--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On May 22, 2009, at 12:30 AM, raunchydog wrote: > > > Vaj: Why on earth would a successful meditator still have > > lingering destructive emotions months after the original > > stressor? ["He raped you, so what, get over it."] > > So experiencing Hillary loosing was like being RAPED? > > I'm sorry Raunch, but I do believe it's time for the > therapists couch.
For the record, this is *exactly* what I was talking about in my "The *intent* of overly-emotional writing" post this morning. Not only is the analogy Raunchy is trying to make here inappropriate, is is *knowingly* inappropriate, and used for its emotional- manipulation characteristics. It is a lot like people who won´t let go of what happened to Native Americans: "Don´t you people *understand* what the white man did to the Indians? <insert long list of atrocities here> *I* feel bad about that, so why don´t YOU? Is there something *wrong* with you that you don´t feel as bad as I do?" On the one hand it´s the inappropriateness of such emotionally-manipulative writing that galls. The people saying this on the forums I´ve heard it on are all lily-white and have never even *been* to a Native American reservation or Peublo. But on a more fundamental level it´s an attempt at emotional blackmail. We are supposed to feel *bad* for them because Native Americans were crapped on. We´re supposed to feel *bad* for Raunchy because she feels that Hillary Clinton losing was like her being raped. And on one level the intent of that is that we´ll feel more inclined to take her rants more seriously, because she "feels them so deeply." But on another level, the real *intent* is to make the reader feel *bad*, PERIOD. Raunchy feels like shit because Hillary lost. And she wants us to feel like shit, too. That´s the bottom line. I´m sorry, Raunch...I like you when you´re not pulling this crap, but that is *exactly* what your intent was by posting the above.
