--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > > > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Received in email from Michael/t3rinity: > <snip> > > > > If anybody thinks that this is an overeaction, or is > > > > interested, you can look at the last post Barry wrote > > > > to one of my posts, and then compare it to the original > > > > post. To cut it short, Barry draws a number of > > > > conclusions out of my posts about my alleged opinions, > > > > which are in no way written there, and which I had made > > > > clear to him before, that they are not mine. > > > > > > Michael, you CLAIM that they are not yours. You > > > suffer from the same dis-ease as Judy, in that > > > you cannot conceive of anyone's assessment of > > > you and your motives that differs from your own > > > being correct or valid. If they don't see you and > > > your motives and your trends the way you do, they > > > are WRONG. I think my assessments of your actions > > > and your motives are correct, and I stand by them. > > > > Hmmm... So when you perceive something that Michael > > denies, you're right and he's wrong, but when I perceive > > something about Curtis, I'm wrong and he's right? > > Barry is currently in the throes of a massive > struggle with cognitive dissonance that has > reached a crisis stage. As far as his psyche > is concerned, it's a battle for his very > survival.
What Judy says above is called OPINION. It's her interpreting my actions a certain way, as colored by her upbringing and the things that she believes about the world. It's also laughable, from my point of view, but she has the right to say it. Unlike Michael, I won't go off the deep end and unsubscribe because she sees me differently than I see myself. I also won't spend any energy "refuting" her view of who and what I am and what is motivating me because what she says doesn't affect me in any way, just as her very *existence* or *non- existence* doesn't affect me in any way. Spending post after post "defending myself" would, in my opinion, just demonstrate how attached I was to one fixed notion of self. That's what Judy and Michael and Jim do for fun. I have other ways of having fun, ways that allow me a bit more flexibility in terms of self, or selves. Yesterday saw a *great number* of people coming out of the woodwork with their theories of what motivates me and what kind of psychopath they believe I am. As I remember, the people who felt the need to "pile on" included Judy (of course), Shemp, Lawson, Jim, Nablus, and Michael. Willytex will "pile on" as soon as he logs on again. Look at that list of names. Based on what they write here, and the number of times they have been *excited* about something happening in their own lives, do ANY of them strike you as happy people? ANY of them? (Jim does seem to be the one in the list who has more of a "real life" than the others IMO, and since he is undoubtedly still reading FFL while pretending not to, I thought I should say this.) I may not be the best person to judge, but I think that my posts are pretty much a blend of me being funny, happy, celebrating my weird life in a Span- ish beach town, remembering high moments from the past, writing about high moments in the present, AND some diatribes against aspects of the TMO or its followers that I think deserve to be beaten with a stick, AND being basically a jerk. In other words, I think I've got RANGE. My posts reflect a life that has its ups and downs, but that really DOES has its "ups." I don't really see their posts as containing very many "ups." I wouldn't trade my life for ANY of theirs, and I don't think many other people here would, either. Look at the list of "pile on" names again. Judy, Shemp, Lawson, Jim, Micheals, Nablus, and Willytex. Would YOU "trade lives" with ANY of them? Would you willingly spend even *ten minutes* inside one of their heads? 'Nuff said...
