Exchanges with People that Make Your Brain Hurt

[Softly Spoken]

Okay I can't quote a specific exchange but I read a post the other day (lost the thread sorry) and then heard a similar comment on t.v. so I have to mention this here because my brain is twinging on it. I am pretty sure I am making my own brain hurt with this, and maybe I should put it under "stupid questions" but it is more of an observation that I wanted to know if anyone else has noticed:

Has anyone ever heard where people are talking about someone who has passed away, and they talk about how "so-and-so did/was XYZ when they were alive." Why do they feel the need to say "when they were alive"? Unless you believe in zombies or resurrection, wouldn't it be naturally assumed that anything you say about a deceased person would be applied to the time before they became deceased? 

If I were talking about my Mom, I would say "My Mom loved musicals." I wouldn't say "My Mom loved musicals, when she was alive." If her taste had changed during her lifetime, then I would say something like "My Mom loved musicals when she was older," or maybe "My Mom loved listening to musicals up to the day she died." All these phrases either give a fact about my mother and/or put the character trait into chronological context.

Am I just crazy/nitpicking? It just seems strange to my ears when people make a big deal about someone doing something "when they were alive" - when else would the person in question have done it?

[Softly Spoken]

I was going to post this in the Special Snowflake thread but then I realized it was more brain hurty than anything.  Though the guy was still kind of SS-y for the attitude.
In our city, every car must have a City Sticker.  *snip*
So we had this tenant who suddenly absolutely refused to buy a city sticker or residential sticker.  *snip*
So he got towed.  By my estimates, he now had to pony up at least $580 in boot/tickets/impound PLUS the $100 PLUS the $40 late fee because he didn't want to pay $100 to have the proper stickers.  And he really needed his car for work, so he HAD to get it out.  And he complained about it every minute we saw him.   

As yes, SS "logic": the classic brain hurt.  I think most SS behavior/"reasoning" behind said behavior is brain-hurty by default...otherwise it wouldn't be so infuriating. It is the ego-driven rejection of basic common decency and sense that sends us eHellions to fetal positions in a corner to smack our heads against the wall (lest we be tempted to smack the heads of the snowflake in question). 

[Sebastienne]

I was going to post this in the Special Snowflake thread but then I realized it was more brain hurty than anything.  Though the guy was still kind of SS-y for the attitude.


In our city, every car must have a City Sticker.  And depending upon what street you live on, some residents are required to have a residential parking sticker if they wish to park on the street.  The City Sticker isn't cheap, they run about $75 per year for your average car (they cost more if you have a large SUV or pickup truck).  The residential stickers are $25/year.  The stickers go on sale in May or early June and they're expected to be on your car by June 30.  This is not a secret and is heavily advertised.  If you buy your sticker after the deadline, it's another $40.  And if the local PD pulls you over or spots your car on the street and it doesn't have a sticker on it, you get a $120 fine. 

So we had this tenant who suddenly absolutely refused to buy a city sticker or residential sticker.  He'd bought them before but decided they were stupid and he just wasn't gonna do it anymore.  I get it, we do a little moaning and eye rolling over it sometimes but it's a requirement for living here.  We're all free to live elsewhere.  No one is being held hostage.

So June 30 came and went and he started getting tickets.  He chose to ignore them and racked up a few tickets.  Then his car got booted (you get the boot when you ignore your 3rd ticket).  It cost $60 to get the boot removed but you have to pay your tickets before they'll do that.  Leave it too long and you get towed.  And THEN you get to pay for the impound to spring your car.

So he got towed.  By my estimates, he now had to pony up at least $580 in boot/tickets/impound PLUS the $100 PLUS the $40 late fee because he didn't want to pay $100 to have the proper stickers.  And he really needed his car for work, so he HAD to get it out.  And he complained about it every minute we saw him.   

That actually reminds me of a completely different, very brain-hurty city sticker problem. We used to live in the same city as you (I'm assuming. Lots of wind?), and both our cars had years' worth of Chicago city stickers on our windshields, since those bastards were almost impossible to remove. Eventually, we moved out of state, about a 3-hour drive from the city, right before the new city stickers were released. A few weeks after our move, my husband had some business back in our old city. He'd already registered the car in New State, and it had a New State plate, which should indicate that he did not live in Chicago.  But he still got a City Sticker violation for the car when it was parked on the street. We assume the officer had seen all the stickers but the new one, and he'd been in "gotcha!" mode, and written the violation--including the license plate number, for an out-of-state plate!--without thinking.

That's not the only brain-hurty part, though. It took us over a year to fight that ticket. There was a lot of runaround: "But you didn't have the sticker!" "But we live in Michigan! We don't need the sticker!" "But there was no sticker!" Argh.

[goldilocks]

My granddaughter was 3, and was very proud to be learning to order for herself in restaurants.

Papa and I took her to local diner, and she ordered a cheeseburger, plain.  While she was doing that Papa quickly called her mother to see if she wanted anythign on it and her mother confirmed that no- nothing on it.

So, cheeseburger arrives and baby is extremely upset that it has - Cheese.  It seems that when she orders a cheeseburger with nothing on it, that includes the cheese   Her mother had forgotten to tell us this important fact.

[Shalamar]

That reminds me of when our older daughter was going through her "plain pasta" phase when she was 8.  She ordered it for herself in a restaurant and said "just the pasta, please.   No sauce or toppings or 'green stuff' (I.e. spices)."

When it came, the plate had parsley sprinkled all around the edge, much of which had fallen into the pasta itself.   When we expressed dismay, the server looked at us like we were stupid and said "it's just a GARNISH."

Sigh.   I don't know how much clearer our daughter could have been.

[magician5]

Has anyone ever heard where people are talking about someone who has passed away, and they talk about how "so-and-so did/was XYZ when they were alive." Why do they feel the need to say "when they were alive"? Unless you believe in zombies or resurrection, wouldn't it be naturally assumed that anything you say about a deceased person would be applied to the time before they became deceased? 

If I were talking about my Mom, I would say "My Mom loved musicals." I wouldn't say "My Mom loved musicals, when she was alive." If her taste had changed during her lifetime, then I would say something like "My Mom loved musicals when she was older," or maybe "My Mom loved listening to musicals up to the day she died." All these phrases either give a fact about my mother and/or put the character trait into chronological context.

Am I just crazy/nitpicking? It just seems strange to my ears when people make a big deal about someone doing something "when they were alive" - when else would the person in question have done it?

So did you ever have the temptation to say "Yes, she really loved musicals when she was alive, but she completely stopped once she was dead"?

[Softly Spoken]

Has anyone ever heard where people are talking about someone who has passed away, and they talk about how "so-and-so did/was XYZ when they were alive." Why do they feel the need to say "when they were alive"? Unless you believe in zombies or resurrection, wouldn't it be naturally assumed that anything you say about a deceased person would be applied to the time before they became deceased? 

If I were talking about my Mom, I would say "My Mom loved musicals." I wouldn't say "My Mom loved musicals, when she was alive." If her taste had changed during her lifetime, then I would say something like "My Mom loved musicals when she was older," or maybe "My Mom loved listening to musicals up to the day she died." All these phrases either give a fact about my mother and/or put the character trait into chronological context.

Am I just crazy/nitpicking? It just seems strange to my ears when people make a big deal about someone doing something "when they were alive" - when else would the person in question have done it?

So did you ever have the temptation to say "Yes, she really loved musicals when she was alive, but she completely stopped once she was dead"?

No, because I personally am comforted by the image of my mother relaxing in heaven and enjoying the soundtrack to R & H's The King and I that the angels provided upon her request.

[Slartibartfast]

I guess I can understand the ". . . when she was alive" thing because even though the fact that a loved one is deceased may be obvious to the speaker, it's not always immediately memorable or obvious to everyone else.  I would have to stop and think a minute to remember which of my best friends' grandparents are still alive, for example - even when the deaths were fairly recent.  "My grandmother loved going to musicals" could imply she's dead, or she's now in a nursing home and can't go anymore, or she has dementia, or she was so upset when "Cats" closed that she couldn't bring herself to ever attend a musical again.  The ". . . when she was alive" cues the listener in to asking follow-up questions like "What was her favorite?" instead of anything like "What does she do for fun now?" or "Does she hope to be in one someday?"   

[Thipu1]

Had a good one yesterday.

I was in the card store and there was a woman engaged in a discussion with a clerk about tea roses, of all things.  She was convinced, and vehement about it, that the flowers are called tea roses because of their orange - brown color. 

I didn't get involved but I was always under the impression that the flowers were named because their fragrance was reminiscent of tea.  They come in several colors, as I understand it. 

[EnoughAlready22]

Not an exchange, but something I saw that made my brain hurt.

I was at Target recently and saw a toddler-sized onesie with "Single and LOVING it!" written on it.

WHY?

See, that actually amuses me and I usually hate that kind of thing on babies/toddlers (or adults for that matter). Possibly because my brain interprets it as a mockery of the whole idea of writing your relationship status across your chest, but maybe that's just me.

It sure beats the 50-something woman I saw today, whose shirt read "I <3 BOYS!"   

That reminds me of when my ex and I first split up.  He came over to pick up our son and was wearing a shirt that said "I love hot moms".  I just looked at him and said "Uh, thanks?".

[Kariachi]

The talk of travel agencies in the 'Never Shopping There' thread reminded me of a brainhurt from several years back.

I was dating long distance, and had decided to pay my then-girlfriend's way out here so she could spend christmas with me and my family. I sent her several hundred dollars, as well as links to flights at the appropriate times, with enough stops in the sort of airports where her claustrophobia wouldn't act up much, with plenty of time to move between gates, and all for a good chunk less than I'd sent her, roundtrip. All she had to do was choose and book, and she'd have spare cash on hand to do whatever she pleased.

I asked if she'd booked her flight yet in our next phonecall, only to be told that yes, but she'd had to shell out her own cash because I hadn't sent enough to cover it.  Odd, because what I sent her should have covered the tickets, baggage, etc with spare.

Turns out that she had decided to ignore my links and suggestions and had instead gone to a local travel agent. She spent twice what she could have, didn't have time to eat because the time between her flights was small compared to how much ground she had to cover between gates, and was stopped off in one of the busiest, most crowded airports in the country. You could feel the stress and anxiety I'd been trying to avoid rolling off her.

Suddenly, I understand her 'I don't like to fly'.

[ladyknight1]

Not an exchange, but something I saw that made my brain hurt.

I was at Target recently and saw a toddler-sized onesie with "Single and LOVING it!" written on it.

WHY?

See, that actually amuses me and I usually hate that kind of thing on babies/toddlers (or adults for that matter). Possibly because my brain interprets it as a mockery of the whole idea of writing your relationship status across your chest, but maybe that's just me.

It sure beats the 50-something woman I saw today, whose shirt read "I <3 BOYS!"   

That reminds me of when my ex and I first split up.  He came over to pick up our son and was wearing a shirt that said "I love hot moms".  I just looked at him and said "Uh, thanks?".

There was a man at DS's high school orientation wearing a shirt proclaiming his love for MIL*F's. I couldn't believe it. 

[gramma dishes]

It sure beats the 50-something woman I saw today, whose shirt read "I <3 BOYS!"   

Is it possible that she meant she loved her grandchildren who all happened to be boys? 

[snowflake]

The parking one reminds me of a co-worker I once had.  She never was the sharpest crayon in the box so pretty much every conversation was in this vein.

She called in late one morning because of "car trouble."  (BG: She lived in a very hip part of town where on-street parking was limited.)  She came in steaming and insisted that her lateness was not her fault.  It was the fault of the pigs who towed her car!  They SHOULD NOT have towed her car!  Nope!  They did it to be mean. 

Me: (Trying to be sympathetic) Well, did you tell them where you parked it?  You can tell them what the signs say.
Her: Yes, and they said that since it was in a no-parking zone, they were going to tow it.
Me: (Trying not to make a disgusted face.) Well...uh...I mean...really?  You didn't expect that?
Her: They aren't allowed to tow it in the first 24 hours.
Me: Oh, I've never heard of that law.
Her: And that cow wasn't even a real police officer.  She was just some <insult> who ran the tow yard.  I told her that she had no right to keep my car from me because she wasn't a police officer but she was acting all hoity-toity.
I don't know what else they expect me to do!  The entire block in front of my building is no-parking!  I move my car every 24 hours!  What else can I do?

The stupid thing is that she refused to pay the $30/month to park under her building.  The ticket she got was $250!  Normally, I'd have expected $40 which means she wasn't just parked in a loading zone or something like that, she was probably parked to block traffic or a fire lane.

I finally got her to stop ranting to me by telling her she should look into contesting the ticket.  But the whole time I was imagining some judge throwing a gavel at her.

[2littlemonkeys]

That actually reminds me of a completely different, very brain-hurty city sticker problem. We used to live in the same city as you (I'm assuming. Lots of wind?), and both our cars had years' worth of Chicago city stickers on our windshields, since those bastards were almost impossible to remove. Eventually, we moved out of state, about a 3-hour drive from the city, right before the new city stickers were released. A few weeks after our move, my husband had some business back in our old city. He'd already registered the car in New State, and it had a New State plate, which should indicate that he did not live in Chicago.  But he still got a City Sticker violation for the car when it was parked on the street. We assume the officer had seen all the stickers but the new one, and he'd been in "gotcha!" mode, and written the violation--including the license plate number, for an out-of-state plate!--without thinking.

That's not the only brain-hurty part, though. It took us over a year to fight that ticket. There was a lot of runaround: "But you didn't have the sticker!" "But we live in Michigan! We don't need the sticker!" "But there was no sticker!" Argh.

Ugh, that stinks.  I'm impressed you were able to fight it successfully! And yes, that is the city of which I speak.     Those things are hard to get off.  And now you can get dinged for not removing the previous year's stickers.  I don't know how my husband gets it off but I bet it includes a razor blade, some Goo Gone and a lot of swearing.