Look, if the horse doesn't win, both you AND the horse can get lost, mmmkay?

2009-03-31T15:51:04-06:00

It was a rainy, overcast first Saturday in June of 2003, in Honolulu, when I decided to lower the proverbial boom on my relationship of nearly nine years. While I am fairly certain that my lover saw the end coming, as did I, I think he thought, again, as did I, that we could, somehow, work everything out so that we were both happy and engaged with each other in a way we had not been in years. I, however, or, rather, my slightly insane need for HIGH DRAMA, would not allow any of that.

As the gun fired on the television, signaling the beginning of the 135th running of the Triple Crown of Horse Racing's Belmont Stakes, in an equally wet and dreary Long Island, New York, I made a decision. A lucid and / or rational decision, no, but a decision, nonetheless: if Funny Cide, the horse favored to become the 12th Triple Crown Winner, did not win the Belmont Stakes, as he had won the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness Stakes, I decided, I would break up with my lover as soon as the race was completed. Less than three minutes later, and true to my decision, oiled with resolve and lots and lots of vodka, as Funny Cide placed a disappointing "Show" instead of the coveted "Win," I took a deep breath, set my martini glass down on the cocktail table, lit a cigarette, turned to my lover, and said, "We need to break up."

Politely bitch-slapping the irritating talker is so much more civilized.

2009-03-15T10:47:26-06:00

Of course, I've also been known to pull a Madeline Ashton with my fellow travelers and simply intone bitchily, "Can you just NOT BREATHE?"

Irritating talkers may be dealt with quite quickly, actually. With a polite, "You must pardon me, Darling, but I've absolute mountains of reading to do for my pitch meeting in Paris so you'll understand if I don't engage you in conversation, right, Darling? Thank you ever so much for understanding," and the obvious gestures of turning to one's laptop and inserting one's earbuds, irritating talkers are usually disengaged rather easily.

Quiet starers, on the other hand, are disconcerting on a host of different levels, and cause much angina in terms of the psychological hoops through which the recipient of said quiet stares must jump. One wonders, in turns, "Is there food on my face?" "Does this person know me?" "Is this person following me?" "Is this person spying on me?" "Does this person find me attractive and wish to begin a conversation but is too shy / introverted / socially retarded to do so?" "Does this person want to meet me in the bathroom for clandestine fellatio? Because he is really cute and I would actually be so down with that." Etc.

So, yeah, irritating talker.

Atherton Bartelby - Plinky Answers

Look, if the horse doesn't win, both you AND the horse can get lost, mmmkay?

Politely bitch-slapping the irritating talker is so much more civilized.