Unnecessary Roughness
March 27, 2009 at 12:57 am 18 comments
It’s no secret, I suppose, that I don’t have much liking for Poop on Peeps Chicken Liver. I totally agree with alot of what’s said there, particularly in the comments. There’s just something about that Chick that rubs me wrong. Creeps me out a little. Her writing is freakin’ ridiculous. The way she interprets other blogger’s. Come on – somebody admit it. She puts a fucked up spin on everything. Her hate for Dooce is wildly, incredibly intense. Don’t tell me it’s about concern for Dooce’s kid. No way. It’s way deeper than that.
Now Chick has found a new blogger to pick on, this time it’s Kristen Chase of Motherhood Uncensored. She’s gone way over the line this time, though. Her complaint with MU is that Kristen posted about her son, and his obsession with farts. Chick’s rant is about Kristen’s use of the phrase “tiny little asshole”. She thinks it’s is a sexual word, and Kristen put her child in danger by referring to her son’s. Never mind we all have one.
The most horrifying part of Chick’s rant is when she accuses Kristen of having a sexual fascination with her son. Now, I don’t know about y’all, but I would go ballistic if that were me. She may as well call her a child molester and pervert. A sexual fascination? Yes, it does take a sick mind to see it that way. Or a coldhearted bitch looking for traffic. You decide.
I think Chick’s real problem with Motherhood Uncensored is that Kristen is known for posting alot about sex. But to suggest a sexual fascination? That’s fucked up. Sorry, but it is.
Salacious, she calls it. She’s even kind enough to define salacious as lustful and lecherous, obscene and grossly indecent. The MU post certainly wasn’t in the least bit lustful, nor lecherous. Obscene and grossly indecent? Hardly- it was about farts, people! But Chick’s entry? Definately grossly obscene. Crossing lines that can’t be uncrossed.
Isn’t exploitation exploitation no matter who is the exploiter is? If Kristen Chase is exploiting her son with this post (and I don’t think she is), isn’t Chick exploiting said child as well? Isn’t she actually doubly guilty of this offense, considering that it is she, and not Kristen who is referring to sexual behaviour with this child? If Dooce is exploiting her child by writing about her and making money, how is it different when Chick writes about Dooce’s kid? Someone please explain that twisted logic to me.
Sorry, but I’m not buying this Caped Crusader routine. It freaks me out that so many of her readers seem to fall for it. Oh, I know there’s been a couple here and there that take her on, but it’s not many, and they disappear after a few weeks. Attributing any altruistic motives to Chick seems wrong, makes me feel skeevy just thinking about it.
What’s your take? Do you think her motives are as pure as she claims?
Entry filed under: Blog Madness, Blogs that annoy me, poop on peeps, Things that just piss me off, Uncategorized. Tags: chicken liver, Dooce, exploiting minors, Kristen Chase, Motherhood Uncensored, poop on peeps.
thebitchsessions.wordpress.com 
1.
Lilith | March 27, 2009 at 7:21 pm
I couldn’t agree with you more. Her motives are definitely not pure — not even 50% more. I would expound, but I’m working on a post for my own blog about le Poop.
2.
Thalia | March 27, 2009 at 11:48 pm
She sure has plastered the ads all over her site, hasn’t she? I wonder why she has it set up to approve comments. Isn’t her site the one where everyone gets their say? Maybe they aren’t all getting posted…
3.
Boo | March 28, 2009 at 6:07 pm
It’s not a maybe. She has blocked my recent comments and I know of others who are also censored.
I am respectful and polite but apparently that is not enough. Blind allegiance is also required.
Can you spell h y p o c r i t e?
P.S. Did you see that CL has been outed by Margalit on Twitter?
4.
The Queen B | March 28, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Thalia, I think that’s a major complaint about Chick – I’ve seen comments from others who say they were banned. I’m pretty sure she seriously moderates – much more than she’ll ever admit.
5.
The Queen B | March 28, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Boo – You are probably quite right – I don’t comment there, but I should – just to see what happens!! Ha!
Chick has blocked me on Twitter, which I find hilarious – pot/kettle thing, ya know?
I haven’t seen Margalit’s updates – have you? Spill all – did she really out Chick?
6.
Pup | March 29, 2009 at 9:47 am
I like reading CL’s blog – for the comments, not for her writing, that’s for sure (as a high school teacher I just want to go over my screen with a red pen!). That being said, when I commented asking if CL had seen the Art of the Takedown’s take on CL vs. Margalit, that comment was not posted.
I have no love for Margalit, either, and honestly am not interested in either of their “real” identities, but I feel that if Margalit seriously feels as though she’s one of CL’s “prime attackees” (hah! CL has mentioned her name 2 times – it’s her readers who talk about M in the comments), then Margalit should do the dirty work herself, not puss out and try to start a whisper campaign.
7.
The Queen B | March 29, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Pup – I know a couple of people have posted to Chick about the Takedown site. And I don’t think she has approved any. Proving, of course, that she is NO different than any other blogger who tries to protect themselves. Chick, from what I know and have found out, has a VERY long history of blocking comments that don’t agree with her. One of her many bitches about the A-listers.
As for Margalit being a “prime attackee”, I can almost see her point. Sure, Chick hasn’t said much about her in posts, but there’s truly been an outpouring of hate for Margalit on Poop. One could make the argument that Chick has her readers doing her dirty work. She’s the one approving all the comments about Margalit, and I think she’s let a few zingers go in comments herself.
8.
Joy | March 29, 2009 at 5:46 pm
With all due respect Qneen B, Margalit tarred all the commenters at Cl’s site with the same brush when she called us all illiterate morons. She is pretty good at handing out the insults, but she isn’t very good at taking them. If Margalit is correct then I’ll just plead stupidity, but it seems to be if you throw insults into someone’s life, you really ought to expect them to come back to you.
I’m not going to defend CL, she can do that for herself. It’s just my personal opionion that there is a huge difference between posting some negative comments on a web site, about a web site, and passing out personal infomation about someone on the internet. One is for the moment still legal, and one is not. However if the Margalits of this world get their way, that might not be the case for much longer.
The real issue here is very subtle, and if the rhetoric gets out of hand the issue is lost. It’s just my personal opinion that this is how the bullies win. They fog the quiet truth with loud ugly propaganda, then they go on to bully another person on another day.
9.
The Queen B | March 29, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Joy – Believe me, I get it. And I am not siding with either. For whatever reason, and it seems that she is choosing NOT to give her reasons, Margalit sent this info to me. And her 600 followers, of course. And quite honestly, I don’t have sympathy for Chicken Liver being outed, because I always figured it was bound to happen. You simply can’t be that vicious and have no one out to get you. Margalit did give her kid’s name, and I don’t really agree with that, but if Chick hadn’t plastered it all over the internet to begin with, would Margalit have known it to give?
There’s just something about hypocrites that sets me off. And from what I can tell, Chick is one of the biggest going. That doesn’t mean your opinion, or anyone else’s, isn’t valid. Just how I see it from here.
10.
Lizzie | March 30, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Oooh the hypocrisy of CL. I’ve not been banned, but every so often, when I’m in disagreement with others there, the comment won’t be posted. Whats that about Ms. Poop??
11.
mysterygal | April 3, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Ooohh, that’s funny! CL hasn’t posted a comment from me in months. When I e-mailede her and everything and she didn’t reply then either.
Didn’t she say she posted all comments that didn’t have personal information in them? That’s really funny!!!
12.
Bulley On You | April 4, 2009 at 12:18 am
Mystergal,
let me guess who you are, Aki, Lucy, PWR, Welfaremum, or something like that.
13.
The Queen B | April 4, 2009 at 12:22 am
Bulley on you – let me guess who you are, Chicken Liver, right?
14.
Bulley On You | April 4, 2009 at 4:08 am
Wrong. But there’s like four people at CL who leave the same messages over and over again. Aki was seen on here earlier she’s always been anti chicken liver along with Lucy, and they all see to be coming to your blog.
15.
Bulley On You | April 4, 2009 at 4:10 am
Wait, you want a real name, are you going to out me if I’m not honest?
And you DID out C.L. you’re in denial. You were her puppet, but nonetheless you did it. Your blog is the one with her name on it, not Margie’s.
16.
The Queen B | April 4, 2009 at 5:13 am
Sure. Whatever. Why not mention all the others who read Poop on Peeps and this blog? This is truly dumb.
17.
The Queen B | April 4, 2009 at 5:15 am
Last time I will say this – Margalit outed you Chick, not me. It may not be on her blog, but it sure as hell is on her Twitter. Grow up and stop playing games. Everyone would have a ton more respect for you.
18. What’s new, Chicken? « | February 5, 2010 at 4:35 am
[…] Unnecessary Roughness […]