one of the Turqy's silliest posts ever- what's the point? definitely a masturbatory tirade of epic proportions...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchy...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Theorem: Anyone can say anything about you > > that they want; that is out of your control. > > What is *not* out of your control is how to > > react, or whether to at all. It is my con- > > tention that those who react defensively or > > angrily to "protect their self image" have > > the most self to protect, and the least Self. > > > > Take Marek as yer classic example of how a > > person who is *not* heavily invested in his > > self acts. Several people on this forum have > > laid into him mercilessly; one threatened him > > in real life. But as far as I know he has > > *never* tried to "defend himself." In my book, > > that indicates a lack *of* self, in its neg- > > ative connotation. And it indicates a presence > > of Self, in its positive connotation. Take > > Curtis, who rarely gets involved in "defending > > himself," and when he does, usually manages to > > do so with humor. > > > > Now take a couple of other frequent posters who > > shall go unnamed because there is no need -- > > everyone here thought of them the moment I said > > "those who react defensively or angrily." Then > > mentally count up the number of posts they > > spend each week "defending themselves." Now > > extrapolate from that to the amount of self > > they believe that they have to "defend." > > > > In case no one has noticed, I've been trying > > not to defend myself. I've had many occasions > > to, but I don't. I may in fact do my best to > > portray those who spend the most time demon- > > izing me as being as ridiculous as I perceive > > them to be, in the hope that if enough people > > laugh at them, someday they might learn to > > laugh at themselves. And I may occasionally > > give them "a taste of their own medicine." > > > > But I don't waste time trying to nitpick each > > derogatory name they call me or "defend myself" > > by disputing their claims. What would be the > > point? Those on this forum who already dislike > > me still will, no matter what I say. If I were > > to waste time "defending myself," all that would > > happen is that I'd be playing the game of the > > people who want me to do just that. > > > > No way. I'll stick to "drive bys," thanks. I'll > > just say what I say and allow those I say it > > about to react the way that *they* see fit. I > > feel no obligation to "back up" any of my opin- > > ions (because that is, in fact, what they are), > > or to argue about them incessantly, the way some > > seem to want me to. If that's what they see as > > a good use of their time, so be it. I'll stick > > to expressing my opinion and allowing others to > > express theirs in response. Or not, depending > > on how much self they feel they have and how > > desperately they feel it needs defending. > > > > And that's all I have to say about that. Lit- > > erally, this being my last post of the week. :-) > > > > > > "So there!" says Barry as he stamps his foot and fizzles into the ether. > Adieu, Bro. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I've rapped a few times about the tendency of some > > > > spiritual seekers to mistake a feeling of strong > > > > emotion for spiritual experience. This morning > > > > over coffee, I'd like to rap about doing that in > > > > public, and link it to the phenomenon I think it's > > > > most similar to -- whacking off. > > > > > > > > Think about recent rants in which one of our resident > > > > emotional jackoffs went on and on inventing fantasies > > > > about about poor, victimized people and those who > > > > prey on them. Now go back and read that same rant > > > > and visualize him masturbating furiously while > > > > writing it. Doesn't it fit? Doesn't it seem like > > > > that's *exactly* what's going on? > > > > > > > > > POT: > > > Gather 'round children, and get a good picture in your > > > head of Edg, jacking off and cleaning up after himself. > > > (Ewww!) Now watch and be amazed as I, the biggest crybaby > > > of all and master of irony, jacks off in public on FFLife. > > > > > > KETTLE: > > > Pretend not to notice that Pot is desperately trying to > > > convince you that Edg is just a big meanie for picking on him. > > > > > > GREEK CHORUS: > > > Hey Pot, don't forget to clean up after yourself. > > > > > > > > > > My theory is this -- if a spiritual organization does > > > > not provide real spiritual experience on a regular > > > > basis, it learns very quickly that to keep followers > > > > on the line and contributing the big bucks it has to > > > > give them something *else*. That "something else" > > > > is often regular doses of strong emotion. > > > > > > > > The organization might do this in the form of "telling > > > > stories" about the teacher or root guru, stories cal- > > > > culated to make the followers feel strong emotion > > > > about them. And, over time, the followers begin to > > > > associate those strong emotions with real bhakti, and > > > > believe that the manipulated pseudo-emotions they're > > > > feeling were somehow spontaneous, and that they're > > > > "growing in devotion" to the teacher or root guru. A > > > > few might very well be, but IMO most of them are just > > > > being manipulated as effectively as addicts of soap > > > > operas are. "Ooooooh...Guru Noname walked on water...I > > > > feel so uplifted and spiritual just thinking about it." > > > > "Ooooooh...Genna is pregnant with Darin's baby and he > > > > dumped her but she managed to overcome her angst and > > > > saved the town from terrorists anyway...I feel so > > > > uplifted." > > > > > > > > The thing is, after decades of being manipulated by > > > > others telling you "uplifting stories" to stimulate > > > > you into a sense of heightened emotion that you have > > > > been trained to associate with "spiritual experience," > > > > many people begin to do the same thing to *themselves*. > > > > They start to tell these "uplifting stories" to them- > > > > selves as a way of "jumpstarting" emotions that they > > > > cannot feel naturally. > > > > > > > > Thus we get the phenomenon of "manufactured outrage" > > > > we see so often here on Fairfield Life. Someone pre- > > > > tends to be outraged about someone "lying," and rants > > > > on and on about it for hundreds of lines of text, > > > > jacking themselves up into a mood of oh-so-righteous > > > > indignation and moral superiority. Or they accuse > > > > someone of "predation" and do the same thing. Or they > > > > call someone else an "anti-TMer" and do exactly the > > > > same thing. The supposed "causes" of the manufactured > > > > outrage vary, but the effect it has on the people > > > > expressing the faux outrage never does -- they're > > > > *getting off*. > > > > > > > > I'm presenting the notion that by doing this they are > > > > essentially masturbating in public, indulging in > > > > fantasies to jack their emotional levels up to the > > > > point where they can convince themselves that they > > > > can still *feel* emotion. And it is *SO* satisfying > > > > to them to feel these emotions. Make up a story about > > > > some poor woman manipulated by evil scum who make her > > > > do Bad Things, and you can feel *SO* superior to the > > > > "scum," and *SO* evolved yourself because you *care* > > > > about the fate of this poor woman. Repeat with a > > > > regular motion. Now grab a Kleenex and clean your- > > > > self up and run the same number again next week. > > > > > > > > Feeling dull and gray and lifeless, as if your medi- > > > > tation practice did nothing for you? Simple solution: > > > > pick someone who has done something you can consider > > > > "wrong" like...uh...say something positive about a > > > > person you hate, and make up some stories about how > > > > he or she is evil and use the story as a kind of > > > > masturbation fantasy. It doesn't really matter who > > > > the target is of the fantasy...it could be Sal, or > > > > Vaj, or Barry, or Ruth...it could be the Dalai Lama > > > > or Obama or pretty much anyone...their faces are as > > > > interchangeable as the photos in Hustler that guys > > > > jack off to on the toilet or the photos of Burt > > > > Reynolds that *you* jack off to in your bedroom. All > > > > that matters is that you can fantasize about them > > > > and GET OFF. Again, when you've finished, grab > > > > a Kleenex and clean up, while claiming "victory" > > > > and saying that you "won." Uh huh. > > > > > > > > Call me a perv ( and I know that some will :-), but I > > > > think of this act, repeated ad nauseum by those who > > > > seem addicted to it, is *exactly* what I'm portraying > > > > it as -- a form of mental and emotional masturbation. > > > > The people who indulge in it are using fantasies to > > > > manufacture cheap emotion in themselves and GET OFF. > > > > > > > > And, interestingly, many in the "audience" they're > > > > speaking to *cheer* the emotional jackoffs for doing > > > > this, and shout "Booyah!" or "Boy, you sure nailed > > > > him/her/it with that one!" I have to assume that > > > > after doing so they have to run for the Kleenex > > > > box themselves. :-) > > > > > > > > > >
