious education. I don't really understand that much about that concept or what godparents are supposed to do on this front. The second, as I understand it, is that godparents are supposed to be the ones designated to house and raise the child should both parents die before the child is an adult. Now, I don't know how many people put much stock in that second one considering that so many people choose godparents who are not a couple already. Even my own parents chose an aunt and an uncle on my mother's side (and, thus, unable to marry each other). I know that my wife's family chooses godparents in that way, as my wife and I are godparents to our nephew (her sister's son, and the nephew we're closest to), while another couple are the godparents to our niece (the sister of our godson). I also know my wife's brother and his ex-wife chose two separate couples to be godparents for their two boys.

[Random Noise]

4 hours ago, backformore said:

Am I the only one who didn't know this thing that she insists is the traditional role of godparents?  

Other than my parents, brother, and sister, I never got gifts from anyone in the family. Maybe those of us who are of Dutch heritage are a little more stingy in that regard, hence 'going Dutch' at a restaurant.

1 hour ago, bilgistic said:

I just sold my old TiVo for my full asking price of $100. Whoot!

When I was young they used to say "don't spend it all in one place." That's probably an impossibility, or at least very unlikely now.