english_peach (english_peach) wrote in anti_baggage,

  • Mood:


The whole flamewar we had recently makes a lot of sense now. The uproar I provoked by this post seems to be based on the idea that I would hurt a child. This notion is further illuminated by this remark:

I guess it makes me sad that someone could be so selfish that they are willing to push away a child just so she could have a man all to herself.

Yes it does appear selfish, and I am the first to admit I am emotionally confused and hurting at the moment. However when his baggage does eventually show up, he will be a man, not a child. I DON'T hurt children, I never will, and I think that is something a lot of people misinterpreted.

P.S. Keep up with those ideas for community rules! ;)
  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

you seem to confuse the word child with the age of the child. from where I sit it's irelevant if the mans son or daughter is 13 or 33, they're still his offspring and deserve better. he/she doesn't stop being his son/daughter at age 18.
Oh My God! Where was I and how did I miss the entire post?

I fear for my sanity!

keep up the good work EP - and I'll get to back you with my contribution to the rules - :-)

Freaks - ya gotta love 'em!

HM x
*hugs* Thanks babe. How's that messenger-downloading going?
downloading as we speak - might take a while as we've only got shitty dial up at the moment.

HM x
However when his baggage does eventually show up, he will be a man, not a child.

That's why you need to sign away all parental rights NOW and get the restraining order when his child turns 18. Trust me, nothing will keep a child away from finding a birth parent better than a restraining order! They're so easy, too, and once you're married you can do it without your husband even knowing. But when that kid shows up, CALL THE COPS!