The Transformed Wife is a blogger and a minor Twitter celebrity. In her profile she describes herself as
A wife, a mother, a grandma, and a keeper at home. Loves Jesus and is not afraid to speak Truth because it sets you free!
But I think she’s selling herself short here, because she seems to have forgotten that she is also a bold crusader against the evils of our age: feminism, witchcraft, and grouchiness.
Let’s roll the tape, or rather the tweets:
It’s just too bad God designed women to be so gullible.
Remember: Marriage and babies, good. Putting a hex on the Transformed Wife, very bad.
Apparently witchcraft and feminism are pretty much the same thing.
Uh oh, now she’s naming names!
Whatever you do, don’t dress like a slut, because that too is a sort of witchcraft.
This lady is doing it all wrong:
This tweet sounds a bit like a pitch for a fun rom-com — that is, if your version of fun involves burning in hell for all eternity:
And while you’re going about your non-witchy life, don’t be a grouch! Remember to smile or God will smite you or burn you in hell for all eternity or something.
And don’t worry about the end, which is near!
SMILE DAMMIT.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
She sounds pretty grumpy to me. She might be getting a smiting herself. As well as what @Kat mentioned about Jesus dissing people who are so pridefully religious in public. God knows if you’re a good person or not, judgy bitch, STFU. And she shouldn’t be preaching, leave that entirely to her husband. These bozos never actually comprehend what the Bible says.
I am a grumpy person. I have RBF unless I’m actively smiling. So did my dad.
By her standards, I’m a witch because I don’t have kids, but I have had cats my whole life.
@.45: Back in the day, country people had wide feet (from being barefoot) and city people had narrow ones (from wearing shoes since babyhood).
@Alan
The corset fighting video. Omg thanks I have to watch that.
@contrapangloss
I’m willing to consider that. As I’m sure you know it would be a matter of subjective judgment to decide when to use that. There are some times when I do have to take a stand.
And I appreciate that very much.
The detail is usually intended actually to confront or deal with an actual specific element of misogyny or a response to a particular misogynistic episode but I know if another person’s own orientation means that person isn’t comfortable with what I do that might be hard to see. So I want to empathize with you even though we are very different. Differences in the world are a good thing and I know that.
That is who I am.
Thanks, Stacey!
I appreciate the kindness and empathy of your response, and the boldness of your stands.
And I’m 100% happy to let you be the arbiter of subjective judgement, and promise not to pitch any fits when you decide something needs to not be behind a cut.
As far as I’m concerned, your willingness to consider is already a pretty hefty gift.
StaceySmartyPantsTwiceRemoved asked me to read her comments. She asks that specifically. I see a few others reply. Ok, if I reply too will everybody tell me off again? Is that how these feminists blogs work? Some things are ok for some people. Not for everybody though.
It seems like she’s asking me what I think. That’s what I’m saying.
To steal a line from The Good Place, Mother Forking Shirtballs.
@Howard, I’m going to try and approach this kindly.
You wrote:
Well, my dude. Not exactly.
First off, no. Not everybody will tell you off. Some people will rightfully ignore you. Some people are going to tell you off because you’re being obnoxious. Some people are going to try and explain to you that we live in a society, because they are foolishly optimistic that maybe you somehow missed the life lessons on how to live in a society and are asking these questions out of confusion.
Count me in the society explainers of foolish optimism. And, okay, yeah, I am also a little annoyed. I’m trying not to snap at you, but if you sense a little edge of annoyance, you are being more adept at reading the e-room than you have been all day.
If you (or anyone else want to actually read some conflict advice and living in a society, according to Contrapangloss, I’m hiding it under a cut because otherwise this comment is gonna get REAL long.
So, yeah.
And the nitty-gritty truth is that the only person whose emotional state and actions that you have any control over… is you. There is nothing you or anyone can say to anyone else that will actually change their behavior or feelings. Only they can change their behavior and feelings.
So, I’m not gonna touch on what Stacey needs to do here. She can figure that out on her own. She’s not the one appealing to the rest of the room for sympathy or “why is everyone picking on me.”
Her behavior here (and in future comments towards you) is actually pretty irrelevant, as far as a “Dude, you live in a society” goes. This would be true even if Stacey was actually your pal Ambrose who is ticked at you because you said his pet hedgehog was the most disgusting animal you’d ever met, and he was reacting by posting nothing to the thread but pictures of said hedgehog AT YOU, even after you recanted and said the little blighter was actually kind of cute but just not your thing.
Why am I saying this, you ask? It’s so unfair? Why am I saying that it doesn’t matter if people are being mean AT you.
Lets review the chain of events, and the probable likely events of the future, okay?
We’ll do this in general form.
Person A: Says a thing that is poorly considered and insulting / creepy / a mistake
Person B: Takes umbrage
Persons C: Explain why umbrage was taken
Person A: Apologizes
We’ll pause the retelling here. I already explained a little about what can happen next. Either Person B can accept the apology, or they can reject it. Person A cannot do anything to make them accept it. Person A can give a good apology, or a bad apology, but ultimately it is up to Person B whether they judge it acceptable.
Your apology was a little weak-sauce, but that’s an entire different essay. Even if it was a perfect apology, Person B is still not obligated to accept it. This would be true even if the roles (i.e. you were B and I was A) were reversed. Nothing to do with gender or this being a feminist space. Just a fact of life. You don’t control other people’s brains / emotions. I don’t either. So, we’ll carry on with the scenario. In the perfect world of your dreams, this would have happened.
Person A: Apologizes
Person B: “Aw thank you so much, I accept your apology, you’re a wonderful human”
Person A: I’M THE BEST HUMAN!
Persons C: Much rejoicing. Peace and prosperity in the comments.
That didn’t happen.
Person B in this case (probably correctly) assumed that your apology wasn’t genuine, either because you seem to still not grasp the idea that she wants nothing to do with you (which was the start of the whole kerfuffle) or because they’re still too mad at you. Honestly, if I were them and you’d wandered up and gone “Hey, I hear you very clearly don’t want to have a relationship, but have you considered a relationship with ME?” I’d probably also be very ticked at you, but again, that’s a side issue.
Apology can either be accepted or not, and once the apology is issued it is out of your hands and ability to control.
So, what actually happened was this:
Person A: Apologizes
Person B: I don’t like you
Person A: Um. I apologized? Why are you mean to me?
Person B: I don’t like you.
Persons C: Person A, quit while you still can.
Person B: Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. I hate your guts.
And then we had a few sorties to the tune of:
Person A: Well, how about them cowboys?
Person B: What are you still doing here, fite me.
Person A: Why are you so mean?
Person B: I see you dare fight me. You suck!
Person A: HELP I’M BEING REPRESSED! COME SEE THE VIOLENCE INHERENT IN THE SYSTEM!
And
Person B: I wonder if person A is around still BECAUSE THEY ARE TERRIBLE
Person A: Well yeah I’m still here, fite me.
Person B: YOU SUCK
Person A: SO MEAN I’M SAYING. EVERYONE SEE HOW MEAN THEY ARE?
So, basically, the situation we’ve got here is this. You’ve got two people fighting in a comments section. One person is incredibly mad and you have no control over their posts. They are probably going to continue to say you suck loudly and point at the hole you dug earlier and say how deep and creepy of a hole it is. The dwarves of Moria could not have dug deeper. They’re not wrong? It’s inconvenient for you, and you’ve tried to backfill it a little, but sometimes a hole is dug and you let too much of the original dirt drift off to refill it again.
The other person in the conversation is you. And guess what, you have control of you! Isn’t that exciting?
If you choose to continue posting (instead of ghosting off into the ether of the interwebs), the three possible things that could happen are:
1) You and Stacey magically reach an accord and live in peace. SUPER UNLIKELY.
2) One of the two of you can choose to not engage.
3) You continue to have at it until David bans one or both of you. My money would be on David bans you, because the chances of you saying something against the rules is a bit higher. Less time in the threads, more casual ignoring of the whole “Howard cannot control other people”, and Stacey has been around significantly longer without problems outside of when a creeper shows up to be creepy. And I’m not sure I’d call “being willing to stand up and call out a creeper being a creeper” a problem. So, revise that last bit to Stacey has been around longer without problems.
I think it should be obvious which of the 2 likely scenarios is a bit better for you?
The one where you don’t get forcibly removed via a banhammer?
Additionally, in a perfect just society, when you have two people going at it (and yes, continuing to do appeals to other people with a “BUT WHY IS THIS PERSON NOT NICE” in an attempt to manipulate them into making the other person behave in a way pleasing to you DOES count as going at it)…
The person most in the wrong AT THE START of the altercation would have the societal obligation to be the person to let the insults roll off them like water from a ducks’ back.
That, my duck, is you here.
You stepped in it. You dug this hole. You don’t have the ability to make anyone else stop pointing at it and telling you that it’s a big hole that you dug. It dug. You kind of just have to live with it for a bit.
This would be true if it was your hedgehog hole, as well.
I’d say the hole you dug is a lot more creepy and annoying than the “hedgehogs suck” hole, so it’s gonna take a LOT of time before folks who remember you digging it will be able to resist the temptation to go “Wow that hole was deep hole of creepy. I think I might have seen a Balrog at the bottom, yikes.”
So yeah. Not really a “feminist space” problem. Or a “But why does Stacey get the pass, is it because she’s a girl?” issue.
More a “Welcome to the internet. People are amazingly still people, while on the internet” problem.
To TL;DR:
1) The person who was most initially wrong has the primary duty to resolve the conflict by removing themselves from it (by ceasing interaction with the other party or by leaving)
2) Even if there is no clear wrong, if the conflict is to end and at least ONE party wants it to end, it is the job of the person who wants it to end, to end it. This should include at least an apology for whatever part they played in the initial kerfuffle (even if they believe the other party is more wrong). If the apology is not accepted, leave or cease interacting.
Of course, WHEN YOU’RE BEING A CREEPER or if you break the comments policy, or you want to be the best possible you, I strongly recommend the LEAVE option. Because, honestly, do you want to hang out with people who are strongly suspicious of your motives? Do you think we want to hang out with you when we are strongly suspicious of your motives? Does this sound like any fun? Anyone?
I don’t have control of you, so you can stick around until when/if you break the comments policy, if you want. You can keep going with your fight, if you want, and increase the likelihood of said banhammer. You can go elsewhere on the internet to tell the tale of how mean we were. You do you, bro. Not my decision. I strongly recommend going (or at least not engaging), but it’s up to you.
Well, and David the Blog Owner.
As for your last comment of “Well it seems like she’s asking me what I think…
… do you really think she actually cares what you think? Really? Think back on everything you’ve read, and decide how much you REALLY think she REALLY wants to know what’s actually going on in your head.
Smart money is on “probably not”.
@Thread: I’m drafting and sending a “Hey, David. Potential trouble in the threads” email to let David know what’s up. I’m going to probably stay off the interwebs for a few days courtesy of some rough news from the homefront.
I don’t think Howard has quite crossed the threshold from annoying/creepy to bannable/creepy, but it seems pretty possible that it’s gonna go there if this carries on too much longer. And since I’ll probably miss it when he does… yeah.
@Stacey: I’m sorry you’re dealing with a creeper. I totally trust that you are capable of picking (and winning) your own battles, but… you should not have to? Nobody should have to argue their right to be mad with a creeper to their creeper.
In a perfect society, we should all be looking out for each other. And yeah, we’re not in a perfect society, but we can try, right?
Good luck!
Email sent! Might be to an old address, so no promises. Also, David’s blog so David’s move. I’m still guessing Howard hasn’t quite crossed the banhammer line, but if the email is a good one, at least David has a warning to keep an eye out.
Nequam, I included a link to your tip, too! Just to knock out a couple things in one go. Not sharing the email around, and probably not emailing him again unless he says it’s cool, on account of it looks like he took his email down from the blog.. so it might be an emergencies only deal these days.
Anywho…
Good night to you all, and I hope you all stay well and hale. Or if you’re already ill, that you heal well. Or if you’re seriously at risk of some serious burnout, that you take good care of yourself on your breaks, and give yourself permission to say no to things?
It’s late, I’m tired. Best, all.
Okay, I know I have been busy and I’ve missed a lot so I have to ask, who the fuck is Howard? why do they have attitude? What is their problem with Stacy?
@Contrapangloss
I’m sorry to hear that. I hope the situation works out well.
I usually stub my toes while at home, so living in a more urban or more rural setting presumably wouldn’t make a difference. However, in icy winter conditions I might often turn my toes inward to avoid slipping when walking outdoors. Otherwise, splaying does help with the balance.
?? Habit would be my guess. Girls were taught to do that when sitting – keeps the knees together and stops people peeking up their skirts.
Least thats what I always assume when I see that pose.
Just a bit of an off-topic question
I have wondered what happens in a US/UK court if somebody says ” common law is an abomination, far inferior to civil law” or something like that. Is that contempt of court? Or argues on merits of common and civil law?
Has this happened by the way?
@Threp
Perhaps, but it’s a model in a posed shot. So there is some intention in her pose. Habit does make a difference though. And it’s not all one or the other. I am very conscious of pose in my daily life but because of my ballet training I do things out of habit too. I tendu sometimes for instance.
As long as it all looks good though!
@Elaine
It’s a NiceGuy situation in the form of an extreme creep. It makes me livid but I got some artistic inspiration out of it. And I still am.
@contrapangloss
I hope your homefront situation improves.
I’m sorry you’re dealing with a creeper. I totally trust that you are capable of picking (and winning) your own battles
You should and I am. This blog is certainly not my main nor only online presence. My others are private/invitation only and I definitely protect my privacy here as elsewhere, so I can handle him safely. He will see the wrath of the goddess if he further acts gross and entitled.
I do not have to. Even wrath can be an emotion channeled into creativity.
And I do not. I am giving him the torment and contempt he and all NiceGuys deserve.
@Howard
Yes, you should read *everything* I wrote very carefully before reacting to it further. If you *actually do that* then reply.
@ Alan
I didn’t know baritsu was more common as a misspelling, so thanks! This is probably my just desserts for having been so snarky about Doyle all year, since I read all the original Sherlock Holmes stories in the spring and some of the inconsistencies were hilarious to me.
@Stacey re: posing toes inward
Thank you for the explanation, it seems feasible. Reading your response I also realised that you don’t have to stand like that for a long time to get a photograph, and it looks so uncomfortable to me just because I remember having to do a stand with inward toes at budo practice, which was hell on both my ankles and knees.
@bumblebug
Same with the “toes outward knees straight” situation. I was really confused as a child when a physical therapist (or some such) explained that my toes pointing outward had something to do with how my femurs attach to my pelvis, which did not seem to take into account where my knees were pointing.
@Threp
That’s interesting. I’ve never heard of that before. Either we don’t do that in Finland or I missed that day of girl school.
So everyone who’s not a Christian (or not Christian-ing the way this “Transformed Wife” wants them to) practices witchcraft?
Well, that simplifies things. And here I thought life was complicated. 🙂
@Alan – I don’t know the character (Discworld series?) but I love the outfit and colour scheme. All those purples and reds!
One thing I heard – it was in a play about the history of beer, so I don’t know how much research went into it – was that pointy hats were worn by beer brewers, often women, and then pointy hats got associated with witchcraft. True? I dunno. Would be cool, though.
@Stacey – Props to you for the no-bullshit attitude. I was reading the other thread yesterday and it was creepy the way Howard singled you out (all that “but would YOU like ME?” stuff)
@Contrapangloss – Just want to say I appreciated the “how to live in a society” insert! Different situation, but I’ve been stressing out about disagreeing with a friend, and I think I annoyed her by trying to get her to see my point of view. So I needed to be reminded I can only control my own actions.
Re: bar(t)itsu
Long ago I saw in Finnish humor magazine a joke about “traditional Western self-defense arts”, meaning the art of explaining your way out of trouble. If I try to render the joke in English, these proposed self-defense arts would have names such as “yu si”, “aimin” and “natmi”.
@epitome of incomprehensibility
Thank you. I know what is getting him worked up and I have less than zero empathy for him.
So many other commenters explained in more patience than he deserved.
I noticed that several commenters referred to dating, some talked about their own relationships as examples and so on.
But the key point is one that kupo and Victorious Parasol brought out: that women are not a monolith.
I am very unconventional about relationships. I’ve made clear that I do not “date” and that although I am obviously a very sexual person the ONLY sexually intimate relationships I want are in the context of my BDSM performance art. And for me the standards of physical attraction are absolute and I will never lower them, and only raise them as time goes on.
Yes a guy has to have other positive qualities besides a great body but even if he does have other great inner qualities (which this creep so completely does not) UNLESS his body is up to what I desire AND he shares an enthusiasm for the kind of very unconventional relationship that I want we will NEVER have a sexual relationship and I will despise any guy who even mentions otherwise. No matter what!
There are plenty of others who did find that physical attraction grew over time for a guy based on his being a TRULY wonderful person and not a “NiceGuy”. And that is great because people are different! But I will never, ever be like that.
I’m the outlier but I’m proud of that. It gives me space for some very edgy and challenging creative work that slams patriarchy in its ugly face. I love being conventionally attractive and know that I am very much so and dress the way I do knowing how much it attracts men of all kinds and as for the vast majority of men who are drawn in but who don’t meet my exacting standards TOUGH SHIT!! No sympathy, no empathy!!!
It’s a direct and visceral challenge to patriarchy and the rotten core of this culture and I love it.
@ talacaris
In an English court a judge would most likely say “Well, common law is all we’ve got.”.
Having said that…
Contracts usually have jurisdiction clauses. So you’ll see in the small print something like “This agreement is governed by the laws of England and Wales; and the English courts shall have sole jurisdiction.”
But those two limbs don’t have to match. For example I once had a case where it was agreed the contract was subject to French law; but any disputes arising should be dealt with by the Truro County Court (the parties were French but they lived in Cornwall). You see this a lot with people who don’t trust their own country’s judiciary. So for example a lot of litigation between Russian parties is dealt with by the RCJ in London; but applying Russian law.
Also, you can refer to cases from other jurisdictions as persuasive, as opposed to binding, precedent. I’ve got a matter on at the moment where I’m hoping to persuade an English judge that an Argentine judge has already considered the issue and taken an approach that should be followed here.
Hope that helps.
@ masse mysteria
Ah; but that’s all part of the fun. There’s a thing called The Holmes Game; where we try to reconcile all the incongruities between the stories.
@ epitome
I didn’t know that; but it’s a topic that deserves to be researched. I shall selflessly go to pubs with microbreweries, and drink beer; and see if a woman in a pointy hat shows up.
@ lumpuna
English self defence…
Ok I have seen enough. I am going to call out Stacey. Yes, I read all that you say. I think you a very shallow and mean person. We can take your own words Stacey.
See. This is manipulating. And stuck up. You probably have lots of good decent men who would like to know you. But you are too stuck up. You insist on doing this art stuff where you produce nothing. What do you do actually for civilization? I bet you look down at IT people like me.
And you say I am entitled. You are the entitled princess. Other people pay for you to play and do nothing and yet all you do is make demands.
The only reason why you go around in your outfits and with your whip is is so you can take advantage of men. Why else would you write in such detail on a blog if you did not want to draw men in. And take advantage. How many men’s lives have you ruined? How many decent men have you sent away like even you admit you do in your silly pointless selfish so-called art show. It is not art. It is just you standing there LITERALLY above everyone else yelling and demanding. These are your own words. So do not blame me. See.
Now that is shallow and entitled. But you call me entitled? This what is wrong with women today.
Maybe one day you will turn around and give decent men a chance. We will probably be all gone though. Then it will be too late. Even though you cannot see it though I am actually the nice one because I am trying to get through to you.
What is on the inside matters. Intelligence and knowledge and reason. Things that men have always had and given women like you.
Everybody here says be a good person. Yet Stacey is the only one who admits that does not matter for her. Read her own words.
Yes. I read your comments. Other people here also know you are shallow and selfish. Now I do too. Once and for all.
Alan Roberts: Thanks for the answer. Now I have an image in my head where two self-important french people tell the the judge”of course we can’t expect an english judge to comprehend our Superior french law. Do you know anything about the Code Napoleon?”
This whole conflict of laws is quite confusing, where judges are supposed to render judgments from legal frameworks in which they have no training. If my understanding is right,an ordinary western judge can be called to interpret Sharia (in matrimonial or inheritance matters for example). This doesn’t seem so easy if you are not trained in that.
Fortunately more and more international commerce contracts stipulate an arbitration clause, to keep things less complex ( and increase the speediness and decrease costs)
Which is good otherwise the courts would be more clogged up.
Maybe that is a problem when people don’t trust the courts any longer to reach a decision within reasonable time and reasonable costs (whatever the result, both parties will lose) and reach for other solutions. Maybe State courts try to make themselves more attractive fora for dispute resolution, or are they content to leave the matters to other instances such as Chambers of Commerce etc?
@ howard
I’d prefer not to get embroiled in the underlying debate; but I’m afraid I must disagree with you on this…
Art is civilisation.
Art performs so many roles in society. It’s an essential part of who we are. Name a culture from any time or place that hasn’t produced art.
Art entertains us, amuses us, brightens up our environment, gives us something to talk about. It’s both decorative and practical.
I’m very keen on the idea that “Art should comfort the discomforted and discomfort the comfortable”.
Think of all the artworks that have done just that; and inspired people to great ends.
Seriously start with something obvious like Guernica, but then check out people like AI Wei Wei or Dread Scott. Dread is the only artist I know who’s had a work banned by Congress. What does that say about contributing to civilisation?
Stacey is just following a time honoured tradition and performs a vital function; as all artists do.