objection to your quoting me
This is what happens when you don’t check your email: You miss the hilarity.
objection to your quoting me
From: Sharon Wildey
To: Issendai
Date: 2017-04-10 09:49Your article regarding abandoned parents which seeks to quote both myself and my book is misleading and false. Please remove these offensive passages and send me proof that you have done so.
Sharon Wildey is the author of an undercooked dog’s breakfast of a book titled Abandoned Parents: The Devil’s Dilemma: The Causes and Consequences of Adult Children Abandoning Their Parents. It’s beloved of a certain class of estranged parents, offering up insights such as:
There may be psychological diagnosis that can be made about the adult child who lives this hate filled life, and perhaps should be made, but first and above all it is a moral failure and in some cases even evil.
There is not a crueler action to take against another human being than ostracism, abandonment and alienation and especially when that other human being is your parent.
I quoted it on a couple-few pages of my site. Those quotes… are still up. I emailed Wildey an invitation to explain how my analyses are misleading and false, with an eye toward changing my analyses if she makes a fair case, but somehow I don’t think much will change in the days to come.
Add a Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Oh my god. That is too freaking funny.
“You claimed that I said things I actually said and it’s making me look bad! You can’t do that!”
“And then send me proof! Because I can’t just look at your page!”
It makes sense, though. If you don’t think others can trust their own eyes and they should believe what people say about themselves, why would you trust your own eyes? Better to get the other person to tell you what you’re supposed to think.
“It’s not my assertions that are misleading and false; it’s the quotes taken directly from my book and properly attributed to me that are misleading and false.”
aka, “I didn’t write what I wrote. I didn’t publish what I published. I didn’t send this email to you that I sent to you.”
Smells like gas-don’t light a match. For EPs it’s a short step through the parameters of reality if ya wanna whine and troll. I’d be embarrassed if I wrote that crap too. They simply can not resist repeatedly pounding home the case for their Estranged ACs and then claim to “have no idea whhhyyyyy” the AC walked away-never to return.
This is about as cray cray as you can be and still be walking the streets.
Literally everything one needs to know about Sharon Wildey: http://m.openjurist.org/47/f3d/1475/wildey-v-a-springs.
I got the impression that the court was distinctly unhappy about the case and was glad for a reason to throw it out.
The irony is that the breach of promise suit was over in a few years. Then Wildey turned around and sued the friend who okayed the letter that got the breach of promise case thrown out, and that case dragged on for something like THIRTEEN YEARS. That case, Wildey vs. Paulsen, was a wonder of incompetence on both sides. Final ruling: Wildey was awarded $100 for alterations to her wedding dress.
I didn’t know about the second case! Off to google …
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.iadtc.org/resource/resmgr/imported/publicationpdfs/19.1.69.pdf
Oof, that’s a mess. Really, both of them were attorneys, and both of them should have known better. And I can’t imagine Paulsen is entirely free of dysfunction if her response to “I want to sue my ex-fiance because he dumped me” was “Sounds great, let me help.”
And I think I’m especially appalled because I have a broken engagement in my own past, where I was also the dumpee. It sucked. A lot. I am fully empathetic to how much it sucks. I was heartbroken, moped around in a good friend’s house while bemoaning my cruel fate, did some therapy, journalled a lot. But it never even entered my head to sue my former fiancee, good Lord.
But yes, who can even say why Wildey’s children might want nothing to do with her? Truly, it is a mystery!
Ohhh, because they are defective children don’tchaknow. They refuse to “kid” the “right way.” Yes, those mysterious rejects of Adult Children who estranged because they are ” hateful,” “spoilt,” “and just because they CAN” because “they want CONTROL!” I’d be ever so grateful if someone who was obviously so much of a threat to my well-being they were intent on commiting pre-meditated “homicide” for their absence in my life. But ooooo no.
Thanks for the link. Nothing screams “retribution” or “Imma Gold Digger” like suing the guy you love bombed for money when he had an opportunity to come up for air and saw the scam for what it was. Yep, tender widdle feeblings, berry, berry tender.
Shameless. Absolutely shameless.
Apparently all relationships are monetized: Hence the book on how awful those reprobate kids are which paradoxically reveals far, far more about the disordered thinking of the author.
With friends like this, who needs friends?! So the friend is somehow responsible for her decision to send a letter-let’s just smear the responsibility for my adult choices all over my dear friend. What a classic PD response. Professional Victimhood apparently is a job description-no wait, a “life calling.” No one is ever “allowed” to say No to me! In that old classic “The Gift of Fear,” Gavin DeBecker continually reminds the reader anyone who refuses to take “No” for an answer is trying to control you. No DNA Exemption there. Apparently the Control on their XBox Estranged ACs is just as defective as those ungrateful little bitches/bastards.
In any event, both situations are the very incarnation of legal proxy abuse and shameless money grubbing. Prostitutes demand financial renumeration for their “services” in much the same way, this one demands financial renumeration for her “services” and her Butt Hurt.
I thought the court showed a lot of restraint when they didn’t write, “In conclusion, Sharon knew Richard for less than four months before they got engaged, he broke up with her, and she decided to sue him. Jesus Christ, Sharon, get your shit together.”
The second case just reminds me of a labor law professor I had once. He was really fond of reminding us students, “don’t spend $10,000 on a case that’s only worth $5,000.” Maybe he could’ve helped Wildey and Paulsen.
Now she decides to complain?? Your pages on estrangement haven’t been updated in almost a year… she’s the one choosing to bring attention to them again. And I don’t see how quoting her word for word could be twisting anything.
I suggested she’s wrong. Clearly I’m twisting something, because if I got it straight, she would come off as sympathetic.
No one has the right not to be offended. If you were literally lying about what she said, that would be one thing, but you directly quoted her. She does not get to control how you interpret her words.
Some people will never be satisfied until they can control everyone else’s thoughts.
Yep. And I’m not entirely certain she objects to my interpretation. She may just not like my page, and want her quotes off it.
This is why we have fair use: for dealing with people who want to control what other people say about their work.
OMG, Sharon Wildey. I’m almost jealous. She’s like the pinnacle of PD dysfunction and she’s so entertainingly public about it. I love the way that EPs handwave away the lunacy of her private life like it’s completely irrelevant to whether there’s any legitimacy to what she says.
I do hope we’re going to get The Second Coming of an Estranged Parent. It was fun the last time.
Yes, this was such a protracted period of getting to know the guy-what, 2/3 months of phone calls and maybe a total of 14 days in person? That’s the very definition of “Love Bombing” in action.
Much like a horrid case of the other kind of gas, they keep repeating as demonstrated by the serial marriages: If first ya don’t chisel enough money off your ex-spouse, try try again. Sounds predatory to me.
(And then still manages to go bankrupt even when representing herself in all the protracted court proxy abuse.)
Did you see that she wrote a new book? If only I could find an extra $8.50 to buy it so I could read “a short message to estranged adult children from a third party ie the author. The purpose of this book is to provide a written method of communication to parents who wish to address the estrangement with their children while avoiding as much emotional turmoil as possible.” http://a.co/4Wj7TcA
$8.50 for a 24-page pamphlet designed to be bought by estranged parents and sent to their estranged children? Marketers assume retirees are loaded, but man, that’s a callous application of the principle.
At least, I assume that’s what the book is designed for. Surely no one who’s been cut off by all five of their children would lack the empathy to understand how such a pamphlet would come across to an estranged adult child.
That’s what I assumed it was for, but wow. What kind of failure at basic human relationships do you have to be to think that you can fix something like this by paying someone else for words to give to your kid? Not your fault, after all, so why should you do any heavy lifting? If my mother hadn’t already done far worse things, this would probably be the thing to make me certain that nothing was going to change.
I also wonder if the grammar is as abysmal as I expect it to be.
Could be worse. While still estranged my Mom sent me a book on making more money. Financial abuse was a major thing with her and I was supposed to be her retirement plan.
Bonus: she sent the same book to my brother.
Welp, I better get cracking to make more money to send to the woman I hope to never see again for the rest of my life!
You’d be surprised how completely unoriginal EPs really are; after all this entire series of posts underscore the common features of EPs, right?! They have no compunction about plagerizing letters to their “ungrateful little brats” from other publications so it’s not a surprise a serial marital grubber would try to financially exploit the EP market. After all, estranged adult children are attempting “homicide” on their abusive parents so what’s a few bucks when your very life is at stake? It’s amusing as hell a flagrant histrionic would use the phrase “while avoiding as much emotional turmoil as possible.”
Yeah, she’d know all about that. Sigh.
I’m an early 30s-something who has gone NC with his father. But God, I hope you’re sued.
You’re such an arrogant know-it-all who thinks he knows anything and can do anything he wants, indeed with a God complex, that justice demands you’re driven out, and if quoting your correspondents from private email conversations, who’ve given you no permission to (the fact that you do this all over your blog is further proof of your arrogance) then more power for their elbows.
Uh oh, looks like fleas.
Or the author herself!
Is there anywhere I can read the post she’s emailed you about? I want to see your analysis!