The advice column discusses a husband's unreasonable demand for a friend, Ronda, to reimburse damages caused by a leaking toilet, which he blames on her weight. The author argues that the husbandâs actions stem from bias rather than evidence, questioning whether he would hold the same stance if Ronda were differently built. The advice emphasizes that the demand is a personal attack on Ronda's character due to her size, rather than a rational response to the situation. Ultimately, the columnist expresses skepticism about the husband's ability to see the unfairness of his demands.
I also wonder, if Rhonda had been a 300 pound, 7-foot-tall bodybuilding man, and the toilet seat had broken after his visit, would your husband be suggesting that you send a bill for the repair?
What I'm getting at is that he's using this incident to try to punish Ronda for being fat. It's totally insensitive to her feelings but it's more than thatâit's a way to deliberately hurt her.
Collection
[
|
...
]