If I misinterpreted your comment, Jim, I'm sorry.
Originally Posted by Jim Hayes
What I strenuously object to is the peevish and mean spirited description of being ‘juvenile’
I reserve the right to my opinion, and to assume that a writer who posts light verse here and then muses about why so few people are commenting wants that opinion. I can understand your taking offense at that word, but when I politely point out that I find the poem slight, the rhythm clunky, and the diction awkward, and that the poem doesn't seem to me to play sufficiently with the speaking-backward thing that should provide the core verbal delight, and in response I'm told how poorly I've understood the masterpiece and given (what I interpreted as) a lecture about sexual harassment, my hackles go up.
If a poet can't be gracious to someone who has tried and failed to help, he or she should just ignore the unhelpful crit.
I will try hard not to give you reason to object to future crits of your poems.
Added in: Since "sllight," "clunky," and "awkward" may not seem very polite, I'm pasting my original crit that those words describe:
Originally Posted by Max Goodman
Cute joke. The situation and the fact that the poem doesn't see anything odd about this guy sitting down to harass this woman (as it can't, without weakening the surprise of the punchline) make it a joke. Everyone has their own way of telling jokes. Nothing wrong with yours. I wouldn't comment if you hadn't complained about a lack of comments.
If it were mine, I'd try to make it shorter, I'd try to make the rhythm (of each stanza at least) continuous line to line, and I'd try not to write awkward things like "possessed an affliction," ("possessed" a more formal word than feels natural to me, the diction being stretched for the rhythm). Most of all, I'd play with ways to make the backward lines sparkle rhythmically. This last you've probably already done, with an ear that's different than mine.