|
The other day, Beth's mom (that would be Donna) asked Beth if it
bothered her that I was so mean to her on this blog.
Me? Mean to Beth?
Hmm, well, it set me a-thinkin'. Am I really
mean to her? Back when we first started dating in 2000, I told Beth that
I had a blog (back then it was called an "online diary"--ah the good old
days) and that if she stuck with me, well, she'd be in the blog. She
pretty much didn't have a choice. However, I specifically asked her if
it would bother her if I wrote about her quirky habits, silly sayings,
and whatnot. She said--and I swear she did--that it wouldn't bother her.
So, unlike many other people (such as Barney), Beth had a chance to opt
out, as it were. And she chose not to. Game on, right?
Well, no, not quite. She may have let me
write about her, but she never agreed to let me be mean to
her. The original question still stands then.
So I decided to a little research. I searched
Way Out In Left and came up with a whopping 124 different entries
in which I mentioned Beth by name--and that doesn't include where I
referred to her as "my wife," "sweetie," "schmoopie," or "fruit roll-up
supreme." And although I didn't make it through all 124 entries (sorry,
I got tired), I found quite a few entries in which I wrote about her
either in an unflattering way or in a cute way (depending on your point
of view, of course). For example, I wrote about her
knowledge of The Amazing
Jonathan, her use of the word "mor-off,"
her early bedtime, her
dieting techniques, her
penchant for locking
herself out of the house, her love for
Kurt Rambis, her golf
course etiquette, her
problem with return
address labels, her high opinion of
peanuts, her childhood
affinity for aluminum
foil, and, of course, her
canine anatomy theory.
To me, they're cute little stories that are
funny. I mean, c'mon! Then again, maybe they don't come across that way
to everyone else.
So...
Am I mean to Beth? |
2000-2006