Judy, You say Barry's a liar of significant degree. You're accusing him of mindfully trying to besmirch you, and that this agenda of his is undeserved by you.
Even though this "personality has waged a ten year 'war'" on you, you choose to support and defend and assume that his other intents in life are not equally tainted by this dynamic. I think the concept of infinite self-reference applies here. Barry can't be so cruel towards you without it leaking out into his other actions. If he can so "coldly stalk" you hoping for the least chink to slam a wedge into, why can't he stalk a girl in a bar with an equally offensive intent? After he utters "hit that," you do not think that it is logical to call for a concern that he'll pursue a manipulative intent in a bar while talking to a 25 year old. Why? He's burned you not once, but hundreds of times, yet you'd trust his words here to be a correct description of his modus operandi in bars? "Hit that" tells any man in the real world that the speaker is out for objectified sex, yet you say Barry's not revealed any predatory intent and is, well, I guess, "trustable," and that we should take him at his word about his true motivations? You've taken the stance that girls of the world are too savvy to be tricked by him, and that I am off base thinking women are so easily targeted, and that I am being offensive to women to assert that they are at any risk. I do think women are as easily manipulated by "loving gestures," as men are by tits and ass. A balanced equation if you ask me, and I'm not so much saying women are weak as I am saying that all folks are weak in some way and that predators know how to exploit these things. If anything, I think women are vastly superior to men in ways that I really envy. OTOH, men have their niche advantages. Men and women, thus, go together like peanuts and chocolate. And I reserve the right to be as wildly corrosive in my descriptions of anyone here as I want to be -- call them projection if you like, but I'm trying to encapsulate emotions, and the emotions just need big words and phrases. Miss not my point, I am disgusted with Barry's glib disregard for society when he of all people here has had the life experiences to know the value of core morals. To express this, I've reached into my magic word basket and pulled out phrases that are as offensive as his "hit that" are to me. If he were in a bar next to me and said "hit that," I'm a man, and in a man's world, men get to say that to each other, so I wouldn't start a fist fight about it, but if he said it to me in church while looking at a choirgirl, my anger would be instantly full blown. That's my sexist double standard, and I'm trying to fix that by calling Barry -- AND ALL MEN -- to task about their marauding, outlander, manipulative, conniving and denying ways. Edg PS -- The "Judy boy toy" thing was due to your words that suggested that you would take a lover 20 years your junior. I don't see you as a predator on a regular basis though -- just willing to be one if you "got lucky." Barry seems to work the crowd regularly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some here have expressed skepticism when I have > said that Barry is dishonest. > > Following is a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous > example (from #151367): > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > <snip> > > Thirteen years ago, on another forum, someone > > else developed the same kind of twisted fixation > > on me, confusing me with all the things she hates > > in herself but cannot accept or recognize in > > herself. > > > > She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since > > Barry is, of course, referring to me. > > The first paragraph is Barry's *opinion*, even > though he states it as if it were established > fact. He's totally wrong, but he's entitled to > hold wrong opinions. > > The dishonesty is in the next line: > > > She has stalked me from forum to forum ever since > > This is a lie in the narrowest sense of the > term, in that Barry knows it isn't true. He > has repeated it many times here and elsewhere. > > Here are the facts, of which Barry is very > well aware: > > Barry and I have been on exactly three of the > same groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, > FairfieldLife, and Knapp's blog, TMFree. > > I encountered Barry for the first time on > alt.m.t, so obviously I couldn't have "stalked" > him there. > > I was a member of FairfieldLife before Barry > ever joined it. I didn't read it regularly > or post to it, however, until after Barry had > joined and *invited* everyone on alt.m.t to > participate in the discussions on FFL. > > "Stalking" can mean several different things. > One thing it does *not* mean is responding to > an invitation by the purported stalkee. > > And I was posting comments on TMFree shortly > after it went live, *well before* Barry had > posted anything there himself. If anything, > he stalked *me* there. > > Again, Barry is very well aware of all these > facts. His claim that I have been "stalking > him from forum to forum" is a deliberate lie. > > This is not an isolated example; it's not some > kind of aberration. It's very far from the only > lie he's told, here and on alt.m.t and TMFree > (and goodness knows where else that I'm not > aware of), about me, and about others. But as I > say, it's an unambiguous example, and it's > something anyone can verify for themselves. > > Finally, just as a bonus, note the phrasing > "ever since," following Barry's claim about > what had happened 13 years ago. In fact, for > 11 of those years, until 2005 when I started > posting to FFL, alt.m.t was the *only* forum > Barry and I were on together. > > "Ever since" is therefore deliberately > deceptive, making it sound as though the > purported "stalking" has been going on for > 13 years. It's a lie on top of a lie. >
