Tuesday, July 20, 2010

not my kind of prophecy


Today, this note was lying in our parking space, in front of our apartment, when Nathan got home from work. We do not know where it came from, who left it, if it's meant as a joke, or if someone is really concerned about how excessively we spoil our dog. What we do know is that Seamus is for sure the closest thing to a child we plan on having and that we would never trade him in for anything! Also, Nacogdoches is weird.

(Whether it's a joke or not, we're taking it as one. The note is currently on our refrigerator, where it will no doubt hang for a very long time!)

18 comments:

  1. I definitely think it is one for the permanent refrigerator door file, but...it's creepy and judgey. Usually, I find judgey kind of entertaining, but...yeah. Besides, why would anyone trade? We want Molly AND a baby for her to snack on. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Woah. Yeah, there's one more reason I'm glad to be out of the South

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maybe it was Pauly Shore!! He heard you hated his BJ jokes :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have tried to not be too judgey about this note, thinking of all the ways it could be a joke, or a friend messing around, or someone who is legitimately concerned. But I'm failing. It really does seem like someone dislikes our choice of adopting a dog instead of having a baby, which is just bizarre any way you look at it. C'est la vie. At least it says a lot about how well Seamus is treated!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry for the winded (does that make sense if it's text?) comment - I'm so BORED!

    I doubt it's anything to worry about. It might be possible that one of your neighbors thinks that you two do so well together and/or that you would make good parents. I don't think that there was any malicious intent here. It might be a compliment, not a critique. Who knows?!

    And it's not like you adopted a dog "instead of" having a baby. Who would think that? That just doesn't make sense. One isn't a substitute for the other. It's like saying, "We were gonna have a baby, but we got a dog instead." Or, "We were thinking about a dog, but opted for the baby." That's just weird. Sure, pets are family members, but they're not little humans; dogs are WAY easier to deal with. (And much more grateful!)

    All the same, you should consider some hand-writing analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think you need to buy a baby bonnet for Seamus and have him wear it around the complex. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. @mulleina - I'm not worried, per se, and I do like you suggestion to take it as a compliment. I'm mostly weirded out that someone would take such an interest in my choices to go to the trouble to leave a note like this. Maybe they don't like Seamus' barking though I would think a baby crying would be more annoying to a neighbor. Who knows. And yes, you can most definitely have a dog AND a baby, should you so desire them!

    @Zay - Bonnet. I love it. Can I borrow some of O's cast offs? :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm really glad you're taking this with a sense of humor, it touches a raw spot for me. It's the insinuation that I am reading into the note that a couple is not a "family" unless they have (human) children. Or that marriage is solely for raising children. Grr.

    Or that animals are less deserving of love and care than humans. Grr.

    But in good humor, two words: BABY BJORN.

    PS our three cats are treated like children! Neither of us have a desire to have children, although we sometimes think about (one day in the far far future) adopting an LGBT teen who has been kicked out of their house for their sexuality/gender identity.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yeah, to me as well this implies a family isn't complete without a baby, that whoever wrote this is incredibly archaic and uninformed and wants to to subscribe to their outlook on life. However, it is also hilarious and I'm glad you're taking it that way. Some people need to butt out and get a life! Notes on the door, really? Don't they know you have a blog they could spam anonymously? Hahaha. :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why would you want to EVER trade a loving, adorable, loveable dog for a useless,squalling lump of human baby?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I just have to say I love the comments and this post again! It's nice to know there are other childfree and pet-loving people and that the blogosphere is not completely baby-obsessed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Michael Huxley, all evidence points to a carpetbagger, or some other import of questionable lineage, as the culprit. A true southerner would have found a much more subtle and passive-aggressive way to make the point.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I would hardly call a baby a useless, squalling lump. That seems a bit uncalled for.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Just had a thought...we DO need more intelligent people to start procreating...

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  15. After the recent baby-boom among my friends, I am pretty sure the world is in good hands without my genetic contribution. I will, however, be the best Aunt ever!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I wonder if someone left a note like that for the woman who just recently killed her two children. Yeah, it's wonderful the way the majority of our society believes it's some sort of basic human function to reproduce, regardless of a person's ability to properly raise a child. I hope whoever wrote that note is sterile, because my guess is that they're a freak who shouldn't be near children, or pets.

    ReplyDelete
  17. SO WEIRD. I hate that having kids is seen as 'normal', something we all have to do and are supposed to want to do. So far me and my husband don't want any kids. Actually, we already have plenty - they are all just four legged!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Here, here, Chrissy. Babies are adorable and fun at parties. Most of the useless, squalling lumps I know are adults, and it seems like it took them years of effort to achieve that status.

    ReplyDelete