Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails...
No, you didn't "lose" and you aren't "lost" :) From: awoelflebater To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater wrote: > > > > > AZ Grey writes: > > > "I would also suggest the possibility of her eating her own > > > children but that isn't credible as the likelihood of her > > > finding a male of the species to actually engage in coitus > > > with her is highly unlikely. > > > > I have noticed a number of men on this site who seem to > > use this line, or some variation thereof, when they have > > otherwise run out of intelligent things to say. It usually > > signifies they are at their wits (or lack of wits) end and > > can think of no other road to take (linguistically speaking). > > With all due respect, Ann, I don't think you're seeing > all of the possibilities here. > > One of them is that AZ was simply interested in tweaking > Judy and getting her to react. Past experience on this > forum probably indicated to him that being considered > unattractive sexually was one of her "hot buttons," and > that she'd fly into a somewhat embarrassing hissy fit > if it got pushed again. > > Also, as a woman, I don't think you "get" one of the > things that inspires a lack of sexual desire in men. > It's what I call the "repulsiveness factor." Trust me Barry, as a woman I definitely "get" that. How could I not? Men aren't the only ones who can find someone of the opposite sex repulsive. > > As an example, if in some universe I was told to bed > Kim Kardashian, there is simply no way it could ever > happen. Some find her physically attractive, but I > would never be able to get past her repulsiveness > factor. No amount of Viagra or Cialis could overcome > the repulsion I feel for her and all that she stands > for. No matter how much makeup she was wearing, no > matter how she was dressed...or undressed...there is > simply no way that I could even conceive of having > sex with her, much less conceive a child. I suspect > that if someone took my sperm and shot her up with > it artificially, my "boys" would feel a similar > revulsion and swim the opposite direction from > the egg. :-) Then I have to say my respect for you has increased a hundred fold. Also, I wouldn't want to have sex with her either. So at least we share something in common. > > Now imagine how most men would react to not Kim Kar- > dashian but a seventy-year-old woman whom they have > judged over the years to have similarly-repulsive > characteristics. Sex is just not in the picture, > much less children. I get that too, but are we judging everyone here on their bedability? (my made-up word for the occasion.) AZ is just using grade school put-downs that aren't worthy of anybody. At least not Judy or me. > > I think you're reacting the way that one of the Bene > Gesserit priestesses in Frank Herbert's "Dune" reacted > when Paul Atreides used a particular flavor of "The > Voice" on her. He spoke to her using a tone of voice > intended to psychically convey a subtext of "You are > not a sex object. You have never been a sex object. > You will never be a sex object." Suffice it to say > that the priestess did not react well. I'd like to imagine myself a priestess but other than that I'm not seeing any relationship there to my reaction. No one was talking about me being repulsive, a child eater or unable to find a sexual partner. They still might, but not so far. > > But she wasn't intended to. Paul was making a statement > of fact. Giving AZ the benefit of a doubt, he may have > simply been expressing his own assessment of Judy's > repulsiveness factor. Or he may have just been trying > to get under her skin...and succeeding. I am not sure if he got under Judy's skin, I haven't seen a reaction yet, but his standards kind of put me off. It was not the content but my perception of his intention to bring her down by claiming she is basically repulsive is, well, a little repulsive. > > Seems to me he succeeded in getting under yours as well. > You did, after all, come out of the lurker woodwork to > weigh in on this, claiming that what a man thought of > you sexually wouldn't really affect you. Yeah, right. :-) Barry, you seem to disdain people who feel things. I don't claim to be some unfeeling mechanical entity so I am happy to admit that some things I see written on this site may: shock me piss me off astound me hurt me If that means I "lost" then I lost. > > Note that you start by trying to do to AZ exactly what > you seem to be upset about him doing to Judy -- trying > to demean his worth, both sexually and intellectually. > Then you move on to trying to do the same with all men. > My bet is that AZ will read your post and -- as I did > -- laugh, without his buttons gett
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails...
My perception is that he wakes up every morning and gets out all his aggression or angry thoughts about whatever (unless it is a movie review) by "dissing" you. It's part of his routine. You are likely doing him a service; who knows what havoc he might wreak on others if he didn't have you to "diss" on a regular basis. Ohhhmmthat's it, just Ohhm...is my new response. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 6:34 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails... Aside from all the other obvious absurdities and inadvertent ironies in this latest anti-Judy diatribe, I'd just like to remind folks once again that Barry *doesn't read my posts*. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > > > "By what pushes their buttons ye shall know them." > > > > > > Yes, button pushing is a good technique for getting to > > > know people. I find there are much more productive ways > > > to do this however. Button pushing only shows you the > > > reactive side of a person. That is never the whole story. > > > > I would say that the "reactive side" is very much > > the whole story. What you still react to owns and > > defines you. > > > > "It is only shallow people who do not judge by > > appearances. The true mystery of the world is > > the visible, not the invisible." - Oscar Wilde > > Ann, I'm going to rap about this for a bit, because > it's touched on the very thing that keeps me inter- > ested in this and other spiritual forums. At this > stage in my life, I find myself not terribly inter- > ested in the "spirituality" per se. Just not my > cuppa tea. But the *people* on these forums, and > the dichotomy between who and what they present > themselves to be and who and what I and others > perceive them to be, that I find endlessly > fascinating. > > With many people on FFL, I find very little difference > between who they present themselves to be and who I > perceive them to be. I think Rick and Alex are very > much what they present themselves to be, as is Curtis. > With others, I see a BIG difference. The latter I would > characterize as lacking in self-knowledge or the ability > to honestly self-assess, and so invested in the image > they are compelled to create that they can't see the > image they really *are* creating through their actions. > The provocateur in me sometimes enjoys pointing this > dichotomy out. > > I have found over time that the best way to do this > is NOT to get up on a soapbox and talk, talk, talk > about the people I feel are hypocritical, and whose > walk I feel doesn't match their talk. That's Judy's > approach, and to some extent was Robin's. They are > constantly trying to *sell* their POV to a perceived > audience, trying to get this perceived (and often > imaginary) audience to *buy* this POV, and agree with > them. My assessment of both people is that they > honestly believe that what they SAY is more important > than what they DO. > > I believe the opposite. After seventeen years of watch- > ing what Judy DOES, I don't believe a word she SAYS. > I have never in my life encountered a human being who > in my opinion has a less accurate view of who and what > she is. > > Now I could point this out the way she does, by talk, > talk, talking, and trying to *sell* my assessment of > her to others, but I don't think that's very effective. > What I prefer to do is to push her buttons and allow > her to *demonstrate* who and what she is. > > You may remember that recently I pointed out that she > is somewhat monotopical, in that she is obsessed with > a number of perceived "enemies" on this forum, and > can't go for very long (never more than a few days) > without badrapping one or more of them. I also pointed > out that IMO one of the reasons for this is that *she > doesn't have anything else to say*. > > Compare this assessment to an overview of her posts > for the last few months. How many times has she posted > anything original, or even something that wasn't in > reaction to someone, used as an opportunity either to > put them down or to "prove" herself smarter or more > authoritative, or start an argument with them? I > challenge you to watch over the next few weeks to see > if she is able to make even a handful of posts that > don't fit into this description. Only a few weeks after > my post characterizing her act on this forum as chant- > ing the Judyatri Mantra (bashing Curtis, Vaj, Sal, > myself and other perceived "enemies"), she's pretty > much back to doing this non-stop. > > I will freely admit to *encouraging* this behavior, by > posting things that I know from past experience will > push her buttons and cause her to
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails...
If I read and respond to FFL through yahoo email, are the responses automatically formatted this way? I think not, based on comments I've gotten from Richard. This is an example. How do I format the preferred way? Sorry, I need these things spelled out for me :( From: Richard J. Williams To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 7:57 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: When all else fails... > > > So, yes, it's text, but professionally formatted > > > for easy reading. Everyone knows that plain text > > > with line breaks is the preferred format for > > > discussion groups. Go figure. > > > > It really depends on the system that the text is being > > processed through, whether you are responding through > > Yahoo's text editor or using the HTML editor, whether > > you get the post via email etc. I don't bother with it. > > Sometimes I will reformat something so it looks better > > after it has passed through many iterations of replies. > > > > The greater than character (>) is not quite a right > > angle > > authfriend: > The term is "right angle-bracket" (as opposed to a left > angle-bracket < ), not "right-angle bracket." > Thanks for re-formatting Xeno's message - it's much easier to read with the angle bracket inserted before each reply line of text! 307292 Xenophaneros Anartaxius: > It really depends on the system that the text is being processed through, > whether you are responding through Yahoo's text editor or using the HTML > editor, whether you get the post via email etc. I don't bother with it. > Sometimes I will reformat something so it looks better after it has passed > through many iterations of replies. > > The greater than character (>) is not quite a right angle and it is generated > automatically when replying via Yahoo's text editor. What Judy and Barry do > is manually format the line breaks so the lines tend to remain unbroken > through several iterations of posts and replys, that is they make the lines > short enough so reformat by the forum software which makes the lines longer > by adding the '>' character and additional spaces does not result in a new > line break. Most do not fuss with this. I do not fuss with it.
