|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 12:00:10 GMT -5
Andrew, your response looks like someone who perceives themselves to be attacked and is lashing back out looking for weakness in his opponent. I sat with the response for about a minute before I posted, and also considered different kinds of responses. It wasn't lashing out, it was quite carefully considered. I discerned that it was reasonable to put in a boundary of sorts. I think it worked. Now, what is your motivation for challenging me on this? Can we establish first of all if you consider Reefs to have conducted himself in a way that reflects the absence of 'the person' in the last page or two? Do you consider Reefs to have been facilitating peace in the last 2 pages, or facilitating discord? The reason I saw it the way I did was because "The forums Reefs started" had nothing to do with our current conversations. It was completely out of the blue and designed to attack someone where they might be weak. Yes I see Reefs poking at you. I'm talking to you because you're the one demonstrating that they feel hurt by words on a screen. If I asked Reefs to stop poking at you, how does that help you become aware of your subconscious sense of woundedness? |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 12:17:01 GMT -5
I guess you passive aggressive commenting hasn't stopped? Still trying to change my behavior?  Ooh. Tough guy this morning, ay? I don't know, Top......maybe you see all women who aren't afraid (relatively speaking) to challenge people's ideas as 'manipulative' - I thought it was a decent general comment about the issue. It's not all about you. now you're escalating "my problem" to be with powerful women. I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her. Those PSA announcements are for preserving social structure and people's sense of self. We're looking at the problems from a different angle. If those that perceived themselves to be bullied saw themselves as whole, they would not become weak in the face of bullying. There would be no problem. They would stick up for themselves. Your comment is passive aggressive because of the way you presented it. "I guess the PSA's are wrong.. " The implication being you felt like the PSAs were warrented, but see me as if I am saying the PSAs are unwarranted. It was a very loaded expression. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 12:31:14 GMT -5
Ooh. Tough guy this morning, ay? I don't know, Top......maybe you see all women who aren't afraid (relatively speaking) to challenge people's ideas as 'manipulative' - I thought it was a decent general comment about the issue. It's not all about you. now you're escalating "my problem" to be with powerful women. I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her. Those PSA announcements are for preserving social structure and people's sense of self. We're looking at the problems from a different angle. If those that perceived themselves to be bullied saw themselves as whole, they would not become weak in the face of bullying. There would be no problem. They would stick up for themselves. Your comment is passive aggressive because of the way you presented it. "I guess the PSA's are wrong.. " The implication being you felt like the PSAs were warrented, but see me as if I am saying the PSAs are unwarranted. It was a very loaded expression. I hear you and I believe for the most part understand where you're coming from here. It's too darned easy to read into "I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her" that you have a personal problem communicating with me, singling me out simply because I don't happen to see things as you do and/or agree with your assessment of things and pov. You are reading me wrong - I'll try and make it more succinct. You know 'my story' enough...so, you know I happen to be sensitive to the issue of abuse and for me, that means anyone of any age. Mostly because so darned many people don't get help when it really is necessary - when they're young and/or small and/or helpless - genuinely helpless due to a variety of factors. This IS a serious issue for me. The way I tend to see it, is that Reefs, especially, hides behind the philosophies of the non-dual mindset (?) to reach out and swat someone - early and often. It's his excuse. I know you're reasonably open person, so I'm grateful and relieved that I feel I can still talk to you about pretty much anything, even when we don't see eye to eye. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 12:38:02 GMT -5
now you're escalating "my problem" to be with powerful women. I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her. Those PSA announcements are for preserving social structure and people's sense of self. We're looking at the problems from a different angle. If those that perceived themselves to be bullied saw themselves as whole, they would not become weak in the face of bullying. There would be no problem. They would stick up for themselves. Your comment is passive aggressive because of the way you presented it. "I guess the PSA's are wrong.. " The implication being you felt like the PSAs were warrented, but see me as if I am saying the PSAs are unwarranted. It was a very loaded expression. I hear you and I believe for the most part understand where you're coming from here. It's too darned easy to read into "I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her" that you have a personal problem communicating with me, singling me out simply because I don't happen to see things as you do and/or agree with your assessment of things and pov. You are reading me wrong - I'll try and make it more succinct. You know 'my story' enough...so, you know I happen to be sensitive to the issue of abuse and for me, that means anyone of any age. Mostly because so darned many people don't get help when it really is necessary - when they're young and/or small and/or helpless - genuinely helpless due to a variety of factors. This IS a serious issue for me. The way I tend to see it, is that Reefs, especially, hides behind the philosophies of the non-dual mindset (?) to reach out and swat someone - early and often. It's his excuse. I know you're reasonably open person, so I'm grateful and relieved that I feel I can still talk to you about pretty much anything, even when we don't see eye to eye. But we're mixing contexts. This isn't facebook. Nobody here is 12 and insecure and still trying to form an identity. The topic of the forum is loss of identity. So the PSA isn't really applicable in this context. Reef's bullying is very specific. I don't get the impression he's going to be targeting kids, or that his intent is to make someone suicidal. He mocks what he sees as insincerity and pretentiousness. He mocks what he sees as someone having a false realization and is just pretending at realization. That's what I see in his mocking. I would love to see how Ramana and Niz would respond to being mocked. Of course they probably wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 12:48:11 GMT -5
I hear you and I believe for the most part understand where you're coming from here. It's too darned easy to read into "I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her" that you have a personal problem communicating with me, singling me out simply because I don't happen to see things as you do and/or agree with your assessment of things and pov. You are reading me wrong - I'll try and make it more succinct. You know 'my story' enough...so, you know I happen to be sensitive to the issue of abuse and for me, that means anyone of any age. Mostly because so darned many people don't get help when it really is necessary - when they're young and/or small and/or helpless - genuinely helpless due to a variety of factors. This IS a serious issue for me. The way I tend to see it, is that Reefs, especially, hides behind the philosophies of the non-dual mindset (?) to reach out and swat someone - early and often. It's his excuse. I know you're reasonably open person, so I'm grateful and relieved that I feel I can still talk to you about pretty much anything, even when we don't see eye to eye. But we're mixing contexts. This isn't facebook. Nobody here is 12 and insecure and still trying to form an identity. The topic of the forum is loss of identity. So the PSA isn't really applicable in this context. Reef's bullying is very specific. I don't get the impression he's going to be targeting kids, or that his intent is to make someone suicidal. He mocks what he sees as insincerity and pretentiousness. He mocks what he sees as someone having a false realization and is just pretending at realization. That's what I see in his mocking. I would love to see how Ramana and Niz would respond to being mocked. Of course they probably wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. You simply don't know how these forums affect people - and I realize none of us can protect everyone, but to go overboard as Reefs often does, is been pointed out as being rather ineffective method of doing what you say he's trying to do here. Can either one of you provide rock-solid proof that his method is productive in any way? If so, who has benefited? I think we've all pretty much heard nothing but complaints about that. It sure the d.ickens sounds like abuse to me - even if it falls on deaf ears and no one in the choir is really bothered by it - except more sensitive souls. And that's what I'm talking about. *shrug* It sure seems to me like you're covering up his behavior with your own unique apologies. That's why I want to know why a handful of you want to make this forum more closed? Limit people's ability to express divergent opinions and challenge what-ever notions are being advanced by the old timers here? I don't think that's a very positive or productive approach. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 22, 2013 12:50:11 GMT -5
It sure the penisens sounds like abuse to me Ugh. Poor Charlie Dickens. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 12:52:22 GMT -5
It sure the penisens sounds like abuse to me Ugh. Poor Charlie penisens. Heheh, That censor is a sick thang!  |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 13:24:05 GMT -5
But we're mixing contexts. This isn't facebook. Nobody here is 12 and insecure and still trying to form an identity. The topic of the forum is loss of identity. So the PSA isn't really applicable in this context. Reef's bullying is very specific. I don't get the impression he's going to be targeting kids, or that his intent is to make someone suicidal. He mocks what he sees as insincerity and pretentiousness. He mocks what he sees as someone having a false realization and is just pretending at realization. That's what I see in his mocking. I would love to see how Ramana and Niz would respond to being mocked. Of course they probably wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. You simply don't know how these forums affect people - and I realize none of us can protect everyone, but to go overboard as Reefs often does, is been pointed out as being rather ineffective method of doing what you say he's trying to do here. Can either one of you provide rock-solid proof that his method is productive in any way? If so, who has benefited? I think we've all pretty much heard nothing but complaints about that. Hearing nothing but complaints is selective hearing. The people complaining are the ones that have identified most with being wounded at some point in their lives, if not still wounded now. That's not Reef's fault for the wounds being there. If some stranger comes by this forum and sees Reefs comments and gets depressed to the point of killing him/herself, that's not Reef's fault. Do I think Reefs is an excellent role model of human behavior, no. But who is? Do I think Reef's contributions are valueless? No. Do I think that Reef's mocking can have no positive effect? Please hear me when I say I am focused on growth. Can there be growth without trauma? I don't know. Can there be growth with trauma? Absolutely, if there is resiliency. Reefs provides the trauma. The resiliency comes from the observer/experiencer. Trying to make Reefs a non-traumatic experience by putting him in a straight jacket is not embracing growth, its removing the stimulus towards growth. I'm not claiming to know Reef's motives. My claim is about how to milk the negative experience and turn it into fuel for growth. It sure the d.ickens sounds like abuse to me - even if it falls on deaf ears and no one in the choir is really bothered by it - except more sensitive souls. And that's what I'm talking about. *shrug* It sure seems to me like you're covering up his behavior with your own unique apologies. That's why I want to know why a handful of you want to make this forum more closed? Limit people's ability to express divergent opinions and challenge what-ever notions are being advanced by the old timers here? I don't think that's a very positive or productive approach. How active are your wounds when you're saying this? How do you know when you're not talking from woundedness? |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 13:40:53 GMT -5
You simply don't know how these forums affect people - and I realize none of us can protect everyone, but to go overboard as Reefs often does, is been pointed out as being rather ineffective method of doing what you say he's trying to do here. Can either one of you provide rock-solid proof that his method is productive in any way? If so, who has benefited? I think we've all pretty much heard nothing but complaints about that. Hearing nothing but complaints is selective hearing. The people complaining are the ones that have identified most with being wounded at some point in their lives, if not still wounded now. That's not Reef's fault for the wounds being there. If some stranger comes by this forum and sees Reefs comments and gets depressed to the point of killing him/herself, that's not Reef's fault. Do I think Reefs is an excellent role model of human behavior, no. But who is? Do I think Reef's contributions are valueless? No. Do I think that Reef's mocking can have no positive effect? Please hear me when I say I am focused on growth. Can there be growth without trauma? I don't know. Can there be growth with trauma? Absolutely, if there is resiliency. Reefs provides the trauma. The resiliency comes from the observer/experiencer. Trying to make Reefs a non-traumatic experience by putting him in a straight jacket is not embracing growth, its removing the stimulus towards growth. I'm not claiming to know Reef's motives. My claim is about how to milk the negative experience and turn it into fuel for growth. It sure the d.ickens sounds like abuse to me - even if it falls on deaf ears and no one in the choir is really bothered by it - except more sensitive souls. And that's what I'm talking about. *shrug* It sure seems to me like you're covering up his behavior with your own unique apologies. That's why I want to know why a handful of you want to make this forum more closed? Limit people's ability to express divergent opinions and challenge what-ever notions are being advanced by the old timers here? I don't think that's a very positive or productive approach. How active are your wounds when you're saying this? How do you know when you're not talking from woundedness? That> gave me a jolly good laugh - not even sure why!  and this> .......awww crap, pretty much the whole rest of your post, says that no one can confront anyone else about anything else. And yet Reefs is free to do whatever he wants. Anyone can do anything they want without the consequence of being interfered with by anyone who has unwanted experiences from it. Like a field day for one and all. And those who've been previously assaulted in whatever way, can just sit and spin. How's that appropriate - or is there no such thing as appropriate in the non-dualistic way? You can call my opinion as coming from someone who has been injured and therefore, has no right to their opinion because if they speak up and out, they will be challenged by the next person who comes along and wants to sh*t on them. Intimidation. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 13:51:16 GMT -5
I hear you and I believe for the most part understand where you're coming from here. It's too darned easy to read into "I see Figs as a very powerful woman, and I have no problem communicating with her" that you have a personal problem communicating with me, singling me out simply because I don't happen to see things as you do and/or agree with your assessment of things and pov. You are reading me wrong - I'll try and make it more succinct. You know 'my story' enough...so, you know I happen to be sensitive to the issue of abuse and for me, that means anyone of any age. Mostly because so darned many people don't get help when it really is necessary - when they're young and/or small and/or helpless - genuinely helpless due to a variety of factors. This IS a serious issue for me. The way I tend to see it, is that Reefs, especially, hides behind the philosophies of the non-dual mindset (?) to reach out and swat someone - early and often. It's his excuse. I know you're reasonably open person, so I'm grateful and relieved that I feel I can still talk to you about pretty much anything, even when we don't see eye to eye. But we're mixing contexts. This isn't facebook. Nobody here is 12 and insecure and still trying to form an identity. The topic of the forum is loss of identity. So the PSA isn't really applicable in this context. Reef's bullying is very specific. I don't get the impression he's going to be targeting kids, or that his intent is to make someone suicidal. He mocks what he sees as insincerity and pretentiousness. He mocks what he sees as someone having a false realization and is just pretending at realization. That's what I see in his mocking. I would love to see how Ramana and Niz would respond to being mocked. Of course they probably wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. The road to Hell, top. He mocks when he thinks he sees insincerity or pretentiousness. It's still just his personal opinion. It's all knee-jerk.  And yeah. They wouldn't be on this forum - because - it's a lotta BS. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 15:09:07 GMT -5
Hearing nothing but complaints is selective hearing. The people complaining are the ones that have identified most with being wounded at some point in their lives, if not still wounded now. That's not Reef's fault for the wounds being there. If some stranger comes by this forum and sees Reefs comments and gets depressed to the point of killing him/herself, that's not Reef's fault. Do I think Reefs is an excellent role model of human behavior, no. But who is? Do I think Reef's contributions are valueless? No. Do I think that Reef's mocking can have no positive effect? Please hear me when I say I am focused on growth. Can there be growth without trauma? I don't know. Can there be growth with trauma? Absolutely, if there is resiliency. Reefs provides the trauma. The resiliency comes from the observer/experiencer. Trying to make Reefs a non-traumatic experience by putting him in a straight jacket is not embracing growth, its removing the stimulus towards growth. I'm not claiming to know Reef's motives. My claim is about how to milk the negative experience and turn it into fuel for growth. How active are your wounds when you're saying this? How do you know when you're not talking from woundedness? That> gave me a jolly good laugh - not even sure why! and this> .......awww crap, pretty much the whole rest of your post, says that no one can confront anyone else about anything else. If anything, my posts are saying to look at where you are coming from when you approach someone else. And yet Reefs is free to do whatever he wants. Everyone is free to do whatever they want, provided they are willing to accept whatever consequences come with it. Anyone can do anything they want without the consequence of being interfered with by anyone who has unwanted experiences from it. I never said you couldn't stand up to Reefs, I said to look and see if you are relating to him through woundedness or wholeness. Like a field day for one and all. And those who've been previously assaulted in whatever way, can just sit and spin. How's that appropriate - or is there no such thing as appropriate in the non-dualistic way? The question of propriety does not seem to be a non-dualistic question as it pertains to culture. You can call my opinion as coming from someone who has been injured and therefore, has no right to their opinion because if they speak up and out, they will be challenged by the next person who comes along and wants to sh*t on them. Intimidation. You keep adding your own wounded interpretation to the things I say. I never said you couldn't speak up. All I have EVER said is to be aware of where you are speaking and relating from. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 15:09:56 GMT -5
But we're mixing contexts. This isn't facebook. Nobody here is 12 and insecure and still trying to form an identity. The topic of the forum is loss of identity. So the PSA isn't really applicable in this context. Reef's bullying is very specific. I don't get the impression he's going to be targeting kids, or that his intent is to make someone suicidal. He mocks what he sees as insincerity and pretentiousness. He mocks what he sees as someone having a false realization and is just pretending at realization. That's what I see in his mocking. I would love to see how Ramana and Niz would respond to being mocked. Of course they probably wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. The road to Hell, top. He mocks when he thinks he sees insincerity or pretentiousness. It's still just his personal opinion. It's all knee-jerk. And yeah. They wouldn't be on this forum - because - it's a lotta BS. And yet you are still here rolling in the bull shit if that is what you really think it is. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 15:19:51 GMT -5
The road to Hell, top. He mocks when he thinks he sees insincerity or pretentiousness. It's still just his personal opinion. It's all knee-jerk. And yeah. They wouldn't be on this forum - because - it's a lotta BS. And yet you are still here rolling in the bull nuts if that is what you really think it is. When I say "a lotta...", I mean a lot of - not ALL. You have a definite tendency to exaggerate what I say. Why is that? All forums have BS - because it's made of people.  |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 22, 2013 15:21:51 GMT -5
That> gave me a jolly good laugh - not even sure why! and this> .......awww crap, pretty much the whole rest of your post, says that no one can confront anyone else about anything else. If anything, my posts are saying to look at where you are coming from when you approach someone else. And yet Reefs is free to do whatever he wants. Everyone is free to do whatever they want, provided they are willing to accept whatever consequences come with it. Anyone can do anything they want without the consequence of being interfered with by anyone who has unwanted experiences from it. I never said you couldn't stand up to Reefs, I said to look and see if you are relating to him through woundedness or wholeness. Like a field day for one and all. And those who've been previously assaulted in whatever way, can just sit and spin. How's that appropriate - or is there no such thing as appropriate in the non-dualistic way? The question of propriety does not seem to be a non-dualistic question as it pertains to culture. You can call my opinion as coming from someone who has been injured and therefore, has no right to their opinion because if they speak up and out, they will be challenged by the next person who comes along and wants to sh*t on them. Intimidation. You keep adding your own wounded interpretation to the things I say. I never said you couldn't speak up. All I have EVER said is to be aware of where you are speaking and relating from. Even though the specific topic / focus has been on Reefs, I am saying a whole lot of things in a general sense. I'm not sure why you keep interpreting what I say as if I'm referring to only myself! And I'm getting rather puzzled that you keep referring to me and my experiences as 'wounded' - sheeeesh. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 22, 2013 15:23:32 GMT -5
And yet you are still here rolling in the bull nuts if that is what you really think it is. When I say "a lotta...", I mean a lot of - not ALL. You have a definite tendency to exaggerate what I say. Why is that? All forums have BS - because it's made of people. You said they wouldn't be here because of a problem you see. I just pointed out you're hear despite that problem you perceive. I'm not exaggerating anything. |
|
