Alrighty, I tried my hand at interspersing my responses...
>________________________________ > From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 2:31 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi >Chivukula > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@...> wrote: >> >> I'm sorry Barry. I may have this wrong...I thought I was >> referring to a conversation between you and Zarzari, not Vag. >> I can tell the difference between you and Vag > >Vaj. Short for Vajranathra, his screen name. You don't >seem to be aware of the fact that by referring to him as >'Vag' you are perpetuating derogative namecalling started >by people who don't like him. That's fairly clueless of >you IMO, especially in the context of criticizing someone >else for the terms *they* use to describe people. >**ER. This was a complete mistake/mistype on my part...in my head, I was >hearing the word "vague"...probably subconsciously influenced by Bob's post - >oh, oh, I see a diagnosis coming my way. And, I totally didn't even think of >what Judy mentioned, in terms of relating the name to "vagina." That was a >real shocker and particularly with regard to the potential to "demean" women - >not at all my intent, of course. > >> I haven't appreciated all the "psychiatric" labeling of late >> because it's so limiting and dismissive and disrespectful >> and inaccurate. Other types of labeling - alright then... > >So labels like "stupid," "liar," "malicious," etc. are >fine with you, just as long as no one uses terms usually >reserved for shrinks. "Vag" is clearly also OK. I get it. >**ER. Are you telling me you don't understand the difference in implication >or use? You are talking apples and oranges here in a huge way. > >> ...but "psychiatric" labels by armchair experts on an internet >> forum is a bit of a stretch, I think. I actually find the >> exchanges between Curtis and Robin quite interesting, but >> I'm acting as a voyeur only in that respect. > >Isn't "voyeur" too psychiatric a term for you to be using, >given what you just criticized? Just sayin'... :-) >** ER. I don't know about "voyeur" as a psychiatric term, but it is true that >almost everything on this forum has been hitting me as a "love sonnet of giant >proportions." But, I do often interpret abstractly and may ignore the details >and stay in my version of the big picture. Take Merudanda's poetry for >example - her communication style is really quite incredible and blows me >away. I really must get back to Sean Williams videos on "is it bipolar or is >it waking up." I'm healing, but who knows, maybe I'm Bipolar I or Bipolar II >or hypomanic or an NPD myself or a "sex addict" or in menopause or in the >throes of a growing brain tumor, or any number of other things. Maybe I'm >"normal" with more than my fair share of "common sense." Maybe I'm "crazy." >Maybe you actually have no idea who I really "am", based on what I write here. > I'm not in any real rush to diagnose myself, honestly, and see no value in >entertaining some internet-based diagnosis either. It's a real buzz-kill honestly. > >> I don't experience Robin here the way he was purported to >> behave before he rejected his "enlightenment" and I hold out >> an ideal that people that are willing to explore their depths >> change. It doesn't mean that communication patterns or an >> individual communication style don't persist - that's >> part of the human - expressing who we are and what we believe >> in an always coherent way, is difficult. > >Not, in my experience, if one is coherent to start with. YMMV. >**ER. This is a ridiculous statement to make, particularly, as a >writer/editor, if that's what you do. You know better than that. > >> But, those that aren't willing or able to explore or question >> themselves and their depths never truly change/evolve/grow, >> in my experience. That's O.K. too for them....but that >> approach won't work for me. Also, I have a pretty loose >> definition of "crazy" - even looser since I started on this >> forum. We are all a bit crazy...you too, IMO. I admit to >> appreciating the "craziness" and "absurdity" of life. > >What I'm questioning is the wisdom of *feeding the fantasies >of people who could possibly be suffering from serious mental >illness*. THAT is what I think has been going on here on FFL >with Ravi and with Robin, and for the basest of reasons. >IMO, a small group of rather sick people here praise these >two, thus feeding their narcissistic fantasies and contributing >to the possibility of making their condition WORSE, for no other >reason than that they're trying to recruit people who will "pile >on" and demonize the same people they live to demonize. I think >that's not only a little sick, but dangerous. I fear it will >end badly, and when it does the very people who have been >*encouraging* Ravi and Robin to act even crazier than they >normally do are going to say, "Awwww...too bad. But it wasn't >my fault." > >How crazy does a person have to BE before someone used to >craziness in the TM movement NOTICES? Would RWC have to have >written *twenty* thousand words trying to insult and taunt >Curtis into perpetuating a useless and pointless "I'm right >and you're wrong" argument with him before they thought it >was crazy? I got it after the first ten thousand words. > >Truth be told, I got it during his first couple of weeks on >FFL. Knowing almost nothing about him, I struggled valiantly >for a while to make it through the incoherent mass of self >obsession that he posted, wrote him off as not worth my time >to read, and said so. The realization that he was actually >crazy came later, after he started to make up things to act >outraged about, and started to abuse people who failed to >consider him important enough to argue with. > >Although I have my doubts about several other people on this >forum, who strike me as fairly "high functioning" psychopaths, >there are two I think are losing their ability to function. >I have named them, and applied what I think are the approp- >riate psychiatric labels to their behavior. >**ER. I understand the position you are articulating here and below and you >do have a right to your own opinion. It's clear that you feel you are an >expert in these matters - case closed. >People who never question themselves and assume that their reality is >representative of the one true reality and as such, applies to everyone else >on the planet, are impenetrable, completely predictable, and fully fear-based >in their subconscious, from what I've experienced in life. Doesn't mean these >people don't have interesting things to say now and again, don't have a sense >of humor, and don't deserve to live on the planet or post on FFL. > >You don't seem to like these labels. Well, come up with your >own. When doing so, I hope you aren't as limited as those >who have to rely on epithets like "stupid" or "liar." Or, >for that matter, "Vag." > >> >________________________________ >> > From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> >> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >> >Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 12:36 AM >> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi >> >Chivukula >> > >> >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: >> >> >> >> From my years of experience, I am of the opinion that you/Barry >> >> have made some critical and major errors in judgment and should >> >> have preceded your diagnostic conclusions with a well-researched >> >> "fatal flaw analysis," at the very least. >> > >> >Emily, a couple of points. First, Vaj and I are >> >different people, not one person with two names >> >separated by a forward slash. You are the second >> >person in two days to not be able to tell the >> >difference between us, and that we're separate >> >people. Just sayin'. >> > >> >Second, in saying that I think RWC was suffering >> >from hypomania and a host of other serious disorders >> >back when he first declared his enlightenment and >> >still is today, I was stating my OPINION. I was not >> >trying to sell that opinion to you. >> > >> >If you feel that someone spending several weeks and >> >writing literally tens of thousands of words, all >> >seemingly dashed off uncontrollably, as if in a fit >> >of mania, all trying to get one person to interact >> >with him so that RWC could tell him over and over >> >and over what's wrong with him -- if you feel this >> >is SANE behavior, I feel sorry for you, but that's >> >your choice. Go with it. >> > >> >I'm merely pointing out that to me it *doesn't* >> >feel like SANE behavior. It feels like the opposite. >> >ALL of RWC's ramblings since he appeared on this >> >forum have struck me as being highly manic and as >> >lacking coherence. Often he "goas off on" and gets >> >crazy behind things *that weren't even said to him*, >> >such as that there was some incriminating photo of >> >him in drag running around out there. That was pure >> >imagination on his part, and in my opinion not >> >healthy imagination. I think the guy's a total nutcase. >> > >> >Furthermore I think he's essentially the SAME nutcase >> >he was back in Fairfield, running the SAME number on >> >gullible people here that he ran on gullible people >> >there. Back when he was a crazy person pretending to >> >be a spiritual teacher in Fairfield, RWC's "schtick" >> >(according to several sources, not just Vaj) consisted >> >of dragging people up on stage and then confronting >> >them and yelling at them and telling them what was >> >wrong with them and what demons were inhabiting them. >> >Now look at what he was trying to do to Curtis. Do >> >you see any difference? I do not. >> > >> >If he sticks around, and you consider him SANE enough >> >to do so, I think you should have as many conversations >> >with RWC as you see fit. Go for it. Have a ball. >> > >> >But don't expect me to, because I just don't interact >> >with crazy people any more. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
