Doc sez: Emily, its like before I had kids, I'd hear a baby crying, and it was alarming, then after I had kids, I'd hear a baby crying, and I could tell exactly what the baby was saying. Sometimes, better to just let the baby cry.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@...> wrote: > > Yeah, the whole comparison to Squeaky Fromme is an incredibly hostile and > demeaning and horrible thing to say, really. Â So is everything else he said > targeted at Ann. Â Simply despicable and misogynistic. Â Yuk. Â Barry, you > owe Ann and apology. Â I wouldn't trust that man to "have my back" for any > reason, ever. Â > > > ________________________________ > From: authfriend <authfriend@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 12:09 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who is it they're writing to? > > > Â > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > <snip> > > You gained the same impression that > > many others did, that so far Ann's presence here pretty > > much revolves around her perception that FFL delivers up > > Robin to her as a captive audience. > > Just out of curiosity, how many here have gained this > impression about Ann? Barry says "many others," so one > has to assume there are at least three of you besides > Barry. > > And if I may, what suggested to you that Ann perceives > FFL to "deliver up Robin to her as a captive audience"? > If this were the case, why would she have stuck around > for three months *after Robin had left*? > > > He's never responded to anything she writes, nor even > > acknowledged her existence. Yet she's still on the "Robin > > was and still is brilliant" bandwagon. Call me crazy, but > > I think the best commentary on this so far was someone's > > comparison of her to Squeaky Fromme. 'Nuff said. > > 'Nuff said indeed. This is possibly the most fucked-up > remark ever from Barry. The person who made this > comparison was Bhairitu, but he was *joking* (if it's > possible to joke about Fromme). > > <snip> > > Often (and the subject of this rap), such derailments seem > > to not even be aimed at the person they are presumably > > written to. In many cases, the derailer is "writing to" > > someone who has made it crystal clear that he or she wants > > nothing to do with the derailer, and in many cases doesn't > > even bother to read what they write. They have been, in > > as real a sense as in the romantic one, been "dumped." > > Another fantastic mental invention of Barry's. I think > we have to conclude that the constant criticism directed > at him has finally unhinged his mind. > > What follows is raving, pure and simple. It's completely > detached from reality. > > > > > And, just as one finds in bars full of sad men and women > > desperate for someone -- anyone -- who will sit there and > > listen to them drone on endlessly about the person who > > dumped them and what horrible, nasty, inexcusably > > inexcusable people the act of dumpage makes them. In bars, > > you could deal with such people the same way people do in > > real life -- get up and move to the other side of the bar > > and leave them ranting to themselves. > > > > Here, you can't. They can continue to rant, often pretending > > that they are *still writing directly to the person who has > > made it clear they aren't reading a word of it*. (Or, as in > > my case, only the first 10 words or so shown in Message View.) > > > > Few call them on this. WHY? Because IMO *they're* the ones > > reading it, and in fact *they're* the ones being written to. > > It's all part of a phenomenon we discussed briefly earlier, > > trying to form what you call "associations" with other > > people, what I call cliques. > > > > On one level, I think that people on Internet forums who > > continue to rant angrily at people who have dumped them > > (or defend and praise them just as embarrassingly) are in > > the same ballpark as stalkers who stand outside the apart- > > ments of men or women who have dumped them romantically and > > scream at their closed, double-paned-for-soundproofing-purposes > > windows. The ranting is *not* for the purpose of communication; > > it's a way of either venting their own line-on-stone anger > > at the person who has dumped them or a way of (in their > > minds) trying to "get them back." > > > > Because the dumper is not paying any attention to the some- > > what deranged dumpee, and thus refusing to become a "captive > > audience" for those they've dumped, the dumpees settle for > > the "next best thing." That is, the same thing that the > > drunks in the bars settle for if they can get it. Someone > > -- anyone -- who will listen to them rant endlessly about > > the horrible dumper and then hopefully either pile on to > > ragging about them or, at the very least, respond with an > > occasional "Uh huh" or "Whatever you say," which the raging > > dumpee interprets as meaning "You go, girl" or "You rock, man." > > > > Meanwhile I'm over here in another corner of the bar, > > wondering why others are still sitting there listening to > > someone drunk on attachment carrying on endlessly about it. > > >
