To the guy in the North Halifax Library computer room who started banging a chair against a cubicle in order to get two people to stop talking, and then called them “retards”. First of all, they weren’t talking very loudly. Second of all, being rude yourself in order to make other people stop being rude is hypocritical and childish. Grow up. —Rude is as rude does
This article appears in Feb 19-25, 2015.
this bitch is only legit if op is not one of the two yakkers.
THE DYNAMIC UNCONSCIOUS IN ACTION
“Second of all, being rude yourself I order to make other people stop being rude is hypocritical and childish. Grow up.” Rude is s rude does
But as Freud so clearly taught, we are not entirely aware of what we think and so we act for reasons that have little to do with our conscious thoughts. What we have here is clearly a case of the “dynamic unconscious” in action.
A pleasure as always,
Cheerio!
So we can call people retards now?
SPOOFING
My last four comments on today’s bitches were spoofs. In view of my comments “On the Fatuity & Dishonesty of Psychology” (“Do you remember me”) I thought this would have been obvious but for some retards I guess it wasn’t.
A pleasure as always,
Cheerio!
^^^ The satirical nature of your comments was evident given your obvious disdain for psychiatry in previous posts. However, how do you know that this wasn’t obvious to everyone? Were you expecting written acknowledgement or simply a flurry of likes?
Your need for recognition may indicate what Jung referred to as a Father Complex whereby an adult compulsively seeks the approval that was denied during their childhood. A few years of psychoanalysis might clear that up. Good luck!
What did you expect him to say? “Excuse me, could you lower your voices a bit so I may focus on my reading. Thank you.” or something?
RSVPS
The Pussy (02/23, 5:14PM)
As with so much psychological (and psychiatric) advice yours to the effect that I didn’t know that my satire was obvious to everyone was misdirected. Look at the comment of The Retard (12:19PM) just above mine. Clearly he did not find it obvious and so it seemed only logical to suppose that others didn’t as well. I trust you can understand this.
In he same way your claim that my comment was prompted by a “need for recognition” was similarly misconceived. My purpose, as always, is the discovery of meaning and truth. Since both are philosophical rather than psychological concepts, Jung would be utterly impotent to engage either. Sadly however, you appear to be one of his loyal acolytes.
Son of Crispy Critters (9:02PM)
I would reply to your comment if I had the foggiest idea what it meant, but unfortunately I don’t.