Share, did you plan to get back to me on this? Or, are we leaving it and moving on? I would like to know why you think I have sunk to a *NEW* low.
Did you reply to this on the other thread, where you pasted what I had said to you after your Juliette response? If so, never mind. I already replied to that. That discussion is moving forward, no? Or not. ________________________________ From: emilymae.reyn <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:24 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily about extremely polarized thinking <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. > > > > > >
