--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in the archives where > I said LA LA LA. But perhaps by real world you mean some context other than > FFL? > > > I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar to > me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people like > Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar situations.
Er, hello, you have your own in-resident former WTS participant right here at FFL, namely - me. Why not pick my brain a little more?  I choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the validity of my experiences especially those who express these in a very attacking and or crude and or condescending way. I also choose to ignore those who first ignore and or misrepresent what I've written. I don't see that any good will come of such discussions. And I certainly choose to ignore certain posters who, though delightful on their own, often become distorted versions of themselves when they take on the pack mentality.  > > > I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or > disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate manner. > > > ________________________________ > From: Alex Stanley <j_alexander_stanley@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex > > >  > Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and > it does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real > world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're > likely to get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA > LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile > on. > > --- 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.àPiling on in the > > name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and > > cowardly behavior in wts.àThat and piling onto only one of the people > > who disagreed with them.àAnd cheering each other on about it.àWarts > > yet present.àI never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.àAnd > > it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same meetings.àIn my > > experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in which people could be > > rigorously honest with themselves and with others.àIt was balanced > > masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction. àà> > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > à> > > > > > --- 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. > > >
