<snip> And yes Emily you did accuse me of enabling Barry. No big deal. It's such a preposterous idea.
Share, I went back and did a search as I still didn't understand that I had accused you of this. Yes, I did use this line in the context of the post quoted below - except that I put quotes around "enabling." This is a key distinction from using the word without quotes. I was assuming a very general interpretation of the word "enabling" - hence my putting quotes around it. Barry has exhibited a lot of anger against women here, and your interactions with him could be *perceived* as "enabling" or "supporting, egging on, encouraging, etc." and could set you up for being attacked by him if you then challenge him - it's already occurred - where he called you an "idiot." My main point, although poorly communicated was that when you throw out loaded terms and don't explain the context in which you are defining them, they are equally as applicable to you. I apologize for the misunderstanding. P.S. When I said "ELECTION" week below, I mean the week leading up to the election. "Share! What do you think the wts post was! Talk about creating confusion. You have steadfastly pursued an agenda of attributing extreme motives to others' yourself! "Enabling" is another one of those loaded words you like to use. You are "enabling" Barry - this is potentially very dangerous for you (not for him). And as usual, you invoke the name of another to support your reality. Jason? Why is what he says the truth? It was ELECTION/STORM WEEK the week Judy was gone. The whole country was focusing elsewhere, not just FFL!"
