--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: <snip> > But negative emotion? That we've got in > spades. Let someone suggest a way of seeing > a poster that doesn't jibe with that poster's > way of seeing themselves, and the snit hits > the fan. It often feels as if they take in the > minor provocation and shoot it up like meth > and then react emotionally *as if it had been > a major provocation*. > > A joke about someone becoming so angry that > they burst into flames as a result of spon- > taneous combustion becomes a "death threat."
Just to inject a note of reality here (sorry): This example didn't occur in a vacuum; it came on the heels of a long series of increasingly vicious and ugly denunciations of feminists and feminism, in response to a post in which two feminists here were described not only as bursting into flames but also as "dumb angry cunts *too stupid to live*" (emphasis added). As I noted at the time: "When you publicly envision the violent deaths of two people at whom you've been spewing the most vicious hatred, you've gone over the edge, no matter how desperately you pretend you were just trying to be funny." (Note that Barry's Rules prescribe that *he* is permitted to let his negative emotions take him over the edge, but the people he doesn't like are not.) <snip> > My suggestion for WHY "manufactured emotion" > is more acceptable here on FFL than real emo- > tion is that that's the situation in the TMO > as well. There are certain situations in which > an over-display of emotion are considered > "good" and others in which an over-display of > emotion are considered "bad." ROTFL!!
