--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: <snip> > > Here's the post you were responding to (which is > > referring to a satirical TMO press release Barry > > crafted, which you said you had taken seriously > > until halfway through it): > > > > -------------- > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > We say this over and over again on this newsgroup, but > > > it speaks volumns about the present state of the TMO > > > when outrageous satire of the TMO is initially > > > perceived as "rational" movement discourse! > > > > Does it speak volumes about the present state of > > the TMO, or about how people on this forum tend to > > perceive the TMO? > > > > I knew this was satire after reading the title. > > The question I posted for you to answer were relevant to your above > comments, Judy, because Tantra's satire was very, very close to the > reality that the TMO had become. > > But you seem to NOT feel that way because you were, unlike me, able > to recognize it as satire as soon as you read the title. > > So I countered by asking you the question that I did because I > wanted to see if you would have started TM when you did had the > absurd reality of present-day TMO been prevalent then...
Now, that wasn't so hard, was it? The answer is, of course, almost certainly not. I can think of only one circumstance under which I might have: If I had had a good friend who had been practicing TM and was familiar with the organization, who had explained to me that I could ignore all the crazy stuff and just learn and practice the technique. As it was, I didn't know anybody who practiced TM when I started, so all I knew about it was its public face. If it had been charging the same prices then as it does now (even adjusted for inflation), that would probably have discouraged me as well. (I paid $125 to learn in 1975.) But Shemp, you knew this is how I would answer when you asked the question, which is one reason I didn't bother to answer. As I said earlier, it was a rhetorical question, not a request for information. Not only that, your rhetorical question didn't make the point you explain above that you intended--and you even supply the reason why it didn't: You note that Barry's satire wasn't close enough to the reality, as far as I was concerned, to make me uncertain as to whether it was serious. In fact, you prove *my* point, which was that the inability to recognize Barry's piece as satire had more to do with one's perception of the organization than with the reality of the organization. As nutty as the TMO now is, even so nutty that it would have dissuaded me from starting TM, it's nowhere near *as* nutty as Barry's piece suggested. One would have to have a really unrealistic view of the TMO to be taken in by it. I don't think even *Barry* expected that. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
