Bernie Rimland is dead.


(If this post offends you, read this one first.)

Bernie Rimland is dead.

I’ve watched two people I know (not him) die in recent years, and watched their various eulogies transform them into people they never were to begin with. Perfect people, with their positive traits exaggerated, their negative traits eliminated, and sometimes growing (in the course of the eulogies) positive traits they never had to begin with. This bewildered and terrified me. If physical death was not enough, erasing their bodies, dishonest eulogies were erasing people’s true memories of them.

Not only that, it made me seem like a monster for remembering them as the people they actually were, who were, like everyone, a mixture of good and bad points. I don’t know what magic goes on in most people’s minds when someone they know dies. I don’t know what about death transforms the memories of the living. My memory does not transform that way, I remember dead people the same way I remember living people that I haven’t seen in awhile.

I will always remember Bernie Rimland as the guy who used his fame for publicly debunking the refrigerator mother theory, as a platform to say a lot of things that were destructive to autistic people. I will remember him as a promoter of mass institutionalization of those he regarded as severely disabled. I will not remember him as any kind of autism saint.

This is, incidentally, exactly what I thought of him yesterday, when he was alive.


About Mel Baggs

Hufflepuff. Came from the redwoods. Crochet or otherwise create constantly and compulsively. Write poetry and paint when I can. Developmentally disabled, physically and cognitively disabled. I'm not really part of any online faction or another, even ones that claim me as a member. The thing in the world most important to me is having love and compassion for other people, although I don't always measure up to my own standards there by a longshot. And individual specific actions and situations and contexts matter a lot more to me than broadly-spoken abstract words and ideas about a topic. My father died in 2014 and that has changed my life a lot in ways that are still evolving, but I wear a lot of his clothes and hats every day since he died and have shown no sign of stopping soon.

47 responses »

  1. There isn’t really any transformation of memories. It’s just social pressure to “not speak ill of the dead.” Most people, autistic or not, are perfectly aware of the negative qualities of the recently deceased, but don’t want to say anything, because they think they’ll seem like monsters. Like most social taboos, I think neurotypicals tend to follow it more.

    It’s interesting to look back on the reaction when Richard Nixon died. There were a number of sanitized eulogies, followed a few weeks later by people pointing out the disconnect between how he’d been percieved, and how he was being spoken of. Most people’s opinions hadn’t changed, they just didn’t want to express negative opinions of the newly deceased.

    I think the Bernie Rimland situation is a good example of how autistic people and parents of autistics don’t have the same interests. There’s some similar interests, and some overlapping interests, but they simply aren’t the same. Even parents who reject the biomedical approach are better off without the refrigerator mother theory, and have something to thanke him for. But autistics who were subjected to one set of ineffective treatments based on an incorrect understanding of autism and switch to anothe, aren’t having their interests served and may not benifit at all.

  2. Ding dong…ta dat da da. (srryz)

    Well, you came up with a good thing (kinda) and a bad thing for him. It does tidily illustrate the example of what you say about a mixture of good, bad, (pretty, ugly and grey or non-existent).

    I can only remember him wanting to take an anvil or some large blunt object to “autism” or IOW, this imaginary essence that can somehow be removed from my brain or prevent my existence. Oddizm has something like that.

    All I can say is that I’m kinda glad he never achieved his goal and instead ended up a sickened sideliner. I can partially pity him and do wonder if he ever did regret his words. If so, he should have done so publically before this happened but ah well…people often miss out on a lot of things and we no one longer needs that from him. For his family’s sake, I’ll just say, RIP. His not a monster but as you say, not any saint of autism either. I have a hard enough time sometimes for tears (immediate ones anyway) for those I’m related to…let alone people who lived how he did. I really don’t feel like writing much more about it actually so I’ll leave it there. More interesting to me is this phenomenon you bring up in general here and the living who will answer.

  3. ballastexistenz: “I will always remember Bernie Rimland as the guy who used his fame for publicly debunking the refrigerator mother theory, as a platform to say a lot of things that were destructive to autistic people.”

    Sad, but true.

    Not least of which was the idea that autism was something to be cured. The legacy of that particular idea will carry on for a long time with the whole make-the-autistic-kid-‘normal’-by-misusing-ABA movement and the kill-or-cure-with-chelation crowd.

    ballastexistenz: “I will remember him as a promoter of mass institutionalization of those he regarded as severely disabled.”

    Sad, but true.

    ballastexistenz: “I will not remember him as any kind of autism saint.”

    Nor shall I.

  4. My main regret in fact is that he didn’t renounce at least some of the more damaging of his views before he died.

    I am not, by the way, holding anyone to any standards I don’t want myself held to here. I have already posted awhile back about how I want to be remembered as who I was, not some whitewashed, sanitized, near-canonized version the way I’ve seen people disturbingly transformed in eulogies. I personally think it’s more disrespectful to the dead to remember them as someone other than who they were — that’s just another way of killing them.

    If you can’t stand me, I don’t want you to start liking me the moment I die.

    The only time I saw it work the other way around was with Bettelheim. He was so scary in life that some of the more negative truth of what he’d done to people, didn’t come out until he died. But even then, there were people claiming it was wrong to speak ill of the dead, so…

    At any rate, the not speaking ill of the dead thing doesn’t seem to be a hard and fast rule, either. There are plenty of historical figures who are remembered in less than flattering terms.

  5. “And the evil that men do lives on after them…”

    But it’s a normal human impulse to transform the dead into ideal people. In part it’s self justification–“I wouldn’t have been friendly with him if he was really a bad person”. In part it’s simple pity: why criticize a person who can not defend themselves? In part it’s selfish hope: hope that people will remember your good points and forget your bad points when they come to sum up your life. And I suspect unacknowledged superstition has a role: don’t speak bad of the dead, because the dead have power to hurt the living.

  6. I’ve never understood why we shouldn’t speak ill of the dead, anyway.

    Shouldn’t lie about the living, sure. Shouldn’t say pointlessly mean things (true or otherwise) to people to their faces, definitely. Probably shouldn’t lie to say bad things about the dead, or say bad things about them for no reason other than to hurt people, I can see that.

    But when you’re telling the truth, and not to people who will be directly harmed by it, who cares? It’s not like the dead care, they’re dead. All their problems are over, but we still have to deal with the messes they left behind.

  7. There certainly is something that happens magically when a person dies. But sanitizing a person’s ghost can backfire as it did with a friend of mine. He was a great guy who was very loved but was very intense. People kept trying to pigeon-hole him into their lifestyle and when he resisted, they rejected him.
    But when he died, his ex girlfriend became his widow and talked about what a great vegan he was (he wasn’t). His family conducted a Christian ceremony and likened him to St Francis of Assisi. His friends were disillusioned and argued over his seeming contradictions. Some felt he was a jerk in death. All of his exes talked about his sense of humor that they never understood, but in death, he was the funniest guy around.
    So, yeah you can be “born again” through death.
    It’s one of the reasons I can’t stand wakes and funerals because people just reinvent the past to suit their personal purposes.

  8. JBJr: “If your brain wasn’t addled by mercury, you would know that it is not nice to speak ill of the dead.”

    If you weren’t so bloody obsessed with this mercury crap, you’d realise that it’s even less nice to speak ill of the living. I agree with Amanda’s take on the man. Well, on his legacy, since that is what she was talking about. Not that you are able to distinguish between the two concepts.

  9. It’s like when any child/teenager in school dies – they were always “bubbly, full of life, popular” etc. There’s almost a ‘dead child’ proforma that’s filled in, which has nothing to do with who they actually were.

  10. My spiritual beliefs impact how I feel about this particular subject.

    I believe that good and bad are basically two sides of the same coin. In a world beyond our own, where there is no differentiation, and good and bad don’t exist apart from each other, there exists something greater than either of them: the whole which existed before they separated. And yes, this whole is greater than good.

    I believe that when people turn their dead into saints, they are somehow tuning into this, and acknowledging that no matter how bad that person was, the whole was greater than that. But not having the ability except to think in terms of good and bad, they turn this whole into some sort of saintly good, or extreme good, which it isn’t.

    But overall, I don’t think it’s wrong to think of a person as greater than their bads. My question is why do we only do this for the dead? Why not the living?

    I come from a family which could not be described as neurologically typical. When my mother’s sister died, her daughters spoke about the good things she did. But they also spoke about the not so good things, in a humorous way, as if to say, “we survived that!”

    I think this is a healthier way to remember the dead, (and see the living). Eliminating the bads, (or the goods) is to ignore the whole of who they are, and not acknowledging that whole, they can never be greater than good, (or bad) in our eyes.

  11. And he died without having found the cure he spent much of his life looking for. I hope it was worth it. He’s survived by a son, a talented autistic artist I understand, who I suppose Bernie Rimland never fully accepted. I’d like to imagine he did find acceptance there in the end, even if he just kept it to himself.

  12. it is not nice to speak ill of the dead.
    Well, (A) how nice is it to say the kind of stuff you (JB) say about live people?! and (B) that is just a social custom. It doesn’t make it right or true.

    My main regret in fact is that he didn’t renounce at least some of the more damaging of his views before he died.
    Yeah, that’s the pity when people w bad ideas die, you wished they would have changed their mind –or in the case of influential people, you wish they would have changed others’ minds as well– before dying.

  13. Oh, also, I do think autistic people benefited from having the refrigerator-mother crap debunked, although much of what it became after that point was refrigerator-autistics, which is little better.

  14. It is not what a man does at the beginning of his life but what he does at the end that matters to balance out the totality.

    Had Bernie died after debunking Bettelheim, all well and good, but he went on to undo that good and failed to move with the times, therefore I think his overall contribution was harmfull.

    If Marshall Petain had died after the armistice, the French would continue to honour him as the hero of Verdun, however he went on to be a collaborationist and that is how he is remembered now.

    When the eulogies have passed and gone and the dust has settled over the autism question once and for all showing that Rimlands bio medical theories were snake oil I am sure it will be the parents as well who will be seeing him as someone who hindered progress in his latter days.

  15. Never mind not speaking ill of the dead, one should not speak ill of the living either, however where someone is clearly doing wrong it is ones duty to point that out.

    I am no hypocrite to change my opinions of Rimland simply because he is not here to argue with me any longer (not that he even knew of my existence to argue with me while he was alive either)

    He was not a friend or even a personal aquaintance whose loss I would feel in that capacity and the only regret at his death is that it robbed him of the opportunity to either see or admit that he was wrong.

    I believe he lived a long enough life and there is nothing particularly tragic in the manner of death to any but his family and friends so I am certainly not going to shed any crocodile tears on his behalf.

    Incedentally in my last post I am not comparing him to Marshall Petain as I don’t want to evoke Godwin’s law against myself, the similarity is in the way that people who were once seen to be on the side of right can later be seen in a different light.

  16. The thing is when someone dies they don’t have a chance to defend their views anymore, good or bad. Try and think of Bernie as your father, then having to view the above comments. Not very nice.

  17. Rimland never bothered to defend his views from me when he was alive, so by your logic I never should have said these things when he was alive, either. I said the same things then. And will continue to say them. I would be, as Larry points out, a total hypocrite to do otherwise. His views were problematic, I will continue to point out why as I have been doing for many years. He has directly, physically, hurt a friend of mine, I cannot forget that either. But I doubt he ever saw a word I wrote about him, I’m not that important in his world, I’m just a random autie.

    If he were my father, I would not exactly expect people who disagreed with my father’s opinions to suddenly agree with them when he died. I don’t think he’d expect it either. If I were mourning my father’s death, and really didn’t want to read that stuff, I would probably make an attempt to stay away from people who didn’t like his views (or him), if I didn’t want to hear it.

    I would have far more of a problem if my father were turned into someone he was not. He’s a human being with merits and flaws, and I will remember both when he dies, just as I remember both when he is alive, and I seriously doubt he has a problem with either one. To me, loving someone has nothing to do with overlooking their bad points — because then all you do is love an imaginary version of them, and that’s not love. It’s a form of erasure, which is hate.

  18. It a culture thing again.

    We are in danger of being portrayed as cold hearted pyschopaths who don’t care about the human qualities of those we disagree with, but that is not the case.

    Many who join in the homilies over recently dead people, will after a certain passage of time turn round and say later what they really think, and it seems to me to hide that is equally offensive.

    I did not know Bernie Rimland, I never had any correspondence with him, he was not a part of my life except to be a figurehead for a lot of bad science, and to be responsible for a lot of bad attitudes towards disabled people in general. There is nothing worse I can say about him now he was gone than I was prepared to say while he was alive.

    Nonetheless where it is appropriate I cite him for his place in the current history of autism, but it is not as significant as some people like to make out.

    When Lorna Wing dies I shall mourn her loss for real.

  19. k_994: “Try and think of Bernie as your father, then having to view the above comments”

    Why? If he had been my father, I would never have had the highly educative experiences I did have as a child, because my father would have been too interested in curing me, instead of showing me how much funit is to get to know things. Had Bernie R been my dad.

    To be honest, I’m happy that I have had the one I actually did have.

  20. My father is not a nice person and, while he has some good points, what I mostly (will) remember about him -both now and when he dies- is that he let his family down in ways that are not easily named by the typical names of abuses, but that are not easily forgettable and are also not easy to recover from. Assuming no personality transplant inbetween now and then, this is what I will remember.
    I think the overall summary of what a person did (unless they repented of and tried to undo the bad parts later) is what really defines their legacy.

  21. I do feel bad for his son, though. Before and after Bernie Rimland was dead, though, if the son was subjected to some of his father’s theories…

  22. Perhaps if my brain was more addled in some way I might be able to forget what he did to my friend, but I can’t really do that, and it seems disgusting to want to.

    I also cite Rimland in his place in the refrigerator mother stuff, but I can’t remember him stopped in time at that point, he stopped in time yesterday, after doing a whole lot more. Including things that indirectly harmed me, directly harmed a friend of mine, and directly and indirectly harmed a number of other people.

    Like Larry, I pointed this sort of stuff out when he was alive, I’m not going to stop because he’s dead.

  23. “I want to send a ballistic missile into the heart of autism.”

    – Bernie Rimland

    He was given far too much credit for the good he did, and not enough blame for the bad he did. He was paid quite handsomely, too, by the ARI organization, in the past few years, and maybe before that. It’s not like he was advocating for DAN! dox for free. His organization gave money to Teresa Binstock “PhD” when all she has is a bachelors in science and a phony research insitute or something she runs out of her home.

    There’s lots of ugly stuff than can be said about Rimland in connection with DAN! It’s highly inappropriate to glorify this man. Without Rimland pushing the epidemic and chelation, Abubakar might still be alive. People’s actions have effects that ripple outward. Rimland’s effects were quite negative. I’m sure he’s loved by his friends, that doesn’t make what he did right.

    His actions have buried nearly a million autistic adults into a place where they can’t get services as autistics, but are being served as “schizoid,” “schizophrenic,” “mentally retarded” and other mislabels as well as with no label at all. His son got to be identified properly but he denies that there could have been so many more much like his son born at the same time and before.

    Oh, and I don’t have any mercury in my head, John, though you might.

  24. “I want to send a ballistic missile into the heart of autism.”
    – Bernie Rimland

    These were some of his last public words as I recall. Quite telling. Ultimately, Rimland’s historical legacy may prove worse than Bettelheim’s.

  25. However I think that in the mainstream of autism research he has been a sideline for a long time. Eric Schopler who also died recently was questioning the psychodynamic approach around the same time as Bernie Rimland was.

    Ultimatly autism is a creation of the society we live in that takes anything whether it be a neurological difference, or a physical one, and builds a whole industry of medical specialties around it. First defines it as a problem and then provides the opportunity for quack practitioners to flourish.

    People forget it is happening just as much with Dyslexia too which also has its charlatans offering bogus cures based on even wackier “science”

    They exist too, to take money from parents who do not have the discernment to recognise when they are being conned.

    And I can recall with MS and Arthritis too, there are the “miracle workers” with there fad diets who ultimately cause a great deal of harm. I know of at least one suicide resulting from the false hopes given by these people who never fail to get press copy for there miracle cures.

  26. Imbecile North-Eastern: “Andrews; If your brain wasn’t addled by mercury, you might make some sense.”

    If you weren’t so damn obsessed with this mercury crap, it would actually be possible to have a conversation with you. Currently, that is a long way off. Your obsession with it currently limits that possibility.

    Imbecile North-Eastern: “My son will know that he has Dr Rimland to thank when he recovers from his nightmare. Perhaps God will let him intervene from above to help all of you anti-cure zealots realize the flaws in your thinking.”

    Now you’re making no sense at all. Not my brain that’s addled; it’s yours.

    As Larry says, Lorna Wing will be the real loss for me and him. She did far more good than Rimland ever did. No ‘atomic missiles to the heart of autism’… no ‘kill or cure’ ethic from her… just let’s get on with the business of raising our kids and advocating for them as best we can. No battle metaphors, and no wanting to get rid of us.

    Yes, I’ll mourn her loss when she dies.

  27. Rest assured John Best, no one will speak any worse of you once you’ve shuffled off this mortal coil.

    I expect you already know that given your powers of clairvoyance.

  28. John Best: I find it interesting that you chose to use the pronoun “it” instead of “he” or “she” in referring to Camille’s child, as if her child were on the same level as her dog or cat [assuming, of course, that she has a dog or cat].

    My brain may be addled by mercury (and, BTW, it’s statistically certain that mercury is not the cause of autism) but it still seems to function better than yours. At least I know better than to call another human being an “it”.

  29. NM: “Rest assured John Best, no one will speak any worse of you once you’ve shuffled off this mortal coil.”

    I can’t imagine that it is possible to speak any worse of JBJr post mortem that it is ante mortem. In the words of John Cooper-Clarke, slightly adapted: They can’t find a good word for him, but I can…
    (expletive deleted).

  30. And just to remind people about Lorna Wing

    She is like Bernie Rimland was, a parent of an autistic child, whom she has sadly outlived. As far as what we now know about autism we owe much more to Lorna Wing and her more sober minded colleagues than we do to Bernie Rimland, for Rimland never finished what he started and saw it through, the true legacy is with the likes of Lorna Wing, who once autism was established not to be pyschodynamic sorted out just what it was leaving a legacy for the next researchers to follow.

    But she was more than a clinician, indeed you could blame her for being responsible for the autistic epidemic if you like, by coming up with diagnostic protocols, and going out to look for autism in the world amongst those diagnosed as retarded or in mental institutions diagnosed as Schizophrenic. Someone who has been concerned to see proper services develop and campaigned for that. Of course she has not done that alone, but with colleagues and others taking there fair share of the credit.

    No the image of Saint Bernie was like every thing else seems to be in the Wild and Wacky West, a product of mythologisation and hero worship. The man died, we are all mortal and he was no giant. I hope all that “missile into the heart of autism” Bullshit will die with him and that all his groupies will pack there bags and go home leaving the serious business of autism to those who really know what they are doing.

  31. “John Best: I find it interesting that you chose to use the pronoun “it” instead of “he” or “she” in referring to Camille’s child, as if her child were on the same level as her dog or cat [assuming, of course, that she has a dog or cat].”

    More like an object. I don’t call animals it. Except perhaps a snail or other single-sex creature.
    I don’t care what causes autism. If it’s mercury, it’s unusually benign for mercury, since the autistics I’ve met are not seriously ill. Some have allergies or migraines or seizures, but the only life-threatening stuff is directly caused by society (eg trouble getting enough to eat/drink, being murdered or given life-threatening ‘treatment’). Even so, if I had a child with something like trisomy 13 that is life threatening, I’d want treatment for the health problems but wouldn’t want it to make them normal.
    What’s so bad about diapers, anyway? I didn’t mind them when I used to wear them. I didn’t like Good Nights when my mom got me them, but that was probably just that it had been 5 or so years since I last wore diapers and I wasn’t used to them anymore.
    I wonder how you can claim to care about autiostic children while attacking autistics. Most parents of disabled children realize it’s hurtful to use comparison to their children as an insult. I mean, I have yet to meet a parent of a developmentally delayed kid who isn’t upset by hearing someone use ‘retard’ as an insult.

  32. shiva: “I have a strong feeling “John Best” is either trolling or trying (not very effectively) to be satirical…”

    Both, actually, but not really very well.

  33. Mr Best,

    If you’ve given up on communicating with people here as people, and are going to confine yourself to venting your fantasies about having Social Service or God forcibly rewrite their personalities so they like and agree with you, why are you even posting here? If you post, “You’ll like me and agree with me after my group makes it legal to forcibly rewrite your personality!” do you expect anyone to go, “Oh, I want to have my personality replaced so I have more in common with the person I don’t like?” Do you think you’re persuading people?

    Or do you just enjoy making people angry and frightend?

  34. There’s a few ways you can refer to a person in a non-gendered way without using “it”:

    “She/he”, or “s/he”, or “(s)he”, or any one of those strange ways of writing both when you don’t know which it is.

    “He or she”.

    “They”. Yes, this is a more accepted way of doing gender-neutral singular than you might expect.

    “xe”/”xyr”/”xem” or “ze”/”zir”/”zem”. (Both pronounced the same.) Those are recently-made-up gender-neutral pronouns. So is “sie”/”hir”.

    At any rate, there’s lots of alternatives to “it”.

  35. Mr Best,

    So you’re in favor of responding to predjudice (“being picked on because he was autistic”) by forcing the group being mistreated to become more normal, rather than encouraging respectful behavior as a social standard? Personally, I’d target the bullies for correction before the bullied.

    And do you consider becoming more trusting (“lose his paranoia”), being less of what you’d consider disagreeable, more social behavior (which is generally considered a component of increased functioning), and feeling gratitude to someone he seems to dislike intensely a personality change, or not? Because if it is, than your post about having him ‘cured’ by social services is a discussion of forcibly altering his personality. If not, I’m curious what would constitute a personality change in your views.

    If someone wanted to subject you to a treatment that would make you speak well of people you currently genuinely dislike (I’m sure you can think of a few names), and this treatment claimed to operate by physically altering your brain functions, would you have any concern about how this would rewrite your personality or your sense of self? Would you assume anything that made you more agreeable, less likely to be picked on, and could gain a few IQ points was an unequivocal good? Or would you worry about someone you disagreed with tampering with your mind to make you fit their idea of better?

    Also, do you think your approach to communicating with the people at this blog is potentially persuasive, or do you simply wish to provoke hostility and fear? You didn’t answer that question.

  36. The truth is that no cured autistic person has ever asked to revert to being autistic.

    If this is true, it is only because there ARE NO cured autistic persons. Show us one, just one.

  37. I actually know an autistic woman whose greatest regret is learning language.
    that is such an intriguing statement. as a person whose #1 perseveration is language(s), both as an art and as struggle (or often both simultaneously), i am very curious to know more of her story about that. if she would not mind, could you tell it? if she has told it herself, can you give a URL or reference?
    if that is very private to her, then nevermind the curiousity, of course.

  38. Imbecile Northeastern: “Andrews; You’ll speak well of me after Finland’s Social Services learns that you should be cured and helps you.”

    You need to give up comedy. You don’t raise any laughs.

    Imbecile Northeastern: “I’m not discouraging respect.”

    You’re just not giving it.

    What the fuck is this obsession you have with me? You really are clinically warped. If you can be cured of this obsession by being chelated, I’ll buy into the theory. Until then, stick your ALA where the sun don’t shine.

  39. JB: I don’t have moles. (Well there is that one on my arm…) I don’t even have “people” in the sense of “I’ll have my people call your people.” You must be confusing me with someone important. And creepy.

  40. John, obviously you have a two rule system in your head.

    “J; Andrews’ personality might not change just because he got the mercury out of his head. He might function better though and would no longer feel he was being picked on because he was autistic. He might lose his paranoia and be less disagreeable and he’d probably add a few IQ points. For that, I’m sure he’d be grateful.”

    This was entirely an insult. You may not think so, but I’d say that most reading it do. You want me to stop insulting you, you have a lot to do before your earn that, I can tell you.

    Start getting rid of your insulting material about me, and I’ll be glad to start seeing you in a better light.

    Sadly, I hold out absoultely no hope that you would ever do that.

    So you’ll be lucky if I have any motiviation not to refer to you as what I have every right to see you as: an insult-mongering, unintelligent, boorish piece of elephant-shite.

    If, on the other hand, you were to get rid of your very insulting thread about me on your blog (no, I haven’t read it, but a lawyer friend of mine told me about it)… that I would see as a start.

  41. ImbecileNorthEastern: “Andrews; I got rid of a couple of posts about you recently. You’d have to be more specific.
    No insult intended, my son functions much better with some of the mercury gone. You can apply your quoted “insult” to every person on the spectrum who has not proven that their disability is genetic.”

    I’d say that just about everything you have said about/to me has been insulting.

    So, remove everything.

    Odd thing is, there was one remark you made that didn’t seem like baiting that someone thought was. That remark was obvious as non-insulting based on the fact that everything else you’ve ever posted about/to me has been insulting.

    You are going to have to do way better than this, Imbecile.

  42. Imbecile: “Andrews, Calling me an imbecile isn’t going to persuade me to remove any comments I’ve made about you.”

    So you get referred to as that then, since it’s evidently what you are.

    You want me to not insult you, show me first that same respect. If you can’t do that, stop whinging all the time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s