Thanks for the effort, LG.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> >
> > RD, where do you stand on this? Did you need to revise your questions
> posed to me perhaps based on an incomplete reading of all my comments as
> suggested by me below (BTW, no shame in that), or do the questions stand
> as originally asked? If I don't hear from you (and sometimes no response
> might be in and of itself a loud and clear answer), then I'll do my best
> to answer them as originally posted. I do this because, at some time in
> the future, I wouldn't want you or anyone suggesting that I *couldn't*
> answer them therefore you were right in your assumptive basis for asking
> them...I'm going to start calling this the MWE (muddying the waters
> effect) as I think that I try to keep FFL discussions in which I'm
> involved simple and *clear* (pun intended).
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote:
> > >
> > > RD, I'm not sure if you read *all* my comments interspersed
> throughout...read all the way to the bottom where I recognize what I've
> done and why I did it:
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327690
> > >
> > > If not, you might want to do that, then revise your list of
> questions below. I'm not sure if I can answer them because I'm *can't*
> read Share's mind. And it's not that I'm a stalwart defender of Share;
> you and the others (see Judy's list) have had her under the spotlight
> for so long that I think it's only fair that the spotlight be turned on
> you and the others. And it appears that this might be beginning to
> happen in a very logical and intelligent manner, and not from my posts
> alone. As my wise grandfather used to say: "It looks like the chickens
> are coming home to roost." Open up and have a willingness to learn. It's
> really not so bad.
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > LG I'm really glad Share has such a stalwart defender as you.
> Since you're butting in on Share's behalf as if she were not an
> intelligent adult, capable of responding to my post herself,
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
> > > > could you take a moment to read her mind as I have been unable to
> do and answer a few questions help understand her better? You can
> elaborate but yes or no will do.
>
>
> > > > Based on Share's post below:
>
>
> > > > Is wts Share's fantasy?
>
> I'm thinking one might refer to FFL having *similarities* to WTS (hence
> lowercase letters used) particularly if that person feels like she's
> being "confronted" on an internet forum very much like what happened in
> the WTS cult. I can't speak as to anyone's *limits* that would have to
> be reached in order to feel the way they do...everyone differs in this
> regard but I think we should all respect those limits as we become aware
> of them. And I'm probably right in saying that the *relentlessness* of
> the questions and opinions coming from *many* directions within hours,
> if not minutes, of each other are two similarities that might make any
> intelligent person feel that way. Then again, perhaps we completely
> missed any irony or humor by the person in referring to FFL as
> wts...afterall, Robin might be the master of irony but others can be
> pretty good at it as well.
>
>
> > > > Did Share accuse Judy of psychological rape?
>
> At http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327671
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327671> , she
> writes: "Here's Judy at her wts best. Doing the psychological rape
> thing of attributing to me thoughts and feelings I've not had. Then
> presenting her ideas as The Truth. Then lacking in compassion..."
> Notice she goes on to define what psychological rape means to her
> therefore if what Judy is doing falls within that definition, then to
> Share, Judy is "doing the psychological rape thing."
>
> I like Xeno's take on this at the end of
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327694
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327694> when he
> writes: "When someone talks of psychological rape, this does not
> necessarily mean they have a victim mentality, they might only mean they
> feel the attempt has been made. Share seems to be taking the stance that
> she is not going to put up with it, even if the attempt is made."
>
> > > > Did Share accuse Judy of attributing thoughts and feelings to her
> without explicitly saying how or what they were?
>
>
> Probably, but then again, Judy does that to most of her "opponents" in
> order to "fluff" her argument. Again, I'll defer to Xeno again at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327694
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327694> when he
> writes: "She [Judy] also seems to attribute feelings and thoughts to
> others. I do this too, but with the caveat that I really cannot knows
> what anybody's thoughts are unless they speak or write them out, and
> maybe those are not what they are really thinking. And, my
> interpretation of other's emotions are probably pretty unreliable. Judy
> seems to imply that she is really good at this. Judy is very heavy on
> characterising her opposition's arguments and states of mind in a way
> that I interpret is to demean them, without supporting fact. (Then he
> lists several examples.) These are all characterisations attributing
> motives, with strong emotional flavours, to others. But these
> characterisations come out of Judy's mind, they are what is in *her*
> mind. Perhaps they give us a clue as to what goes on in her own mental
> world, something that none of us can experience directly."
>
> As far as "explicitly saying how or what they were", I've seen Judy
> write that she's not going to do anyone's homework for them when an
> "opponent" demands that she state examples to support her accusations.
>
> > > > Does Share's framing of her argument against Judy based on her
> assumptions about the fantasized existence of wts help her effectively
> rebut the posts Judy cites in the archives that demonstrate Share's
> misunderstanding of why Robin decided to cut off private email
> communication, her subsequent misunderstanding of the sequence of events
> that transpired, and then based on misunderstanding of her own making,
> accused him of psychological rape?
>
> If my response to question 1 above holds any merit, then wts isn't a
> fantasy in Share's mind...it's her reality based on her experiences. As
> far as private email communications, why they were cut off, etc. etc.,
> what makes you think that Robin's understanding of the sequence of
> events isn't the *mis*understanding? And as far as psychological rape,
> now by Robin, I again defer to Xeno's comment as I did in my response to
> question 2 above.
>
> And if I may be so bold to opine: RD, your prejudices are really showing
> in your assumptions in the above question.
>
>
> > > > If Share dropped her wts and psychological rape fantasy, and
> rebutted Judy based on what transpired between herself and Robin in the
> archives would she be more successful in defending herself and put an
> end to your need to defend her?
>
> Again, see my responses to questions 1 and 2, then 4 above.
>
> As far as my "need to defend her", I was partly joking and partly
> serious when I stated that I'm a "defender of fair play" rather than a
> defender of any one person such as Share.
>
> > > > Is Share unwilling to address her misunderstandings in the posts
> Judy cites because she cannot defend what she has written?
>
> You've long ago made up your minds with regard to the certainty of your
> "truth" of this situation. therefore, any address of misunderstandings
> by Share or any of her supporters falls on deaf ears. Really, it does.
>
>
> > > > In order to truthfully address the posts Judy cites would Share
> have to first drop fantasizing herself as a victim of wts and
> psychological rape?
>
> Thanks for making it so easy for me, RD. See above.
>
>
> > > > Do you think these are fair questions?
>
> Any question is fair if asked in the right spirit, and any answer is
> fair if offered in that same spirit. I hope I've accomplished that.
>
>
> <snip>
>
