Excellent push back Curtis. I feel much better. That type of spin put on by Judy and some others cannot be allowed to go uncontested. I simply cannot get dialed in to the justification that Judy (in particular) and others feel they need to provide to Ravi. I am in total agreement with your analysis. Of course Ravi interacted with that 19 year old as he described. And you know what, who cares.
I did not view it as debauchery. I think he has a tremendous amount of sexual energy just as he describes. But like you, I don't for a moment believe his nonsense about he is also naturally celibate, or some such thing. A 19 year old is of legal age. He may have something she wants and she something he wants. So what. Really strange to see him go into hyper denial mode. Talk about unhinged. But I digress. Let me mention something else I observed since we're going into detail here. Did you notice how Ravi describes strip clubs as "Gentleman Clubs". Hell, I've gone to plenty of strip clubs in my day, but never did I call them Gentleman Clubs. And my motivation in going to them was always the same. To get a sexual hit of some sort. Really struck me as lame, and in denial to refer to them as Gentleman Clubs. I'm glad you care enough to come back with a very elegant counter to what else has been presented here. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" jstein@ wrote: > > Snipped the dancing routine, sooo Nancy Grace in the groaning 3 inch heels. But this is the good part cuz her refusal to accept that she has been called out was just predictable. > > Here is where I start hearing the music from the start of the twilight zone in my head. > > > It's amazing how Curtis engineered all this to make > > himself appear to be the totally blameless victim by a > > series of moves that's so convoluted nobody gets what > > he's done except those he's done it *to*. And not for > > the first time, either. > > > > That's one thing at which he's better than anyone here. > > And this is not the first time you have accused me of such a bizarre thing. And on a public board no less where we all read all the posts if we want to. And I am able to hide my deviousness from everyone but Judy, how can that be? Oh I know, it has to do with her inflated sense of her perceptive powers to detect evil, beyond all other posters reading the same posts. > > Let me defend myself from this twisted claim of special powers of deceit in plan sight. > > Ravi was spinning a tale of how he has no sexual desire from his self proclaimed "whatever" state for the umpteenth time, while describing the old guy in the club behavior I get to see on a regular basis during performances where alcohol is served. The only people I hear talking about having no sexual desire uninvited, and relevant to nothing that applies to us, are preachers running a "I'm too special for human feelings" like Jerry Falwell. In the end they are usually revealed to be hypocrites who were compelled to make their denials because they are selling a story about themselves. Like Ravi is. And I would have just let it pass but he also called me dishonest for the millionth time with zero evidence. So I commented on how he appeared to me. > > Then Ravi claimed that he wasn't really buying drinks for an underage girl which was his original story. I am guessing that he ended up looking a bit loseresque getting worked by a Tom Sawyer in hot pants and a tank top. So he tried to cover his tracks but once I smelled a rat I didn't buy his denial. I think he really did go to a club and have a young girl work him for free drinks before telling him she needed to go to the bathroom and run out of the club giggling with her friends full of Ravi financed liquor. So he flew off the handle and called me names, some of which are out of line so I let him know I felt that way. I tried to explain to him the deeper context of his slurs and how they really don't belong here. Labeling someone's behavior as desperate or his denials of having human feelings like the rest of us is not the same thing as being called a retard, (the N word of the disabled community) or an unhinged assault being called someone's bitch, which among men is rarely used face to face because it is an invitation to fight. Online it is extreme trollish behavior. Then he doubled down again and lied about why I left the movement. > > Then Judy joined in as if his tirade were just another cute thing the pool boy does as he cleans her pool as she sips vodka enhanced ice tea lemonades enjoying the view. Kiss kiss Ravi, you are so hot! See how it works Ravi, she would be buying YOU drinks in a bar, does it all make sense now why the hot young thing slipped out the back door while you found out the number she gave you was fake? > > I was reminded of her posturing against what she considered unfair posts and how she castigated me for not stepping in to scold other posters who attack her. I remember the rash of shit she has flung my way concerning me not busyboding myself about what other people say to her. I realized that she was really in the exact situation where if she has an ounce of the integrity and ethical values she bloviates around here like it is her special badge of honor, she would say in her I love hot Ravi manor, "hey Ravi, perhaps you could turn it down a notch, some of us read here." But no. > > And I frankly don't care if she didn't, and don't need her to come to my aid for a mouthy dude who calls other men names while out of their reach. But I notice the hypocrisy and I called her on it and asking her to get off my case for doing the exact same thing, choosing my battles here, and letting us fight our own. And without the rash of hypocritical shit, that would be a reasonable position that I endorse here. > > But then she chose to enter the Twilight Zone to try to slip out of getting called on bullshit. It was me who made Ravi use derogatory terms for mentally disabled people, lie about why I left the movement, and lay into a demeaning tirade. > > One that other posters noticed was over the trollish line. > > But not Judy. Judy saw secret Curtis deviousness at work orchestrating Ravi's bad behavior from his secret lair. And that defending myself from an unwarranted meltdown attack is because I've been fighting a computer virus and it has unhinged me. > > And only she can see it, but all you other dimwits who read these posts are unable to penetrate my devious ways. > > Out of all of this I am looking forward to a 2012 with zero "you need to scold other people for things they say to me" posts. > > Zero. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > I still am waiting to hear from you: do you think > > > > > > > > > > it is ok for Ravi to have told that nasty personal > > > > > > > > > > lie about Curtis? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See if you can rephrase your question so it's not > > > > > > > > > offensive and I'll consider answering it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think it is ok for Ravi to have told that > > > > > > > > particular lie about Curtis's leaving the TM movement? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's see, "Does Judy think it's OK to tell lies?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope, still offensive. > > > > > > > > > > > > Uh, I asked if you think it is ok if Ravi told a Particular > > > > > > lie in a Particular instance? Not a general statement about > > > > > > how you feel about lying in general (Does Judy think it is OK > > > > > > to tell lies?). > > > > > > > > > > So you're unsure of whether a negative response to "Does > > > > > Judy think it's OK to tell lies?" would cover all lies. > > > > > > > > > > I see. > > > > > > > > > > > A bit of difference, as you well know and would be quite > > > > > > quick to point out in others. > > > > > > > > > > Not if I were paying attention and wanted to be fair. > > > > > > > > > > > But in your dodging around and unwillingness to answer > > > > > > I got my answer. > > > > > > > > > > You can manufacture whatever answers and degree of > > > > > willingness suit your agenda, Susan. They don't have to > > > > > have anything to do with reality. > > > > > > > > Hey, whatever. I don't want to hide behind analysis of > > > > details and words. Just simple responses would have been > > > > enough for me. I am done with this discussion, no interest left. > > > > > > If one reads the words carefully, Judy is correct to not > > > wishing to answer the questions as they were written. It > > > was spin. Who wants to answer spin? > > > > Not only was it spin, the whole basis for the question was > > disingenuous, since Susan is well aware I'm against lying. > > But she wanted to hide behind the pretense that there was > > some uncertainty on that point. > > > > There were any number of questions she *could* have asked > > that would have cleared up what she genuinely didn't > > understand. Even if she didn't agree, at least she would > > have known what she was disagreeing *with*. > > > > It's amazing how Curtis engineered all this to make > > himself appear to be the totally blameless victim by a > > series of moves that's so convoluted nobody gets what > > he's done except those he's done it *to*. And not for > > the first time, either. > > > > That's one thing at which he's better than anyone here. > > > > > > > > > > Just saying. > > > Happy New Year to us all! > > > > > >
