The Sage has become aware of the difficulty Followers might have with jumping back and forth between teh page of Seekers and the Sage's wisdom. Therefore, brief synopses will henceforth be included with each response. Today's Seekers may be found here. http://www.slate.com/id/2260483/
1. First is a Seeker with a small child. The woman's longterm boyfriend wants her to have her breasts enlarged. The rest of the details are in the link.
The Sage fails to understand why you didn't take care of this inadequacy on your part years ago. Pity the poor man, who has had to endure sexual relationships with you time and again, all the time knowing that he was forcing himself to make do without Dolly-sized cups. Did you think that he was with you for your winning personality and intelligent mind? Your daughter's self-perception is immaterial, since size tends to be hereditary, and regardless of her education or accomplishments or personality, she will one day also need to have her own body enhanced in order to keep a boyfriend stung along for years. Surely you would not expect that she ever would marry, since that would require a commitment on the part of her beau, even knowing that some day she, too, will wrinkle and sag and get age spots. Besides, this augmentation will help you secure another temporary father figure for your child, when this one tires of you and moves on.
2. Next is a Seeker whose elderly in-laws wish to be included on ever trip, particularly vacation trips, that the couples make. Far-flung siblings of the husband are reticent about assisting with their parents.
The Sage reminds you that, yes, you absolutely are being selfish. Why would you need any time away from household chores, pressures at any outside employment or volunteer responsibilities, and ensuring that your husband's parents are well taken care of? You certainly have not expected your husband to be the primary one looking out for his own parents the times when you have consented to take them with you. It should not matter that your sight-seeing may be limited to whatever an octogenarian might be able to do, since you absolutely must not go to any ruins or caverns or the like which might make it difficult for them to be with you for every step of your journey. The Sage is also aware that as a responsible daughter-in-law, you must be sharing a room in whatever hotels you stay at with your mother-in-law, while your husband bunks with his father, in case they have needs or desires during that night that only a loving child would be able to assist with.
3. Our next Seeker is an individual with a psychiatric disorder which is being well-managed. A new intern uses disagreements between them as an excuse to comment negatively on the Seeker's disorder.
The Sage recommends that when this person makes such a comment, you remind her of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and that constant harassment of someone due to their disabilitity is an actionable item. Document every such occurence, especially who else was present when these comments are made. Should it continue, bring your complaint and documentation to your Director of Human Resources. Neither your nor anyone else in your field will be subjected to this person's condescending attitude in the future should it reach this point.
4. Our final Seeker of the day is a former florist who was asked to make an arrangement for a funeral, which upset most members of the family, including the one who made the initial request.
The Sage commends you on embarassing your entire side of the family, with the exception of your step-mother. You really will need to try harder in the future. When the others call and complain, tell them that you have acheived your goal, and hang up.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sage, you've outdone yourself! Your advice is not only wise, but totally hilarious...
ReplyDelete#1 was delicious. Good on you to go to Dolly. I, a lesser-able dispenser of urbane sagacity, unwisely went to Pamela A.
ReplyDeleteSince the Sage is older than the Mystic Cave itself, great care had to be made not to mention Ouglakni the Persian, lest the readers not recognize the reference.
ReplyDelete