--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely > did not in my experience ever include what I call in FFL > piling on. Piling on in the name of rigorous honesty is what > I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.
Unbelievable. There was never any "piling on in the name of rigorous honesty" on FFL. All anybody has ever asked of Share is *basic* honesty. Even just *approximate* honesty would be a welcome change. > That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed > with them. And cheering each other on about it. Does anybody have a clue what this means? > Warts yet present. I never saw any of these behaviors in > Waking Down. Look to your own warts, your own unhealthy, unhealed, and cowardly behavior here. Start by eliminating, or at least cutting down on, the bullshit you spout, like the above. If it appears that you are making *some* kind of effort to be honest and straightforward, you won't get so much flak. But don't expect *not* to get flak when you come up with utter crap like "wts" as an excuse for not copping to your own behavior. Nobody buys that, and we all recognize that it's pure hostility on your part-- hostility because you've been called on the rest of your dishonesty and your refusal to deal with reality. > And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same > meetings. In my experience, Waking Down created a safe > environment in which people could be rigorously honest with > themselves and with others. It was balanced masculine and > feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction. Obviously Waking Down did Share no good whatsoever. She's made herself utterly oblivious to who she is and seems to be incapable of any kind of honesty with herself or with others. What a contrast with Alex. > ________________________________ > From: Alex Stanley <j_alexander_stanley@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination. > > > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being > > "rigorous". > > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's > excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. > Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as > another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not > about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; > it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own > experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's > brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
