It's pretty strange that you would have to ask, Share. But since you seem
confused:
The best possible outcome would be for you to take responsibility for having
said something incredibly insensitive and then apologize to the rest of us for
having tried to wiggle out of it before. You could also tell your knee-jerk
defenders like Steve that they're wrong to try to exonerate you, especially by
vilifying others for their purportedly "nefarious" understanding of what you
actually said.
I have virtually no hope of that ever happening, but boy, if it did it would
sure change my notions of how reality works.
<< Judy, what are you hoping to accomplish by bringing this up? What is the
result you want? >>
On Thursday, December 26, 2013 8:58 PM, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote:
If Judy really thinks so badly of me, then why does she continue to
communicate with me?! It makes no sense and leads me to believe that she has
another motive. Very strange.
Anyway, Steve, how's the skiing? Are the villages looking beautiful?
On Thursday, December 26, 2013 8:46 PM, "steve.sundur@..." <steve.sundur@...>
wrote:
Sure Judy, I wouldn't expect you to interpret it in any other way.
When there is an opportunity to frame something in the worst possible way,
it's pretty much guaranteed that you will be first in line.
Or I should say, those with whom you have a vendetta.
You may not realize it,,but this is a major reason why people stay away from
here.
Of course, I think there are many positive contributions you make, but on
balance, I think it tends to stay pretty ugly.
Maybe those two pictures in the photo section do actually capture two big
facets of your personality.
---In FairfieldLife@{{emailDomain}}, <authfriend@...> wrote:
Right, the context was Share's preference for punjabis over saris:
"Plus they are practical, meaning one could still flee or er apply one's knee
to a feller's nether regions if he got too frisky. So punjabis I'm guessing
are great for setting boundaries if one is about to experience PhysR rather
than PsyR or EmoR. I'm just sayin." (That's a reference, BTW, to her having
accused Robin of "psychological rape," another very ugly story involving
Share.) IOW, "got too frisky" here refers to attempted rape.
Curtis was confused, thinking she was referring to Fairfield. She corrected
him:
"Oh, I meant the women in India. From recent news reports there seems to be a
lot of hyper frisky fellers there."
She was referring to an NPR story Buck had linked to about the terrible
problems India was having with rape (including murderous rape--one of the
recent victims was 4 years old).
She later claimed calling the Indian rapists "frisky fellers" had been a
"joke."
I kid you not, folks. This is what Steve is trying to defend her from.
The NPR story is here:
http://www.npr.org/2013/03/28/175471907/on-indias-trains-seeking-safety-in-the-women-s-compartment
http://www.npr.org/2013/03/28/175471907/on-indias-trains-seeking-safety-in-the-women-s-compartment
I can give you links to any of the posts I quoted.
(I can also refer you to one of the very ugliest posts I've ever seen on FFL.
It's from Curtis, also attempting to defend Share, and it's truly sickening.
Only someone with a disturbed mind could have written it.)
Steve wrote:
Exactly Share. Most everyone knew the context in which you made your comment.
And only those with the most nefarious intent would choose to interpret it in
the way they do.
Why don't you tell us what your interpretation was, Steve? I've given you the
context; go to it.
Quite a shame that people choose to do that.
