On Nov 5, 2006, at 2:59 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: > I missed all of the dressing-in-saris-and-identically- > white-suits thang. After my time. For that matter, I > missed the entire MD and THP thang, too. And Chopra, > much less Rajas. I beat feet in the '78-79 ballpark.
You must have also missed the "Sidha dresses" phase--made the saris look positively sexy. > >>> But the one thing that remained constant in my >>> experience was that if there was an "attention >>> hierarchy" to be climbed, some women were driven >>> to climb it, even if doing so made them miserable >>> on a day-to-day basis, and cut them off from >>> cordial company with the other women. >> >> Yep, there's those types in all groups, the only thing that >> changes is the criterion. > > Exactly. > >> In MD I would guess whoever's got the most dough gets >> the most attention. > > I would expect pretty much the same thing. However, > given human nature, I would imagine that four or five > of them really share the "big money maker" crown, so > I would expect there to be some *other* criterion that > these four or five would use to define the absolute > pecking order. And I would imagine that it isn't pretty. > >>> Have you ever been stuck in a relationship that, >>> for all intents and purposes, was over, deceased, >>> a dead parrot? And have you ever, in such a >>> situation, stayed in the relationship because >>> you hoped that it could regain the magic it once >>> held for you? >> >> I don't know if it was for that reason or simple apathy-- > > Entropy. It is, after all, the other strong force > in the universe. > >> maybe a combination. >> >>> That, in my opinion, is why women stay in a very >>> visible position that requires them to be models >>> of blissninnydom, when they're feeling not the >>> least blissy. Same thing for the men who persist >>> in paths that make them less than happy. Most of >>> them, in my opinion, are just pushing the rela- >>> tionship past its time. But one never realizes >>> that one is doing that until one does, whether >>> it's a spiritual relationship or an amatory one. >>> >>> People do weird shit. There's really no figuring >>> it out sometimes... >> >> That's for sure. And paying large sums, to the tune of >> thousands a year, to be essentially unhappy, is about as >> weird as you can get. Freud would have a field day with >> those two groups. > > Yes he would. But I have some compassion because I've > been there, done that, and worn out the T-shirt. Several > times. I stayed too long in most of my amatory affairs, > and I stayed too long in most of my spiritual affairs. > I hung in there long past the day when I realized it > was over, sometimes years past the day when I realized > it was over, often to the detriment of my spiritual > and mental health. But hey!, we all do stupid shit. > It's one of those perks you get for being born human. > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
