Messages By: stabornc

I'm jumping the gun and posting before the show airs.  I don't have to see it to know what will be said - I lived it, but not from my mom - my dad was worse. 

My philosophy was as long as my parents paid my bills, I was obligated to follow their rules.  That meant not going to the library without my sister. Not leaving the house without my sister. No dating. Who wants their sister on a date? My older brother was required to chaperone our oldest sister on her dates, and the resentment was huge because my father never once offered to pay for my brother and his obligatory date to accompany her.  Although there was 9 years difference between the 2 sets of children the attitude didn't change. 

My twin sister and I were required to room together in college, and if a parent called and one of us didn't know where the other was........   I was the dishonest one who lied to prevent the hysterics.  Once my sister was grounded with no car because I returned to the dorm room at 10pm after being on the interstate for 40 miles from visiting our older sister.  We were 21 years old and 3 months from graduating.  My father's attitude was "what if something had happened", and my response was "then you should take the blame for not believing you taught us to take care of ourselves - back off".  My sister didn't receive this treatment - she followed the formula of "daddy takes care of you until your husband does". 

I never told my parents when I was interviewing for a job after I lost the first interview because my father was in attendance.  He was afraid something would happen on the trip and insisted on going along for the ride.   

I moved 500 miles away for my second job, and he panicked when he found out at the age of 26 I booked my own flight, rented a car, survived the trip - and didn't tell him until after I accepted the job. I didn't even tell him I was job hunting.  I traveled to Manhatten during those days on business - but that didn't concern him - I suppose he thought a man accompanied me the entire time.   

I bought an answering machine with a remote the time I returned home from a weeklong business trip with a weekend layover to visit friends.  I was furious when the police came knocking on my door begging me to call home because he had been calling them every 3 hours the entire weekend afraid I had an accident and couldn't get to the phone. That was the first time I raised my voice at him.  No news is good news - his name and phone number were in my wallet in case of emergency.  His response was "what if you had a flat tire", and I yelled "And just what do you think you could do 500 miles away? I am supposed to call and wait for you to drive that distance? ". 

Then there was the time in my 30's when I went on a 15 day vacation - part being an 11 day cruise.  While I was gone there were a news cast about a cruise ship that had run into trouble.  Thank goodness a sister was present to remind him the ship was in the "wrong ocean" from the ship I was on.   

Enough of these scenerio's resulted in our not speaking the last 2 years of his life.  I have no regrets.  It was his problem.  He was too overprotective. He should have been proud to have raised a child who was self-sufficient instead of  his being so self-absorbed and selfish in trying to keep "life" from happening.  I once asked my mom why she and dad treated us in such a manner, and her response was "for your own safety".  I asked "and if you had an only child you would have locked them in a closet their entire life to protect them?".  It was cruel of me, and she didn't answer, but my point was taken - too late.  A parent needs to realize that things happen, and it isn't their job to prevent those situations, but to train their child to make decisions and then be there to help pick up the pieces and learn from the mistakes.  We don't learn life and mature from the good times - we learn and grow from the bad times, and it's easier when a parent doesn't judge but assists in that growth. 

Overprotective parents are doing themselves and their children no favors in their behavior. 

Isn't it ironic that when a spouse or other adult treats a person in this manner it is considered obsessive , stalking and grounds for legal action?  So why do parents think it is OK behavior?  It isn't. 

It is disrespectful of her to not tell the old flame that she is committed to you and not to call anymore.  Been there, done that, and it only causes problems.  Ask her why she cares if he is miserable? Why does she care at all if she has moved on to a new and better relationship? 

If she cares about you she will put an end to the situation.  I don't think she will go back to him, but there is something that prevents her from cutting the strings and you, or a counselor, needs to find out why.  

Continuing contact with old relationships is trouble.  Your lady may not be interested in reconnecting, but her old flame is, and it needs to stop. 

I spent 15 years in retail - at many levels - and 10 years ago stepped out on my own to operate my own business.  These 2 ladies have a glamorous idea but no practical skills. 

1) They need to take a class at the community college or univerity on Retail Management. 

2) They need to work minimum one year for a store in order to understand the seasonal cycles of consumer spending.  The month of December can make or break a retail operation and be equivilant to combined 3 months prior sales.  How will they get through that season without proper planning of deliveries, storage, extra help, extra hours (+16 per day), and then be so worn out by Christmas Eve they don't have time or the desire to enjoy the holiday? 

3) They need to research, research, research.   

Explore what it takes for space rental, utilities, liabilty insurance in the case of a customer accident, and if they serve alchoal they will need a liquor license and must realize they could be sued if a customer has an accident on the way home from their martini party.   

And what about policies on returns?   

Do they know how shoplifters operate?  

What about filing taxes,? 

Can they read a  P & L statements, and balance sheets, and what about bookkeeping services?   

What about dealing with vendors, and shipping and advertising costs?  

What about security controls to reduce employee theft?   

What about hiring and training employees? They need to find out the ADA laws, EEOC rules, etc. 

4) What about the legal aspects of the business? Corporation, limited corporation, sole proprietor, etc? 

They want to take care of the details later - bad move.  Not working out the details in advance will put them out of business in no time flat. The actual buying of merchandise is less than 10% of the store operation.  It's the other 90% managing the inventory that can make or break the operation.  I researched my business for 6 months prior to even beginning to think about looking for a location. 

And going into business with a friend can be the best way to ruin a relationship.  Without establishing guidelines, who will be responsible for what duties, and who will bear the crux of the loss if they fold?  Too many unknowns. 

Ladies - dream away.  I have to disagree with Dr. Phil on this one.  Your dream needs to remain just that.  If you don't want to deal with the realities of the business then you have no business going into business. 

With all due respect, you are too emotionally attached to your product.  As a former retail buyer, I can assure you that if "those stores may be closed minded", you need to find out why.  Retail buyers don't buy merchandise for their own personal choice or taste (you other two ladies need to listen to this too).  They buy merchandise based on what the consumer tells them they want to purchase.  Marked down merchandise is a key to a clue that the buyer missed the mark and either bought too much of a mediocre item or made a bad judgement. 

You missed the boat by not doing marketing research before putting the product into production.  If the product doesn't sell itself because of bad packaging or because the target market is wrong, it doesn't matter if you have a product that is superior - it'll die a quick death. 

You need to be pounding the pavement, or set up a website.  You need to sent protypes to the major mass merchandisers (ie drug stores, retail operatons, etc.).  Take protypes to salons and pedeicurists, cosmetic counters - people who actually will use it, -  and *listen* to their suggestions. You need to follow up with phone calls.  You need to pay attention to the video that Dr. Phil showed you.   

I don't think it's the stores that are closed minded - I think you are being closed minded in not taking suggestion into consideration in moveing your product to the next level in order to be successful.  With the lack of customer service in the stores, the product needs to sell itself on the self, and if the packaging is wrong you're doomed.  Perception is reality, and if a product's perception is wrong, it's the kiss of death to you and to the company selling the product. 

To tell your husband you aren't willing to give up anything to help pay for and offset the costs of his medical care is the most selfish and selfcentered attitude I have come across in a very long time.  Her husband's blase' attitude about the bills is normal - not her materialistic mode of thinking.  She should be happy to have him around and be willing to give up *everything* including her cell phones, cars, home, etc.  So they live in a shack, never eat out, never go to the movie, shop at Good Will, etc.  You do what it takes - as long as you have each other.  And the fact that she tried to turn the tables and say her attitude was based on her husband's non-chalant financial concerns was a low blow. 

This man should be kicking his wife to the curb, and the fact that she even had to ask if her attitude was "normal" is appalling.  Where is her sense of empathy, her committment to her vows of "better or worse, richer or poorer"?  Obviously she should never have gotten married if her only committment was to "better and richer". 

I know a lady who rides a bicycle to a part-time job, her only phone is a cell phone her son sends  on occasion that has a few minutes left on it, they are living in a rent by the week hotel because her husband has congestive heart failure and a brain tumor, and their insurance was not renewed because his medical bills are too high.  They were once very wealthy people - she is in her 60's and has nothing.  She is willing to give up everything, but her sick husband isn't willing to part with any of his expensive collections to offset their living expenses. 

We have a society that is too focused on material comforts and possessions. 

Sitting on the outside looking in, it is easy for you and other's to be judgemental.  No one ever knows what they will do until they are directly involved in a situation.  You might think you know, but you don't.  When faced with   complicated and emottional issues such as this, you make the best judgment calls you can with the information you have, you make judgement calls on how you think the other person will act - and no one has all the answers, even after the fact. 

Stop judging Donna and every other person faced with an abusive situation.  Until you have been there, you don't know.  For every person who is making critical remarks, I hope at some time you have to live in an abusive situation - not because I wish you harm, but because you need to know the emotional toil it takes.  There are many people who live one life in public and another in their minds, and there is no way of knowing who those people are - until they turn weird. 

As to Jerry's $200,000 bond, and the person who posted the comment that because he was able to post bail on his own showed he was to be trusted - hog wash.  That man held a gun to a woman's head - and had the State Police as witnesses.  The man should never have been released on bail - period.  He should have been held behind bars.  In all cases, in all states,  involving domestic situations (sexual assault, stalking, physical abuse, etc.) , the law protects the rights of the criminal, not the rights of the victims - that is wrong. The criminal might serve prison time and then get released, and because they have no conscious, they are free.  The victim serves time the rest of their lives. 

My heart breaks for Caitlin's family and friends.   

Situations such as this occur all over the US.  Just recently in my town, a man killed the mother of his child and himself - she had taken out a protective custody warrant, but did not appear in court - because she still loved him and something in her hoped he would come to his senses - she had been involved with this man for years.  She was told by the police never to meet him by herself - to call them.  She didn't, she asked a friend to meet them, Befor the friend arrived he shot her while she was sitting in the car, then himself.  What was her occupation?  She worked with Domestic Violence victims.  She knew all the right things to too.  She gave advise to others.  But her emotions overrided her logic.   

In another case several years ago a young woman was abducted , raped and murdered by a casual friend.  But because of a technical issue in the process of questioning him, and he admitted to the crime, he went to trial, was sentenced to life in prison, appealed  because of the technicality,  plea bargained for 25 years, minus time served , and basically got off scot free. Capitol One murder - and 10 years later he is out on parole.  He was tried a third time by the Federal Government, due to the intervention of Janet Reno, for possession and firing of an illegal weapon on Federal property (the crime occured in a national land reserve) - for that charge he could get the death penalty.  What was wrong with this picture?  The man is still alive and shows no remorse, but the family has to live with his actions, knowing the justice system is screwed up, and their daughter's murderer has basically served no time for his actions. 

Our media touts that we need a partner to be whole.  We women, despite the Women's movement, are trained as children to think of marriage, and fairy tale romances.  We are bombarded with Romance Novels that tell us the innocent virgin will tame the angry rogue; that forced sex is romantic (Rhett and Scarlett being a prime example); pornography teaches that rough sex is erotic, etc; and none of that is true or real.  Until the media and the law takes a look at their roles in these situations, nothing will change and horrible situations such as this will continue to occur.  We as a nation are not taking responsibilty for our moral standards in the guiz of protecting individual rights 

I can't read any more posts on this board.  I can't stand the judgemental, "I have all the answers and if Y had done X then Z wouldn't have happened".  Human nature cannot always be predicted.  Get over yourselves and put your energies into more postive actions and emotions in supporting Caitlin's family and other's who have had similiar experiences. 

PS.  When going to the website, make sure you use www.SpiritofCatlin.org, not www.spriritofcatlin.org - they are two different sites. 

For you parents who are giving their children everything they want: You are doing them no favors.  You are not teaching them that material possessions won't get them through a crisis.   

You are not teaching them how to cope when they move out into the "big bad world".  Do you think their bosses are going to just give them what they want in salary or a promotion without earning it? 

For the first 2 years of a child's life , if the money spent on presents was put into a savings fund of some type, the compound interest over the next 18 years would pay for their education.  Wrap up a cardboard box and let them use their imaginations.  Kids don't care about what's in the box anyway.  Some of the best childhood memories I have was knowing that Spring had arrived when the local furniture store owner would call my mom (it was a small town) and tell her that his shipment of refrigerators had arrived.  My older brother would trot across town, bring home two boxes and he and my mom would cut a door and window and we would make curtains for our play houses.  If we wanted new clothes for our dolls, we made them.  We made our own clothes and that satisfication of knowing we had created something that was well down was worth more and created lifelong memories than going to a store and buying something that was boring after a couple of times.   

Limit Christmas and birthday presents to 3 items they truly want.  Make them decide what is most important.  And if they don't play with those items on a regular basis, make them given the toys to charity.   

Children today don't know the value of self-satisfaction of working and earning their material possessions, and we are creating a monster for the next generation.   

How many kids of this generation would survive if there was a repeat of the Great Depression of 1929-1945?  They wouldn't because they don't know what it is like to do without and be creative in problem solving.   

Parents - are you raising children or future adults?  If your answer is "children", then you need to rethink your path.   

And the mother who thought her daughter's spending wasn't a problem, and that her daughter would automatically learn to balance her checkbook , pay bills and control her spending needs help herself.  If you don't teach them, how will they know? 

Wake up America. 

Lovelywife?  I didn't see a pretty woman - I saw a robot with no personality. What I saw was a woman devoid of any emotion.  I turned the show off when I heard her say "I'm angry", but didn't hear it in her voice or demeanor. She's angry?  What right does she have to be angry? She's selfish and is making everything about her.   

 Bridgette has been using her husband since day 1 of the marriage - she sold herself to him and her mother the day she married someone she didn't love - just for the money - and she makes up for her lack of self-worth by shopping.  And if she wants to fix her "addiction", she should cold turkey cut up every CC she and Michael own, and when she has a "need" to shop, she should find something else to do - go for a drive away from a mall, run, hike, go feed the homeless, etc.  Have an auction to sell everything she doesn't use and give the money to a local charity that is in dire straits for finances - ie Domestic Violence shelters, one of the programs to provide utilities for less fortunate, disaster relief, etc.   

Michael could have put a halt to her spending if he took away her CC's, and balanced his checking account.  For him to say that providing for his family was his need for self-worth, it's beyond that.  What kind of self-worth is working to find yourself in constant debt with selfish children?   

I've never been a shopper because I was raised by parents who lived through the Great Depression.  I spent 15 years in retail management for large companies.  I learned a long time ago that material possessions loose their power in a matter of days - they don't fulfill a long-term need, only a short-term fix.  I never buy anything except I don't ask myself these questions: 

1) Do I need it or want it?  If I want it, why?  

2) Do I love it enough to pack it and move it? I've moved many times in my life.  If the answer is no, it stays on the self. 

3) I never buy something that I don't get rid of something. I buy 2 pair of shoes per year, and disgard the ones that are worn out.  I rarely buy clothes, my allowance is $200 per year, and I still have clothes I don't wear. 

4) Do I have a place to put this? If not, then I have to get rid of something or leave it at the store. 

15 years ago I left my full time job and only worked part time for 9 months.  I put myself on a $20 per week allowance, instead of $20 per day.  I quickly learned who my friends were, and was much more statisfied with the basics of life than the years of trying to live up to being at the right place at the right time with the right people. 

To the person who says they feel guilty walking into a store and not buying something - that's an excuse.  Why do you feel it's your responsibility to support every retailer in the world?   

People who fill a "void" with shopping or other habits are afraid to look at themselves.  Stop.  Take time to look at the world around you.  Find out who you are by being yourself and stop impressing others.  Explore the world by hiking, going to plays, doing charity work, gardening, reading, etc.  You'll be a much more interesting person to be around - and probably happier with yourself and your world. 

The best thing for this family would be divorce.  Why work on a marriage where there is no love?  That is the root of the problem, and it was evident in both Michael and Bridgett.  Neither of them love the other, but neither are willing to take the chance to step out on their own.  The kids need to be kicked to the curb.  Michael would be better off giving Bridgett half of his possessions, and half his debt, and cutting the cord that is tying them together.  Bridgett should get no alimony and should have to work to learn the value of a $, the kids are over 18 and should be given nothing - they need to learn what it takes to survive without mommy. 

Obviously I have no sympathy for these people. 

Being by oneself and being alone are not the same thing. 

I am single, never been married, and thank goodness - considering the relationships I've experienced over the years.  I am by myself, but I am not lonely or alone. 

I am 46/f and do not perceive advancing age as a problem.  I am happy by myself, am active in social and civic affairs and my church.  I don't have a problem dining out by myself or traveling alone.  I am self-employed and don't have to answer to anyone about finances.  Sure, it would be nice to have someone help out around the house on occassion - especially on garbage day - but the inconveniences of being independent far outway the conveninces of being dependent.  If I need someone to talk to, I send an email or pick up the phone.  I have plenty of single and married friends.  I don't define myself as "single".  I am just me. Single, married, etc.,  is just a point of reference, not a definition of who a person is. 

I have plenty of friends, and a huge support system in my church.  I don't need another person to define who I am.  I'm not looking for a relationship and the few times I have gotten interested the past few years, I find myself purposely walking away.  

Over the years I have found that depending on another person has lead to disappointment, and the energy involved in maintaining a relationship that turns out to be one-sided just isn't worth wasting.  I can better use my energies for other activities that will benefit more people than me - feeding the homeless, working on a disaster relief team, volunteering at the hospital, working as a Big Sister to a less fortunate child, being involved in civic situations, giving time to clean up streets and streams to protect the enviroment. 

There's more to life and living than having another person to monopolize your time.