Love that - there are times when nothing will do but the word "fuck" - one of my favorites, although I watch my language these days. :) :)
________________________________ From: obbajeeba <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 1:48 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi Share, like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsrXZ_Mdehw *snort --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: > > It's nice to see you working on being an adult, Share.  As an adult, one > must always be careful not to be too sanctimonious.  > > > ________________________________ > From: Share Long sharelong60@... > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:14 AM > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > >  > Yep, I still think it's possible to set boundaries without using potentially > harmful language. In this I prefer to err on the side of being too gentle > than too harsh even if I have to fake it in public and work on it in private > or with my counselor. That seems adult to me. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "doctordumbass@..." doctordumbass@... > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 8:22 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > >  > Sometimes you must speak another person's language to communicate with them. > Maharishi said this, meet them at their level of consciousness, so rather > than going on and on about compassion and my fellow man, sometimes a good go > fuck yourself serves equally well. It is not said in judgment, but rather in > context. An attempt at behavioral modification, as would be used on a very > stubborn and angry adult child. It shows them immediately that there is a > boundary there. Not something one would expect to have to do around adults, > setting social boundaries, but some are childish in their state of emotional > development. Sorry if it looks ugly from the outside, in, but not sorry > enough to stop it, if necessary. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > Judy and Xeno, I'm learning, especially here on FFL, that it's best NEVER > > to blast someone unkindly. Whether it's *important to* reminds me of > > something posted a few weeks ago: that evil takes over when good people > > become prideful. Furthermore, I think it's possible to express one's > > opinion, set boundaries, etc. without being unkind. Because really, exactly > > what does unkindness accomplish? Does it produce kindness in the abusive > > person? If so, then all I can say is that I have seen no empirical evidence > > of that here on FFL! > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: authfriend authfriend@ > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 9:46 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Chopra nothing without Maharishi > > > > > > > >  > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote: > > > > snip > > > > That may well be true. I don't think one ought to blast > > people unkindly unless one feels it's important. It isn't > > something to be done casually or for fun. > > > > > Getting blasted by Barry, and getting blasted by you are, > > > for me, entirely different experiences. For me, that recent > > > post to Share was the only one, of the ones of Barry's I > > > have read recently that comes close to your intensity. > > > > You've missed quite a few posts of his, it seems. > > > > Did you see this one, for instance? > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/349106 > > > > (Actually this is my response, but Barry's post is > > quoted in its entirety. Interestingly, not long > > afterward, he decided he was going to go back to > > not responding to his "enemies." Oh, BTW, below > > Barry's post are my responses to two of yours, > > which I'm not sure you saw either.) > > > > Here's another (also with my response at the top): > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/349548 > > > > > It makes me wonder if somewhere in your life history your > > > method of responding to people developed in response to > > > some less than pleasant events, or it could a family > > > characteristic. > > > > Neither, sorry to disappoint you. Maybe I was just lucky, > > but until I started posting to electronic forums 25 or > > so years ago, I'd never encountered this kind of > > intellectual and factual dishonesty and gratuitous > > obnoxiousness. (You can call that a "less than pleasant > > event" if you like, but somehow I don't think it's what > > you had in mind.) > > > > > Some people seem inclined to confrontation and argument > > > more than others. So in reply to your last comment, aside > > > from the question I asked about percentages, I do think > > > you are confrontational and accusatory. I am stating this > > > as if it were a fact. But the other side of the coin is, > > > do you think yourself that you are this way or not? > > > > When I think it's appropriate, yes indeed. (The difference > > between you and me in that regard is that I'm honest > > about it.) > > > > > Do the people on the forum who are generally favourable to > > > you think you are confrontational and accusatory? There > > > would seem to be a range of opinion on this issue. > > > > I guess you've thought more about it than I have. It's not > > something I'm concerned about. You probably should ask > > the folks you have in mind. > > > > > I would assume that those who thought you were would tend > > > to be more favourable in Barry's direction, and those who > > > felt you were not would not be favourable to Barry, and > > > even if they thought you were confrontational and accusatory, > > > would feel it was justified as you championed ideas and an > > > outlook on life they were more comfortable with. > > > > I have no idea what your point is here. I think people react > > to Barry as individuals, not because of how I react to him. > > > > Maybe you're the exception, though. > > >
