-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_re...@...> wrote: My take on you here Tart is that you are an intellectual resource on FFL. Whatever post I make that you choose to respond to will open my eyes to some other perspective that I either missed, or may have discarded too quickly, or I may have discarded for good reason and you are rubbing my nose in my decision again.
The Internet is slow. Your brain is fast. I would welcome an opportunity to experience your engine at full speed in person. In the meantime. Keep on posting. You are bridging worlds here and doing some great work. I totally dig that you catch me blindside and piss me off with some of your insights. This is good. Riff on brother. Our educational system has made an institution out of suppressing your version of intelligence. I dig it. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > I think you are looking at the wrong side of the relationship issue to see > > why society views some relationships differently. > > I am not giving MMY a pass. Your points below taken. (And not in argument, > but an aside, the modern western ethical standards are good. however, I am > not sure within the broad context of the multi-cultural world in all of its > dimensions that such standards are absolute. We can be so ethically > ethnocentric-- we think, "what we say is right in this day in age, in our > moderness, it is the ultimate ethical standard." I question that. I guarantee > you in 50 years the standards will be different. Many of our activities will > be judged barbaric. And in the future, sexual harassment law will change. It > will evolve. It may become more refined, nuanced perhaps.) > > My point, misunderstood by some other readers, is that the women expected to > get something out of it. And they were aware of consequences of getting > involved. They are not 100% victims -- even if MMY is 100% a victimizer. I > may give MMY a 0% pass -- I don't think all of the women get a 100% pass. > > > Laws and ethical standards protecting people in unequal power relationships > > from being exploited which includes: therapists and their clients, > > religious leaders and their flock (see how I slipped in a sheep reference > > for the religious followers!) and employees and their bosses, are not made > > because their feelings might get hurt when they get dumped. It is because > > at the beginning of the relationship, when the person with the power is > > requesting that articles of clothing be removed, the person may not feel > > they have the ability to say, "Back-off, jack-off" without harm to their > > mental or spiritual health, or their career and livelihood. For some of > > these women around Maharishi he managed a toofer by also employing them. > > > > There are many gray zones, but the intent is to protect. No one wants to > > think that after spending 20-30 extra-large per year on their daughter's > > college that some pencil-thin mustached Russian Lit teacher is going to put > > the moves on them during an after-school private session that included a > > few glasses of Tawny Port of the same age as the student. (20 year old aged > > port wines are as smooth and sweet as any co-ed.) > > > > >In a group as small as the inner circle around Maharishi, where the power > >deck got shuffled each time plane tickets were handed out or withheld each > >time the MASTER had a whim to be somewhere else, the ramifications for > >saying "not tonight I have a headache" might have lasting negative > >implications. > > Or very positive ones -- a quick ticket out of that hellhole -- if it was > one. And if a "counselor/mentor" and/or boss hits on you, then by your > definition it was a hellhole. why would it be a problem to bail? I know > people who bailed on courses -- on their own. They came to the course all > 100% gung-ho -- got wind of some rotteness, and quickly left. Ones perception > about a situation can change from 100% positive to 100% negative very fast if > revealing information presents itself. If the guru hitting on you is > unspeakable bad, then if the guru hits on you get the hell out of there. > Quick. > > > >(By Maharishi's own count about one full yuga cycle. By mine, as long as it > >took for the person to realize that all that is self-proclaimed is not gold, > >despite the tacky layers of gold leaf applied by celibate trolls from MERU > >press.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sorry if and when anyone is hurt. I wish it were not so. But in most > > > things in life there is give and take. Following your words to their > > > implications, one might think JJ gave all, obtained nothing, and was > > > severely taken advantage of and cheated. Not sure, but J always seemed to > > > have gained a lot when I saw him. I am not sure he would grieve and moan > > > that he walked away empty handed (and actually -- emptiness is a great > > > thing). > > > > > > Not all our dreams come true. Not all our fantasies materialize. But no > > > one got any benefit? They walked away totally empty from the deal? > > > > > > By my own choice, I worked in the TMO, became a teacher, taught, did > > > courses and generally had good things happening, growth happened in many > > > areas of my life. Some great adventures. Gained a lot. Was I disappointed > > > all my dreams did not come true? Was I disillusioned over time? Sure. Was > > > I disappointed M didn't give me all the face time I wanted? Sure. But > > > irrespective of that, after some time of seeing a pattern of disconnects, > > > I said adieu. As did most people. Did I leave with nothing? With less > > > than I came with? Hardly. I walked in expecting to gain the universe an > > > all knowledge. I walked away with less -- but still a smile on my face. > > > > > > The ladies, I hurt for them. I am sorry some were hurt. Were they > > > participants? Or did they walk away? I know girls that had affairs with > > > professors in college (not MIU -- though that happened too). They knew it > > > was a dicey thing. But were willing to take the risk. They knew it was > > > not a long term thing. Were the ladies (such a TMO word), were these > > > woman totally oblivious to any downside? Was it all just upside? Become > > > the princess of the TMO? Forever? No risk? No downside? > > > > > > People make choices. And they are aware of the consequences of the > > > choices. People enter relations -- far more normal than these womem -- > > > and are later hurt, rejected. Life sometimes sucks. And sometimes we > > > learn and grow from that suckiness. People learn. People move on. > > > > > > I just can't buy 100% into this victimhood stigma you wrap these women > > > in. They made choices -- probably naive ones, but they were aware of an > > > upside. They were aware of a downside. Their dreams were not fulfilled. I > > > am sorry. I wish all dreams were fulfilled. But life moves on. It sounds > > > like most or all of the women have fruitful lives. > > > > > > As far as discarding women -- did you ever see that among teachers? It > > > happened and happens. I am sad it does. But are you also rallying against > > > all of the teachers who had relations and moved on -- (to the next town, > > > next course...) without a totally sweet ending? I wish all relations had > > > happy endings. Sadly not all do. Sadly some men are heals. (Some women > > > are too.) But are all women totally oblivious to this? They have over the > > > ages no clue it would not always end like a fairy tale? And by the way -- > > > any guys ever get dumped in unceremoneous and undeserved ways. Yes, they > > > have. > > > > > > And from what I saw and have pieced together, the women were sometimes, > > > perhaps often, aware of previous women. Clearly things did not work out > > > for those preceding them. Yet they chose to go ahead with it. And things > > > did not worked out as planned or hoped. I am sorry it was not all golden. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <geezerfreak@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It's nice that it doesn't bother you Doc. But, how about the ladies > > > > involved? Does the damage done (and it very clearly WAS done) to the > > > > ladies bother you? That MMY could so callously use his power and > > > > influence over these women to bed them, then discard them in a variety > > > > of ways when a new box of chocolates opens to him, makes me question > > > > plenty about this guy. The same thing happened repeatedly to those > > > > whose money he was after. He used you up and discarded you when you > > > > were know longer of any use to him....happened for years. Didn't matter > > > > who you were. Ask Jerry Jarvis. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "drpetersutphen" > > > > <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone...Some masochistic impulse made me join FFL again..go > > > > > figure...I must have had something transit rahu, whatever. > > > > > > > > > > What I find amazing about MMY and all the ladies is that I believe > > > > > that it is all true and it doesn't bother me the way it might in the > > > > > distant past. I can't conceptually resolve it by dismissing MMY > > > > > because of the amazing transformations his body of techniques and his > > > > > darshan itself have had on me. I can't figure out why he'd be > > > > > interested in sex, especially the kind of "bust-a-nut" sex these > > > > > ladies seem to be describing. It's a mystery. I wish one of these > > > > > women had asked MMY, what's up with all this sex, Maharishi? I don't > > > > > get it. > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Anonymously: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course please keep my name and position private. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have been reading, almost obsessively-compulsively, the sequential > > > > > > > > > > > > discussions re: Judith's book on FFL. At first it was with a sigh > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > relief, that one lady had opened up, and was so well received. Now > > > > > > the dirt > > > > > > > > > > > > is rolling in--people doing their best to cast doubt on her > > > > > > experiences, to > > > > > > > > > > > > besmirch her integrity, to ridicule what she has to say just so > > > > > > they will > > > > > > > > > > > > feel better. And people wonder why the other ladies don't come > > > > > > forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember Judith from Squaw Valley days. She had been put in > > > > > > charge of > > > > > > > > > > > > cleaning M's rooms and silks. She had the most beautiful saris. I > > > > > > asked > > > > > > > > > > > > her where she bought them and she explained that M had given them > > > > > > to her. > > > > > > > > > > > > Immediately my radar went up; she had done something personal with > > > > > > him that > > > > > > pleased him, > > > > > > > > > > > > I surmised, and he gave her something beautiful in exchange. > > > > > > Having been > > > > > > propositioned by M > > > > > > > > > > > > myself but turning him down, I had not received anything for that > > > > > > one night. > > > > > > > > > > > > Even way back then with Judith, I thought, maybe if I had said > > > > > > yes......my > > > > > > life would have > > > > > > > > > > > > turned out better. I would be allowed to be closer. Now it's easy > > > > > > to see > > > > > > that isn't always the case. > > > > > > > > > > > > It helps to know that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Judith probably has done more for the other ladies who went through > > > > > > similar > > > > > > > > > > > > experiences than any one else. Remember also that she left the > > > > > > Movement and > > > > > > > > > > > > went off on her own path. She has had the freedom to speak the > > > > > > truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > My psychology is better now for what she has written. Truth, sweet > > > > > > truth > > > > > > > > > > > > helps. And Judith sees the good that M has done for the world. It > > > > > > is the > > > > > > > > > > > > technique of meditation that counts. Does THAT work? That is what > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > > > > marketed to the world and hopefully today the world is a better > > > > > > place--not > > > > > > > > > > > > perfect, just a little better. No one likes everything about > > > > > > something or > > > > > > someone; > > > > > > > > > > > > that is the nature of the relative--it's not perfect. I guess we > > > > > > forget > > > > > > > > > > > > that in our quest for absolute anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But shouldn't we focus on what does work, > > > > > > > > > > > > what is good? That's what Scriptures keep telling us to do and > > > > > > there must > > > > > > be a reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > That instruction is not guru-based; it is evolutionary based. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What FFLfers are now doing is not helping us heal. Rather the fear > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > returning, the sense of persecution is coming back to life. If > > > > > > these people > > > > > > > > > > > > ever find out......runs through my mind constantly. This probably > > > > > > will be > > > > > > > > > > > > the closest I will ever come to going really public. This tiny > > > > > > missive that > > > > > > > > > > > > hardly says anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess I am asking FFlfers to please, please, please, give us > > > > > > ladies a > > > > > > > > > > > > chance to heal. It may be lies to you, it may be fantasy to you, > > > > > > but it's > > > > > > > > > > > > not to those of us who went through it. Keep that in mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If anything, have compassion in your hearts and give us the space > > > > > > we so > > > > > > > > > > > > desperately need to heal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thank you > > > > > > > > > > > > Yours Truly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
