Incorrect. My point is that when someone suddenly begins using that language, while also newly having access to children, it raises a red flag, and it would with anyone, whether it was Barry Wright saying these horrid things, or even his mom, who was probably a nice lady. As a friend of mine said, "Who even thinks that way?"
Yes, the expression is deeply disturbing, and I only mention it to underscore this issue. How you and others can defend this type of statement is beyond me. This is *not* my attempt to "get Barry" as he constantly fantasizes. I am raising awareness that a potentially deeply disturbed individual is around kids, and we ougtha watch him more carefully. That's it.:-) OK, back to The Peak. Get a clue, people... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <reverse_archery@...> wrote : Rick and I have known each other since the late 1970's - If he had truly been offended, he would not have subscribed to my new forum, The Peak. I can appreciate your sensitivity, though you expressed no such qualms, when Turq made a reference to "Maharishi butt-fucking babies". His exact words, a month ago. And you are repeating it right now, here, verbatim. That means your whole act is hypocritical, because, if it offends you, why would you repeat it? I guess context is everything - not that I would like this example, but I understand that it was posted purely as hypothesis - that Maharishi's name was associated with it, was sort of incidental. While I can still understand your reaction, to leave the group, and make your own one - what you are doing now is simply absurd and ridiculus, you come here, and try to pull everybody over to your group in attempt to isolate Turq, that's all too transparent. For that matter, count me out, I'm not interested to join a group with you partonizing. This, along with the knowledge that Turq now lives with, and often babysits, a two year old girl, and had never used language like that before, really got to *my* sensitivities, so much so that I started my own forum. Now here it gets a whole lot weirder from your side: Whily Turq made a purely theoretical hypothesis, you are actually insinuating this for him as a reality. That's a big difference. Not only that, you try to isolate him, and basically destroy this group, together with Buck, who is a lot more outspoken about your real goals. Apparently a lot of people agreed with my sensitivities, too. I guess we are all sensitive in different areas, eh? Anyway if you grow too sensitive for FFL, come on over the The Peak, and let's talk about it.:-) I thought your comment merited a response, though I won't be commenting further on here. Yeah, sure, because you are already gone, right? Give this as a message to Buck as well. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jamesalan735@...> wrote : Maybe I'm being a bit too sensitive, but the "reverse_archery" moniker suggests to me a cheap shot at Rick Archer which isn't needed.
