--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn" <emilymae.reyn@> 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > You may not choose to retract your statement.  But in consideration to 
> > > the time and effort that many have spent asking you to explain why you 
> > > used it - you have still not done this.  Until I understand what you mean 
> > > by that term and how you are defining it for yourself, what is the point 
> > > of anything that you are writing to attempt to resolve the issue? 
> > 
> > I don't get why this is YOUR issue Emily. (or anyone elses')
> 
> Why is it *your* issue, Curtis?

Because she brought me into the post and from the beginning I thought her 
phrase was an apt one to describe how it feels to have Robin run his routine on 
you.  But you don't see me running after Robin demanding he explain himself to 
ME for what he said to Share do you?

> 
> > Why are you owed an explanation for something she said
> > to Robin that he apparently doesn't care enough to pursue
> > himself?
> 
> Dig the malicious spin in the last part of that sentence.
> 
> Some things are just too painful to pursue, Curtis.>

Really, show me where Robin expressed that melodramatic perspective. You are 
making this up.

> 
> Robin spent 25 years in isolation atoning and suffering
> for the harm he'd done others. Now all of a sudden, out
> of the blue, he's accused of continuing to inflict the
> same harm when all he was after was friendship and goodwill.>

Oh poor Robin, only after friendship and good will.

Small problem. His own stated goal with Share was to shock her into an 
awareness of the reality he was presenting.  Did you perhaps miss the pages and 
pages of his posts deriding me?

Your "story" is bullshit.

> 
> > The whole grilling has gone on a bit long IMO.  And the
> > constant focus on her label for his behavior rather than
> > his behavior is the most baffling aspect of this whole
> > thing.  Doesn't ANYBODY care why someone would feel that
> > this was the best way to describe what he was doing? 
> 
> That is what Emily just asked Share, Curtis. Did you not
> bother to read what she posted? Too eager to go after her
> for not agreeing that Robin is a psychological rapist?>

That was unclear on my part.  More simply, why not focus on Robin at all?  Only 
Share.  And when Share does try to explain herself it instigates another round 
robin of attacks from the crew.

> 
> What do the words "the time and effort that many have
> spent asking you to explain why you used it" mean?>

So maybe she will if she thinks this is a sincere request, I don't know.  I was 
making another point, but I see it was not clear.

> 
> You utter schmuck.

Find yourself another emotional punching bag.


< We have looked at everything that's
> been presented to us, starting with Robin's post that 
> Share claims freaked her out, *and we can't figure out
> what the hell her problem was with Robin*. We've asked
> her over and over to explain her use of that term, as
> Emily says, and she never has.>

She has been grilled by unfriendly people calling her a liar with no intention 
of understanding her POV.  

> 
> Maybe if she would for once respond straightforwardly,
> she could get off the grill.>

Right with Judy as judge of what "straightforwardly" how could she give up a 
chance for that fair trial.

> 
> The "psychological rape" accusation doesn't make any
> *sense*, Curtis, except as something to beat Robin up
> with for past personal resentments that have nothing
> to do with his encounters with Share.>

Well it did to her and it does to me.  But then we have both been the target of 
Robin's routine and you see him as 

"all he was after was friendship and goodwill"

Right, guess I missed that.




> 
> 
> 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Share, Share, Share.....I hesitate to weigh in here, but if you think the 
> > > post below by Curtis is an example of his "fine writing" I don't know 
> > > what to tell you.  This is just a comment from him supporting an "us and 
> > > them" interpretation on your part, which you are apparently loving as it 
> > > supports an approach you've used over and over - indicating very black 
> > > and white thinking, IMHO.  Curtis can and has put forth some fine 
> > > writing, no doubt, but this is not it.  
> > > 
> > > It's not about Robin Share - it's about you.  It's not about Robin's 
> > > "supporters" (us and them again), it's about what you said and 
> > > encouraging you to examine why you used a term that you still have yet to 
> > > define in a way that supports your continued use of the term or what you 
> > > posted at the time in question.  Curiously, and I continue to ask this of 
> > > you, although I know you aren't going to do it, can you post a definition 
> > > of the term that correctly reflects how you were actually feeling 
> > > initially and how you were feeling after your experience with Robin 
> > > settled in more definitively - a few weeks later?  
> > > 
> > > You now say  you were experiencing a "range of emotions" from grumpiness 
> > > to psychological rape.  That doesn't make any logical sense either as it 
> > > is highly unlikely you would emotionally maintain such a range *in the 
> > > moment* and your post indicates only the former.  The latter feeling 
> > > (which was what exactly) would supersede.   
> > > 
> > > O.K.  It is *your* experience Share, of that only you *know.*  But you 
> > > have yet to explain what it was in terms that even come close to use of 
> > > the term "psychological rape" and your posts simply don't reflect it.  
> > > You now say you were emotionally upset and overwhelmed and lacking 
> > > psychological development.  Are you trying to say that you used the term 
> > > in error because of your internal landscape at the time?  You say your 
> > > POV is accurate - SHARE, WHAT IS YOUR POINT OF VIEW ON YOUR USE OF THE 
> > > TERM AT THE TIME YOU USED IT.  HOW ARE YOU DEFINING IT WITHIN YOURSELF.  
> > > FROM AN IDEAS PERSPECTIVE, DEFINING THE TERM IS KEY TO YOUR UNDERSTANDING 
> > > OF WHETHER IT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN THE CORRECT TERM TO USE.  WHY 
> > > WON'T YOU PUT FORTH AN EXPLANATION OF THIS?  IF YOU INCORPORATE FEEDBACK 
> > > AND FIND THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE ERRED, WHY IS A RETRACTION SUCH A LOATHSOME 
> > > THING TO DO?  
> > > 
> > > "Retraction" can be a very useful thing.  Here, I'll  do one for you now. 
> > >  "For the record, I retract my entire paragraph speaking to cultural 
> > > context of the Roustabout song.  I had done no research when I wrote that 
> > > paragraph and other than the idea that cultural context is important in 
> > > understanding lyrics, the paragraph is garbage and was written quickly 
> > > with no clear thought process behind it.  My apologies to raunchy for 
> > > posting that back to her in response to the discussion that was 
> > > unfolding.  It was representative of a thought process that was unfolding 
> > > in my head and was not germane to question of whether the lyrics were 
> > > describing a gang rape or consensual meeting "in the pines."  
> > > 
> > > You may not choose to retract your statement.  But in consideration to 
> > > the time and effort that many have spent asking you to explain why you 
> > > used it - you have still not done this.  Until I understand what you mean 
> > > by that term and how you are defining it for yourself, what is the point 
> > > of anything that you are writing to attempt to resolve the issue?  
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Curtis, when I'm rushing in the early morning, I save your posts for 
> > > > reading later.  Why?  Because just reading them makes me settle down 
> > > > and feel more reasonable and therefore happier.  Now that I think of 
> > > > it, this is IMO the highest compliment I can give to a writer.  And 
> > > > just now I recognize that such writing here on FFL has evoked in me the 
> > > > desire to be exactly this kind of writer.  Hope that's not too mushy.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It's strange is it not that we both have these threads going on about 
> > > > the R word?!  Hmmm, let us ponder which group is common to both those 
> > > > threads.  Let us ponder...never mind!
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It'll be eight months on May 6!  Unbelievable!  And with a threat 
> > > > that it will continue.  But with today's post I think I've answered 
> > > > all of Judy's continuing concerns so maybe she will drop it now and or 
> > > > go badger Robin about it.  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > And that there last sentence is probably my most deluded thought of all.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________________________________
> > > >  From: curtisdeltablues <curtisdeltablues@>
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 10:21 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: J gets another fact wrong and S apologizes 
> > > > to R
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > Nice post Share.  I'm sure Robin will be along with his apologies for 
> > > > making you feel as though the phrase was the best way to express it.
> > > > 
> > > > Oddly enough the committee giving lip-service to defending Robin's 
> > > > honor have dragged out the discussion 777 months now, making it a MUCH 
> > > > bigger part of Robin's online legacy than it would have been if they 
> > > > had just brought up their objections and then DROPPED it. 
> > > > 
> > > > But their desire to get you to say "uncle" was too strong, so they 
> > > > ended up shredding the doggy pull toy they claimed they were 
> > > > protecting.  The chances that this term will be found by anyone looking 
> > > > up Robin are now EXPONENTIALLY bigger through their diligence.  I'm 
> > > > sure he appreciates their HELP!
> > > > 
> > > > On the other hand, as you mentioned, this will probably not be the 
> > > > thing that swings their vote in one direction or another about the guy.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, Judy, apologies accepted, thank you.  Moving on, you think I 
> > > > > was wrong when I said psychologically raped to Robin.  I think I 
> > > > > was emotionally upset, as well as overwhelmed by many other 
> > > > > inputs.  I think I was lacking in psychological development.  I 
> > > > > think I was lacking in certain communication skills. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Nonetheless I think my POV is more accurate and inclusive of the 
> > > > > whole truth than yours.  And my inner Xeno is smiling wryly about 
> > > > > that.    
> > > > > 
> > > > > My statements on and about Sept 6 were all genuine expressions of how 
> > > > > I was feeling when I wrote them.  Even now I assess those posts as 
> > > > > accurately reporting that I was very upset with Robin and also giving 
> > > > > him the benefit of the doubt because I wanted to see if there was a 
> > > > > way to continue being friends.  It is true that I was experiencing 
> > > > > a mix and range of physical and emotional states from grumpiness to 
> > > > > feeling psychologically raped.  
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mix and range of inner experiences is something humans experience. 
> > > > >  Though evidently not all humans recognize this fact.    
> > > > > 
> > > > > In addition, every time Xeno, Curtis, Steve, feste and others write 
> > > > > about this, their clarity and greater objectivity has helped me 
> > > > > understand what was often subjective and emotionally challenging for 
> > > > > me.  So I am grateful to them all for helping me find the words to 
> > > > > understand events and individuals that I'm still trying to 
> > > > > understand.  And I continue to incorporate their understandings 
> > > > > and wordings into my thinking and writing about it.  EMILY, take 
> > > > > note, my incorporating of the insights of others will continue to 
> > > > > happen.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Judy, it's not that I keep going lower and lower.  It's that your 
> > > > > assessment of your POV keeps going higher and higher.  Indicating 
> > > > > only that it's all relative.
> > > > > 
> > > > > As for your concern about Robin's reputation, as one poster recently 
> > > > > said here, what I said was a blip on the screen in comparison to 
> > > > > Robin's own posts.  I'd add that the postings of many of his 
> > > > > supporters also affects his reputation negatively, as difficult as 
> > > > > that might be for them to acknowledge.  
> > > > > 
> > > > > Reasonable people everywhere will consider all that is pertinent.  
> > > > > Or maybe ignore the whole thing.  Beyond that it is the workings 
> > > > > of karma.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > >  From: authfriend <authfriend@>
> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2013 10:10 AM
> > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: J gets another fact wrong and S 
> > > > > apologizes to R
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >   
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Poor archives, still being selectively eschewed by Judy.
> > > > > > Correcting Judy:  I joined FFL in May 2012 and Robin
> > > > > > rejoined in June 2012.
> > > > > 
> > > > > You are absolutely right, my mistake, and my apologies.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Robin *first* joined FFL in June 2011, left in January
> > > > > 2012, and returned in June. You joined in May 2012,
> > > > > as you say. Apparently I conflated the two June dates.
> > > > > I should have double-checked.
> > > > > 
> > > > > However, my point stands: You were not new either to FFL
> > > > > or to Robin at the time he made the remarks that you
> > > > > decided four weeks later constituted "psychological rape."
> > > > > You had been on FFL for three-and-a-half months, and your
> > > > > conversations with Robin had begun in early July, two
> > > > > months previously.
> > > > > 
> > > > > >  Aren't you all glad I straightened THAT out?!  Dear Robin, 
> > > > > >practicing just in case:  please forgive me for not joining FFL 
> > > > > >in the same month as you did thus rendering Judy a LIAR.  I hope 
> > > > > >you can understand.  Shalom and all the best always, Share
> > > > > > PS  May I take this opportunity to wish you Happy Birthday a few 
> > > > > > days early? 
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to