[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:
snip
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially
 recently -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people 
 asserting that they not only have the right to try to change
 people they don't like, they've been asserting that it's some
 kind of ethical or moral duty, and that anyone who *doesn't*
 do as they do and try to impose their view of how things
 should be on others is ethically deficient.

Translation: People have been criticizing Barry's behavior
again, and this annoys him, because he believes he is
entitled to be immune from criticism. He believes he should
be free to treat the people he doesn't like as if they were
garbage, demonizing them, lying about them, and trying to
get others not to read their posts, without anybody--
including those he treats this way--uttering a peep of
protest.

 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does
 not compute. The only environment in which such a 'tude
 *does* compute is a cult, especially one that has a history
 of treating its members like children who need to be
 corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.

Only trouble is, most of the people who are criticizing
Barry have long since rejected the TM movement. 

 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed
 of adults.

Says Barry, who feels entitled to treat us all like
children and lecture us on how we ought to behave, as if
we need to be corrected by our betters (i.e., Barry).

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

Barry,


That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
-- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
things should be on others is ethically deficient.

Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
movement.

Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.

Hey Barry,

Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get along 
here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not do...say,,,I 
not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  Now I read your 
first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and accused him of 
acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and you really let 
him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that way and that he 
is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few dustups after that 
because apparently some people here believe you were sadistic and offensive 
in those posts.

ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem to 
have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was just 
thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me now and 
like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find offensive.  Now I 
know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask that you be more like 
me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even encouraging you by not 
asking you to change in this way,so I hope you understand.

Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
here is what I am asking:

1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have any 
question about what this is the standard is Judy.

2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we might 
disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your judgement 
about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.

3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
to step in with a rolled up newspaper and tell you how bad you are.  This is a 
right I have been given because you and I don't fight here.  The reason we 
don't fight is not that we like each other but because of our alpha male pact 
which was sealed that night we crossed urine streams.  That was not gay even 
though we saw each other's wieners and in response to your unwarranted and 
sadistic chuckling at what you referred to as my peanut, I want you to know 
that some are for show and some are for grow.  Just because mine is neither, 
you had no right to ask me if I was going to clear my zipper.  And speaking of 
gay topics...

4. I don't think Robin is gay.  I don't know if you you were implying that he 
was or offensively stating it in a manor unpleasing to some other posters here, 
but I need you to think about him more as I do in this way too.  (And for the 
record if a guy wears women's clothes underneath male ones that is not 
trans-sexual it is just a question of comfort.)

5.  I have noticed that you are not as interested in the blues as I am.  I hope 
you will honor my friendship rights by changing this.

6.  You have been mean to Judy more than she has been mean to you by her count. 
 This is apparently meaningful.  Please take note.  In fact from her POV you 
are actually the only mean one and she has been forced (but not in a victim 
way) to respond to every one of your lies, misrepresentations and offensive 
putdowns of her for the last 16 years.  Please stop miscounting how many times 
she mentions you in her posts. (Please check with Judy for the technical 
reasons your count doesn't count.)  Please accept that her view is the 
objective reality and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.

And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
it's not my favorite kinda music.

I hope that this will help to keep us best buds, because as everyone
knows best buds have to agree with each other about pretty much
everything in life.

Yo,

Barry

P.S. For the record, I don't think Robin is gay either. I was merely
using a good one-liner I heard from somewhere to point out the
rather drama-queen-y / drag queen-y nature of some of his suck-up
verbiage. If I were to really guess as to his sexuality I would assume
him to be asexual, because I honestly can't see anyone that narcissistic
having a real-life relationship with anyone other than themselves, be
they male or female.

P.S.S. I sure hope that P.S. wasn't offensive. Could you check with the
standard-keeper for me?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 Barry,

 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially
recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that
they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like,
they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of
how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.

 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not
compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like
children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.

 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of
adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone
says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up
to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become
cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.

 Hey Barry,

 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you
said some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since
you and I get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could
uh do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might
find offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you
called him a drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to
treat him as a special person and you really let him have it and said
that you were not going to treat him that way and that he is boring to
you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few dustups after that
because apparently some people here believe you were sadistic and
offensive in those posts.

 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so
I seem to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and
all I was just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think
more like me now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others
might find offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a
bit far to ask that you be more like me but I've been accused of having
bad ethics and even encouraging you by not asking you to change in this
way,so I hope you understand.

 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and
for all, here is what I am asking:

 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you
have any question about what this is the standard is Judy.

 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting
please clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything
that we might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not
trust your judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the
professionals.

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 To some extent, I've been less charmed by the latest two episodes of
 HBO's Enlightened while watching it, but in retrospect I've realized
 that Mike White and Laura Dern *are* still dealing with material that is
 relevant to FFL and to the cult of spiritual narcissism; it's just more
 subtle than in the first 2 episodes.

It sounds like an interesting show. Being bit torrent busted, I will have to 
wait for netflix to get it.
 
 It's now been a week since Amy has returned from her idyllic (although
 enforced) retreat in Hawaii. Her epiphany -- whatever it was -- had
 faded in significance, and now she's focused on trying to still live an
 enlightened life out in the real world. 

Because clearly we need enlightened individuals who on their own, have become 
spectacular beacons of light, independent of all the smucks around them, having 
transformed Consciousness, watered it , made it grow and evolve to fantastic 
higher states of Consciousness, not the dirty old Consciousness of the smucks. 

 In Ep4, confronted with her
 first weekend, she has to figure out what to do with it.

She has to figure out what to do with IT in relation to the world. Right on!   
 
 She first decides to spend it meditating, which gives us a classic (and
 hilarious) opportunity to listen to her inner thoughts in pretty much
 the classic TMer meditation. That is, all thoughts, no silence, all
 trivia and self-involvement. Her first thoughts are about being 40 and
 having wrinkles. Then she comes back to the mantra and tries to
 visualize something more positive, and lapses into thoughts of a happier
 time. But then, inspired by visions of that happy time, she sets out to
 recreate this fantasy happier time. And that's where the trouble begins.
 

It began there?

 She phones her ex-husband in the middle of the night, waking him, and
 tells him that he's just got to go off river rafting with her. At 7:00
 AM the next morning. And here's where the connection to TM and to
 cultism comes in; she doesn't *ask* him whether he wants to go, she
 tells him that he needs to, and makes the reservations herself. Being
 essentially a nice guy, he thinks she's crazy, but agrees to go anyway.
 They get there, are out on the river, and for a few minutes both are
 feeling a little of the fantasy happiness she was seeking.
 
 But then reality intrudes. She finds that he brought along a bag full of
 drugs 

Which are the Self, a wave on the infinite ocean of Consciousness. Whats her 
hang up?!

 and, offended in the way that only a New Age twif can be offended,
 throws them away. He goes ballistic, and storms away, her following. As
 he finds a new stash and gets high, she harangues him with what a
 low-life he is, continually insisting that she's doing it for his own
 good, trying to get him to become the person he could be. Problem is,
 it's not the person he wants to be. 

Maybe he doesn't want to be a person. Rather to be what he actually is.

 From his POV (and, by this time, the
 audience's), *she* is the one living in a delusional world, 

Because clearly they are not delusional, their mindstates, well if not 
enlightened, are well, like normal, good and true.

 and worse,
 she's consistently treating not only him but *everyone* around her as if
 they're lesser than she is. 

Because in the vastness and totality of silence, there are actually heirarchies 
of better and worse pockets of infinite silence. 

 The *only* way she can imagine interfacing
 with these lesser people is to try to convert them, to infect them
 with her hypomania and make them more like her. Fortunately Levi (Luke
 Wilson) finally has it up to here with her condescending, superior BS
 and tells her to fuck off and leave him alone. He tells her something
 she has never realized, that the way she sees him makes him feel like
 shit, because she sees him *as* shit, compared to her and her new
 fantasy lifestyle.
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed 

Sounds kinky. Have I been missing out on something?

 of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.


All good. Now we just got to find some adults to fill the forum.

 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[whynotnow7]

Well done. Watching this one from the sidelines (T/MZ), I agree we are all 
adults here, and it is just as valid for B to play the largely anti-social role 
that he does here, and have others give him back what he is putting out. Last I 
checked, that's the way it works. 

imo, no one, including you needs to acknowledge anything about anyone here. You 
are a big-hearted guy Curtis, and you probably see a kinship with B that 
dissuades him from going after you, and vice-versa. I kind of enjoy stripping 
away his layers, so to each his own. 

My *open declaration of self realization* really gets under his skin, although 
he continues to be a virgin spiritually. 

I am also tired of hearing who B doesn't like. His need to always dump his 
chamber pot from the second floor window onto the street below, is obnoxious, 
and judging from the responses he is getting here on FFL, more and more 
contributors think so too.

Granted, I don't have to read B's posts, although the way I look at FFL is as a 
whole - everybody contributes - like a cocktail party that goes on 24x7, with 
people wandering in and out - groups having discussions, so B is part of that 
mix, as are my comments about him.

This is my sketch of the groups at the FFL cocktail party, in no particular 
order:

A. Spiritual discussion groups
* God and no god
* TMO
* MMY
* Spiritual teachers
* Spiritual values
* Enlightenment
* The nature of reality

B. Cultural discussion groups
* TV and Movies
* Politics
* Art, video and sound
* Travel

C. Fairfield local

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Barry,
 
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
 
 Hey Barry,
 
 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
 things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get 
 along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not 
 do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  
 Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and 
 accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and 
 you really let him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that 
 way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few 
 dustups after that because apparently some people here believe you were 
 sadistic and offensive in those posts.
 
 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem 
 to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was 
 just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me 
 now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find 
 offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask 
 that you be more like me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even 
 encouraging you by not asking you to change in this way,so I hope you 
 understand.
 
 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
 here is what I am asking:
 
 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have 
 any question about what this is the standard is Judy.
 
 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
 clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we 
 might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your 
 judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.
 
 3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
 to step in 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:
snip
 Well I gave it a shot everyone.  And although I know in advance
 that it was not good enough to satisfy your views of my
 obligations here, it is the best that I can do with the 
 inconvenient intrusion of my own POV on all this.

You're a lot better than Barry at satire, but you
make just as much use of straw men in your satire as
Barry does in his lectures on how we should all
behave.

Straw men are fundamentally *dishonest*, of course. 
Satire doesn't need to stick to the truth as closely
as straight lecturing does, but the farther you
depart from truth, the less effective the satire.

(At least you have enough self-knowledge to avoid
criticizing people for doing what you yourself do
routinely. If you really wanted to help Barry out,
you might think about conveying to him privately
that his tendency to do this slaughters his own
points and makes him look ridiculous.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

If you really wanted to help Barry out,


This may be the essence of our disagreement Judy.  This is not a motive for me 
here.





 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 snip
  Well I gave it a shot everyone.  And although I know in advance
  that it was not good enough to satisfy your views of my
  obligations here, it is the best that I can do with the 
  inconvenient intrusion of my own POV on all this.
 
 You're a lot better than Barry at satire, but you
 make just as much use of straw men in your satire as
 Barry does in his lectures on how we should all
 behave.
 
 Straw men are fundamentally *dishonest*, of course. 
 Satire doesn't need to stick to the truth as closely
 as straight lecturing does, but the farther you
 depart from truth, the less effective the satire.
 
 (At least you have enough self-knowledge to avoid
 criticizing people for doing what you yourself do
 routinely. If you really wanted to help Barry out,
 you might think about conveying to him privately
 that his tendency to do this slaughters his own
 points and makes him look ridiculous.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[maskedzebra]

And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]

RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have falsely 
and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears women's 
clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that you indeed 
have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to deny this in 
the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse you—if you 
insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of being a liar and 
a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.

What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?

This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.

Robin

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Barry,
 
 
 That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
 -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
 not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
 been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
 anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
 things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
 Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
 The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
 especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
 who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
 movement.
 
 Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
 Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
 something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
 and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
 their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
 people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
 their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
 cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
 if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
 cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
 
 Hey Barry,
 
 Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said some 
 things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I get 
 along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh do..er...not 
 do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find offensive here?  
 Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a drama queen and 
 accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a special person and 
 you really let him have it and said that you were not going to treat him that 
 way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded and I guess you had a few 
 dustups after that because apparently some people here believe you were 
 sadistic and offensive in those posts.
 
 ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I seem 
 to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I was 
 just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more like me 
 now and like Robin and not say anything to him that others might find 
 offensive.  Now I know this may be pushing our friendship a bit far to ask 
 that you be more like me but I've been accused of having bad ethics and even 
 encouraging you by not asking you to change in this way,so I hope you 
 understand.
 
 Just so we are clear and I can get this monkey off my back once and for all, 
 here is what I am asking:
 
 1. Do not write things that anyone here might find offensive.  If you have 
 any question about what this is the standard is Judy.
 
 2. If you don't like someone here and find their persona offputting please 
 clear your objections with the rest of us before posting anything that we 
 might disagree with. You are a bad person and you should not trust your 
 judgement about this.  Please leave this up to the professionals.
 
 3.  When you say hurtful things to another adult on this forum it is up to me 
 to step in with a rolled up newspaper and tell you how bad you are.  This is 
 a right I have been given because you and I don't fight here.  The reason we 
 don't fight is not 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  If you really wanted to help Barry out,
 
 This may be the essence of our disagreement Judy.  This 
 is not a motive for me here.

Could this possibly be because Curtis has gotten
past the evolved man's burden mindset of TMers
and others who feel that it really IS their dharma
to help out those who believe or do something
different than they'd like them to by changing them?

Let's face it...Curtis is perceived as the mensch
he is BECAUSE he doesn't feel the need to change 
the people he interacts with, to make them more 
like him, and thus help them. 

That is a mindset so rare and refreshing that many
have responded to it favorably. Others, who find 
it a negative commentary on their need TO help 
those not as evolved as themselves, find it a bit 
challenging, and react to him as the threat to 
their carefully crafted self-images they see him 
as. Me, I just take him as what he appears to be,
which I see as returning the favor he does for
me and others on this forum.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

Ah, how fickle is true love. :-)

I merely am stating that the image of you writing your
posts to this forum while dressed in women's clothing
is not original with me. Someone else brought up this
image, I laughed at it at the time and forgot about it,
but then when your language got all drama queen-y with
Curtis, I thought it would be fun to trot out, just to
see what the reaction was, on all sides. The reaction
has exceeded my expectations.

BTW, guy, you *really* should look up what the term
drama queen means. It has nothing to do with one's
sexuality; it has to do with trying to turn everyday
minutiae into all-important, emotionally-inappropriate
opportunities for confrontation or emotional blackmail. 
You do that, and in spades. And you've done it since 
Day One on this forum.

What you do with your penis or lack of one has no 
interest for me whatsoever, and I doubt it has any
interest for Curtis, either. Are we clear? Now I 
leave you to emotionally blackmail Curtis as much
as you want, knowing that because he's *not* a 
drama queen, he can handle it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person and you really let him have it and said that you were not 
  going to treat him that way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded 
  and I guess you had a few dustups after that because apparently some people 
  here believe you were sadistic and offensive in those posts.
  
  ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I 
  seem to have a different opinion of him and since we 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Yes, how fickle you are. 


This is so much fun; now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend reading all of 
Judy's posts and composing your bank shot responses to everyone. And while 
you're at it, please post the email you sent directly to me yesterday 
(unsolicited since its been 50 years since i hung out with eight year old's) 
that portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't believe for a 
minute).



PS: DO NOT email me directly, once was more than enough.




From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 8:57:34 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



Ah, how fickle is true love. :-)

I merely am stating that the image of you writing your
posts to this forum while dressed in women's clothing
is not original with me. Someone else brought up this
image, I laughed at it at the time and forgot about it,
but then when your language got all drama queen-y with
Curtis, I thought it would be fun to trot out, just to
see what the reaction was, on all sides. The reaction
has exceeded my expectations.

BTW, guy, you *really* should look up what the term
drama queen means. It has nothing to do with one's
sexuality; it has to do with trying to turn everyday
minutiae into all-important, emotionally-inappropriate
opportunities for confrontation or emotional blackmail. 
You do that, and in spades. And you've done it since 
Day One on this forum.

What you do with your penis or lack of one has no 
interest for me whatsoever, and I doubt it has any
interest for Curtis, either. Are we clear? Now I 
leave you to emotionally blackmail Curtis as much
as you want, knowing that because he's *not* a 
drama queen, he can handle it. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

Robin,

Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
you read the full line on my post to Barry.

In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I began 
to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the more 
dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was never a 
putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides that could 
lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less.  

In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero.  
Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.

But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person and you really let him have it and said that you were not 
  going to treat him that way and that he is boring to you.  Robin responded 
  and I guess you had a few dustups after that because apparently some people 
  here believe you were sadistic and offensive in those posts.
  
  ow as you know I've been having fun in long discussions with Robin so I 
  seem to have a different opinion of him and since we are friends and all I 
  was just thinking that it is probably my right to ask you to think more 
  like me now and like Robin and 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

My apologies, although you will note in retrospect that
1) I never named the source of the remark, and 2) never
said that it was the only such remark. (It wasn't...at
least one other person made a similar comment before I
echoed it.)

That said, I do apologize, and agree that any comment
you might have made was early on, before you got into
deeper conversations with the guy. And you are welcome
to your impressions of him; I just have different ones.

*That* said, and if there is any passive aggressive
intention involved on my part, it was to see how both 
Bob and Robin react to learning that the image of Robin 
sitting around in drag writing to FFL wasn't my invention? 

My intent was not to reveal any dickness on your part, 
but on theirs. As you and most people here probably know 
(but possibly not them, because they're both relative 
newbies), I've lived in towns that are 40% gay, worked 
for companies in which all employees other than myself
were gay, and am counted by my gay friends as one of
the least homophobic people they've ever met. What I
am is a sucker for metaphors that capture a particular
type of human behavior and a particular style of bad 
writing. I still believe that the posting-in-drag 
metaphor is right on. At least one person here agreed 
publicly, and a couple more did in email responses. 
But YMMV, and I don't want to push the metaphor on you 
or anyone else if you disagree with it. I just stick 
to my guns when it comes to my right to use it.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
 
  Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
  same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
  in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
  and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
  a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
  the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.
  
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 
 ME: 
 
 That was a bit of passive aggressive private conversation betrayal Barry, 
 what's up with that?
 
 The line you are referring to from a private email in the middle of July was: 
  But I had a good time uncovering his personal world like an anthropologist 
 and  I felt genuine affection and compassion for the guy.  It would not 
 surprise me in the least if on meeting him he was dressed as a woman. 
 
 It reflected the context of a lot of emphasis on Lady Gaga in our discussions 
 which could be taken as code, and I was genuinely wondering.  My amended view 
 of his orientation came as a result of personal emails.  And it was not meant 
 as a putdown, but as my perspective that I was dealing with a person who 
 lives very far outside the box.  And I still feel that way about Robin, 
 although not in this specific way.
 
 So I guess the gang has uncovered their cherished goal of getting me to 
 sincerely correct your behavior about something Barry.  I would appreciate if 
 you kept the contents of our private emails between us, and especially don't 
 want it used outside the intended context to make me look like a dick.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me look 
like a dick.
 

That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, maybe 
even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to worship you 
as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are like up to par 
with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of the minor ten 
Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. (Despite your 
consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)

   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 My apologies, 

Accepted


you will note in retrospect that
 1) I never named the source of the remark

The context was obvious and Robin immediate caught it.

and 2) never
 said that it was the only such remark. (It wasn't...at
 least one other person made a similar comment before I
 echoed it.)

Hey, you outted me and I had to explain myself about my own confusion about 
Robin in the beginning.  I was happier just rolling with my corrected view of 
him.  I suspect this is going to kill all the gay-ntastic joking that we have 
been doing, but oh well.


 
 That said, I do apologize, and agree that any comment
 you might have made was early on, before you got into
 deeper conversations with the guy. And you are welcome
 to your impressions of him; I just have different ones.
 
 *That* said, and if there is any passive aggressive
 intention involved on my part, it was to see how both 
 Bob and Robin react to learning that the image of Robin 
 sitting around in drag writing to FFL wasn't my invention? 
 
 My intent was not to reveal any dickness on your part, 
 but on theirs. As you and most people here probably know 
 (but possibly not them, because they're both relative 
 newbies), I've lived in towns that are 40% gay, worked 
 for companies in which all employees other than myself
 were gay, and am counted by my gay friends as one of
 the least homophobic people they've ever met. What I
 am is a sucker for metaphors that capture a particular
 type of human behavior and a particular style of bad 
 writing. I still believe that the posting-in-drag 
 metaphor is right on. At least one person here agreed 
 publicly, and a couple more did in email responses. 
 But YMMV, and I don't want to push the metaphor on you 
 or anyone else if you disagree with it. I just stick 
 to my guns when it comes to my right to use it.

The metaphor worked.  I just feel that it is unfair to expose things in private 
emails out of context. The context was loving toward Robin and it came off as 
judgmental without correction.  But I appreciate your owning it and would like 
to go back to our TM instructions:

Everything we learn in private, we keep private.  Not because the view I 
expressed about Robin to you is different from what I express to him, they were 
not.  But because you were using the metaphor in a very different way with 
different intentions.  

Thanks,now lets snuff out these joints, get out of this middle school bathroom 
and get out there for recess to see how Betty-May's bulbs are growing in that 
manly way we do that lets everyone know that we were in the same bathroom stall 
for the last 15 minutes doing only manly things.





 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
  
   Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
   same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
   in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
   and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
   a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
   the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.
   
   And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
   I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
   clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  
  ME: 
  
  That was a bit of passive aggressive private conversation betrayal Barry, 
  what's up with that?
  
  The line you are referring to from a private email in the middle of July 
  was:  But I had a good time uncovering his personal world like an 
  anthropologist and  I felt genuine affection and compassion for the guy.  
  It would not surprise me in the least if on meeting him he was dressed as a 
  woman. 
  
  It reflected the context of a lot of emphasis on Lady Gaga in our 
  discussions which could be taken as code, and I was genuinely wondering.  
  My amended view of his orientation came as a result of personal emails.  
  And it was not meant as a putdown, but as my perspective that I was dealing 
  with a person who lives very far outside the box.  And I still feel that 
  way about Robin, although not in this specific way.
  
  So I guess the gang has uncovered their cherished goal of getting me to 
  sincerely correct your behavior about something Barry.  I would appreciate 
  if you kept the contents of our private emails between us, and especially 
  don't want it used outside the intended context to make me look like a dick.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
 and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me 
 look like a dick.
  
 
 That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, maybe 
 even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to worship 
 you as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are like up to 
 par with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of the minor ten 
 Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. (Despite your 
 consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)

If you are asking if you can pour warm ghee on it, the answer is yes, but 
please make sure it isn't too hot.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Yes, how fickle you are. 
 
 This is so much fun; 

Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.

 ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
 why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
 reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
 responses to everyone. 

Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.

Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
writers.  :-)

Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Robin,
 
 Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
 you read the full line on my post to Barry.
 
 In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
 the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I 
 began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the 
 more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was 
 never a putdown on you to have thought that. 

Why would thinking someone gay, or transgender, be a put down? Its like we are 
living in Don Draper days, only the subhumans are no longer women or blacks but 
humans with a different orientation than than those making the slurs and put 
downs.   

And wearing womens' clothes? All of the women I see day to day are generally 
dressed in shorts and t-shirts and sandals in the summer, and jeans and 
non-gender specific shirts in the winter. Some do wear shoes that make them 
appear a bit taller, hiking boots, but they are not like pink hiking boots. Am 
I a cross dresser if I dress like that? (Next you are going to tell me I can't 
wear my powdered wig! As if our founding fathers were not balsey enough for 
you.)


 We both have dramatic sides that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I 
couldn't care less.  
 
 In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
 as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero. 
  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.
 
 But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
 beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
 
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
  email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
  of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
  about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
  listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
  it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
  
  RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
  falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
  women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
  you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
  deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I 
  accuse you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such 
  evidence—of being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
  
  What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about 
  me were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
  
  This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
  name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
  
  Robin
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   Barry,
   
   
   That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
   -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
   not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
   been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
   anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
   things should be on others is ethically deficient.
   
   Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
   The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
   especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
   who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
   movement.
   
   Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
   Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
   something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
   and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
   their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
   people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
   their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
   cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
   if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
   cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
   
   Hey Barry,
   
   Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
   some things that they don't like and found 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Curtis,

I love you bro, but you need to keep up. As happens on FFL; the subject has 
moved on---from sexual orientation and homophobia---(although Barry's: There's 
a black guy in my kids school defense---is fun to watch), and we're now 
discussing hypocrisy or, if you prefer, duplicity (pick your poison). 



From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:15:49 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



Robin,

Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
you read the full line on my post to Barry.

In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I began 
to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the more 
dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was never a 
putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides that could 
lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less. 

In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as 
hetero.  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.

But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
 
 RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
 falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
 women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
 you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
 deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I accuse 
 you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such evidence—of 
 being a liar and a deceiver. A real Iago kind of guy.
 
 What's the deal here, Curtis? Did you let B know that his suspicions about me 
 were founded in fact? And you have have access to this fact?
 
 This, if it is true, is the ultimate deal-breaker. And it dishonours your 
 name—unless you can, of course, explain yourself.
 
 Robin
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Barry,
  
  
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like, they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
  
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
  
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
  
  Hey Barry,
  
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you said 
  some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since you and I 
  get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could uh 
  do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might find 
  offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you called him a 
  drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to treat him as a 
  special person

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Bob Price]

Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 


Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to Curtis who may have 
the cajones to post it.




From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Yes, how fickle you are. 
 
 This is so much fun; 

Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.

 ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
 why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
 reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
 responses to everyone. 

Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.

Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
writers.  :-)

Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.


   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote:

 Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 
 
 Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to
 Curtis who may have the cajones to post it.

Wow. He just snipped this part of your post entirely:

And while you're at it, please post the email you sent
directly to me yesterday (unsolicited since its been 50
years since i hung out with eight year old's) that
portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't
believe for a minute).


 
 From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued
 
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
 
  Yes, how fickle you are. 
  
  This is so much fun; 
 
 Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.
 
  ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
  why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
  reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
  responses to everyone. 
 
 Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
 Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
 such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
 in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
 But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.
 
 Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
 the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
 view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
 good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
 even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
 writers.  :-)
 
 Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
 oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.
 
 
   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote:
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
  and especially don't want it used outside the intended context to make me 
  look like a dick.
   
  
  That is totally over the top. I mean Curtis, you seem like a nice guy, 
  maybe even an awesome guy, but for Barry to equate you with Shiva, and to 
  worship you as Shiva is just bonkers on Barry's part. I mean maybe you are 
  like up to par with the younger, less significant Ashwin twin, or one of 
  the minor ten Adhytias, possible Vayau on a bad day, but Shiva no way. 
  (Despite your consorts' oft screamed tribute oh, my God!!)
 
 If you are asking if you can pour warm ghee on it, the answer is yes, but 
 please make sure it isn't too hot.
 

As fans of Janis (and who is not) used to offer her bottles of Southern Comfort 
that she would imbib in stage (loosens the vocal chords, even one of our famed 
sidha ex rockers said sipping before a concert was golden), I hear that some of 
your fans, often of the blonde and long legged part of the human genome, are 
prone to offer you jars of warm ghee on stage (well, sidewalk) hoping you will 
self anoint your self during or after your songs. Hope springs eternal for 
them. Just make sure no one is smoking withing 10 feet. That could be a 
disaster -- and could inspire a round of self-imolations among the OWS crowd, 
remenicent of Saigaon in 1963.  Your sacrafice might actually be the trigger of 
the Grand phase transition. (I know life would change for you.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[maskedzebra]

Curtis,

I don't mind being called gay. I am not gay, but so what? I detected from 
Barry's post the implication that he was in possession of 'the smoking gun'; 
that is, you had divulged to him that you were in possession of the forensics 
which would make of my gayness a fact.

If I were gay, and you had concrete evidence of this, no problem. Although I 
would be a hypocrite and a liar for using all that outrageous irony with Barry 
in response to this insinuation.

If Barry never intended to imply that he knows the real source of this 
characterization; that it was all just as you say, then I have misinterpreted 
the degree of specificity in Barry intent in that post. He acted—or so it 
seemed to me—as if he and you knew what 'really was the truth'.

So I apologize to Barry (and to yourself) for raising the notion of Iago here. 
I was wrong. And I accept your explanation entirely.

I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a woman. 
In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite remarkable. 
But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as straight as they 
come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.

You are an even more complex and versatile fellow than I thought. Imagine that: 
you all the while knew so much more about me than I assumed—from how you wrote 
to me—that you did. Curtis, he is up the moment; or at least he's better be.

Barry's negative response to me, I now take as very serious and intense. I 
thought before it was somewhat petty and mindless. But he is very sincere in 
his revulsion of Robin. I get this. And I think it very significant. And I am 
glad he has his supporters who write to him offline that they agree with his 
take on me. That's good to know.

For myself, writing here on FFL, I have only one aim: to understand myself 
better; to clarify my own philosophy; to learn from the tension I sense as 
others take positions that are in opposition to what I believe; and to tease 
out reality (in the form of these other posts—most notably your own) such that 
I can use these cues to somehow get to know where my destiny is taking me.

My motives in all that I have written on FFL are honest and without prejudice.

I find it simply nonplussing that someone (like Barry, and a few others 
evidently) can misconstrue this and declare: You are a fucking pain in the neck 
(I switched anatomically there, for obvious reasons), Robin. 

I don't doubt this is Barry's experience; it is just that it seems so wide of 
the mark.

It might just be happening for me to shut up for awhile after this.

I appreciate your explaining yourself. And of course I exonerate you.

Robin 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 Robin,
 
 Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further once 
 you read the full line on my post to Barry.
 
 In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I believed 
 the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over time I 
 began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other outside the 
 more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  But it was 
 never a putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have dramatic sides 
 that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't care less.  
 
 In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant it 
 as a gay slur, he calls Jim that all the time and he is well known as hetero. 
  Perhaps in later posts he went further I don't know.
 
 But please don't hold it against me ( unfortunate phrase I know) if in the 
 beginning I speculated about your orientation.  It was sincere confusion.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
 
  And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
  I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
  clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.
  Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
  email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
  of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
  about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
  listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
  it's not my favorite kinda music. [BW: November 2, 2011]
  
  RESPONSE: Am I to take from this disclosure by B, Curtis, that you have 
  falsely and knowingly implied there is a real source to this Robin wears 
  women's clothing when he posts? It sounds as if you have stated to B that 
  you indeed have evidence of my more than feminine side. I challenge you to 
  deny this in the strongest terms, since it is absolutely false. And I 
  accuse you—if you insinuated to B that you did in fact possess such 
  evidence—of being a liar and a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[whynotnow7]

Barry tried the same thing with me, the unsolicited email on the side. I didn't 
go for it either. I wonder how many others he's done this to?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
 
  Nice try, no cigar (remember Groncho). 
  
  Post your direct email to me on FFL, or at least send it to
  Curtis who may have the cajones to post it.
 
 Wow. He just snipped this part of your post entirely:
 
 And while you're at it, please post the email you sent
 directly to me yesterday (unsolicited since its been 50
 years since i hung out with eight year old's) that
 portrays Curtis as quite the hypocrite (which I don't
 believe for a minute).
 
 
  
  From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 9:30:09 AM
  Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued
  
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote:
  
   Yes, how fickle you are. 
   
   This is so much fun; 
  
  Gawd, dude. You're as into gotcha consciousness as Judy.
  
   ...now that you've admitted you read all of Robin's posts, 
   why don't you come clean bout the hours and hours you spend 
   reading all of Judy's posts and composing your bank shot 
   responses to everyone. 
  
  Because it isn't true. I can honestly state that 
  Robin's writing style gives me the heebie-jeebies
  such that I haven't read a single one of his posts
  in its entirety. Judy's I ignore for other reasons.
  But there really isn't any *reason* to read more.
  
  Anyone who can't tell what they're on about from 
  the few sentences one can't avoid in Yahoo's message 
  view or from a quick skim just doesn't have very 
  good reading skills. Heck, such a poor reader might 
  even believe that hacks like Truman Capote are good 
  writers.  :-)
  
  Sorry you've gotten your buttons pushed so thor-
  oughly, dude, but really, they're YOUR buttons.
  
  
    
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@... wrote:

 I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
 that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a 
 woman. In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite 
 remarkable. But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as 
 straight as they come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.

I appreciate that you get the spirit of the speculation.  It was not even about 
your orientation but that I considered you such a unique human with such an 
open ability to dramatically reveal your own uniqueness here, that lead to 
express it that way.  It was literally true that it would not have surprised me 
or made me miss a beat if you had shown up in a woman's dress or a full gorilla 
suit or painted blue.  You are an original intelligence here.  And it is rare 
that I find someone as willing to go with the metaphorical flow as we have in 
our posts.  

Thanks for understanding my intention.  We can revisit the topic of your POV 
concerning my ability to see your POV I hope.  I'll give it some thought, and 
perhaps you can give me some assistance in seeing what you meant.  I know for 
sure that if I am to understand this point it will be from your friendly 
perspective.






 Curtis,
 
 I don't mind being called gay. I am not gay, but so what? I detected from 
 Barry's post the implication that he was in possession of 'the smoking gun'; 
 that is, you had divulged to him that you were in possession of the forensics 
 which would make of my gayness a fact.
 
 If I were gay, and you had concrete evidence of this, no problem. Although I 
 would be a hypocrite and a liar for using all that outrageous irony with 
 Barry in response to this insinuation.
 
 If Barry never intended to imply that he knows the real source of this 
 characterization; that it was all just as you say, then I have misinterpreted 
 the degree of specificity in Barry intent in that post. He acted—or so it 
 seemed to me—as if he and you knew what 'really was the truth'.
 
 So I apologize to Barry (and to yourself) for raising the notion of Iago 
 here. I was wrong. And I accept your explanation entirely.
 
 I think it a brilliant—but in the literal sense, mistaken—impression of me, 
 that you would not be surprised if, when you met me, I was dressed as a 
 woman. In a sense this is an insight of a kind about me which I find quite 
 remarkable. But it is metaphorically true—whereas in actual fact I am as 
 straight as they come. As I am sure your anthropological research proved.
 
 You are an even more complex and versatile fellow than I thought. Imagine 
 that: you all the while knew so much more about me than I assumed—from how 
 you wrote to me—that you did. Curtis, he is up the moment; or at least he's 
 better be.
 
 Barry's negative response to me, I now take as very serious and intense. I 
 thought before it was somewhat petty and mindless. But he is very sincere in 
 his revulsion of Robin. I get this. And I think it very significant. And I am 
 glad he has his supporters who write to him offline that they agree with his 
 take on me. That's good to know.
 
 For myself, writing here on FFL, I have only one aim: to understand myself 
 better; to clarify my own philosophy; to learn from the tension I sense as 
 others take positions that are in opposition to what I believe; and to tease 
 out reality (in the form of these other posts—most notably your own) such 
 that I can use these cues to somehow get to know where my destiny is taking 
 me.
 
 My motives in all that I have written on FFL are honest and without prejudice.
 
 I find it simply nonplussing that someone (like Barry, and a few others 
 evidently) can misconstrue this and declare: You are a fucking pain in the 
 neck (I switched anatomically there, for obvious reasons), Robin. 
 
 I don't doubt this is Barry's experience; it is just that it seems so wide of 
 the mark.
 
 It might just be happening for me to shut up for awhile after this.
 
 I appreciate your explaining yourself. And of course I exonerate you.
 
 Robin 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  Robin,
  
  Well this is all getting a bit Jr High but I am happy to explain further 
  once you read the full line on my post to Barry.
  
  In the beginning of our conversations I just assumed you were gay. I 
  believed the Lady Gaga discussions were code like friend of Dorthy.  Over 
  time I began to question my assumptions and once we emailed each other 
  outside the more dramatic context of FFL I decided that I had been wrong.  
  But it was never a putdown on you to have thought that.  We both have 
  dramatic sides that could lead to people thinking I was gay.  I couldn't 
  care less.  
  
  In the context of Barry calling you a drama-queen I don't believe he meant 
  it as a gay slur, he calls Jim that 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[Ravi Yogi]

Ok hope the dust settled, let's remember Barry's suggestions to act like mature 
adults. 

Hold it, huh? what? Barry started all this? OMG !!!

Oops.., never mind please ignore me.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 Curtis, because you're one of my homeboys and we like a lot of the
 same things and all, I'll take your advice and do everything you say
 in this post. I'll do this knowing that it won't change a damned thing,
 and that the Spiritual Vigilantes (had to find a new name for them as
 a performing group since there are now more than 3 of them and thus
 the Pips is no longer appropriate) will keep up the same act anyway.
 
 And because you're one of my buds and all, I'll go even further. First,
 I'll avoid giving away the real source of the Robin wears women's
 clothing when he posts line that someone found so offensive here.

ME: 

That was a bit of passive aggressive private conversation betrayal Barry, 
what's up with that?

The line you are referring to from a private email in the middle of July was:  
But I had a good time uncovering his personal world like an anthropologist and 
 I felt genuine affection and compassion for the guy.  It would not surprise me 
in the least if on meeting him he was dressed as a woman. 

It reflected the context of a lot of emphasis on Lady Gaga in our discussions 
which could be taken as code, and I was genuinely wondering.  My amended view 
of his orientation came as a result of personal emails.  And it was not meant 
as a putdown, but as my perspective that I was dealing with a person who lives 
very far outside the box.  And I still feel that way about Robin, although not 
in this specific way.

So I guess the gang has uncovered their cherished goal of getting me to 
sincerely correct your behavior about something Barry.  I would appreciate if 
you kept the contents of our private emails between us, and especially don't 
want it used outside the intended context to make me look like a dick.











 Second, I'll promise not to reveal the details of any of those private
 email exchanges that some on the vigilante squads have accused us
 of having behind their backs in our continuing attempts to tell lies
 about them, TM, Maharishi, and the American Way. Third, I'll
 listen to more of the Delta Blues from time to time, even though
 it's not my favorite kinda music.
 
 I hope that this will help to keep us best buds, because as everyone
 knows best buds have to agree with each other about pretty much
 everything in life.
 
 Yo,
 
 Barry
 
 P.S. For the record, I don't think Robin is gay either. I was merely
 using a good one-liner I heard from somewhere to point out the
 rather drama-queen-y / drag queen-y nature of some of his suck-up
 verbiage. If I were to really guess as to his sexuality I would assume
 him to be asexual, because I honestly can't see anyone that narcissistic
 having a real-life relationship with anyone other than themselves, be
 they male or female.
 
 P.S.S. I sure hope that P.S. wasn't offensive. Could you check with the
 standard-keeper for me?
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
 curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 
  Barry,
 
  That's where I think the real connection to FFL -- especially
 recently
  -- comes in. This place has been a hotbed of people asserting that
 they
  not only have the right to try to change people they don't like,
 they've
  been asserting that it's some kind of ethical or moral duty, and that
  anyone who *doesn't* do as they do and try to impose their view of
 how
  things should be on others is ethically deficient.
 
  Bzt. As Curtis has pointed out so well, this just does not
 compute.
  The only environment in which such a 'tude *does* compute is a cult,
  especially one that has a history of treating its members like
 children
  who need to be corrected by their betters. In other words, the TM
  movement.
 
  Such a sense of entitlement has no place on a forum composed of
 adults.
  Adults don't really need anyone to stand up for them when someone
 says
  something about them that they might not agree with. Adults suck it up
  and realize that the other person's view of them is just as valid as
  their own. They don't go around trying to impose their values on other
  people; they just do what adults do, try to do their best to live up
 to
  their own values, and allow others to do the same. Groups can't become
  cults if the people in them act like adults. They can only become
 cults
  if most of them act like children, and as if the gurus and the fellow
  cultists around them trying to make them more like them are right.
 
  Hey Barry,
 
  Hey listen, uh...I've been hearing some things from people that you
 said some things that they don't like and found offensive...and since
 you and I get along here pretty well...uh I was wondering if you could
 uh do..er...not do...say,,,I not mean say anything that people might
 find offensive here?  Now I read your first post to Robin where you
 called him a drama queen and accused him of acting as if he wanted us to
 treat him as a special person and you really let him have it and said
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened and FFL, continued

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 Since my first posts about this new HBO series seem to 
 have generated a veritable firestorm of overreaction
 and hysteria, I might as well continue talking about it.  :-)
 
 The more I see the overreaction to what I wrote here
 on FFL (most of it from people who haven't even seen 
 the series themselves)

This is really worrisome. The only person who did any
overreacting in these threads was Barry himself, in
response to comments from Bhairitu that he didn't like.

A grand total of six people (not including Barry) made
contributions of any kind to the threads. Of those, 
four hadn't seen the series:

Ravi responded (quite mildly) only to Barry's unpleasant characterization of 
him; he didn't comment on the series.

Willytex provided a link to the trailer, without comment.

Whynotnow made a comment on enlightenment per se, without
reference to the series.

I drew a parallel between what I've read about the plot
of the series and the Occupy Wall Street protests.

Only one of these posts, mine, made any kind of reference
to the series, and then only to make a point about the
Wall Street protests. The fact that these four people
hadn't seen the series was utterly irrelevant to what we
wrote.

And none of these posts was even *remotely* overreaction
or hysterical.

Nor were the contributions of the two people who *had*
seen the series, Susan and Bhairitu.

Yet according to Barry, this was a veritable firestorm
of overreaction and hysteria.

Go figure. I guess he was disappointed that his posts
*hadn't* stirred up more reaction and had to make up
a fantasy to console himself.