I hate to waste one of my last posts of the 
week on stating the obvious, but isn't it 
fascinating that two people here found the
*general* "victim mentality" topic interesting 
enough to comment on and springboard off of
*as* a general topic. They had fun with it.

Judy saw in it only herself being victimized.

And she reacted exactly as Vaj described, by
slipping into a possibly inappropriate "fight
or flight" response and attacking the person
she perceived as attacking her.

I'd say that my larger point about the "victim
mentality" has been reinforced, not rebutted.


--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> <snip>
> > One of the things that made
> > me think about this "victim mentality" thing
> > was the attempt to demonize the Dalai Lama
> 
> (Gotta-Hide-This-Gotta-Get-Judy-Post Alert!)
> 
> > (or at the very least portray him as having
> > "flawed judgment") because he said something
> > positive about George W. Bush.
> 
> Ooooooooopsie.
> 
> Two deliberate attempts to deceive in the three
> lines above.
> 
> First, Barry put the phrase "flawed judgment" in
> quotes to suggest those were my words (a tactic
> he uses often when he wants to be able to load his
> take on what somebody said).
> 
> Second, he carefully leaves out the positive
> "thing" the Dalai Lama said about George W. Bush,
> because it was so obviously in error.
> 
> Here's what I *actually* said in response to
> Barry's ludicrous "thought-stopper" post:
> 
> "Any evidence, for example, demonstrating that the
> Dalai Lama does not have perfect judgment is
> designed to make you stop having any thoughts that
> there is any good whatsoever to be found in the
> Dalai Lama. If he has any less than 100 percent
> perfect judgment, you are supposed to think that
> must mean he is All Bad."
> 
> And:
> 
> "The Dalai Lama may be a great guy generally speaking,
> but to claim that George Bush is 'honest and
> straightforward' suggests at the very least that the
> DL has not been following the ins and outs of U.S.
> politics and foreign relations all that closely."
> 
> > Anyone who
> > believes that is devoid of compassion; the
> > Dalai Lama is not.
> 
> Of course, anyone who said what Barry *claims* I
> said would be devoid of compassion.
> 
> Anybody who believes I *did* say what Barry
> claims I said, however, is devoid of reading
> comprehension.
> 
> The attempted deceptions are quite skillful. With
> his calculated rephrasing, Barry intends to make
> it appear that my remarks about the Dalai Lama 
> were much broader than they actually were.
> 
> He did this because it would be impossible for him
> to defend the notions that the Dalai Lama has 100
> percent perfect judgment, or--especially on this
> forum--that George W. Bush was "honest and
> straightforward."
> 
> Likewise, claiming that I was "devoid of compassion"
> because I said the Dalai Lama had less than 100
> percent perfect judgment in proclaiming that Bush
> was honest and straightforward would be too absurd
> even for Barry to try to put over.
> 
> Barry *himself* doesn't believe Bush was "honest and
> straightforward."
> 
> And if he believes the Dalai Lama's judgment is 100
> percent perfect, I've got a nice bridge to sell him.
> He doesn't believe that either, though.
> 
> So the only way he could make his claim about me
> sound reasonable was to rephrase it in much more
> general terms, to make it appear as though I had
> said the Dalai Lama's judgment was poor because he
> saw something positive in Bush.
> 
> Heck, *I* see some positive things in Bush.
> 
> Had the Dalai Lama said, for example, that Bush
> had a friendly personality and a sharp sense of
> humor, I'd have agreed with him.
> 
> <snip>
> > In my opinion, the ability to see "shades of
> > gray" and NOT "bag" everything you see as 
> > 100% negative or 100% bad or 100% good is
> > synonymous with what we call "evolution" or
> > higher states of consciousness. The concept
> > of an enlightened being thinking of another
> > human being (or themselves) as "all bad" or 
> > "all good" just does not compute for me.
> 
> Right. Except that Barry purportedly finds it an
> outrage for someone to suggest that the Dalai
> Lama's judgment isn't 100 percent perfect. So
> apparently his own thoughts do not compute for
> him.
> 
> Bottom line: If Barry had a solid case to make,
> he could have made it without attempting to
> deceive. But he doesn't, so he didn't.



Reply via email to