BTW...thanks for the kind words Ann. I miss some posts on here and sometimes catch up a bit later...and still will miss some posts.
Cheers! :) ~carol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > > Er, Steve, you seem to be getting a tad defensive here and it > seems it > > > is because you have this need to run to somehow divert what you > perceive > > > as some sort of attack aimed at Share. I think you should give Share > > > some respect/credibility and the chance to reply and figure out her > own > > > dynamics with Carol here. By jumping in like this it makes you look > like > > > you don't think Share is capable of a one on one dialogue with > someone > > > exploring possibilities of a subject. You have a very hair trigger > > > protective mechanism. Check it out, what are you afraid of? > > > > > > > > > I do feel slighted that I was not breast fed, and that my mother > > > probably smoked during her entire pregnancy with me, and likely my > > > three sisters. That's what coming to mind right now. > > > > "Slighted"? Oh, you mean because your mother didn't "protect" you in > the womb you are more likely to "protect" others now?! Did you feel like > you craved a Marlborough when you emerged? > That would have been a Kent and vodka martini. > > > > > > As for Carol, I detect a selective bias on her part, and I am just > > > voicing it. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I have attempted to hi-light > in > > > a previous post. Maybe I am wrong about it > > > > I think you have an innate protective tendency towards those you feel > might be being singled out and challenged. Okay, I do get riled up when > I see something akin to bullying*** Not that we are seeing bullying > here, but as a tendency on my part, yes I acknowledge that. > *** 1970's definition in force here.Not a terrible character flaw but in > this case a grown woman like Share can probably handle whatever Carol is > likely to bring up in conversation.Uh, really has nothing to do with > Share fighting her own battles. She doesn't need my help in that > regard. I thought Share brought up a salient point that Carol chose not > to include in here reasons why the eminent Dr. Oz would choose to > embrace TM. > I hardly see Carol as some malevolent, unreasonable poster here. Nor do > I. But as I said, I thought she chose to selectively consider > possibilities, choosing not include perhaps the most reasonable > explanation. As these things go, I would call it a small infraction, > but I chose to comment on it anyway. And I accept that people might > feel I am full of sh*t about it. > Share will probably say otherwise, but I think you should have a little > more confidence in her ability to respond/deal with interactions here, > especially with someone as reasonable as Carol. > You will have to take that up with Share. I think she weighs the > cost/reward ratio of who she interacts with. > Personally, I greatly enjoy your contributions here. > > >
