Bobby Allowing Pam To Take Christopher From Him

[Kenny Coyote]

Chill out!

Look, I'm providing some content for the forum so people can have some enjoyment. If you have any imagination of your own, then write about what you think you would do in Bobby's situation. It's easy to just sit back and criticize other's contributions, but a number of people have had the imagination and put forth the effort to write about what they would do in that scenario. They offered up some content in the thread to try to make other people think, to make them laugh, to provide some entertainment value for everyone else here and you just can't stand it can you?

You can't stand that you don't have the imagination or creativity to put yourself in Bobby's situation and describe how you'd handle the situation. @Jon Ewing Jr. did it, @James from London did it, @Piggy It's Kermit Outside did a unique comedic version of it,, and @The Holiday Whore well, what did you contribute?All you mustered was to say how frightened you are of other people's "views" as you put it. Frightened of what? That they're more interesting than anything you think you could do?

I don't give a rat's ass whether you like the thread I created or not but if it wasn't interesting to you, you'd have gone to another thread you liked better, wouldn't you? The others who posted here wrote about what they'd do in Bobby's position because it interested them. They had fun. Imagine that! Neither I nor anybody else who actually participated felt the need to criticize other people's efforts. Why? Because they all know it's just for fun! They get it! Meanwhile, instead of creating anything of your own, instead of saying what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation, all you want to do is take a seat on the sideline and try cut other people' contributions down while offering no substance of your own. Shows your level.

 

[Alexis]

Look, I'm providing some content for the forum so people can have some enjoyment. If you have any imagination of your own, then write about what you think you would do in Bobby's situation. It's easy to just sit back and criticize other's contributions, but a number of people have had the imagination and put forth the effort to write about what they would do in that scenario. They offered up some content in the thread to try to make other people think, to make them laugh, to provide some entertainment value for everyone else here and you just can't stand it can you?

Why can't stand that you don't have the imagination or creativity to put yourself in Bobby's situation and describe how you handle the situation. @Jon Ewing Jr. did it, @James from London did it, @Piggy It's Kermit Outside did a unique comedic version of it,, and @The Holiday Whore well, what did you contribute?All you mustered was to say how frightened you are of other people's "views" as you put it. Frightened of what? That they're more interesting than anything you think you could do?

I don't give a rat's ass whether you like the thread I created or not but if it wasn't interesting to you, you'd have gone to another thread you liked better, wouldn't you? The others who posted here wrote about what they'd do in Bobby's position because it interested them. They had fun. Imagine that! Neither I nor anybody else who actually participated felt the need to criticize other people's efforts. Why? Because they all know it's just for fun! They get it! Meanwhile, instead of creating anything of your own, instead of saying what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation, all you want to do is to a seat on the sideline and try cut other people' contributions down while offering no substance of your own. Shows your level.

Ok, lets get into this. Now it's a long while since I last watched Dallas but basically Pam was living in a nut house. In an environment that she didn't feel was healthy for her or her child. Especially after her suffering from severe depression and being unhappy. Her wanting to leave was probably the shows only logical idea at that point. Why should she continue to live with a bunch of toxic people she doesn't want to live with? Why should she have to? Why should she be dragged into Ewing feuds and be treated like crap?
The scenario you invented for what should have happened just isn't what Dallas was about. That would have been JR's response to Sue Ellen, never Bobby's response to Pam. Bobby as a character wasn't perfect by any means, he could be awfully smug at times. However he was the "good guy" of Dallas. He wasn't threatened by Pam and he didn't think that she would poison their child or as you put it make the child a Barnes or Wentworth. These ideas are nothing to do with Dallas or Bobby or Pam but your own ideas, which aren't that dissimilar to JR's ideas.

Hence why I find a lot of the views in this thread to be frightening. As JR was an arch villain type, he was of course written with a wink here and a nudge there, but he was a terrible person if he was in the real world outside of the constraints of a soap opera set up.

I mean I love Dynasty. I love Alexis, but I know she was a two faced, lying, slutting, manipulative bitch with the morals of an alley cat. And that's fine.

Also your thoughts on Dallas always just have this same slant. The men should all be dominant, strong, authoritarian bastards and the women should do as they are told and keep the baby quiet until it's ready to join the supreme patriarchy.
Jesus... And I am not even a feminist.

 

[Jimmy Todd]

I have mixed feelings about this --- which is probably healthy (although I'm probably biased).

On one hand, there are and always have been, conservative caucasian American hetero-normative males who view Jock and JR as sacrosanct characters whose actions are benign and god-like, and their detractors horrible monsters. It's both fascinating and uninteresting simultaneously. And they'll decry Bobby's shameful atrocities against his big brother, but will side with Bobby (or Ray) if a woman doesn't get in line with the program without complaint.

I don't even know how to address those perspectives except to read them and shake my head.

That said, Pam -- like her sister, Katherine, and mother, Rebecca --- was also "under-written" to a degree. She had to sometimes show excessive concern for her rascal of a brother, Cliff, when he was down so the Romeo & Juliet dynamic of DALLAS' original premise would continue onward. That did sometimes result in Pam seemingly committing rather inconsistent acts and having unpredictable responses to the drama swirling around her. She needed to do what the writers needed her to do to keep the conflict going, so we're told to accept that she's never completely gotten over the anti-Ewing stories she grew up with, smashing windows out at the Ewing building when she was a teenager.

Do I think Pam was justified in leaving Southfork and taking the baby that Bobby illegally obtained just a year earlier because her mother died in a plane crash during the battle over Jock's will? Well, no, I don't think she should have. And maybe I would have an easier time accepting her railing about the Ewing values negatively affecting her child if David Jacobs' initial concept of them -- a bunch of lousy bastards, including Miss "Fair? I don't care if it's fair!" Ellie --- had been maintained. But in classic Old TV fashion, everybody in the family quickly became nice and conscientious and merely dithered over JR's unilateral villainy and whether they should throw him off the ranch this time around as the result of his latest moral transgression.

Pam viewed JR the same way the rest of the Ewing family did. So it didn't always make any sense.

I'm interested in the "fair" comment by Miss Ellie. Was it in the miniseries, and was she originally portrayed to be not as nice as she was later?

 

[Toni]

Look, I'm providing some content for the forum so people can have some enjoyment. If you have any imagination of your own, then write about what you think you would do in Bobby's situation. It's easy to just sit back and criticize other's contributions, but a number of people have had the imagination and put forth the effort to write about what they would do in that scenario. They offered up some content in the thread to try to make other people think, to make them laugh, to provide some entertainment value for everyone else here and you just can't stand it can you?

Why can't stand that you don't have the imagination or creativity to put yourself in Bobby's situation and describe how you handle the situation. @Jon Ewing Jr. did it, @James from London did it, @Piggy It's Kermit Outside did a unique comedic version of it,, and @The Holiday Whore well, what did you contribute?All you mustered was to say how frightened you are of other people's "views" as you put it. Frightened of what? That they're more interesting than anything you think you could do?

I don't give a rat's ass whether you like the thread I created or not but if it wasn't interesting to you, you'd have gone to another thread you liked better, wouldn't you? The others who posted here wrote about what they'd do in Bobby's position because it interested them. They had fun. Imagine that! Neither I nor anybody else who actually participated felt the need to criticize other people's efforts. Why? Because they all know it's just for fun! They get it! Meanwhile, instead of creating anything of your own, instead of saying what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation, all you want to do is to a seat on the sideline and try cut other people' contributions down while offering no substance of your own. Shows your level.

Ahaaa! Finally you realized how unique I am...!​

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Especially after her suffering from severe depression

Yes, Pam had been severely depressed. She had a complete mental breakdown just the previous year and was about to jump off the roof of a building when Bobby got there just in time to pull her away from the edge. Wow, how awful that I wouldn't want Pam being the parent with sole custody of our baby boy. What if her mother's death pushes her back into another mental breakdown? Who is going to ensure Christopher's welfare then? Cliff? He just tried to kill himself last year, taking about 50 tranquilizers. Does either of them sound stable to you?

If I'm Bobby, I know I'm the only stable parent Christopher has right now. Therefore, Christopher stays with me at Southfork, with Miss Ellie and the rest of his family. That doesn't make me a villain; it makes me a responsible parent.

 

[Alexis]

Yes, Pam had been severely depressed. She had a complete mental breakdown just the previous year and was about to jump off the roof of a building when Bobby got there just in time to pull her away from the edge. Wow, how awful that I wouldn't want Pam being the parent with sole custody of our baby boy. What if her mother's death pushes her back into another mental breakdown? Who is going to ensure Christopher's welfare then? Cliff? He just tried to kill himself last year, taking about 50 tranquilizers. Does either of them sound stable to you?

If I'm Bobby, I know I'm the only stable parent Christopher has right now. Therefore, Christopher stays with me at Southfork, with Miss Ellie and the rest of his family. That doesn't make me a villain; it makes me a responsible parent.

Yes of course, we get it. Non Ewings are bad. Terrible people. Mentally unhinged baby killers, be they mothers or uncles.
Also I am not sure, but I don't think that Pam wanted sole custody of Christopher. I don't think she wanted to keep the child away from his father. She just wanted to leave Southfork and have a separation from Bobby for a while. That's not all that uncommon. People have to work through things in marriages all the time. Pam was expressing that she was a person with wants and desires and a voice of her own. Why should she have to live in Bobby's parents house with a man that showed outright contempt for her and her brother. How is that conducive to her child's health and well being? Why should she be tormented by stupid fighting and family politics forever? Maybe that wasn't her dream?
I had countered your calling out post with one that answered all of your points and explained why I thought that your views and some others in this thread were frightening. You came back with one point, that Pam and Cliff were mentally unstable. Every wonder why?
Just because JR didn't attempt suicide doesn't mean he wasn't unhinged.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I had countered your calling out post with one that answered all of your points and explained why I thought that your views and some others in this thread were frightening. You came back with one point, that Pam and Cliff were mentally unstable. Every wonder why?

No, I don't wonder why. The part about who was the more stable, capable parent at that point in time is what is relevant to the topic. I believe the child belongs with the one who is the more stable, capable, parent. At that time, I believe Bobby was that parent. I wouldn't let my wife take my son away if she had recently tried to commit suicide. Damn, what a male chauvinist way to look at it, right? That's why, if I were in Bobby's situation I would choose to tell Pam exactly what I posted in the OP. It's because I'd want my son's health and well-being to be in the hands of the more stable, capable parent. Somehow, that frightens you. Somehow, it means I’m just like JR Ewing. I happen to think that’s just a bit of a stretch, but, whatever!


Oh well. You were free to frighten us with your response as to how poorly you would handle the situation and you chose not to say what you'd do.


You didn't want to say what you would do; you just wanted to sit on the sidelines and judge me and other forum members for saying what they would do in Bobby's situation. Wow, it really took some guts on your part to take such a courageous stand.


I wasn't gonna mention it, but since you practically begged me to respond to the rest of your post, I will. For one thing, it included the following gem:

These ideas are nothing to do with Dallas

Really? "These ideas" are taken directly from Dallas! It's a scenario from a Dallas episode. The thread puts you in Bobby Ewing's place. It asks you what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation.


It's really not that complicated. I just added some extra commentary for entertainment value, as did everyone else who chose to take part in it. Why? Because the whole purpose of it is to make it interesting enough so that it's fun for the people who read it. That's basically what the whole forum is for - to provide interesting content to the forum members for their enjoyment. If that's not exactly it, then it's at least close.


I'm pretty sure the purpose of this forum isn't to sermonize people and judge their morality. So, as I said, I wasn't gonna mention it, but what do I think of the rest of the points you made in your post? I think: Congratulations on posting what may be the most holier-than-thou, self-serving, sanctimonious crap anyone here has ever seen posted on this forum.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

No, I don't wonder why. The part about who was the more stable, capable parent at that point in time is what is relevant to the topic. I believe the child belongs with the one who is the more stable, capable, parent. At that time, I believe Bobby was that parent. I wouldn't let my wife take my son away if she had recently tried to commit suicide. Damn, what a male chauvinist way to look at it, right? That's why, if I were in Bobby's situation I would choose to tell Pam exactly what I posted in the OP. It's because I'd want my son's health and well-being to be in the hands of the more stable, capable parent. Somehow, that frightens you. Somehow, it means I’m just like JR Ewing. I happen to think that’s just a bit of a stretch, but, whatever!


Oh well. You were free to frighten us with your response as to how poorly you would handle the situation and you chose not to say what you'd do.


You didn't want to say what you would do; you just wanted to sit on the sidelines and judge me and other forum members for saying what they would do in Bobby's situation. Wow, it really took some guts on your part to take such a courageous stand.


I wasn't gonna mention it, but since you practically begged me to respond to the rest of your post, I will. For one thing, it included the following gem:





Really? "These ideas" are taken directly from Dallas! It's a scenario from a Dallas episode. The thread puts you in Bobby Ewing's place. It asks you what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation.


It's really not that complicated. I just added some extra commentary for entertainment value, as did everyone else who chose to take part in it. Why? Because the whole purpose of it is to make it interesting enough so that it's fun for the people who read it. That's basically what the whole forum is for - to provide interesting content to the forum members for their enjoyment. If that's not exactly it, then it's at least close.


I'm pretty sure the purpose of this forum isn't to sermonize people and judge their morality. So, as I said, I wasn't gonna mention it, but what do I think of the rest of the points you made in your post? I think: Congratulations on posting what may be the most holier-than-thou, self-serving, sanctimonious crap anyone here has ever seen posted on this forum.

All of that's kind of silly.

 

[Alexis]

No, I don't wonder why. The part about who was the more stable, capable parent at that point in time is what is relevant to the topic. I believe the child belongs with the one who is the more stable, capable, parent. At that time, I believe Bobby was that parent. I wouldn't let my wife take my son away if she had recently tried to commit suicide. Damn, what a male chauvinist way to look at it, right? That's why, if I were in Bobby's situation I would choose to tell Pam exactly what I posted in the OP. It's because I'd want my son's health and well-being to be in the hands of the more stable, capable parent. Somehow, that frightens you. Somehow, it means I’m just like JR Ewing. I happen to think that’s just a bit of a stretch, but, whatever!


Oh well. You were free to frighten us with your response as to how poorly you would handle the situation and you chose not to say what you'd do.


You didn't want to say what you would do; you just wanted to sit on the sidelines and judge me and other forum members for saying what they would do in Bobby's situation. Wow, it really took some guts on your part to take such a courageous stand.


I wasn't gonna mention it, but since you practically begged me to respond to the rest of your post, I will. For one thing, it included the following gem:





Really? "These ideas" are taken directly from Dallas! It's a scenario from a Dallas episode. The thread puts you in Bobby Ewing's place. It asks you what you'd do if you were in Bobby's situation.


It's really not that complicated. I just added some extra commentary for entertainment value, as did everyone else who chose to take part in it. Why? Because the whole purpose of it is to make it interesting enough so that it's fun for the people who read it. That's basically what the whole forum is for - to provide interesting content to the forum members for their enjoyment. If that's not exactly it, then it's at least close.


I'm pretty sure the purpose of this forum isn't to sermonize people and judge their morality. So, as I said, I wasn't gonna mention it, but what do I think of the rest of the points you made in your post? I think: Congratulations on posting what may be the most holier-than-thou, self-serving, sanctimonious crap anyone here has ever seen posted on this forum.

Well that's the first time I have ever been called holier-than-thou. So thank you for that.

You asked for my opinion, to elaborate on why I found your posts frightening. I gave it, and you react in this manner. Basically shouting me down and enforcing on me your point of view.
The scenario you made up is not taken directly from Dallas. It never happened. It never would have happened on Dallas. Not between Bobby and Pam, because that's not who those people were. I could go on to write reams about what I would do in certain situations pertaining to Dallas. I could say what I would do if I were Bobby or Pam or Digger or Afton. But that wouldn't be about Dallas. That would be my fanfiction. That's what your little scenario was, and it never happened on Dallas because it would have been awful writing and a story that went nowhere fast.

What would I do in Bobby's place. If I truly loved my wife? I would listen to her and understand the depths of her despair and unhappiness and do something to change that. Anything to change that. If it meant moving her to another house and offering her support then of course I would do that. She didn't say she never wanted to see Bobby again, or that she was never going to let him or his family see his child. And Pam wouldn't have done that, as that is not who she was.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

All of that's kind of silly.

Maybe it was, but considering the post I was replying to, it seemed appropriate. I took a Dallas scenario and said what I'd have done if I'd been in Bobby's situation - or to put it another way, I said what I think Bobby should have said to her in that situation. Pam had tried to jump off a building just the previous year and he hands their baby boy over to her? Now that's worse than "a little silly."

All I did was create a thread to try to provide some enjoyment for the rest of the people here. A number of people responded positively. If some people weren't interested in it, that's fine too, but why repeatedly post on a thread that doesn't interest you, for the sake of judging people's morality and telling them some of their views are frightening?

It didn't even stop there. I wasn't going to get into it any further, but then, @The Holiday Whore practically insisted that I respond to her entire post - Since the rest wasn't relevant to the topic, I wasn't going to mention it. @The Holiday Whore basically went on to say I'm an arch villain on par with JR Ewing, how dare I make my decision based on keeping the child with the more stable of the two parents, how it has nothing at all to do with Dallas, that Bobby would never do such an awful thing - that only JR would.

I didn't come here for a sermon. You'd think if she didn't enjoy my thread, she'd find a thread she likes, but oh no, that would be too rational. @The Holiday Whore even went on further! I guess I hadn't been properly chastised yet. So then @The Holiday Whore descended into an absolute mess of a paranoid, neurotic rant invoking such nonsensical terms as "the supreme patriarchy"! Geez, I thought the idea was to have a good time, and in return for my efforts to create a fun thread for people, to add just a little bit of enjoyment to their day, I get that?

 

[Alexis]

@The Holiday Whore practically insisted that I respond to her entire post

I did no such thing.

. @The Holiday Whore basically went on to say I'm an arch villain on par with JR Ewing,

You're reaction to Pam and Bobby's dilemma was exactly the reaction JR would have had to Sue Ellen. So?

You'd think if she didn't enjoy my thread

HE.

such nonsensical terms as "the supreme patriarchy"!

Not nonsense at all. If you need to understand the meaning of nonsensical go read over your previous replies to me.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I did no such thing.

The following quote suggests otherwise:

I had countered your calling out post with one that answered all of your points and explained why I thought that your views and some others in this thread were frightening. You came back with one point

It suggests you didn't want me to reply to just one point, but to the rest of them as well.

You're reaction to Pam and Bobby's dilemma was exactly the reaction JR would have had to Sue Ellen. So?

It wouldn't mean anything by itself to say the above, except you said the following:

Hence why I find a lot of the views in this thread to be frightening. As JR was an arch villain type, he was of course written with a wink here and a nudge there, but he was a terrible person

Are you saying that you didn't do that to equate me to "terrible person" and that the above quote wasn't meant to say the decision I'd have made is the decision only an "arch villain" would make?

HE

How was I supposed to know that The Holiday Whore is a man? That was completely unintentional. Sorry about that.

Not nonsense at all.

Do you seriously believe in such a thing as "a supreme patriarchy"? How about the idea that the Earth is flat? Is that valid too?

 

[Alexis]

It suggests you didn't want me to reply to just one point, but to the rest of them as well.

I didn't insist on anything though. You are just making stuff up to support your anger. I merely pointed out what you did.

Are you saying that you didn't do that to equate me to "terrible person" and that the above quote wasn't meant to say the decision I'd have made is the decision only an "arch villain" would make?

I find your reaction, or your scenario to the Bobby/Pam situation to be frightening. Archaic and chauvinistic would describe it better. I guess that's not far from a terrible person. Your reaction was like something JR would do. So yes... You would be villainous.

How was I supposed to know that The Holiday Whore is a man? That was completely unintentional. Sorry about that.

Of course, only women are whores.

Do you seriously believe in such a thing as "a supreme patriarchy"? How about the idea that the Earth is flat? Is that valid too?

Oh boy.... Somethings just go right over your Stetson don't they?

 

[Laurie!]

How do you figure Bobby was not "grown up" and Pam was? Pam lost her mind when she found out that they would need to wait to adopt to have children, and like a child she refused to wait a couple years to adopt.

I despised the moaning Pam who wanted to jump off the roof cause she couldn't have a baby storyline. However, it was a storyline about a mental breakdown which is a very legitimate health issue...it's not a sign of immaturity!

Bobby was like 28 years old in the beginning and he'd never had a real job. That's pretty damned immature. He also lived with his Mommy and Daddy....again, pretty damned immature. He then went to work at his Daddy's company to prove his manhood. Pretty damned immature. But alas...that was the premise of DALLAS so without all of that, it wouldn't be the show we still talk about.

I just find it striking that you take it all so seriously and always seem like a bit of a male chauvinist and blame the women for all evil on the show.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

You are just making stuff up to support your anger.

It's not about anger; it's regarding stuff like the following quote

I find your reaction, or your scenario to the Bobby/Pam situation to be frightening. Archaic and chauvinistic would describe it better. I guess that's not far from a terrible person. Your reaction was like something JR would do. So yes... You would be villainous.

Like I said: I thought the idea was to have a good time, and in return for my efforts to create a fun thread for people, to add just a little bit of enjoyment to their day, I get that? If you don't agree, say what you'd do.

Presume to judge me, my morality or anything if the kind and I'll give you right back what you give me - you choose which way you want it. It makes no difference to me whether @The Holiday Whore is a call girl or s streetwalker, but how you act is how you'll be treated. Bottom line, bud.

 

[Chris2]

Seriously, we’re calling other posters “terrible people” just because they wanted Bobby to get Christopher instead of Pam? Frankly, I find it a bit frightening that people will jump to that judgement based on a thread on the “Dallas” message board.

 

[Alexis]

Like I said: I thought the idea was to have a good time, and in return for my efforts to create a fun thread for people, to add just a little bit of enjoyment to their day, I get that? If you don't agree, say what you'd do.

I already said what I would do! And I said how I feel about what you would do multiple times. I don't agree with you. I have said why, what more do you need?

Presume to judge me, my morality or anything if the kind and I'll give you right back what you give me - you choose which way you want it. It makes no difference to me whether @The Holiday Whore is a call girl or s streetwalker, but how you act is how you'll be treated. Bottom line, bud.

What is that? Some kind of half assed threat? Don't be ridiculous. I have only expressed my view on something you said. I don't agree with you. I don't think Bobby would ever have reacted the way you prescribe he should have. What is the big deal? It's quite clear to me and others that what you would have liked him to do is behave as JR would. I don't think that should have or would have ever happened.

Seriously, we’re calling other posters “terrible people” just because they wanted Bobby to get Christopher instead of Pam? Frankly, I find anyone who would make that judgement based on a thread on the “Dallas” message board to be a bit “frightening” themselves

No we are not saying that. If you read the posts I say what @Kenny Coyote envisioned for Bobby to do in the situation was to react like JR would, and I and others think JR was a terrible person. So that's frightening. Don't twist words. I said his point of view was archaic and chauvinistic, which I think a lot of people would agree with.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I despised the moaning Pam who wanted to jump off the roof cause she couldn't have a baby storyline. However, it was a storyline about a mental breakdown which is a very legitimate health issue...it's not a sign of immaturity!

Bobby was like 28 years old in the beginning and he'd never had a real job. That's pretty damned immature. He also lived with his Mommy and Daddy....again, pretty damned immature. He then went to work at his Daddy's company to prove his manhood. Pretty damned immature. But alas...that was the premise of DALLAS so without all of that, it wouldn't be the show we still talk about.

I just find it striking that you take it all so seriously and always seem like a bit of a male chauvinist and blame the women for all evil on the show.

Some people think it's always a woman's fault; some people thinks it's never a woman's fault.

Besides, is being the company pimp in your twenties immature? Around Southfork, it's just so hard to tell.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

No we are not saying that. If you read the posts I say what @Kenny Coyote envisioned for Bobby to do in the situation was to react like JR would, and I and others think JR was a terrible person. So that's frightening. Don't twist words.

You're not saying that? So then you didn't post this:

Archaic and chauvinistic would describe it better. I guess that's not far from a terrible person. Your reaction was like something JR would do. So yes... You would be villainous.

So, technically, you didn't say I'm a terrible person, you said I'm "not far from a terrible person" I'm only "villainous."

This is all because I believe a man should place the safety and well-being of his children as his top priority. That being the case, I would not, nor have I ever left one of my children in the care if a person known to be mentally unstable - such as a woman who tried to throw herself off the roof of a building recently. If I'm in Bobby's place how do I know that the death of her mother isn't going to send Pam right back into another complete mental breakdown? I don't know that and I would never gamble with the safety of my child.

I'm a father and have two sons and a daughter - all of them adults now. Based on my experience on being a father, and the comments you've directed towards me and my belief of what a father's top priority should be, you don't sound like you're a father because you don't sound like you know the first thing about what a responsible father needs to do. You have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to being a father if you'd place a child in the sole care of a woman who recently tried to jump off the roof of a building and is now looking like she's headed straight for another mental breakdown. She's got no regard for whether she lives or dies and you'd trust her with your kid? What kid? You'd never make such a negligent decision if you were a father but you're not one, so how would you know anything about it?

 

[Alexis]

So, technically, you didn't say I'm a terrible person, you said I'm "not far from a terrible person" I'm only "villainous."

I said that the reaction you would have would not be in character with Bobby but would be more in line with JR. Who is a terrible person. So your reaction would reflect that.

I MEAN HOW HARD IS IT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

I feel like I have expressed this about 17899999999 times in this thread already. And explained myself over and over. I am done.