--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > I am saying is he should shit or get off the pot (to put > > > it rather crudely). I am making no value judgements here > > > about the quality of the discourse or even the value of > > > it. It is just that Curtis keeps coming back for more > > > all the while lamenting his "predicament". I am just > > > tired of hearing him whinge, that's all. Either he > > > should get on with it or move along to the next subject. > > Before commenting on your reply, Curtis, which was IMO > just Right On, nailing the somewhat the somewhat > questionable sanity of Ann's interest in all of this, > I should point out that she has a point.
We all judge the value of each others posting choices that are different from our own. But we don't all equate those different choices as representing a flaw in the person making them. > > Contrary to what others have said here recently, YOU > did not "come back to FFL" as a result of Robin's > presence here. As I remember it, this last appear- > ance of his was occasioned by YOUR return to FFL. It has gone both ways, and it was interesting that Ann painted the picture that it was only one way. > He "came back" specifically so he could rag on me > in Judy's absence, and when I didn't react to his > provocations, he turned his attentions to you, hoping > that he could lure you back into one of his > "confrontations." In this, he succeeded. After all > this time, you should know his tactics, and his > intent, and know better than to get involved. But > it's your choice; you seem to be getting something > out of interacting with him, so if so, continue, > as long as it is fun or interesting for you. I am > not in a position to criticize this, having been > sucked into similar "confrontations" with Judy > for so many years. Finally I decided they -- and > her -- were simply not worth my time. Although Ann equated your opinion with hers it is actually very different. I get it that you are shaking your head about my discussions with him and it has been that way for years with Judy as well. We are both using this writing opportunity in a way that serves us. I at least get that level of respect from you, even if you think I am wasting my time with them. I don't frame it all as getting sucked in obviously. I am using it as a way to express what I want until it stops serving that purpose and then I cut it off. When I cut it off Judy declares victory and Robin escalates his taunts. But I enjoy the ride till I don't. > > Now, to what you said, re Ann... > > > My interaction with another poster is causing YOU > > discomfort. Think about that. > > That's really the issue with Ann's involvement here. > Nothing that goes on between you and Robin concerns > her in the least, but she *takes advantage of it* > to berate you and defend Robin. Given the fact that > we are talking about a person (Ann) who was verbally > and psychically abused by Robin for 3-1/2 FUCKING > YEARS, one simply has to wonder WHY. > > Ann's act has always had a "Patty Hearst" feel to it > for me, as if she's still carrying a torch for the > cult leader who captured her attention and sucked her > into his sick games so many years ago. I still cannot > help but believe that it is her attachment to the > intensity that cult experience had for her that drives > her sad defense of Robin all these years later, and her > inability to see that HIS ACT HAS NOT CHANGED. I think she does see that his act has not changed and it is triggering her because she has not resolved all of her issues with her experience with him. I worked with cult counselors when I got out of TM, and just walking away has a cost if you have no support system to process the experience. This is why I have treated her much more gently than you have. This is a process and it is not easy. And yes I agree with your assessment of her conflicted feelings about the guy combined with some guilt for burning Disneyland down. I think she is right to be cautious about interacting directly with him though. > > He is *still* trying to run the "I'm in charge here...I > am the cult leader and you *have* to stand there and > let me yell at you because *I* know you better than > you know yourself, because I'm so...so...special and > all...further more you *have* to respond to my yelling" > act. He tries to run it on you, on me, and on whoever > else he thinks he can get to fall for it. > Bingo > > So *many* people here have commented on the nature of > this act that it is incomprehensible to me that Ann > does not, or can not, see it. I believe she does see it and is transferring her aggression toward him to me. > > > The issue here is not how I choose my interactions with > > another poster. It is about the reaction you are having > > to it. > > Bingo. > > Ann has *no place* in the interactions you choose to > have with Robin. Neither does Judy, or any of her other > minions. WHY do they keep trying to insinuate themselves > into the situation? Each for a different reason. Judy always is looking for a new angle to show me in an unflattering light. She has no intellectual connection with Robin other that the hater-ade they are addicted to. The strange bedfellows aspect of it really makes me laugh. Robin has the most anti-Maharishi perspective of anyone in the history of FFL, but she has to treat him with deference because of his hostile position toward you and me. That aspect of it delights me. I think Ann is using it as a way to process her emotions toward Robin using me as the emotional punching bag. I don't really mind, but I AM holding up a mirror. > > > And one of your blind spots is that you don't have to > > read any of it. But you do. > > > > Obviously there is a level of interest in the interaction > > for me, but it is not unlimited, and I enforce my own > > level of interest boundaries, despite being goaded to > > continue ad infinitum. I continue till I have expressed > > what I wanted to express and then I stop. > > As any sane person would. > > > There is no end with Robin until I end it and that cycle > > has repeated itself here many times. > > As only an insane person would dispute is the nature > of Robin's game. The man is positively DERANGED behind > keeping you "in the game." I mean, he claims that > succeeding in getting you to respond to him is "making > you come." THAT'S FUCKING CRAZY, man...over the top, > straight jacket stuff. You nailed something key here. In response to me cutting him off from responding to his unpleasantness he started to escalate his behavior to get a response. It shows that Share was brilliant in her use of the term "psychological rape" because Robin was using an icky sex metaphor for power, not sex. He repeated it twice because this image delights him. He has used homo-erotic imagery a lot in our discussions and it is always about dominance and power. The second tell for me that he had unhinged was when he created a post with my name at the bottom. We have been over this before and he thought this would have to get me to respond. It was acting out behavior. It was also over the line for me and that is why I labeled him a troll. All I can do is attach that disclaimer to his posts when he does that, he has ended the conversation with me with that act. > > ( At the same time, it is quite revealing that he feels > that way about the "confrontations" he tries to stage. > He probably felt the same way when he was yelling at > Ann onstage. In his mind he wasn't abusing her; he > was making her come. ) I suspect there was always a creepy sexual element to his domination both for the men and the women. > > > So your advice IS a judgement about the value of the > > interactions for me, you think I should stop or if I > > continue, I shouldn't complain about how Robin is > > acting in the discussion. I have never complained > > about the choices I have made to interact with him. > > But somehow the way I am interacting with him bothers > > you in a way that the way he is interacting with me > > does not. > > Of course. YOU are not submitting to his abuse. She did.> I think that is what is triggering her. > > > Think about why this would be important to YOU. > > Exactly. > > > You are working out your own stuff that is getting > > triggered from my interaction with Robin. MY interaction > > with Robin is not the issue you should be focusing on > > if you spent three and a half years daily with this guy. > > Exactly. > > > I'm fine. > > > > Are you fine Ann? > > Not in my opinion. What I'm seeing is a cult survivor > still trying desperately -- decades later -- to not only > take the side of the cult leader who abused her, but to > HELP him abuse others by cheering him on when he does it. > > That's just sad. We have seen this before in people who walk away from cults. It takes years (decades?) to process, and some of it is hard work. Out of all the years FFL has been around it was Robin who drew her here. Posting tentatively as if approaching a rattle snake, she avoided any direct interaction. I though this was odd and sparked some direct dialogue. Robin turned on the love bomb flattery routine and And was cautious and noncommittal. My initial motivation for interacting with Robin was to see how a cult leader thought. At first he seemed to have a cool perspective on his previous life. I believe that my misread of his meaning when he made a big fuss about me NEVER questioning his enlightenment experience was pivotal. I thought he was doing schtick on being sensitive about it. He was not. When he sussed out that I was not gunna buy his interpretation of his glorious previous state of mind he turned on me. The issue about me not scolding you was just a smokescreen. It was all about my refusal to see him as ever being the special enlightened guy that is key to his inflated identity. So for him all of our discussions are about power. His loss of it. His reaction to me was first to try to flatter me to manipulate me, but he didn't understand that I just took all that as his insecurity. When that didn't work he went ballistic and has remained ballistic to this day. But I have really enjoyed getting a front seat on his thinking process. I know you have been around a bunch of these guys, but it was new to me and quite fascinating. I can see exactly where his epistemology departs from what I consider healthy, and I have a much better understanding of how these guys operate internally. This has been one of the most interesting journeys for me on FFL. And in the end, Ann inserting herself into the discussion has added a lot as a prompt for me to think about these issues from another angle. Thanks for continuing the rap and please excuse my rambling, word floodish, interlude! >
