Cat Ladies

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

I’m going to start with a startling confession: I am a cat lady. There, are you shocked? Running around in circles and rearranging your mental image of me, yet? No? Why not? Could it be because I constantly talk about my cats, when I’m not talking about my kids?

What’s worse, I come by this naturally, having got it from grandma, who was like the platonic ideal of a cat lady, having somewhere between 17 and 30s some named, cared for, clean cats at any given time (To be fair, they were mostly outdoors, in a rural community.), Dad, who if mom allowed him, would bring home every cat who needed a home, and every dog, rabbit, injured bird and turtle too, and older brother who takes in dumped, abused and injured cats on the regular and has a variable clowder of them.

So, of course, I’m now mad at Vance for saying Cat Ladies were bitter and lonely and I’m going to vote for his opponent, who merely wants to strip Israel of the ability to defend herself, and turn over our cities to feral homeless and criminals, and erase our borders. And, oh, yeah, wants to confiscate guns and–

What? You’re not? But you’re low key mad about the cat lady comment? Well, listen, that’s because — I know this is shocking — it was completely taken out of context, and weaponized (by CNN initially) in order to seed dissension on the right. When will you learn? Then for further digging, it was paired with comments he made earlier about people with children deserving more of a say in the future… Sigh. It’s like that.

We now have crazy women running around in circles claiming that Kamala Harris is just like George Washington who also only had step children. Thereby increasing the stereotype of “all women are crazy and hysterical” and seeding more dissension.

I must ask, on the serious, were you people not awake and aware when the left weaponized “Women in Binders”? A reference to giving PREFERENCE TO WOMEN WHO’D BEEN OVERLOOKED which was turned into “proof of sexism” by repetition without context? And which never made any sense, btw?

So, I don’t have a link to it, or even a link to where Charlie Martin pointed out it was taken out of context on Twitter, but I’m sure one or more commenters will find it. The CNN utterance was cut and further distorted by the “concerned discussion” after, as the left does.

What Vance was referring to was not CHILDLESS people, or even people who tried to have children but couldn’t, or people who are childless but have anchors in the future.

What he was referring to was our “elites” who, frankly, are of a sort that infests any nation in trouble — see decadent Rome, France just before the revolution, England before the Victorian renewal, etc. etc. — that is the kind that has bent their entire life into working for and seeking power.

This happens when a polity is so centralized and codified that the only way to ascend the hierarchy is to LIVE FOR IT. Which always ends up with profoundly unhappy people in power. Whether they be male or female, yellow, purple or pink. It’s just the way it is. And having profoundly unhappy people in power, particularly people bent on denying they’re unhappy, always ends up in horror.

Right now our nation is such that we’ve bent every field of human endeavor to be that kind of greased pole, in which you must bend everything and subordinate everything to attain it. Trad Pub too was that kind of ladder, and amid the many career mistakes I made was not bending everything to success. OTOH I have a family and I love my family.

Anyway– I feel the need to explain what he meant by childless versus having children. This is a weird thing to explain, and to make things worse, it’s not even absolute (for the reason Washington and Kamala aren’t the same. And that’s just a beginning.) There are people who have children who are in fact childless in every manner that counts, and people who are childless who are in fact people with children in every way that counts. It’s just there are lessons that are easier to learn through having children and raising them, so that’s the way the personality tends to bend.

It’s weird to have to explain it, because of course, most of the time, most of society has children, and knows what it’s like. Except that’s no longer true. In fact, again, the way our society is organized most of us who have children are encouraged to behave and live as if we don’t.

I wasn’t even aware of this until a much younger friend mentioned in passing that the beau ideal of our fiction — movies, tv, novels — nowadays is sort of an eternal college student. I.e. you have no ties, not even to your parents, and you live life for yourself and your own self-actualization. Even romances are portrayed this way, with often the female’s self-actualization being primary, and the male being there to serve it. Unless they get together because “it will help us both be more ourselves” (which isn’t wrong, but it goes through becoming sort of a blended person first. It’s complicated. Yes, I can do a post on that, too, if anyone needs it.)

This is what people are being told to be. Which in turn distorts everything. Because this is what people view as being “adult” and “responsible.” You have a career, you have friends whom you help, but they’re sort of fungible, you have a place you live and where you can have parties. Children, in both fiction and the way you’re encouraged to live, are viewed as hindrances. And if there is a pet it’s usually a cat, because cats are subordinate to the way you live. You don’t have to walk them everyday. There’s automated feeders and most cats who aren’t Indy don’t take them apart. Etc.

This is so alien for most of human history that it’s distorting the way we live and everything we do. It also doesn’t take in account that we still age. Yes, we stay vigorous and hale till very late in life. But we still age. And old age without someone younger to lend a hand, do the tough stuff, make difficult decisions when you’re not feeling well, etc, is hell on Earth, as a lot of people are finding out, since a vast majority of the population is now hitting old age. (And yes, that’s why MAID and other such programs.)

People who hit it and can no longer live the college student lifestyle are likely to be bitter. Further, every woman I know who hits menopause while childless feels regret, even if childless by choice. If they deny that regret, it too becomes bitterness partly because the culture lied to them and most people aren’t introspective enough to distinguish what they wanted and what the culture told them to want.

More importantly, our lifestyle goes against every instinct and deep-set bit of culture laid in over thousands of years, and that too generates some deep-set subconscious alarms, no matter how happy one thinks one is with one’s life.

So, the explanation:

First let’s get a few things about childlessness out of the way:

1 – Being childless is not a moral failing. There are tons of reasons to be childless. Starting with “never found a mate.” Continuing through “Is infertile”. Going on with “Is physically or emotionally unsuited to having children in the sense that being on certain psych medications makes you unable to.”

2- Being childless has a cost. Even in a perfect welfare state, (which doesn’t exist anywhere) once you hit the slope of old age, you’re going to need help and company, and no, paid help and paid company are not the same. Even if you can find them. I’ve now seen this story several times, and being old makes you cranky even if you were sweetness and light before. And it makes you need tasks done for you that should NOT be performed by strangers, even if some strangers are saintly enough to do them. There is a cost. It’s part of the human condition that everything has a cost.

3- The cost is not, despite our longings and ideas that our genes won’t go on. I actually was watching youtube videos on how genetics work down the line yesterday, because I couldn’t function and it was white noise, but really, it’s fairly obvious if you have 23andme or anything like that. Other than a couple of very ancient genes, our genetics get sliced and diced in such a way, if I have grandkids, ever, they’ll be about as related to me as a second cousin. And further down the line, we all sort of return to an undifferentiated sea of humanity. (This could be a post in itself. Tell me if anyone is interested.)

4- The cost of being childless does NOT include “not passing on my values and ideals” because frankly, you learn through being a parent what you pass on is super weird. Like, you can spend 18 years trying to convince the kid to follow your deeply-felt religious faith, but what actually emerges when they’re in their thirties is that they dress nice on Sundays and have a special dinner. (Not even joking, that’s about normal. They pick up the incidental, more than what you try to teach. And culture always has a say.)

5- Having children has a cost too. A high cost, which is harped on by society endlessly. But in the end that becomes a reward.

Which segues into the costs and rewards of having children, very nicely. Strap on. It’s going to be a weird ride.

I know a lot of people who lament never having had children. This is sort of like lamenting never having gotten married. Or never having gone to college. Or whatever.

It’s legitimate, because it was a thing you wanted to do and didn’t get to. So, of course, regret is legitimate. Envy, bitterness and revenge AREN’T.

Because there’s trade offs. And sometimes it didn’t happen because you weren’t willing to make that tradeoff. (Like, in a flip, my career sucks partly because I was the primary caretaker for the family. I had to learn not to be bitter over that.) And sometimes it didn’t happen because it didn’t.

BUT if it had, you’d have been required to make other tradeoffs, which you might now regret. And which would have made you a different person in the end. You would be markedly different than you are. And might feel bitter because your career was blighted. Or because you you never got to go to France, or whatever.

I find, on average, most people get what they really want out of life. What they’re willing to sacrifice for. (They just sometimes don’t think through the consequences of what they want.)

That said, there are two ways in which the difference that comes with having children makes it better for a nation if those governing it have children. And two ways in which the majority of people NOT having children makes a nation face a crisis as those people age.

The first is obvious. Right now my perception of the future is my potential lifespan plus that of my children. I.e. I am intensely interested in the future of the world for another 60 to 70 years, which given a long-lived line is my expectation of longevity for my children and their spouses.

Because of the times we live in, that’s worrisome, but not a very long time span historically. Even with the wheels coming off, with luck, I can expect that with minimal effort that will keep my kids reasonably fed and prosperous and comfortable for the rest of their lives. At least by historical standards of comfortable.

OTOH if one or both of them spawn my interest in history is suddenly a hundred years with the possibility of more. That means I have a major investment in keeping life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness available for those yet unborn generations that I feel responsible for, because those individuals would not have existed but for my choices. (For at least four generations or so, then…. undifferentiated sea of humanity.)

But Sarah, you’ll say, that’s only if you care about your kids. This is very true. If you don’t care about your kids, had nothing to do with their upbringing or actively dislike them as individuals, OR if you don’t feel responsibility to those you created? All this is null and void.

The flip side, where we get George Washington, btw. who married his wife while the kids were little, is that if you raise or help raise someone else’s kids and care about them INTENSELY then you have the parent mind set, even if you’re not biologically one.

I’ll only add it’s easier to be passionately interested in their fates if they’re actually biologically yours. This is not a slight on adoptive parents, or others, it’s just an instinctive thing. It’s EASIER. Doesn’t mean it happens, or that it doesn’t happen if you’re not biologically related. It’s just that a lot of us who otherwise don’t particularly like kids can connect to our own. That’s all. (I keep giggling as young people in my circles discover this and are shocked.)

The second importance of being a parent, and one not immediately obvious, is that it makes it very obvious both the extent of your ability to influence others, and the sheer, blind inability to save those you love from bad decisions. It makes you less authoritarian because you realize you can’t even completely (or much) control those you oversaw from birth and whom you love passionately. Every parent I know has hit this point with a very beloved child. “I love him/her but I can’t stop him/her doing this bizarrely stupid thing.”

If you’re lucky the bizarrely stupid thing is not permanent, and it’s just oh, getting in a very bad job situation, or a bad relationship, or moving to a strange place. And sometimes the kids come back from those. The permanent ones give you nightmares. And yes, they can include outright suicide.

AND sometimes you find that the horriblebad mistake you thought the kid was making turns out fine, and that it was perfect for them all along. Sometimes that paragliding course turns into a whole life of soaring to high expectations. Because parents are no more infallible than anyone else.

The important thing here, as a parent, is that it teaches you you’re not omnipotent and people aren’t widgets. You don’t get out what you put in. It’s not all situation and gestalt. People are individuals, and sometimes some deep inheritance, genetic or otherwise, can come out and bite you in the pound of flesh closest to the heart. And you still love them. You shake yourself off, and keep on loving them despite that. Because the link is still there.

But Sarah, you don’t need kids for that. You can get that with a spouse, a friend or even a cat.

True. It’s just that having seen the story from the beginning, and having it happen with a creature that depended on you for feeding, cleaning, LIVING for years just makes the lesson inescapable. (As for the cat, a friend with a very abusive parent says that parent learned from the CAT what the parent wouldn’t learn from the kids. That you can’t control everything. People are weird.)

It is an important lesson in terms of polity. And one that a vast portion of our population doesn’t seem to GET, which is why they keep thinking entire groups are composed of widgets, and if you feed input a, you’ll get output b. And never understanding the tradeoffs or unintended consequences.

I’ll note, as in my friend’s example above, that even though every single parent runs into this, some parents fail to learn it. Those are the ones that were either never connected to the kids, or are broken in such a way they CAN’T learn it. So they either cut off the kid utterly or keep trying to control the kid, lifelong.

BUT normally, in the normal run of things, all of us learn our kids are — gasp — individuals, different from us in fun, cute, interesting (sometimes blessed) ways, and also in horrifying “you think what?” ways. No matter how much input we put in, the outputs are more likely than not unfathomable.

These are the primary ways in which being a parent changes you. The third is less obvious and it’s that once you have raised kids, it actually is easier to relate to and care to the rest of humanity.

Now, again, because we live in crazy times: this is not a judgement on people who don’t have kids. For a long time I thought I’d be one of those. First because I thought I’d never marry, and second because it took us six years and intensive treatment to have first son. (Second was an unexpected miracle.)

I have no idea who I’d be in that leg of the trousers of time. I do know my proclivities, though, which are isolation and being slightly afraid of other people’s kids. (VERY afraid back then.)

I might very well be one of those very isolated, bitter cat ladies (cats are a given, look you) who resented the comment, without thinking through it.

And that last would be a mistake.

If you care about the future, even if it’s of that undifferentiated humanity from which you came, and to which your genes will return, it is essential that you think about the future, and think of it as a way that people who aren’t like you but for whom you care can survive and thrive. And of a future where individuals are LESS controlled by an authority that can no more guarantee good outcomes than a parent can for the children he/she raised.

It’s also essential you don’t let yourself be manipulated by cheap tricksters into being angry at people over a handful of words and protecting your abstract group over the actual future of civilization.

Pardon if the post is semi-confused. I’m better than yesterday, but still not well. I can and probably should revisit all the components of this very long and perhaps confused post.

But right now, this is what I feel must be said.

130 thoughts on “Cat Ladies”

  1. It is essential to differentiate “Cat lady” from “Crazy Cat Lady”.

    …

    If kids are what you raise, how many children does a good author have?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Never got to start a family. Never got a thing of value in return. Staring at the inevitable as my life slides downhill. Not angry at those who did start family. Cold rage for those who made a world where people were held back from doing so for the benefit of people already much better off.

    There are legitimate reasons to be angry in this state. The key is to not just be trying to drag down folks who have a bit of happiness just because you’re miserable.

    Also, making sure you’re not confusing justice and vengeance is a good idea.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. It hasn’t started.

        We all laugh at them but look at how popular helicopter memes are on the right. The settling of scores after this will make the “eye for an eye makes everyone blind crowd” look positively polyannaish.

        Like

        1. People forget that “An eye for an eye” is restrained and merciful, historically speaking. If you stop at extracting from the enemy what was done to you, that’s pretty reasonable.

          I encourage Leftie pearl-clutchers to go look up “root and branch” for a little historical primer on how things usually go.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Carthago delenda est, for example.

            Or the massacre and sack of, well, pretty much ANY city that didn’t immediately surrender. Jerusalem (lots), Rome (lots), Constantinople (lots), etc. Up to and including Berlin 1945.

            Vae victis.

            Liked by 1 person

    2. Never started a family either, although I still have some time. Sometimes I get weepy and lonely for the “what could have beens” but I have to remind myself that my fantasies are NOT reality. Getting married and having kids is no guarantee of happiness and I have serious mental health problems and can barely take care of myself, let alone a family. *shrugs* maybe in another life.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. And this is the important part. There are ALWAYS tradeoffs. On the whole I’m very happy with where I am.
        The problems come with people who want the benes without tradeoffs and get bitter.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. They also come from people who got choices that were never going to include their desires regardless of willingness to trade off.

          Training a generation of women that children were bad, even if it didn’t take for most, meant there were a lot of men on the marginal edge of attractiveness who one generation earlier would have had a family who didn’t.

          Like

          1. Actually slightly disagree. Look at history. Except in the new country (America’s) often the oldest son was the only one to marry. The younger sons did not. They were designated as spares. At best they only inherited and married if the older one died without “issue”. Younger sons might marry if they found a heiress who had no brothers (note not just older brothers, any brother) and weren’t going to. Even in the Americas, further out west, many men never were able marry. They ratio of men to marriageable young women were too high. The culture of everyone in the family marrying is relatively new since early 1900s, if that early.

            I’ve mentioned my paternal grandfather was one of 4 siblings to have children. Only one sister married. Paternal great-grandmother married but she had brothers that never married. Again eligible women were lacking (marrying first cousins wasn’t allowed). Even great-grandma, and her sister, only married because of recent immigrants (Scotland and Germany). Great-Uncle, grandma’s brother married but they never had children. He raised his step son, helped grandma with her 6, because grandpa was a civil engineer on the road a lot (thus 3 sets, no twins, over 18 years, had two when he worked close at home, gone for 4 or 5 years, only occasionally home, to repeat the cycle). Great-uncle married an older war widow he met on the east coast.

            OTOH great-great-great-grandfather and his 3 brothers that came with him with their wives and children to Oregon on the wagon train, trailed 3 wives, and 30+ children, in the mid 1800’s. Definitely not universal.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Anger in the current generations are based on failure to meet expectations they were raised with, not those a half or full century before their birth

              Liked by 1 person

            2. You’re half right in that we have a false notion of everyone marrying (and especially marrying young) in times past. It varied plenty. But it’s untrue that younger sons didn’t get to marry, or only married heiresses. Who enforces that, for one? And what if the younger son has to wait because big brother is still alive, but then big brother spends years unsuccessful at having children? Not only is the younger brother the spare for the big brother, but the younger brother’s sons are spares for the big brother’s sons. In most systems with primogeniture inheritance (everything goes to one heir; the common system in European nobility and royalty) they still had lots of kids, and those kids had kids. Look into the Wars of the Roses — that happened because there were multiple cadet branches of the Plantagenet family. The first one died out, but two more existed entirely because younger “spares” of previous generations also had kids. And one of those cadet branches had its own cadet branch who ultimately took the throne via Henry Tudor. In literature of the 1700s and 1800s (especially British, which is what I’m most familiar with) we see many instances of families in which the younger sons were encouraged to take up “respectable” professions — law, military, or clergy (which in Britain would not preclude also marrying) — so they could support their wives and children even without an inheritance. Over time the descendants of those families would probably not maintain any connection to nobility, unless one of them married back into a family of rank, but they still had families. You seem to be under the impression that the only options were to inherit or live off family charity.

              Like

              1. “only options were to inherit or live off family charity.”

                Not my intent to apply that impression. Just it was a way to show that not everyone married then.

                Like

                1. Well, you’re right that not everyone married, but completely wrong in the how and why of it. I’m still not sure how you got the impression that younger sons were unable (or not allowed?) to marry. Especially in commoner families for whom not even the oldest son had much to inherit.

                  Like

            3. Younger sons married. They married later because they had to set themselves up to support a family — in the upper crust, go into the military, or the clergy, or some other occupation — but they married.

              In the 19th century, usually only one son, and one daughter, married in an Irish family, but that was because of famine.

              Like

            4. Another element was the girl shortage. Older, more settled men who lost a wife often remarried, sometimes several times. This soaked up the available ladies. By the time a young man in a skilled trade, or a Hansa patrician family, had saved enough money and/or had achieved mastery in his craft, there might not be many women available for him to marry. (Look at modern Afghanistan and similar cultures for a less-positive example of the situation.)

              That marital shortage often led to the pattern of younger sons heading off into business overseas, or joining monastic orders, or becoming bachelor farmers and other things with the assumption that they wouldn’t live long enough to wed. After 1800, in England, things changed markedly, after the civil War as well in parts of the US, because the sex ratio in some social groups flipped due to war.

              Like

              1. “Older, more settled men who lost a wife often remarried, sometimes several times.”

                I have an example of that in my own family; my grandfather was the youngest of 12; his mother was his father’s second wife.

                “after the civil War as well in parts of the US, because the sex ratio in some social groups flipped due to war.”

                I remember reading in some Civil War histories that there were a fair number of May-December marriages between fair young maidens and grizzled veterans of both sides. When the grizzled veteran passed on, his widow was entitled to “survivor’s benefits”. It’s why you had cases like “last Confederate widow” up into the 70s and 80s.

                Like

            5. don’t forget there were also many women who never married. from the local school marm (who counted all of her hundreds of students as her children), to the vast number of Catholic Nuns who educated us and spent their time praying for us and the world. I don’t believe they spent their time being bitter about it (some did I’m sure) There were many spinsters.

              Like

      2. Yeah. I have the self-awareness to look at the baggage I carried without knowing and realizing that if I had started one it would have been a shitshow for everyone involved, top to bottom. Doesn’t dull the pain a bit, but at least I can say I didn’t hurt anyone else in the process. Sometimes cold comfort’s the only comfort you get, I suppose.

        Like

        1. It’s something, yes. Pretty much the same here – too much crazy in my family, too much of a horrorshow in the results of the younger siblings I was roped into taking care of. I’m not inflicting that on anyone else.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Off topic but about cats.

    Barbara Hambly’s vampire novels are very good reads and I remember the cats of the Spanish Vampire Ysidro.

    Barbara’s female main character has intruded into his home to ask him for help in protecting her husband.

    Now Ysidro is not a Nice Guy but his first remark is about married women intruding into another man’s bedroom. While annoyed that she found his home, his first remark is concerning her morality. 😉

    Later we seen Ysidro getting ready to feed his cats. The cats are watching him do so with some interest but it is obvious that they are staying out of arm’s reach of him. They know another dangerous predator when they see one. 🤣

    Liked by 2 people

    2. And now you’ve given me an idea for when I (inevitably) write a vampire series. The first one the main character meets inside his domain goes the whole nine yards – speaking from the shadows, making doors slam shut ominously, creeping up behind them close enough to bite, etc.

      The main character survives the encounter, though only narrowly, and makes an ally of that vampire. Or at least, not an enemy at the moment. Then he/she sneaks into another vampire’s home, expecting that they’ll have to talk this one out of eating them too.

      … Only, they find this vampire sitting at a breakfast table with a book and a mug of blood. Or working at a computer and snapping over their shoulder, “The cash is in the safe in the kitchen, now go away!” Or really anything.

      Turns out the first one is a traditionalist. Or, alternatively, just that dramatic.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Sounds interesting. 😀

        Of course, Barbara’s Vampires Have To Kill Humans to keep their Vampire Powers.

        Mind you, like most of Barbara’s Vampires, Ysidro has activities (similar to human activities) when he’s not on the Hunt.

        So while he has reasons to be concerned about humans (that know about vampires) finding his home, he might be more annoyed at humans interrupting his other activities.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “Barbara’s Vampires Have To Kill Humans to keep their Vampire Powers.”

          Does it have to be humans, or will something fairly close (physically) do? I’m thinking the DNC would be a good hunting ground… :twisted:

          Like

            1. I think her vampires feed on the death of human minds so the question is “do the DNC super-delegates have human minds”?

              Liked by 1 person

      3. Pratchett had something similar. The representatives of the vampire community in Ankh Morpork are –

        1.) A vampire who tries so hard to pass himself off as “just another regular upstanding member of the community, who happens to be a vampire” that he’s on the verge of a snap, and

        2.) The very much mortal wife of a man who got turned into a vampire. And she insists that they go all-in on the schtick (which he reluctantly goes along with).

        Like

      4. Chelsea Quinn Yarbro wrote a St. Germaine story where he’s staying at a resort and realizes there’s another vampire there…a guy who was “converted,” around 1895 and takes, “Dracula,” way too seriously. (If you haven’t read them, I recommend it. In the first novel he faces down a circle of Satanists with holy water…)

        Liked by 1 person

        1. The problem is everyone knows St. Germaine is an alchemist not a vampire.

          Also, at last report he lived in Brazil and enjoyed the beaches, although that report is a bit dated.

          Like

          1. Nod, St Germain is the type of vampire that doesn’t need to kill.

            Of course, compared to other types of vampires, he’s just a long-lived human who only lives by drinking blood.

            He may be stronger than normal but lacks many of the “powers” that other types of vampires have.

            I can’t remember if he can be killed by sunlight, but he does prefer the night.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Given that my only daughter is autistic, and just barely able to take care of herself, I don’t expect her to ever marry or give us grandchildren. I wish it were different but it is what it is.

    So when a stray cat that (unbeknownst to us at the time) was pregnant came to our door 6 months ago, we eagerly took her in. Now we have her AND all 4 of her kittens. We made some attempts to rehome 2 of the kittens but we haven’t gotten much interest — probably because people who really want kittens are going straight to animal shelters or rescues instead — and now we’ve gotten attached to all of them and are leaning toward keeping them all. They are now 4 months old, still very boisterous and in some ways they will be our substitute “grandchildren”. Getting them all vaccinated and fixed is going to be a big expense (Mama got fixed 2 months ago, the only boy kitten is getting fixed in less than 2 weeks, then this fall we move on to fixing the 3 girls) but we love them and so does our daughter. If that makes me a “crazy cat lady” so be it.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I had the same when we moved here. We homed the two boys, but the mostly white and fluffy female, Chai, actively pursued me around from the moment she could walk. Meanwhile her sister Oolong became attached to my old male Sable (who is mixed on the kittens although I caught him cuddling Oolang the other day and he stood up to hide it).

      Oolong is also the first of the girls to become a lap cat.

      Like

  5. Given that my only daughter is autistic, and just barely able to take care of herself, I don’t expect her to ever marry or give us grandchildren. I wish it were different but it is what it is.

    So when a stray cat that (unbeknownst to us at the time) was pregnant came to our door 6 months ago, we eagerly took her in. Now we have her AND all 4 of her kittens. We made some attempts to rehome 2 of the kittens but we haven’t gotten much interest — probably because people who really want kittens are going straight to animal shelters or rescues instead — and now we’ve gotten attached to all of them and are leaning toward keeping them all. They are now 4 months old, still very boisterous and in some ways they will be our substitute “grandchildren”. Getting them all vaccinated and fixed is going to be a big expense (Mama got fixed 2 months ago, the only boy kitten is getting fixed in less than 2 weeks, then this fall we move on to fixing the 3 girls) but we love them and so does our daughter. If that makes me a “crazy cat lady” so be it.

    Like

    1. COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO ANYTHING ELSE:

      Tito misplaced your email address, can you ping him? If you lost his, too, can email me or go to The American Catholic and I believe he’s got an email contact form there, or he’s on twitter, too.

      And now back to on topic.

      Like

  6. Your post is not confused… a bit scattered maybe, but it still holds together. So – While young and not very smart (I didn’t know I was that dumb) I got married to a “wonderful” woman who had a couple of kids already. We were ‘forever’ and I actually adopted the two she had. We then had a couple more together so, four kids in the house. There were good times and bad but the good were way more often. This went on for just short of a decade.

    Then, one day, during a tough time of scattered employment and just getting by – it was announced by my spouse that we had “problems” and should get counseling. OK I said and off we went. I never figured out, or was clearly told, what the “problems” were but a couple of months later (we had almost nothing) I was divorced with a single cast iron pan and a very confused, bitter and broke future. At that time, there was a huge social/legal witch hunt in our state/county for child abusers – ex said I would be so labeled if I ever tired to visit the kids. I got called into the county attorney’s office and was told my support payments were going up the next month and was informed they loved to put people like me into jail. So… I’ve not had any contact with those kids or much of any with her for now at 40+ years. The last I knew – about 12 years after the divorce the middle son was killed in a car wreck. I only found out about it because the insurance pay out needed me to sign off on it and an agent came by to do the paperwork. Never got a word from any of the other kids or ex but found out he was cremated and the ashes scattered (never found out where). Thus ended that.

    My luck turned and I (or maybe she did) found another who would take a chance on a sketchy type with a “bad” past and we worked out. Married now for 34+ years. She had a couple of ‘older’ kids and we blended really well and are “family” in all sense of the term.

    My wife and I are now a couple of old, cranky farts and both of “our” kids are hundreds of miles away and very tied up with their own families now. We’ve come to realize that we are on our own and have to develop a plan to deal with it without family help. Sure, the kids would come and deal with emergencies or major life/death issues but it is, and needs/has to be a temporary short term sort of thing. We are planning a transition to ‘assisted living’ and developing paperwork to support that move if/when needed along with documenting all our personal data so the kids have a resource and game plan to follow if needed.

    Ok – sorry, long post to get to my main point – children are wonderful and enrich lives. Tradition also means they will be there as the parent goes from care giver to receiver. However, today that involvement with such a transition is very complicated and, as in our case, modified to fit realistic needs and goals. Our kids love us and we love them – the grandchildren are great and will enrich the world as they live out their lives. We just now expect a minimal amount of help and support and hope/pray that it will all work.

    Those who never had children or were able to ‘parent’ as they grew up are the less for it. There is nothing more humbling than changing a diaper at two AM only to have the new one fill up right there. The smile you get from that tiny human when you are all done makes anything worth it and I am so glad I got the experience and pity those who missed out.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Looking at opportunities not taken. Every time I think of a relationship of my younger years that didn’t work out, I realize it’s a good thing they didn’t or I wouldn’t have the wife and child I have today.

    Yes, I could well have had children as the results of those relationships, but those (hypothetical) children would not be my child. So, not regrets (at least not on that front)

    Liked by 2 people

  8. My cats didn’t care. I don’t care. I know exactly the kind of person they are talking about and I saw no errors. It was careless, but the opposition to actually try to run with it shows just how desperate they are. They want to try to front that they traded up, but Cackles is scrapping the bottom of a barrel that just is not deep.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. I was there for the passing of both my parents. Circumstances, (which I can now only blame on Providence), led myself and wife with two kids to move back in with my parents for their twilight years.

    They had been capable and competent almost to the end, but the swift onset of heart issues and cancer are remorseless. My Father left us due to heart troubles; but I had been there to pick him up when he fell, redirect when he was confused and soothe when he was irritable.

    My teenage sons did a lot to care for their Grandmother before the cancer took her several months later. I had a cold the day she passed, and was there with her at the end. (Again, Providence.)

    My point is, though they were strong and capable, the end was much easier with family present. The one of my siblings who’d always been trouble now had children of his own and called his mother daily. She doted on her grandchildren in ways she’d never shown to her children.

    And I know that my growth as a person, as well as my sons as they helped their ailing grandmother, has shaped us in amazing ways.

    That they raised children helped to shape my parents into the loving, giving people they were by the time they passed. By allowing me to care for them, I know that I am a more compassionate and grateful person.

    This isn’t about whether or not you had children, but the realities of relationships. And family is usually the longest, and strongest, that you can find. Both my parents and my wife and I have duct tape relations. They are sometimes closer and stronger relations than the ones by blood.

    And when all is said and done, it’s those relationships that matter.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Wow. It is sobering to read so many of your stories, and I’m deeply impressed by so many folks’ willingness to share, and by their resilience and hard-won wisdom.

    I’m not going to get personal myself, but want to share an observation I heard back in the ’90s: That George Washington had no biological children of his own seems like a confirmation that these United States have no “first family” or “royal bloodline”; all Americans can look upon themselves as descendants of the Father of our Country. And that means something very important.

    And since I don’t like to post a comment that doesn’t contain something silly, here’s a hearty recommendation to watch Puss in Boots: The Last Wish for the best portrayal of a crazy cat lady in cinema history!

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I had a problem with that video when I saw it. Statistically (discounting mutations, which usually end up in non-viability), one-fourth of the genes in your grandchildren ARE copied from your own. The only thing is that, for the vast majority of human genes, there is no way to tell WHICH ones – because every human in their ancestry has the SAME gene. (It can also be in the DNA sequences the exact same gene that is only found in one grandparent – but it’s expressed differently, or not at all.)

    So far as getting cranky in old age… Doesn’t take being childless, I have three (very proud of them, too). It just takes losing your youth – the energy, the ability to do things without paying a hefty price in pain, not able to sleep through the night. That and far too many years of contending with idiots.

    Is there a category for “Cat Gentleman”? Given the resources, I’d have a few dozen around me.

    Rambling, my apologies. Past time for my lunch and afternoon nap…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Actually, no more than one quarter of your grandkids’ genetics are yours. (roughly, measuring this is iffy)

      We’ll go with male, because it’s easy, and you know x/y.

      So, kid gets your Y. That’s your son. He has your wife’s X.

      His daughter has his X, and his wife’s X.

      It’s Way More Complicated than that, but I think it’s shiny and neat. :D

      Liked by 3 people

      1. ‘Nother thing about getting older is that you check more often whether you said what you meant, or had a senior moment ‘twixt the brain and the fingers…

        Double-checked; yes, I said the same thing. Biology is weird. Sometimes the process of replication and division will copy a gene from one “donor” twice, and throw away the other. So a grandchild could have 25.001% of your genes – or 24.999%. That’s why I started with “statistically.”

        Liked by 1 person

    2. I may be wrong but I respectfully submit that an elderly male “cat lady” is generally considered an old codger, or sometimes an old coot.

      But I believe lack of offspring is not as required for those monikers because having raised children seems to put men on the path to codgerhood in much the same way that lack offspring affects women.

      Women seem to be determined to meddle in the affairs of others, motherhood gives them legitimate targets.

      Men, however, get rather cranky dealing with the problems of their children and tend to take it on the world at large.

      I could very well be wrong though.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Nah, we’re cat ladies. My friend Amy and I established that when we swore our “if we’re both single at 50 we’re forming a cat ladies” union.

        Like

      2. Sometimes wish we had a “loved it” star, too…

        Yep, that’s me! Old coot; I’ve been there, done that with my kids WAY too many times to put up with it in anybody else’s.

        Men who’ve participated in raising children – take pride in your codgerhood! You’ve earned it!

        Like

    4. The law of large numbers tells us that happens if you have enough kids.

      The reality is the division of genes during the creation of zygotes is mostly random. A given egg or sperm doesn’t have a 50/50 mix. Over time the slightly parent will get slighted again in the grand children and so on.

      Even at 50/50 powers of two grow quickly. After 8 generations you’re 1/256ths on pure 50/50 split. After 16 you’re 1/65536. Getting slighted even once will make that worse.

      Like

      1. That’s following a single line from one ancestor to one great-great-great-great-etcetera.

        Things aren’t nearly as neat as what you get in high school (or possibly earlier) science class, though. See my other comment – your genes can possibly not be exactly 50% of even the first generation after you. (Bio class also makes the simplification of constant outcrossing, too – which is just NOT possible. At some point, the lines that have your genes are going to merge again – hopefully, so far down that even Heinlein’s Suomi don’t have a word for the relationship.)

        Apply the law of large numbers willy-nilly, and there would be no identifiable Neandertal genes in any of the modern population – but there are.

        Like

  12. Looked more closely at the (men, isn’t that odd?) on my timeline pushing this and they are all Never Trumpers. Which means all this is, they can’t attack Trump directly right now because of the assassination attempt, but they feel free to attack Vance.

    They are also, one and all, apparently unable to realize where a Democratic win will take them, even when they make reasonable and accurate criticisms of Harris.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. I never expected to get married, having been the One Who Gets Picked Last (or On) for Everything for many of my formative years. Then I didn’t plan on having children because my beloved had two from a previous marriage and we spent a few years getting our financial act together. But the Author had other plans and I am so grateful. Even though our son has made some of those, “what the-?” decisions and is currently working through the consequences.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I never expected to get married also – last picked, guys as friends, wanted a life of adventure first.

      Long story – thought I had found “The One!” but he … well long story. Got a daughter out of it, and a grandson.

      And also cats.

      Dogs, too.

      But mostly cats.

      Like

      1. Same on “guys as friends” and co-workers. Hubby started as a friend, worked into something more. Never worked at the same location until after started dating (it was a co-friend that talked me in to changing districts, not him). Never worked together until after we were married.

        Like

  14. Never married and never even dated much. Self-esteem issues, undiagnosed depression, and solitary interests all my life. Finally worked around/through them and am much less lonely, but I’m 63 now and know that things are likely to get worse before the end. I tell myself that the past is past and to make the best I can of the time I have left, which includes making new friends and cherishing them.

    Like

        1. This.

          I don’t think I really started to grow up until my 30’s. I still catch bits of the little boy in me today, and shake my head. What gets my goat sometimes was how many influences in my life (teachers, counselors, media) kept telling me it was okay to not grow up, and perfectly acceptable to be lazy. That doesn’t exonerate me. Taking the path of least resistance was my choice.

          Liked by 1 person

      3. Which I think is a big part of the reason that childless women tend to have serious resentment issues. Their male colleagues who followed the same path can change their minds about having kids and try to course correct. They have a much lower chance of success if they try. Which leads to the eternal wail of the monkey-brain: “It’s not fair!”

        It’s not, of course. But it’s also reality.

        Liked by 1 person

  15. The older you get, the less patience you have for Putting Up With Stupid Shit. You’ve seen the same damn stupidity a thousand times, you’ve called it out over and over and over, and the idiots are still doing the same damn thing! AAARRRGGHHH!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    3. It gets better (at least it did for self and wife) when you retire and aren’t forced to put up with authoritative idiots on a daily basis. Sometimes, sure, you can’t avoid them, but way less frequently.

      Like

  16. I was Odd and shy to the point that I never expected to get married. After a bout of depression and a not-so-subtle hint from The Cosmic Clue by Four, I started to realize that rejection didn’t mean I was horrible, just that I was rejected by [person] for [person’s reasons]. Kept looking. Found She Who Would Be Spouse, and 7 years later, we got married.

    Unfortunately, both of us were too old to have kids, though we have some loose contact with some of our relatives. We won’t have the close vested interest in the nation’s future, but we try.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. And a reminder that even Milquetoast Mitt was subjected to slander by the aspiring totalitarians of the Democratic Party and their allies among the oligarchy, because power must be obtained and kept “by any means necessary” and dissent shall not be tolerated.

      Liked by 2 people

      2. And I contend if the trading-off collegial taking turns uniparty had not altered the deal to cut out half of themselves, first for O’care (thanks, Maverick) and then for their eternal majority power grab, we would never had gotten Trump.

        Like

  18. I never had children, for a variety of reasons that boil down to realizing that I was not compatible with that role. However, since my siblings had (or married into) kids, I get to revel in being the weird, crazy uncle to kids, and now grandkids. 🤪🤣

    Like

  19. It’s legitimate, because it was a thing you wanted to do and didn’t get to.

    Sometimes it’s not a thing you wanted to do. Sometimes, it was the thing you were created to do. It was the reason you had the name you had (and would have had even if you were a girl). It was a purpose you were reminded of from as early as you can remember. It is something you saw in the difference between how you were treated and your longer siblings.

    So when you failed in doing it you didn’t fail to get something you wanted you failed at the purpose for you existence. You failed in the only thing you were for and then, well into life you have to either find a reason to exist independent of the one that propelled your creation or learn to just not give a damn (which is why GenX is better at this one).

    I’ll will say this, I suspect that working through it makes it easier to quit giving a damn if the world burns down.

    Like

  20. I work on the assumption that any quote or report by establishment media regarding a non-leftist is either outright made up or consists of statements and video that is way out of context. Like any entities that are in service to leftism, they know that they cannot sell their ideology and policies by being honest, and thus regularly slander and defame those who disagree with them.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I work on the assumption that any quote or report by establishment media <strike>regarding a non-leftist</strike> is either outright made up or consists of statements and video that is way out of context.

      See “Biden stubborn old man too senile to run” morphed into “Biden great statesman drops out for good of the country.”

      Like

    2. THIS.

      This post by Sarah is the first thing I’ve read about either comment, although I’d heard of both of them. I don’t care what the media is saying about anyone because they lie about everything.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. It’s probably very easy for the emotional energy that otherwise would go toward a spouse and children to be displaced into other things. It probably feels necessary to release that pressure into other things. Cats would be one of them; politics would be another. My guess is that cats are not sufficient to soak up all the energies of seeking to interact with and guide (or more) others. Too darn independent, at least superficially so. They don’t seem to need what you’re giving. So the incompletely compensated cat owner gets into politics, petty or grand (and for that, still petty).

    To join in the True Confessions: I’m personally torn between regretting that I was never anyone’s Mr. Right and being relieved that no woman ever put herself through the ordeal of believing I was. Currently, the former is winning, but that’s a whole other very weird issue. As for the matter of emotional displacement, maybe that’s why what’s being done to my country, society, and civilization hurts so much.

    Republica restituendae, et, Hamas delenda est.

    Like

      2. Congratulations on the (civil) anniversary. I do approve of long and happy marriages. Call me old-fashioned.

        Regarding myself, by now I think I know. I should paraphrase Groucho by saying I refuse to get involved with any woman unwise enough to have me as a soulmate. Besides, there are few things worse than a bad pairing: I’ve seen this at second hand several times.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. It took us 7 years to figure out we were better married than otherwise, but come early August (gotta get a card!!!!), it’ll be 23 years. No kids, but dogs. I had two Italian Greyhounds from my aunt & uncle–champion breeders, then we had a Lab-Aussie and a Border Collie. We’re now fur-parents of a 3 year old border collie who figured her job was to keep us in line. Much of my morning exercise is due to Kat-the-dog. (No potty breaks near the house if she can help it.)

        Were we the right spouses for each other? Haven’t killed each other nor even threatened divorce, so I think yes.

        Liked by 1 person

  22. Hubby and I have been together nearly 40 years, married 37 years. We were never blessed with children. We could not afford anything beyond the why? But the cruelty heaped on us by damn near everyone (immediate family and friends) for being ‘childless’. And to say that our fur persons are our children has ‘them’ saying we’re crazy. We did try to adopt, but my hubby became a disabled US Army vet. And serving your country, and even giving pieces of yourself in serve will keep you from adopting in most states. And that is another twisted liberal bureaucratic puzzle.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Semi-random thoughts:

    1. Rejecting a candidate because you don’t agree 100% is just silly. Now there are deal-killer disagreements; John McCain’s support for “campaign finance reform (and screw the 1st Amendment)” was one for me. I voted Libertarian in 2008 specifically so I could say that I voted against both McCain AND Obama. But the reported “cat lady” remark of Vance isn’t even enough to get angry about.

    2. If the choice is between “childless” and “single parent” one has to be a really fanatic pro-natalist to full-throatedly advocate “Single Parent! Single Parent! Of course! Do it! Do it! Do it!”

    3. Shouldn’t “cat ladies” be older females who were “cat girls” when younger? (So what happened to the ears and tail of our Beautiful But Evil Space Princess?)

    4. Can’t blame everything on our wannabe overlords and masters being childless. Three words: Biden Crime Family.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. given the trouble we’re in as a country and possibly as a world, I say, if you have to go it alone, do it. But if you’re going to do that, consider adopting a “snowflake baby”.

      Like

  24. What I find interesting is they think anyone really cares what the VP says in terms of this election.

    Yes, if Trump wins Vance as heir apparent at his age would in theory mean a sea change in the GOP (although I don’t believe a damn thing will change if Trump were allowed to win…it’ll be a repeat of 17-20 again…possibly with a new Wu Flu type even just earlier).

    But seriously, who has changed their vote based on a VP candidate ever? At best I can see them shoring up GOTV issues.

    Like

    1. Somehow lost my last line:

      This is all just battlespace prep to cover the steal. The hardest thing to cover is Trump outside the margin of error in key states over 50%. Everything else will be sold as “the poll’s margin of era” and “the undecided broke for Kamala” (which I’ve been informed is a rude way to refer to her, using only her first name)

      Like

      2. “…I’ve been informed is a rude way to refer to her, using only her first name…”

        I’ve been calling her #HeelsUpHarris. Ask them if they’d prefer that. (I’ve been calling the finance minister “Twitchy the poisonous dwarf” so #HeelsUp is getting off easy.)

        Like

    2. Never changed my vote – but the VP candidate has sometimes changed my perception of it to more or less “icky.” For instance, in ’08, I could comfort myself with the fair possibility that McCain would stroke out in office.

      Liked by 1 person

      2. Both $SPOUSE and I held noses and voted for McCain (rather expecting we’d regret it later), while hoping that Sarah Palin would become POTUS ASAP.

        After some of McC’s votes in the senate, it wasn’t clear if we would have been better off with him winning.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. In 2008 I voted for Palin and the old white guy. She was the only source of enthusiasm in the campaign. And what they did to her was just a precursor of what they did and are doing to Trump.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “what they did to her was just a precursor of what they did and are doing to Trump.”

          And when the usual idiots complain about how KH isn’t being treated “fairly”. My response is going to be “And how was Palin treated?”

          They went after her son, her daughter, and grandson, not about her policies an governing actions as a sitting governor! Two of the 3 were minors, one a baby, one barely out of toddler stage, the other barely an adult and not on the political trail (except for family photo ops). I would hope our side wouldn’t go that far. Adults or not, her step-children should be off the table unless they hit the political trail. Notably I had to google her status.

          Pretty sad to not see VP’s husband on the political stump, OTOH probably too soon. After all Melania Trump, and her step children, obviously supports President Trump’s run by doing public speeches.

          Liked by 1 person

          2. Don’t for get all the “ethics complaints” that drove her from office as Gov. The corruption of the legal process was obvious.

            Like

    3. Trump isn’t Biden, but he isn’t young. There’s a non-zero probability he could die of natural causes in office. The vice president here is more important than it is for Kamala*, or than it would be for Ron DeSantis or Nikki Haley.

      * In response to your next post’s point that referring to the vice president this way is an insult, all I can say is, I hope so.

      Like

      1. Maybe we should return the “compliment”, and start referring to her as “Literally Ilse Koch, but with less empathy and brains”. That should satisfy them, given their apparent infatuation with Nazis and hatred of Jews. :-x

        Like

  25. “this is not a judgement on people who don’t have kids. For a long time I
    thought I’d be one of those. First because I thought I’d never marry,
    and second because it took us six years and intensive treatment to have
    first son. (Second was an unexpected miracle.)”

    Same. Never considered marriage, until perfect person came along. Ten years instead of six (no reason why not either). Never got the second miracle. It is what it is.

    Cats? Well duh. Between the two of us it is almost “the more the merrier” and this is one item that the one, and only, takes after us. Only regret is he likes dogs, but not crazy dog person. We had to put down our German Shepard when he was 6 months. She was 14, to sick to care that we finally had a little person, who she adored universally (she was raised side by side with a cousin who was a month older than her until she was 8 months old), and she was too sick to care. Then we didn’t get another dog until he was in college, 19 years and 11 months later. She passed away just before turning 10 in my arms at home from her heart. Current dog is 7 years old and is having medical problems. Will we get another? IDK. But guaranty we will be leaving cats in kid’s care.

    FWIW. Been missing Wed – Fri AM because we joined my sisters, their husbands, and mom, at one of the sister & BIL’s new beach house in Longbeach WA. Nice good size officially two bedroom (plus den, loft, unfinished bunkroom, which are technically used as bedrooms, but no official closet), 3 bathrooms, two story home, 1/3 mile walking to either middle of town (east), or ocean front beach (west). Their house plan and build (with contractor). Not our choice on how to spend money. Nice. It is their money.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Have worked a project near Long Beach, close enough to see the Kite Festival. It’s bit isolated, but we liked it.

      Also, the weekend market in Ilwaco can be enjoyable, though it was better pre-Covid.

      Like

      1. We, hubby and I, kind of missed out on any walking downtown. The other sister and her husband checked it out. We missed out because I did something incredible stupid Thursday morning. Second story stairs comes down the length of the house, west to east, then turns south at a platform for two more steps down (platform turn + one step). Was not paying attention for last step, and stepped out too far missing bottom step. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

        My right knee buckled, down I went. Luckily I was holding on to the railing, so fall was not as hard as it could have been. Bounced and slid a bit, but did not hit my head. Besides my knee, my right shoulder aches, and right hip/butt feels bruised, but no bruise showing. Since I bruise easily, kind of surprised there. Right elbow bruised (gone now) and some skin scrape. Right knee OTOH, while no bruise showing, I could not put any preasure on it, period, initially, without the thigh, knee, and shin, going 3 different directions, with sharp OMG pain. Ice and Alieve, got me to the point where with hubby, a BIL, and mom’s balancing cane, I could lock my left thigh and knee to my right, and hobble to a couch. Later I could use the cane and carefully walk. But taking in downtown, walking anywhere, was right out the rest of the visit.

        By Friday morning, while I used mom’s cane to get to the car, did not take it (she needs it to come home on the train Wednesday, JIC). Friday I was walking very carefully. Hurt, but as long as careful the three parts were cooperative. Today walking/limping without pain, but OMG if I try to put any weight on it without some support, the three parts are clearing stating “are you even more stupid?” and OUCH, sharp pain.

        Haven’t seen medical, yet. Absolutely no appointments at clinic we use, our primary doesn’t have appointments until end of September, and local Urgent Care is a mess. Going to the emergency room unless dying right now, is impossible. Hubby’s brother and his wife spent 5 hours waiting for BIL to be seen and he came in initially unresponsive in an ambulance from massive staff septic infection (he is not doing good. Intravenous antibiotic transfusions are done. Oral antibiotics aren’t done, but the staff infection is back in his leg per phone call. They were suppose to call her back and retell the information as BIL got called when he was napping, something he does a lot of right now, but they haven’t, yet. So information on options are a bit unclear.)

        Like

          1. Tell me about it. Left three messages on PeaceHealth portal, two on the accident. Didn’t expect immediate response, not the reason for that many messages. Just keeping information flowing. Realize until swelling down, probably not much to be done to see what I stretched or tore. Doubt like heck it is broken, wouldn’t be walking on it. Bone bruise, chip or cracked, or two, maybe. Most likely the first (realize technically chip or cracked is still broken bone). But still medical care is delayed.

            Liked by 1 person

  26. “I’m now mad at Vance for saying Cat Ladies were bitter and lonely…”

    I watched that speech. I laughed when Vance called the DemocRats a bunch of crazy cat ladies and I said “Hell yeah they are!” I watched the part where he talked about his Grandma having a pistol in every room because she couldn’t walk very fast, and I said “Hell yeah granny! Go you!”

    And of course I’ve seen the pearl-clutching since.

    So I’m going to step back in time a little, to 2020. Do we all still remember finding out who in our circle of family and friends became fans of forced vaxxination? Who cheered when people got tossed in jail or beat up for not wearing the dentist mask?

    Same people. Okay? Hope that makes this all a little clearer.

    Just remember there are STILL people driving around alone in their cars with the dentist mask on.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. This is a variant on the quantity- vs. quality-time argument from at least 20 years ago.

    Yes, it is those quality times that have the greatest impact. Yes, they can occur even when the quantity input is small. And people can choose to max out quantity-time while minimizing or creating negative quality-time

    AND they mostly they don’t and it doesn’t. Quantity-time is a requirement for reliable quality time. Especially since people often don’t spot the latter until years later.

    These exceptions to uncomfortable copy-book-heading rules* *proof* them. Like proofing yeast.

    That whole “dead white males” of literature was more toxic than we perceived.

    *If you wan’t quality time with your kids invest in quantity time. How that looks is up to you.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. I’ve long said that the main reason that gay men are so immature and irresponsible (and many of us are) is because they haven’t had children to force them to grow up.

    Does that apply to everyone? Of course not. There are mature, responsible gay men and there are immature, irresponsible parents. However, it is broadly applicable.

    I like to think I’m mostly mature and mostly responsible. I could be deluding myself – or only sampling my good days.

    Like

  29. Thanx in particular for the reference to child-rearing teaching us that we can’t control ANYONE, and that everyone is different instead of neat little widgets. Since the elites seem to have spent all their energy getting power, I doubt they bothered learning this lesson from their own children – may be part of what Vance was talking about…

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.