I am terribly pleased you posted this explanatory utube video.
________________________________ From: raunchydog <raunchy...@yahoo.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2012 6:48 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How Curtis and I Differ Oxymorons http://youtu.be/cWY_NTLFSa4 http://www.whatyououghttoknow.com/show/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Dare I call you all oxymorons?? > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > Yeah, you nailed it. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Ha ha....see my post....we are all in tune here.... > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: curtisdeltablues <curtisdeltablues@> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2012 5:35 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How Curtis and I Differ > > > > > > > > > Â > > > I was just riffing off of how much is sounds like hillbilly heroin > > > Oxycontin. I just saw one of those horror show specials where people > > > were doing that. > > > > > > But your information is much more interesting. Fascinating to see the > > > mechanics of a mother's love! > > > > > > I don't think I need any. I focused on the sensitive guy routine in the > > > 70's until I found out that the bad boys were banging all the chicks I > > > thought were prudes! What a wake-up call that was in how the world > > > really works. > > > > > > The type of blues I love is trance inducing. Once you're both in the > > > zone it is the field of all possibilities, without the Mahesh. I wonder > > > if he ever used seduction music. Maybe if you play Sama Veda at half > > > speed so it sounds like Barry White you could get somewhere! > > > > > > I'll stick to blues, oxytocin free. Actually blues was always supported > > > most by women. The guys from the 20's and 30's put out records that only > > > the African women domestic workers could afford. They supported the > > > whole industry in the early days. That is your Black history month > > > factoid for the day! > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I am not an MD but my understanding is that oxytocin is just about the > > > > same as pitocin. You can inject pitocin - here's what it does: it > > > > causes a woman to have contractions that lead to delivery of a baby! > > > > It is used in hospitals if a woman needs to have stronger contractions > > > > or to have labor induced. Seven hours of a pitocin drip and the baby > > > > is born. Ouch. In addition to causing contractions, pitocin/oxytocin > > > > causes intense emotional bonding between mother and baby. I think lots > > > > of it circulates in the blood stream as long as a mother nurses and is > > > > also present in females in general. > > > > > > > > Not sure what it would do to a male, but I suspect you would not want > > > > to be the guinea pig on this one. Making inhaling it would be ok. > > > > Hospitals have lots of it. Your music alone probably does something > > > > powerful enough. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Much appreciated Susan. > > > > > > > > > > Lemme know if you have a good source for that oxytocin. Sounds like > > > > > something fun to heat up on a piece of tinfoil and inhale through a > > > > > straw! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Curtis you wrote: > > > > > > > > "When I was actually under a cyber > > > > > > > > attack here by a member some people supported me and I > > > > > > > > appreciated that. But I > > > > > > > > would never expect it, even from my online "friends". I can > > > > > > > > handle my business > > > > > > > > here and everyone can handle theirs. So I don't have the kind > > > > > > > > of expectation > > > > > > > > here I would in my personal life offline." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You also state: > > > > > > > > "We don't owe each other support or approval or any of the > > > > > > > > things we might value offline." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, that is interesting for me to hear this viewpoint from > > > > > > > > you. I have considered it and I find that I live in a very > > > > > > > > different way. My rules for engagement, my definition of > > > > > > > > friends, my values of civility and interaction are not > > > > > > > > determined by the medium I am using , the location or the > > > > > > > > geographical situation I am in. I could be on Mars or in my > > > > > > > > kitchen, the way I conduct my life and how I view the world is > > > > > > > > not determined by the circumstances in which I find myself - > > > > > > > > i.e. whether I am typing to you online or speaking to you face > > > > > > > > to face I will treat you the same and expect you to do the same > > > > > > > > with me. I don't mean that you would treat me with respect if I > > > > > > > > treat you with respect I mean that you do not morph into > > > > > > > > someone other than who you are when you are not face to face > > > > > > > > with me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think we really are in as much disagreement in this as > > > > > > > that quote seems to be saying. If I re-wrote that I would drop > > > > > > > the ominous sounding "or any other things we might value > > > > > > > offline". That does make me sound kinda psycho! Continuing in > > > > > > > psycho mode for a moment: There is no form of human decency that > > > > > > > I recognize online and no matter how vile or how disgusting or > > > > > > > what an affront it is to decency. I support all evil here as a > > > > > > > avatar would in the darkest regions of Second City slums, where > > > > > > > human depravity can know no bounds! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, got that out of my system, I'm back now... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I treat people pretty much the same in my correspondence here as > > > > > > > I do in person. I do post as myself here, everyone knows where > > > > > > > to find me if they want to. I guess I mean only in the area of > > > > > > > scolding people who are being unfriendly to each other. In > > > > > > > person I would have a lower threshold, online it is higher. I > > > > > > > figure people here speak up for themselves as do I. I should > > > > > > > probably keep the discussion about Robin who I judged didn't need > > > > > > > my help rather than make pronouncements that make me sound like > > > > > > > an idiot. I guess I am assuming that you have read enough posts > > > > > > > of mine to know I don't act that way or maybe you have read > > > > > > > enough to decide that I do! Scary thought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know the internet is a great hiding place for some people and > > > > > > > > that they can change their persona in a multitude of ways.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't behave that way here. But I still pick my battles. I > > > > > > > felt Robin was handling himself just fine without me jumping it > > > > > > > to "help" him. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < But I don't think it is an excuse to abandon the ethics, the > > > > > > > standards that they hold highly when they are not on the > > > > > > > internet.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure. No argument there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < Why is FFL or any other online forum a place where we no longer > > > > > > > "...owe each other support and approval." ?? This double standard > > > > > > > is just not me and I don't understand that kind of reasoning. > > > > > > > This seems to me that FFL is/could be a forum for one to act > > > > > > > really badly if one wanted to because, after all, one is not > > > > > > > really like that in "real life" (offline).> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Practically speaking you can't chase after everyone who expresses > > > > > > > themselves in a different way than you would choose here. You > > > > > > > just can't, there is too much interaction. Right now most > > > > > > > posters are being really civil so all this is easy. When we had > > > > > > > a poster who flung obscenities at people in most posts it was > > > > > > > harder. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As an example, I like how you post here, and enjoy your > > > > > > > contributions. But if you got into a pissing match with someone > > > > > > > I would figure you can give as good as you get. So I am not > > > > > > > laying down a rule for myself. But Robin's expectation that I be > > > > > > > concerned with people here who expressed that they didn't like > > > > > > > him wasn't gunna fly for me. He didn't have to interact with > > > > > > > Barry at all, it was his choice. Once he made it, against my > > > > > > > advice, he was on his own. So you are right in challenging my > > > > > > > words as some kind of rule. But it doesn't come out that way in > > > > > > > practice. And if you stick around you will see people using the > > > > > > > term ethics in a contrived way to put people down. I mean no one > > > > > > > jumps into everyone else's fights here, so you can always > > > > > > > challenge someone's choices based on the sin of omission. What > > > > > > > you think they SHOULD have done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You indicate that the newbies don't quite "get it", that the > > > > > > > > laws of good behavior and ethics and just plain life all of a > > > > > > > > sudden become obsolete when you hit the world of the internet.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is not what I said or meant. It is just that lots of people > > > > > > > blow through here and few stay. One of my observations is that > > > > > > > some people have trouble adjusting to the odd combination of > > > > > > > intimate conversation and this disembodied context. When I first > > > > > > > started posting I was much more reactive emotionally. Now I am > > > > > > > better able to let things go. I'm glad I was able to let some of > > > > > > > Robin's challenges go. I consider it a sign of me making better > > > > > > > choices here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < That there are rules and laws and, gee you greenhorns, get with > > > > > > > the program here because you'll go out like a comet or get eaten > > > > > > > alive if you don't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That isn't what I said or what I meant. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You asked me if I enjoy posting at FFL. Yes I do, very much, > > > > > > > > but not because I see it as a chance to indulge myself in > > > > > > > > behavior that is not true to who I am, or who I am working hard > > > > > > > > to be in every other moment of my life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't think of any behavior I have indulged in that is not true > > > > > > > to who I am so I don't know how it relates. I understand that > > > > > > > what I said can be interpreted to mean these things, but it was > > > > > > > not my intention and I take responsibility for being clear. Lets > > > > > > > say you really ran with this ball and used it as a way to > > > > > > > castigate me for promoting a phoney persona so I could abuse > > > > > > > people here. Lets say you really got worked up about this POV and > > > > > > > called me all sorts of names and told me you hate people who try > > > > > > > to pull that shit online and really invested yourself in this > > > > > > > view of me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Inside I would feel wronged because I don't act in an unethical > > > > > > > way here. That isn't what I meant at all. But I wouldn't expect > > > > > > > a bunch of people to jump in to address it. They might, both pro > > > > > > > and con. But I don't believe that anyone is obligated to correct > > > > > > > what would be a misconception about me. And lets take it one step > > > > > > > farther. Let's say I answered you to the best of my ability as I > > > > > > > have here and you responded that it was all bullshit and that you > > > > > > > knew that I was really just a bad guy using the cover of the > > > > > > > internet to do bad things to people here. I might try again to > > > > > > > be understood, but if you came back and doubled down on your > > > > > > > unflattering opinion of me I would let it drop. I might not > > > > > > > respond to the next post directed at me. I might say, that is > > > > > > > her opinion and I obviously am not going to change it. Other > > > > > > > people piling on would probably not change it for you either if I > > > > > > > can't myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So that is the context I mean about our personal responsibility > > > > > > > here. We all have to choose for ourselves who we are going to > > > > > > > interact with here. And we all decide what discussions we want > > > > > > > to jump in on. But personally,I don't expect people to. And if > > > > > > > you do, that is perfectly fine too. You'll find people who agree > > > > > > > with you here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not judging you Curtis, I am giving you my viewpoint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I appreciate an opportunity to clarify what I meant. And I still > > > > > > > may not have succeeded. But you are welcome to judge me here by > > > > > > > the words I write. It is really all you have to judge me by > > > > > > > isn't it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that Curtis does not need defending, but I am going to add > > > > > > just a few words here, just to put in my 2 cents of this particular > > > > > > issue. First, I think Curtis has very clear "boundaries" that he > > > > > > lives by. By this I mean he has a healthy awareness of what is > > > > > > other people's stuff and what is his, and he won't interfere or > > > > > > trespass on the stuff that other people can and should deal with on > > > > > > their own. His posts reflect this. It is not a matter of not > > > > > > standing up for a friend - in the classic sense of that expectation > > > > > > I bet he would help a friend who needs defending. But he is > > > > > > allowing others to take care of themselves and assumes that they > > > > > > can. > > > > > > > > > > > > Second, there was a series of posts here by a person who is now > > > > > > longer allowed to post. This person threatened Curtis multiple > > > > > > times, and still Curtis asked that others not intervene or defend > > > > > > him. Partly I think this was to protect others from possibly > > > > > > getting themselves on the bad side of this poster. Partly he knew > > > > > > could handle it himself. > > > > > > > > > > > > Third, I think men are different than women in these areas. Women > > > > > > very easily and effortlessly support and empathize and help and > > > > > > connect. All that oxytocin in the hormone mix makes it automatic. > > > > > > I know there are many times that I have to step back and > > > > > > consciously not give advice and just listen and let people handle > > > > > > things themselves. It is a fine line.......... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
