Dear Robin, I am just getting back. I haven't read the other responses. I don't like to base what I write on what other people write. I like to be spontaneous. Now, regarding your last sentence. Don't you think that's just a bit over the top? I am putting myself in Share's shoes right now, just so you know. I have the ability to move between realities, or rather, feel what it is like in someone else's shoes.
________________________________ From: Robin Carlsen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:38 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking This letter gave me something, Emily. It is truth going everywhere it can go. It almost seems what should take the place of prayer. --- In [email protected], "emilymae.reyn" <emilymae.reyn@...> wrote: > > <snip> BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for > Ravi, right? > > Dear Share, I missed this earlier. I stopped in for lunch, but let us agree > to start right here, with this statement. Us, as in you and me. I have let > our entire history go; I apologize for hurting your feelings and I will think > fondly of you when I meditate next. > > Now, deep breath....ahhhhhh. O.K. It's a lovely day here, so I must get > back to the ocean, because that is where God resides and I'm only here for > another day. I will be back later and hope to hear from you. > > Please, I really want to work this out with you. I really do. What > specifically is a NEW low for me? Specifically. Please quote anything I've > written in support of this allegation and explain what it is and why you > think it is. I will cop to it all and explain the context and reason why I > wrote it, if true. But, I *really* need you to explain what it is. I'm > seriously confused and don't understand all of what I am interpreting as > purely negative attack rhetoric coming out of you. I could be wrong; I have > been wrong before. Let us just figure this one thing out in present time. > Sincerely, Emily. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: > > > > No Share, that's *not* what I say or have said.  I have said that you > > "avoid" - I have nothing but multiple concrete examples of this I could > > show you, if I cared enough to spend the time to do so, and I don't.  > > > > Good barb on me "running to the coast" and "walking my dog."  Way to avoid > > life - it's one of my specialties, didn't you know?  I  have many more > > tricks up my sleeve I could tell you that you might benefit from more than > > whoever the next healer is on the circuit through Fairfield catering to > > those addicted to the "health and wellness" industry.  You bet your sweet > > little backjack, that's what I'm doing, and I'll be doing that the rest of > > the day and loving every balmy second of it.  > > > > You *are* ranting.  Yeah!  Be angry Share, be very, very angry.  How > > dare these people say these horrific things about Mr. Newton? And, it isn't > > just those you have cultized, it was other people too.  Does that mean > > they are now candidates for the cult you've created to assign people to who > > disagree with you?  > > > > From: Share Long <sharelong60@> > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:21 AM > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > >  > > Jesus, Robin! Can't you answer a question either?! Ok. What scares > > you a little about John Newton? Or scared past tense just in case it's > > already gone. And btw if you really want to be scared, check out his > > teacher, the originator of the forgiveness prayers, kahuna Howard Wills. > > > > Over and out, I'm off to writing group. You know, how Emily says I post > > and then go somewhere else. I guess it's ok that she runs to the coast, > > walks her dog etc. > > > > Great! Now I'm ranting. Yeah, yeah, much love to you too. And what > > the heck, to the whole screwy gang! > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Robin Carlsen <maskedzebra@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:03 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > >  > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaak! Too late! I already replied to RD. But > > > what the heck stung her about John Newton for God's sake?! Has she > > > even met the man?! No, I think it's what I say at the end of my reply > > > to her. She made John Newton wrong to make me wrong. And we all > > > know why the women want to make me wrong. So you and them can > > > continue to be right right RIGHT. Pathetic! What are they so > > > insecure about?  > > > > > > > > > And why the heck does he scare you, Robin? Or are you being ironic? > > >   > > > > I SAID: "just a LITTLE, Share. And that fear may go soon anyways. Please > > don't misquote me: to say "John scares me" is quite different from saying: > > John scares me JUST A LITTLE. > > > > > BTW, I said it was a NEW low for Emily and Raunchy. Not so new for > > > Ravi, right? > > > > As far as I am concerned, Ravi is just full of hate--especially for strong > > and loving women. If he likes you (and you are a woman), that means you're > > weak and pathetic. Dr Salyavin has provided us with a nifty diagnostic > > summation anyhow. I agree with him. > > > > Jesus. I hope I am not losing it again. Much love and over and out. > > > > Robin > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Robin Carlsen <maskedzebra@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 12:41 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Emily I think the main cult characteristics are thinking the cult and > > > > > its leader are almost all positive. AND what I've come to think > > > > > is an even more telling indicator of cultishness, thinking that > > > > > those who don't agree with the cult and its leader are almost all > > > > > negative. So when the writing of a FFL person expresses such > > > > > extremely polarized thinking, then I think that person is > > > > > fundamentally aligned with the group I've been calling wts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > A telling indicator of cluelessness is when a whole lot of people agree > > > > with each other about your behavior, you think there's something wrong > > > > with them and not yourself. Then, rather than consider it a gift from > > > > the universe that an entire group of people have given you exactly the > > > > same feedback, you dismiss them as a "cult" (an utterly laughable > > > > rationalization) and then run off to "healers" to validate your > > > > cluelessness. Healing in right in front of your face. Refusing to see > > > > it is what needs healing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, Judy has labeled me the most toxic person AND labeled > > > > > Robin's WTS intentions the absolute highest and purest. I think > > > > > these phrases indicate extremely polarized thinking as expressed by > > > > > the use of verbal superlatives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem with such extremely polarized thinking IMO is that it > > > > > totally misses an essential truth about us human beings, which is > > > > > that we are all a mix of positive and negative and that most of us > > > > > are mostly positive with a a glitch or two thrown in to keep us > > > > > embodied and growing. And some of us have more and or bigger > > > > > glitches. > > > > > > > > > > Another essential truth is that we humans are going to make mistakes > > > > > whether our glitches are big or little, few or many. In regards > > > > > to this I have also noticed that a big feature of extremely polarized > > > > > thinking is that it does not allow for making mistakes, learning > > > > > from them and forgiveness. This too I think is very harmful. > > > > > > > > > > As far as I'm > > > > > concerned it's up to you to decide if you're a member of wts. > > > > > I'm only weighing in on this because you and others are STILL > > > > > bringing it up! BTW this is another indicator of cultishness IMO > > > > > because it too has an element of being extreme in its expression. > > > > > Also BTW I keep saying IMO to indicate that I realize what I'm saying > > > > > is only my opinion based on my observations. Nothing more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of all the wts people I think you're pretty fluid in your > > > > > thinking. But you still are sometimes extreme in the negative > > > > > direction towards me and towards other non wts people like Barry. > > > > > Often I think your negativity is expressed cleverly and pseudo > > > > > playfully. Nonetheless the extreme negativity underneath is > > > > > discernible. And as I say above, this extremely polarized > > > > > thinking in the negative direction has become for me the clearest > > > > > indication of someone's being in the group I call wts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PS A very recent example of your extremely negative thinking > > > > > about me: I made no judgement about Raunchy's grand daughter. > > > > > I was expressing an opinion about the BENEFICIAL effect I thought > > > > > John Newton's work would have on Raunchy and the people in her > > > > > life. IMO both you and Raunchy reached a new low with those > > > > > posts.  > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who me, new lows? What about Gopi Boy? "Ravi called Newton "fucking > > > > delusional," but he didn't get a gauntlet (or even a guantlet) thrown > > > > at him either." > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328870 > > > > > > > > BTW if John Newton, himself hadn't thought the "fainting goat" riff was > > > > humorous, I'd wonder even more than I do about his bona fides. > > > > > > Don't bite, Share. She's just trying to get back at you. You stung her. I > > > kinda like that. With Emily, I'd say just FO. You're good, Share. John > > > scares me just a little. And that's fine too. > > > > > > > > > >
