Re: Labels. Zarzari and Barry - I think you have both missed my point on the topic of "labels." My points were:
1) There is a difference between informal and/or subjective descriptive labels (of which there are many creative ones and which are used liberally here) and formal psychiatric labels used to diagnose "mental illness." For example, I may refer to myself as having been "deeply depressed" (in the past) or currently "unenlightened" or "temporarily manic" (after my energy surge last month). To me, this is different than someone on this forum attaching a DSM IV, Axis 1 through 5 diagnosis to me on this internet forum as an armchair psychiatrist and then choosing to define all my behavior or posts within that context. 2) I take issue with the latter as being quite presumptuous and intensely disrespectful and dismissive to any said individual, for such a forum as this, and considering, in particular, neither of you has any credentials to make such a claim and even if you did, making such a claim on FFL would be a professional violation. That was my point, as those psychiatric diagnoses were thrown around. Re: Lists. After saying I don't *do* lists, I made a bunch last night with columns and many different headings. I put people in different columns based on my experience to date and thought about it all, and tried to insert myself into a column or two and then took a look at it. I laughed pretty hard. So much B.S. I recognize that there are long-standing relationships between many of the members here and that these obviously, over time, generate ongoing character assessments as part of whatever debate is going on. That doesn't preclude a healthy debate and much of the love on this site is transmitted subtly and much differently from other venues. >From my vantage point, I find most of it pretty humorous, when I'm not stuck >in personalizing, and even then, don't stay upset for long. I tend to >self-evaluate - it what is said bothers me, I ask myself why that is? That's >one way I use this forum. It gives me insight on myself and my own issues. There is no way I'm going to *team up* and go after anyone obliviously because they are on a *side.* If you want to assign me to a *team* and make numerous incorrect assumptions about me, go for it. I don't give a sh*t. From where I come from, this is all child's play. "The problem with labels is that they lead to stereotypes and stereotypes lead to generalizations and generalizations lead to assumptions and assumptions lead back to stereotypes." - Ellen Degeneres ________________________________ From: zarzari_786 <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 2:31 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Rule? Was (Happy new year to everyone !!! (And more love bombing..) --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > O.K. then. Show us one post where Judy has ever pointed > > out an unintended irony, a lie or a wiggle from owning > > up to an error because and only because the person she > > confronted is a TM critic. Bet you a buck you can't and > > I'll bet you another buck Judy would be the first to dig > > up such a post if it existed. > > Raunchy, I think that what zarzari and others > have perceived (and rightly, IMO) is that the > *particular* nitpicks that Judy comes up with > to criticize someone very often have nothing > whatsoever to do with her real reasons *for* > criticizing them. > > One of the troika will post something less > than worshipful about Maharishi or TM or TMers > and within a few hours Judy will be all over > that person *for some unrelated, made-up reason*. > > It's like a teacher who only criticizes the > black students in the class. The individual > criticisms may actually be valid. But if a > case can be made that the *vast majority* of > the criticisms are of black students, and in > fact the *vast majority* of things that teacher > says *period* are negative comments about the > black students, that teacher is going to get > fired for being a racist. > > Judy has been trying to "get" the same three > people on this forum for well over a decade > now, one for over 17 years. I think it's > justified to question whether the reasons > she comes up with *for* consistently trying > to "get" them are her real reasons, or > whether that's just the "cover story" she > trots out to hide the fact that she considers > them the TM TB counterpart of niggers. > > It's the TRENDS, Raunchy, not the particulars. > Absolutely. To say that she is neutral about people and only addresses issues is absolute hypocrisy, all the LABELS (Emily take note) like 'master of unintended irony', or calling Vaj a notorious liar are from her. She 'picks her fights' as she says, and she loves fights, that is obvious, and she thoroughly believes that you Barry are evil, she said so several times, (Can be here or in a private exchange, but she believes it) It's visible since decades. Many people in the past, including myself, who had a general positive view of her abilities and her attitude, have seen this as her basic weakness, and actually tried to persuade her from refraining from this behaviour, which is mainly motivated by anger. If she would only be neutral, making points and pointing out logical flaws as raunchydog wants to make us believe, why, I ask you, anyone, is she unable to wish a happy birthday to her main adversary. She thinks she would be hypocritical if she did so. She thinks it would be some kind of moodmaking, as her FEELINGS are really the opposite. So much for her balanced and neutral view. Barry, Vaj and Curtis, all say valuable things here, all make good posts here, they may go overboard in the extend they make a point IMHO, but it is simply wrong to not see the validity of what they have to say. So Judy too has her good points, I can clearly see that, she also makes good posts, once she pots with someone she has a positive view of. But the main intercations are unfortunately these fights, and she definitely has a list of adversaries, if it is a LIST or simply a mental list doesn't matter, and I know it, she makes a certain switch at some point, and you are an adversary. I don't want to complain, I can live with it, but I do see her modus operanti.
