--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > They can't hold their own, so they portray themselves as > > victims. And they bring nothing but dishonor on themselves > > by doing so--especially since they themselves are far more > > guilty of the behavior they complain about than the folks > > they claim are victimizing them. > > I am not so sure about that. I searched for the word victim > and victimized in Barry's posts to see how he applied the > word to himself, and he does not seem to have used the word > in reference to himself. There were some 400+ references to > the word 'victim' and some 41 for the word 'victimize'. As > I have a limited time, I chose the word 'victimized' and > read every paragraph where he used the word in an original > post. This provides a reasonable sample. > > In not one case does he refer to himself as having been > victimized. I really do not think he thinks of himself > that way.
He does not. Thinking of the people one stalks AS victims is something that stalkers do. Their fantasies revolve around how strongly they are affecting the people they hate. In my considered opinion, the best thing one can do when faced with an Internet stalker is to allow them to fantasize about how strongly they are affecting you (something they would do anyway), while not allow- ing anything they say to affect you at all. Drives them crazy. :-) The other thing it is important to know about stalkers is what the "end point" or "goal" of their game plan is. That is, put very simply, to get you to respond to them one-to-one so that in their diseased minds they can have a Robin-like "confrontation" with you. It *doesn't matter* what you say when replying to them. They already creamed their pants the moment you replied. So don't. It's meaner. :-)
