OMG thats a guy! Your worst experience, please

[ReineD]

Chances are they won't change anyway so why even try?

Because then you look a fool to onlookers as well. People who "lose it" in public are looked askance, whether they have cause to lose it or not. They place themselves on the same level as the one who caused the injury.

It's like looking at a cat fight. Most onlookers don't care who started it, they are too busy enjoying the show.

Hopefully Marcie was not dressed when she said that. Otherwise, there are huge chances that onlookers would see CDers as being unstable and having volatile tempers.

[whowhatwhen]

You don't need to make a scene, you can tell someone that they're a horrible human being in a polite tone.

[ReineD]

You don't need to make a scene, you can tell someone that they're a horrible human being in a polite tone.

I agree with you. This is why using the word "effing", and calling someone a cow, was a bit over the top.

Edit ... in my opinion.

[Jeninus]

Not me, but it was kinda funny.

Back in 1976 I was in court defending a GG on a charge that she was illegally copying VHS tapes in her home...which of course she had been. That's how she paid her bills and my fee.

I was trying to suppress the evidence, i.e. get the charges thrown out, on the basis that the person who let the detectives into the apartment (her SO) was merely a visitor and didn't have the proper status to allow them in without a search warrant. The detective was testifying about the entry and the Judge was only half-awake (it was shortly after lunch, probably for him a heavy lunch). The Assistant DA asked the detective if he could identify the person who granted him permission to enter the premises. The detective pointed at the SO and stated in a loud, clear voice: "Yes sir, it was the gentleman seated in the front row, in the blue dress." (an almost triumphal emphasis on the words "gentleman" and "dress.")

The Judge then suddenly bolted upright, peered over the edge of the bench into the courtroom, and called out: "What was that you just said?" The detective again pointed at the SO and repeated what he had just said. The Judge turned beet-red in the face and apologized to the SO. There were smirks everywhere in the Courtroom except on my face and the Judge's. At the conclusion of the hearing he found that the SO, who was not sharing the home with my client, was not on the lease and was not married to her, did not have authority to grant a warrant-less search of my client's apartment. He suppressed the evidence and threw out the charges.

About 15 years later, at a Bar Association function, I was seated with the Judge at dinner and he brought up the case. He told me he had noticed the SO in the Courtroom, but had no idea she was a he (she was pre-op, but was skinny and fairly passable and I think she did eventually go under the knife.) He smiled about it and said the ADA should have warned him ahead of time what was going on. He then told the other members seated at the table about the case. It certainly had registered with him and he had handled it like a true gentleman.

Incidentally, at the earlier preliminary hearing before the District Magistrate, we were standing outside braving a bitter January wind. My client, the GG, was dressed sensibly in wool slacks and a car coat. The SO was in a light dress that was whipping about in the wind, hose and some sort of bolero jacket. I asked her whether she wasn't uncomfortable. Her reply was, "No. One has to make sacrifices if one is to be true to oneself." I've heard that same sentiment expressed on this site many times.