--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
<anartaxius@...> wrote:
(snip)
> I did not read Judy's post in any detail
(snip)
> Judy finds what I say 'insupportable and unconscionable'; I
> would say she does not illuminate, does not open up the
> discussion
Perhaps you should have read my post in detail. (Perhaps,
in fact, you shouldn't really be commenting on it at all
if you did not.)
> one is, if on the wrong end of her view, simply and
> utterly wrong, there is no potential for redemption or
> discussion.
There was plenty of potential for discussion, but you
would have to have read the post to know about it.
("Redemption," I don't know, it would depend on how you
reacted to all the information I provided you with.)
(snip>
> In the past he seemed to have really messed with peoples'
> minds, and was quite capable of doing that. My suspicion
> is he still does, but perhaps in a more mollified way.
> Judy, Emily, and Ann do not seem to share this suspicion
> of mine. But then, some stay with an abusive spouse or
> partner, always thinking that the problem is their fault.
Right, but since Emily, Ann, and I have not experienced
abuse from Robin, how would this last be relevant?
(snip)
> Judy often accuses [Curtis] of context shifting. As far
> as I can tell, everyone does that. It is those grooves
> and conditioned responses the mind has. We are unable
> to not shift the context of an argument.
"As far as I can tell" are the key words here. That Curtis
is doing something different from what everyone else does
does not become evident until one becomes involved in a
hostile debate with him (as I've pointed out here over and
over). When it's *your* context he's shifting, you know it
isn't like what others do. (Otherwise, it wouldn't, you
know, be an issue.)
(snip>
> By the way, if you are reading this Share, Twinkies are
> coming back. Maybe all of this discussion about rape was
> the result of sugar you had one day.
>
> http://now.msn.com/twinkies-returning-in-july
(Let's see if Share screams at you for referring to "rape"
instead of "psychological rape," as she did at Ann. I'm
guessing she won't.)
