--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > TurqB, everyone's off soybean tofu now. Too much estrogen. Even for > men. Man boobs resulted. >
The Manssiere: Bras for bros http://youtu.be/gZJ8Jxt9qrM > > ________________________________ > From: turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 6:27 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Quotes that really cry out for a graphic > > > Â > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "Ah, yes, your hostility to ____ is all about your concern for > > > > > others. How noble of you." > > > > > > > > > > [https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/385606_389352564440058_55858606_n.jpg] > > > > > > > > Lol, very funny and so true. Barry, I really learned something > > > > from you in this regard, and that it is to simply lean back and > > > > laugh. It's so simple, but such a great thing. > > > > > > It is, in my opinion, the highest way to honor life. As > > > G.K. Chesterton said in the link I just posted: > > > > > > "Seriousness is not a virtue. It would be a heresy, but > > > a much more sensible heresy, to say that seriousness is > > > a vice. It is really a natural trend or lapse into taking > > > one's self gravely, because it is the easiest thing to > > > do...For solemnity flows out of men naturally; but laughter > > > is a leap. It is easy to be heavy: hard to be light. > > > Satan fell by the force of gravity." > > > > Great quote! > > Isn't it? I love Chesterton. Even though he was a > strong Christian and I am anything but, and even > though he was writing his best stuff 100 years ago, > there is a lightness and a humility to his writing > and to his insights that I really groove on. Other > favorite quotes of his that I keep in my ever-handy > Quotes file include "All men are ordinary men; the > extraordinary men are those who know it" and "Poets > have been mysteriously silent on the subject of > cheese." :-) > > > One may think of the British what one wants, but they have > > given the world at least two great gifts: one is tea (of > > course!), and the other their unique sense of humor and > > irony. And what is best, they always include themselves > > in their humor. Just look at Monty Python or Little Britain, > > can't beat that. > > It is good to remember, at least about Chesterton, > that he was as "typically British" as the Monty Python > gang, meaning not typical at all. Much of "Orthodoxy" > is a railing *against* the tendency in British clerics > and philosophers to take everything so damned *seriously*. > One of the other quotes I loved in the set of excerpts > from "Orthodoxy" that I posted a link to recently was > this one: > > "The essence of all pantheism, evolutionism, and modern > cosmic religion is really in this proposition: that Nature > is our mother. Unfortunately, if you regard Nature as a > mother, you discover that she is a step-mother. The main > point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our > mother: Nature is our sister. We can be proud of her > beauty, since we have the same father; but she has no > authority over us; we have to admire, but not to imitate. > This gives to the typically Christian pleasure in this > earth a strange touch of lightness that is almost frivolity. > Nature was a solemn mother to the worshippers of Isis and > Cybele. Nature was a solemn mother to Wordsworth or to > Emerson. But Nature is not solemn to Francis of Assisi. > To St. Francis, Nature is a sister, and even a younger > sister: a little, dancing sister, to be laughed at as > well as loved." > > I *love* this, and find it as applicable to Hinduism > and its slavish devotion to "Mother Divine" or to TM > and its equally slavish devotion to "Mother Nature" > or to "the *Laws* of Nature" as it was to Chesterton > in his time. He obviously identifies more with the > playful 'tude of St. Francis towards nature than he > does the solemnity and the sense of awe and almost > *fear* that many of his contemporaries had towards > nature. It (she) *doesn't* run our lives; it (she) > runs with us through the world, as a fellow child > laughing on the playground. All the difference in > the world. > > > One of my mentors used this expression with regard to a > > friend, lets call him Fred: He said, Fred just laughs off > > everything. I have come to appreciate this attitude. > > Me, too. Clearly, as you go on to point out, this > is not a universal trait. "Laugh off" some people's > attempts at seriousness, and they have to project > their own solemnity and seriousness onto you, and > claim that you're laughter is "false," and that you > are "really" reacting defensively to what they said. > > You'll have to forgive me if I interpret this as > self importance on their part. > > I similarly interpret people who take generic state- > ments personally, as we saw happen today. I never > had the slightest intention of presenting Robin as > "worse than Charles Manson." The thought never even > entered my mind, if for no other reason that Robin > will be completely forgotten by history, if he hasn't > been already, and Charlie will live on in infamy. :-) > > But Robin "heard" me say that. I didn't. My comment > was just about the *lack of discrimination* and *low > standards* used by groupies when choosing a groupie- > master or groupie-mistress. But he not only took > what I said personally, as if I was talking about > *him* and comparing him to Charles Manson, he went > through yer classic samskaric reaction to the > afflictive emotions he felt about it. He described all > the emotions that went through him, over an insult > *that was unintended*. I honestly don't CARE enough > about Robin Carlsen to insult him; it strikes me as > "coals to Newcastle," and unnecessary. As that great > Monty Python gangster John Cleese once said about > someone *he* was trying his best to ignore, but who > kept trying to sucker him into a debate or a fight, > "His very presence here is depriving some village > of its idiot." :-) > > John did in this case what you describe your friend > Fred as doing. He "laughed it off," defusing the bomb > of self importance and giving the affronted person > the importance he really deserved, which was none. > > > Actually, many Indians do this, as I have observed recently. > > You say something critical, maybe complain, they just laugh. > > They laugh it off. Laughter here is not to be mistaken as > > arrogance. It's just, as I see it, a release of tension and > > energy. > > I see it also in a Taoist context. Laughter is a sign > of having achieved resonance with the Tao, or the larger > flow of life. > > Drama queens can't laugh, and hate it when others do, > in response to their attempts to suck them into drama. > I much prefer those who can "take a step back" and see > that the drama is the "small shit," and that it's time > to get back to focus on the "larger shit." > > As another of my favorite philosopher/clowns once said, > "Life is a tragedy in close-up, but a comedy in long shot." > That was Charlie Chaplin speaking. He managed to make > millions and millions of people laugh in his lifetime. > I consider that a much higher achievement than helping > one individual to realize their enlightenment. > > > This is especially important, when a person is in some kind > > of emotional lock. > > > > Laughter here means, to release the energy, and let go of > > the situation. > > Exactly. Those who get uptight at the sound of laughter > CAN'T let go. They want to hold on to the seriousness > and the solemnity and the drama that they are indulging > in, and the sound of laughter fucks with that attempt. > > > Not cynical at all. It also means to not take the situation > > so seriously. Not ones's own emotion, but also not the > > emotion of the other. If I perceive a strong emotion in the > > other, I can just laugh it off, I don't have to go into it, > > justify myself etc., the usual circling around. > > Exactly. Feeling that one has to "defend one's self" > means only that one has a self that is so strongly > entrenched that one feels compelled to defend it. > > > And yet I am free to give my own opinions about any situation, > > not as an emotional need, but rather as my right of free > > expression. > > Exactly. > > > I am sometimes astonished at the emotion projected to you > > and me. > > After seventeen years, I am no longer astonished by it. > I tend to laugh it off. :-) > > > I guess some people have a tendency to project their own > > emotions onto you, and then mirror their own negative > > aspects in you. You become the ultimate evil, unable to > > have a good intention, positive thought, or compassion. > > I think that's silly, naive, and childish. I am not > the ultimate evil. The ultimate evil is Kim Kardashian. :-) > > > It's clearly a projection o sorts I guess. If there is > > anything to the word '1st person ontology', then it is here, > > that no other really KNOWS, how you are feeling toward > > another, that everybody looking at you is just following > > '3rd person ontology'. Yet you see this mind-reading as an > > inevitable and almost constant reflex of some people. > > Yup. > > > OTOH the same people will be most sweet, most friendly, in > > a holier-than-thou-attitude, towards people in their own > > support group, or towards the objects of their very groupie- > > ness, as if to sort of balance out the negativity they > > project onto others. > > Yup. > > > Personally, I feel, that if a person here is unable, to > > congratulate another person here, let's say for birthday > > or new year, whom they usually oppose, in a sort of pseudo > > self-righteous attitude, there is something seriously wrong > > with their EQ. > > A few years ago someone proposed an "FFL get-together" in > Fairfield, where we could all sit down over drinks and > see what we were like in real life. As I remember it, only > one person said that she would definitely not attend if I > were there. I always thought that spoke volumes, both about > "holding on to one's drama" and about "resistance to change." > > What would have happened, after all, if the event had > happened and I'd said something funny, and she got caught > laughing at it? Can't risk that. :-) > > Great chatting with you. I like doing so, BTW, not because > you're any kind of "Barry groupie" or me an "Iranitea > groupie," but because we both seem to like cutting to > the chase and dealing with the *ideas* that underlie > things. The individual personalities and their individual > dramas are like the layer of fat on the outside of a > great slab of roast beef. The real meat is inside, in > the ideas. I like doing on FFL the same thing I do when > having a good steak -- I cut off the fat and discard it, > and chow down on the nice, tender meat inside. > > [ Note: If you're all vegetarian and all, and offended > by my metaphor, make up your own about preferring the > juicy interior of your soybean faux-meatloaf or whatever. ] > > :-) >
