"auntlori" weighs in on PL's Response to "Suzanne"

Here's "auntlori":

"I have a few thoughts on Sue's entry and your reaction to it.

Firstly, I don't find Sue's response to be angry but rather straightforward with no sugar coating.

Secondly, I would have to agree with her in that you need to be straightforward in what your role is/was as a "father" in the children's lives you have been involved in because it IS misleading to refer to yourself as having "fathered" three children. As you slam parents for various reasons, you often cite yourself as a source of reference; however, you never acknowledge that your experience is very different than others. This does not make less of your experience or your role less important. It simply makes it different, and I feel it unfair to negatively hold others against your experience. Being a full time parent to a newborn or toddler IS different than being a part time step-parent to a 4, 5, 7, 10, or 15 year old. There is no better or worse, but there most certainly is a difference that I think should be clarified. I am a biological mother to a 15 month old and was a full-time step-child to a woman from when I was 9-33 years old. It's not the same.

Thirdly, I don't think Sue missed the gist of your post; I think for those who know you, it is hard to sometimes get past the things that seem skewed to make a point. In addition, as a former English professor, I can tell you that one of my first lessons in teaching writing, particularly persuasive writing, was that you never want to offend/turn off the reader simply because they will stop reading and your point will be completely lost. The most persuasive writing is that which considers all, or at the very least, opposing points of view in a non-confrontational manner. When you give credit to other points of view or experiences, you do not cause the reader's defenses to go up and enable your point to be heard and considered. I find Sue's comments to be far less angry than your blog often sounds. So, just as you pose the question to Sue as to why she was angry about your entry, why was your initial entry so angry?

Fourthly, you often make negative comments regarding "traditional" marriage. Why, then, would you make reference to your partner as "your wife"? Again, to those who know you, it would appear that you are only using that word to make a point, which, for some of us, then renders your point ineffective. It seems hypocritical to knock "traditional" marriage, yet then use it, falsely, to suit your purpose. As I told my students, just as important as being non-confrontational in trying to make a point in writing, you must also be a reliable writer. If there are non-truths or "holes" in your writing, the reader no longer believes what it is you have to say because you have become unreliable. I believe Sue may have been making this point.

Fifthly, if there are typos or grammatical errors in my email, please feel free to correct, as it is Monday morning, I had a super-bowl party yesterday and my 15 month old is hanging on my leg."

PL:

Mostly, auntlori, I responded to much of what you wrote above in my response to "Anonymous." But I have a question - if my children were adopted, and let's say I adopted them when they were 3 years old, would I be qualified to speak on the subject of parenting as authoritatively as biological parents? If I were gay and not able to be legally married to my partner, would it be illegitimate of me to say I was married? Should I always qualify and say, "This is my adopted daughter," or "This is my non-legally binding partner?"