Also, reread and make sure you've got all the Rs and Ss straight -- you lost me halfway through, and I think there must be a typo. It's generally clear, but puzzling in detail.
I was, was R saying "you're going to break up with me some day!", and then, ba-ba-bum, R broke up with S! Because, meh.
Or was R saying things like "you're going to leave me for a man, one day, aren't you? Probably my very own father?", and then one day...
"S just had her pronouns backwards"
R had her pronouns backwards, no?
Also, reread and make sure you've got all the Rs and Ss straight -- you lost me halfway through, and I think there must be a typo.
I think the first "S" here should be "R".
Nope! S just had her pronouns backwards, and was informing S of all the things that were in store for her*.
3 should start "I mean,", not "I was,". Or possibly should start with something even more eloquent than that.
The Rs and Ss confused me too, but I think the "S just had her pronouns wrong" was a sarcastic statement. Not sure, though. If I'm reading this right, it went down something like this:
R: "You're going to cheat on me, break my heart, and dump me, I just know it!"
S: "No, I'd never do that to you. I love you."
[*R* cheats on *S*, breaks her heart, and dumps her.]
R: "See! I told you it would happen!! Why don't you listen to me?!?"
This assumes that R *really* said "YOU are going to do these horrible things" and was correctly heard. It's possible R said "*I'm* going to do those horrible things," and S willfully misheard/misunderstood her.
Upon preview, pwned by urple.
Holy shit. I didn't understand the OP, and now I don't understand the comments. This is the first Unfogged post I can think of that was just, like, too hard.
I'll read with a pen and paper handy from now on.
Oh man. Ok, I fixed the 2nd paragraph. Does that help? Did I do it elsewhere?
The wisdom of not using single letter pseudonyms is once again demonstrated.
I agree with LB. The general thrust is clear, but the details are confusing. Maybe fake names would make it easier to follow? Presidents would be traditional.
I was, was R saying "you're going to break up with me some day!", and then, ba-ba-bum, R broke up with S! Because, meh.
Or was R saying things like "you're going to leave me for a man, one day, aren't you? Probably my very own father?", and then one day...
In between these two examples. I'm having trouble remembering specifics, but on the scale of "You're going to abruptly change your mind and stop speaking to me" or "you're going to whimsically drop these big plans we're making".
11, ok, OP is revised with Sally and Rachel.
I think this happens quite a lot. If someone is a cheater, for example, s/he'll tend to be the one in the relationship who is super-jealous and suspicious about where the other one is and whom s/he's with. If you're not a cheater, it takes a lot of effort to imagine your partner going to all that trouble to screw around and lie about it. I've never been able to imagine how I'm going to get fucked over in a relationship, and then afterwards, I realize that my partner was telling me the entire time, when he accused me of various future cruelties he imagined me committing.
I suppose using 'Sally' is all right, so long as she's not the bad guy.
I think it's basically impossible to imagine the internal narrative of other people. When we really try to put ourselves in the other person's position, the best we can do try to reverse engineer their behavior by thinking why we would act that way.
Really horrible people have really horrible internal narratives, so they imagine the people around them are planning on doing the same really horrible things they're thinking about doing.
I think it's basically impossible to imagine the internal narrative of other people. When we really try to put ourselves in the other person's position, the best we can do try to reverse engineer their behavior by thinking why we would act that way.
Probably often when two people get along well, it's because they're tapping a similar internal narrative.
"S just had her pronouns backwards"
I can see ti would be incredibly annoying if ehs did ti a lot. Ouy might break up with reh for taht alone.
14 fits my experience. I think it goes well beyond relationships. Neocons are excellent examples of this, at least the more outspoken ones.
My chair sometimes invents crazy plots that he believes are going on in the other departments, ie Physics is trying to grab our courses so that they can justify adding another position. (Which may be true, but it's just an example.)
At any rate, my mind is now spinning with the possibility that he may be describing himself.
Probably often when two people get along well, it's because they're tapping a similar internal narrative.
Lacan has this whole model of how when you love somebody, you're loving how well the image of them lines up with your petit object a, which is in turn some deep memory of an image of love. A good relationship is when all those reflected images line up, for a while.
Probably often when two people get along well, it's because they're tapping a similar internal narrative the same third party.
At any rate, my mind is now spinning with the possibility that he may be describing himself.
People also have an unfortunate tendency to adopt the values of their organizations. If you see others profiting by bureaucratic finagling, it's awfully tempting to engage in it yourself.
Neocons are excellent examples
All cons are excellent examples. Think "class warfare."
My chair sometimes invents crazy plots
Me too! Like, this one time, it totally moved when I was trying to sit down and I fell on the floor.
24: I think it's basically true of liberals, as well. After 9/11, I heard people seriously advance the theory that it happened because the US refused to sign the Kyoto treaty. It was the only thing they could imagine being serious enough to blow shit up over.
Personally, it took me a long time to see conservatives clearly, because I basically invented a fantasy based on what would make me be a conservative. I had a much higher opinion of conservatives before interacting with so many of them on the internet forced me to discard the illusions.
I've lost the ability to talk about management issues with one of my coworkers because he keeps ascribing insane motives to the people we manage and I can't argue against crazy. For example, one of the people I manage said "I want to do X because it would be good for my career development." My coworker responded, "He doesn't want to do X at all. He wants you to think he wants to do X because you're ambitious and he knows you'll like him more if he acts ambitious too." How can you argue with that?
Just go with it? "You might be right. Tell you what -- let's give him enough rope to hang himself with by giving him the chance. When he balks, we'll know what's really going on." Matches the paranoia level, but comes out in a sane place?
At the time, Sally and I analyzed that Rachel
This hurts me.
A friend of mine constantly uses "discerned" where heebie's using "analyzed", and while "discerned" at least does take that kind of complement, it was clear that what she meant by it was "supposed".
I heard people seriously advance the theory that it happened because the US refused to sign the Kyoto treaty
Jesus H. Christ.
32: [obligatory reference to Kids in the Hall "Ascertained" sketch]
A good relationship is when all those reflected images line up, for a while.
And now I'm depressed.
The OP was prompted by that neutrino-time travel thing, wasn't it? Or will it be so prompted in the future? Who can tell?
a failure to imagine that someone else operates differently than you
You know, this is something that has gotten me in trouble occasionally. Not so much the failure to imagine that someone operates differently, but not knowing when to apply this assumption. If someone *does* operate differently, is there anything useful I can do with that information?
Particularly in analysis-in-the-aftermath situations when something has gone wrong in a friendship or romance, I find that a willingness to grant that someone works differently than I do has just interfered with finally facing the fact that they were probably an asshole all along so I can move on.
At other times Sally told me "Rachel says I never hear what she's saying. I don't know what to do to convince her that I am listening." ...yes, exactly.
After twisting my small brain into knots, I think I finally get the main point of the post, but this part keeps holding me up. Is the idea that Rachel was not listening to what Sally was saying? Or something about the convincing?
What of the possibility that both were right -- i.e., that neither Sally nor Rachel were listening, or that Sally really was capable of committing horrible future crime x?
Also, doesn't "projection" in this context mean something totally different? I AM CONFUSED.
Or wait, now the projection idea is altering my understanding of the post. This whole experience has been a wild intellectual ride.
I can relate to 37. I have another failure mode in which I don't grasp that the other person can't imagine other people operating differently than themselves. This leads to them thinking I am a crazy asshole for attributing motives to a third party which are unintelligible to the second party. Why would I make such obviously erroneous attributions if not to fuck with my interlocutor? Assholishness, evidently.
You'll have no problem understanding this post.
Or, wait, I had no problem understanding this post.
That's what I meant.
Is the idea that Rachel was not listening to what Sally was saying?
Right.
Also, doesn't "projection" in this context mean something totally different? I AM CONFUSED.
Still? Or does 40 mean you're fine now?
I will be confused when I read this thread.
44 -- No, I think I've got it now. Here's how I would categorize some of the issues:
(1) Ascribing to other people the horrible motives and feelings you can't face up to in yourself. This, I believe, is the classic, Freudian sense of "projection"; i.e., I desperately want to cheat but can't admit that, so I accuse my partner of always wanting to cheat.
(2) Claiming (perhaps accurately) that the other party is engaging in the some mutual relationship failure to which you are also a co-party. "You aren't listening to me" can, and usually does, mean both that the partner isn't listening and that the speaker isn't listening back; it's a communication breakdown. "We never talk about my feelings" is often in the same category. Not really "projection."
(3) False accusations of (1), which is a particularly powerful dick move if you're in fact behaving in poor behavior. I.e., the cheater who says to the person worried about cheating "you're just projecting."
behaving in poor behavior in this ever changing world in which we live in.
This was a hot mess, heebie.
||
While we are complaining about human behavior, let me complain about some coworkers.
They are re-orienting my office so that the back entrance will be the front one and access to work spaces will be limited through a key code system.
They are also tearing down a wall so that they can expand a room to be big enough to hold functions in it. The Housing Team Leaders (5 of them) were all there. They were supposed to go into a small-ish room currently filled hotel-style by rehab specialists. Yesterday, one or two of them decided that this was not acceptable and decided to kick my team and some other people out of our large room which fits about 20 people with laptops and no desktops. We were told this casually without even a memo or e-mail, and they moved our stuff today. I have a designated spot, because I had to get a keyboard and ergonomic chair. I don't know where I'll wind up.
Rehab specialists are supposed to spend more time in the group homes, but half of them don't have functioning wifi. FML.
|>
(1) Ascribing to other people the horrible motives and feelings you can't face up to in yourself. This, I believe, is the classic, Freudian sense of "projection"; i.e., I desperately want to cheat but can't admit that, so I accuse my partner of always wanting to cheat.
The point of the post was to describe the classic, Freudian projection in real life, and how bizarre-yet-real a phenomenon it is.
What's the origin of 'hot mess'? Some kind of food metaphor, or something more unpleasant?
1 to 50. The post doesn't actually contain any real-life descriptions of projection, just an assertion that the former lover of a friend, like, totally projected. A lot.
I think you have some very interesting stories in your head, they just didn't make it into the post. I'm guessing that was done for reasons of anonymity, but it left the post a little thin for anyone who isn't reading it with those stories already also in their head as well.
I kept wanting to read Rachel as Rafael and then wondering when Jesse was going to enter the picture.
FML.
In keeping with the post, this actually means 'fuck your life'? Or perhaps 'fuck their life', the 'they' being your team members without designated spots.
51: It involved a defective glue gun, six chickens, twelve product liability lawyers, and a woman in Fresno with serious allergies.
51: http://bitchmagazine.org/post/is-christian-siriano-making-a-hot-mess-of-the-term-quottrannyquot
I didn't mean for 52 to come across as bitchy as maybe it did come across as.
55: They didn't have designated spots before; it's just that there are fewer spots to go around and we're not next to our supervisors office--which is a pain given how often one needs help with small crises. (Other people sit in my spot when I'm not there.)
Our room was always kind of loud, so now the loud people will be jammed in with the super quiet people, and we don't know where our filing cabinets are going to fit. Probably somewhere in the room we're being asked to vacate. It will also be harder for me to collaborate with my team mates.
It does suck worse for other people. It's the decision making process, more than anything, that's frustrating. And it just makes us all hate our jobs that tiny bit more.
I think you have some very interesting stories in your head, they just didn't make it into the post. I'm guessing that was done for reasons of anonymity, but it left the post a little thin for anyone who isn't reading it with those stories already also in their head as well.
Almost as though she failed to imagine that someone else operated differently than her.
I kid. I kid, because I'm trying to avoid work. And so am picking fights. Sorry!
I would prefer to say FOL, but FTLs would work too. Of course, in the context of my work, that stands for "Flexible Team Leader."
The post doesn't actually contain any real-life descriptions of projection, just an assertion that the former lover of a friend, like, totally projected. A lot.
Right, but I responded to 1 in 12, you bitch.
There are no examples in 12. There are examples of things that are "on the scale of" the examples that are in your head.
(Although, re-reading 12, I see that actually you say "I'm having trouble remembering specifics", which means maybe you don't actually even have any examples in your head. Which makes me distrust all of this. How do we know it's not you that's projecting?)
Urple is projecting his projections of projectors projecting projecting.
What's the origin of 'hot mess'? Some kind of food metaphor, or something more unpleasant?
In my interpretation, it's both: namely, vomit, or possibly excrement.
Those are basically what I remember of the real examples. I might have gotten kind of bored over-analyzing all the long, endless conversations that went nowhere and were later recounted to me.
You're no longer making an effort to be the best blogger you can be, are you?
67: You're still determined to be the most obnoxious commenter though!
I just made up a drinking game.
Here's how it works: whenever urple posts a comment, on any topic, he takes a drink.
Tell me that wouldn't be fun as hell.
It's my belief that the blog needs more vague, gossipy one-sided posts.
70: mmm hm. They totally said you would say that.
I'm not trying to be critical of the post. I thought it was fantastic. Top notch. I'm just trying to help explain why some other people seemed to have issues with it.
They should go hang out in the swoopy font thread. It's just the kind of boring topic I thought would appeal to them.
That thread was better when there was more really top-notch signpainting.
This thread is not about me, is it.
I've taken over a job that involves taking students to a lecture series in a different city. The hosts changed the ticket policy this year so that you must show up in person, and limit two tickets per person, and tickets are available at 8 am on a Monday. What a fucking pain in the ass. I can't really see a way to get enough tickets.
...The woman at the ticket office just called me back. What an incredibly nice person. I still have to show up for tickets but she put me on a mailing list and stuff.
I've taken over a job in a different city. The hosts show up in person. What a fucking. I can't really sell enough tickets.
I've taken over a different city. The hosts changed in person, on a Monday. What the ass. I can't really see tickets.
I've taken over a job that involves taking students to a lecture series in a different city.
Holy smokes. I would not like to do this, with or without ticket complications.
Mmm. It sounds like an incredible hassle and probably not something you're really getting paid for.
I've taken over taking students. The year must limit two person. What a ass. I can't see.
I've taken over students in a different city. The hosts changed the policy, and limit two per person fucking in the ass. I can't get enough.
I've taken over students in a different city. The hosts changed the policy, and limit two per person fucking in the ass. I can't get enough.
I'm kind of shocked the Mineshaft didn't get there till the 4th try.
I have taken over a city. My host is different, by policy. I can ticket asses per person.
80 made me LOL in a spectacular spray-food-all-over-my-android manner.
79 ff. (et seq., whatever) are quality unfogged work.
Ahem. Back on topic, from 14: I realize that my partner was telling me the entire time, when he accused me of various future cruelties he imagined me committing
And related remarks about all this accusing each other of feared future slights: I'm horrified by the idea of sustaining a relationship like this. It seems ... needy? whiny? horribly insecure? of the complainer.
I mean, sure, if you have concerns that the partner is withholding or withdrawing from you, that should be discussed, but I'm getting the impression that there are not a few relationships in which one party is fairly frequently declaring, whether hysterically or dramatically or sneerily or with an advance disappointed sigh, that the other party is probably about to do something bad, isn't s/he?
Ugh. I'm pretty sure I'd want to have a talk in which I explained that I couldn't be constantly put on the defensive like this, and what exactly is the problem?
All I can say is that trying to make sense of this post and this thread has reinforced my never-dating-again position. I'm exhausted.
Just run straight to Vegas and get married by an Elvis impersonator and your potential dating worries are over. In fact, marry an Elvis impersonator for best results.
Elvis Crespo, surely.
Blelvis, surely.
my laughter at 76 et seq. led my business partner to falsely accuse me of exchanging flirty texts with my mercenary. but she's paranoid. I stopped texting with him like an hour ago. (and wasn't flirting!!)
Alameida: not buying the faux protestions. That could be a new thead: evaluate the flirty text messages. Is she setting herself up? Or just slowly crushing him?
in the course of working, also, it's become clear that I'm being massively under-paid (10% rather than 20%) and that the proposed budget is insufficient. the former's my fault and the result of agreeing to do it for a friend, ad hoc; the second, mmm, pretty much on me also. I underestimated due to never having done such a big project before. he's amenable to upping the budget I think, but there's no way I can double my fee on him, it wouldn't be fair. I am unable to think of any "that's just the situation, there's no real possibility of changing it now" expressions that don't lend themselves to sexual double entendres, so I'll just leave the preceding part of the sentence. hey--it is what it is.
Eh. You are prob not going to break his heart too much. Maybe he will realize that he has underpaid and get you some star sapphires! Alternatively, he will think that you undercharged him massively because you are totally into him.
still enjoying myself though. picking out colors is fun! I actually enjoy choosing between various types/colorways of fabric braid! swatches! we'll see how I feel about it when a) I have to manage contractors and b) he's back from afghanistan. I suppose I can always turn the latter against the former should they start giving me too much trouble. though the truth is I'm probably more terrifying in this situation: ang moh women are looked upon as mysteriously volatile and impossible to please. you may insert your own jokes about colonialism here, if you have any.
One of my college roommates lives in Narnia. Since he doesn't have kids, he should have tons of money to spend at your store.
my business partner thinks we should never do this type of work even if properly paid, because even with an easy client like mine (in the sense that he told me generally what he wanted but is letting me make all the decisions) it's just a huge PITA. shut up. but I say, it's not as though it's some non-remunerative line of work people turn to when their job application at mcd's gets turned down. if they pay us the 20% and we get kick-backs from sellers of furniture (we do), then it's worth it? but we decided against doing any more custom work because of back-seat-driving and we-asked-for-it-but-we-don't-like-it problems. isn't ID just that, but all the time? more it's a question do we want our business to grow in this direction? I think yes and she thinks no.
I'm pretty sure I'd want to have a talk in which I explained that I couldn't be constantly put on the defensive like this, and what exactly is the problem?
Ha ha I wonder if that ever came up. (Yes, all the time.) Of course, now I'm old and I see this stuff a mile off, but when I was 19-24, no, it didn't, and I'd just blithely ask not to be put on the defensive and what exactly is the problem. Now I solve it by just not getting into monogamous relationships at all.
will: I am not as un-self-aware as all that. these particular text messages were not, as a matter of fact, flirty; but have I been flirting with him in text messages generally, obviously yes. I though that was pretty clear.
because of back-seat-driving and we-asked-for-it-but-we-don't-like-it problems. isn't ID just that, but all the time?
As my wife's brother (I'll call him "§" for clarity) recounts it, one of the low points of his legal career was a case from many years back involving alleged "Interior Decorator Malpractice". Apparently when the case got called the judge wearily asked, "Can this not be settled?" § reiterated their standing settlement offer which opposing counsel* aggressively rejected, "2K? No way!" And so to expert testimony etc. it went. In the end his client was found liable for a few hundred dollars for having an air vent partially-blocked.
*The aggrieved party was the spouse of a BigLaw partner, and some junior associate had gotten the winning assignment.
Fishing with dynamite is illegal, you know.
max
['But FUN!']
my instinct is to treat the money as my own and get the best possible deal for everything, so as to maximize the budget, but my husband worries that per 99 b dude will think I'm working unnecessarily hard on the project because I am totally into him. of course, if my husband knew how much I had ever flirted with dude in the past he would be somewhat unhappy, although I don't think you can complain that much about a "relationship" that has included a) no physical contact ever b) an explicit discussion about how since we weren't ever going to have sex we shouldn't hang out as much followed by c) not hanging out all that much. I flirt with everyone, anyway.
106: it's my understanding that, qua fishing, it's very effective, also.
105: yeah, exactly. so we have thought that we should go generally in the alternate direction of just putting our own creative vision forward and letting people buy it or not as they like. eventually becoming aggregators of pre-made things (as opposed to vintage) which we sell as a "line" to other furniture-sellers. my partner dreams of us not, then, ever having a shop at all. this is stupid, while I naturally dream of us having shops everywhere which offer ID services as a sideline. I have offered to relieve her of all sales duties, which will probably restore her good humor and cause her to see the error of her ways.
also re 106: it's not as easy to suddenly transform a 5-year-long friendship in which you have been harmlessly flirting the whole time into the most distant and cooly professional friendship ever as it is to advise such a course of action. or rather, not harmless the whole time, given that it seemed like some harm could eventuate from original flirting. but then you have a whole awkward conversation about not having sex, and you introduce one another to your families, and all of you hang out together, and then it's perfectly harmless to flirt (up to a point, I mean, there's a point beyond which I wouldn't flirt in any case). who can married people flirt with if not other married people? single people might take you too seriously! he's the one who's gone and made things difficult. also, given that he knows actual me and the actual situation I'm in it's an imposition on my good nature to get all sad-puppy-I-just-kicked in love with me.
I wouldn't worry too much about making him sad, assuming you're really not being confusing about whether there's a possibility that you're going to decide that you're in love with him. It's not something you can do much about within the realm of friendly interaction that you're stuck with at least until his house is done; whether he's painfully heartbroken over you is all in his head.
Now I solve it by just not getting into monogamous relationships at all
What about a monogramous relationship? It seems like a good idea, initially.
he's amenable to upping the budget I think, but there's no way I can double my fee on him, it wouldn't be fair.
An economist writes; if he's amenable to doubling the budget, and your fee is a percentage of the budget, then that's quite like doubling your fee, isn't it?
It was lightning insights like that which helped me draft the conclusion of a strategic review for a major global investment bank (said conclusion was "looks fucked to me. I resign. You're on your own. Good luck")
possibility that you're going to decide that you're in love with him
...she added, toward the end of the Projection thread.
You expect us to stop the projection or you just want to stop the projection thread?
Objection! I reject the project.
116: Some Section-8 housing is really quite nice.
113: you'd think that, but I offered to do it for a flat fee of 3K and then later we determined the 30K budget via back of the envelope guessing. subsequently I asked someone who would know what the appropriate fee was, given the amount of organizing I'm doing. also he's not amenable to doubling the budget. thanks, an economist.
111: I grant my ability to control the outcome is very limited, but since being painfully heartbroken is objectively awful, and he is my friend, then I still don't want that to happen. that's the thing, he was my actual friend, like a person whom I would call for advice sometimes. except that person didn't seem at all like the kind of person who would do so many unethical things.
when he was drinking he worked for an a/gency of the US gov't famed for doing unethical things, and I let him know at the time (when he eventually told me in any detail) I didn't approve of his job. (obviously it wasn't part of his job never to tell people about his job, or he'd be fucking that part up. OTOH he only ever told three people I know of and explained very seriously he didn't want me telling anyone. he told people he worked out of the US embassy, which was perfectly true.) his initial contention was, various elected politicians put me here to do this, if you don't like it pick new ones, etc.
but then he said, you know, this actually blows, and quit his job, and seemed to get his shit together ethics-wise---he fucking converted to tibetan buddhism (not the regular boring kind)! and became a stay-at-home husband committed to tutoring their kid all the time! well, in retrospect maybe this just shows he's mercurial. anyway, I really am surprised by his recent activities. I am (as is obvious) both upset and curious to hear all about them. because they're interesting! -ly not good at all! it just seems like I gravely misjudged him or divorce has made him crazy or filthy lucre has more appeal than I've been lead to believe or?
118
... obviously it wasn't part of his job never to tell people about his job, or he'd be fucking that part up. ...
It most certainly is part of that sort of job not to discuss the details with outsiders. But men sometimes break the rules in order to impress women. Shocking I know.
Another possibility of course is the more lurid details were invented.
I gravely misjudged him
Resistance to admitting such a thing has been, I suspect, the root of virtually all of my heartache in life (romantic or otherwise).
Argh. This is the adultery thread, right?
A good friend of my husband's, who I'm also very fond of, just told him that he's having an affair with a married woman with two little kids. And I'm feeling a bit wrecked over it; she's going to break his heart, or her marriage is going to break up and she's going to be unhappy, or something, and there is absolutely nothing useful at all I can say or do. I'll get over being wrecked, this is not a situation that's at all directly my problem, but I hope nothing too bad happens to him or anyone else.
she's going to break his heart, or her marriage is going to break up and she's going to be unhappy, or something
Eh, not necessarily. Certainly those are possible outcomes. But sometimes these things run their course without getting discovered and everybody goes back to where they were previously, having gotten it out of their system for the time being.
True, could be nothing bad is going to happen at all. He's just chronically single, and is sounding like he's taking this hard.
124: Huh. For some reason, I took "having an affair" as meaning he was cheating on someone, too, but I guess there's no reason to assume that's necessarily the case with that phrase.
I thought that sounded ambiguous as I was writing it, but I couldn't think of a more accurate term for what it is that a single person involved with a married person is doing.
A good friend of my husband's, who I'm also very fond of, just told him that he's having an affair with a married woman with two little kids.
You can't sweat over it too much. Another 20-40 percent of your friends are having affairs, but they just haven't told you about it.
His chattiness about it is what is going to cause him heartbreak.
124: Ah. Well, if he's in lurve and his hope is that their relationship will outlive the marriage, then the odds are poor indeed. A marriage takes a long time to unravel--even after the official split--and that process often wreaks havoc on all the relationships around it, romantic or not. There's only so much emotional energy a person can spare.
128: Yeah, that's about it.
a married woman with two little kids
This sounds exactly like a description of Ms. urple. Now I'm wondering if I should be concerned.
True -- look at me gossiping about his secrets. I think this is secure, with two levels of anonymity and no one reading who knows him (or, I suppose anyone could be reading, but no one who knows him to connect him with me), but you start telling people about things, and they do get around.
128: This sounds disturbingly like the Euro.