I'd like to suggest something here.

Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer
is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't
been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a
non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these
particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?

I'm not expressing this the best way, but maybe someone else can. I think
you know what I mean though. It's just a truism. A tenet of
pyschology. And we're ALL guilty of it. Because, down deep inside, we
ALL have some unresolved issues - some hot buttons - some unresolved issues.
There are no exceptions that I know of on this planet.

Anyway, that's my perspective.

In article <xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.n et>, Bill in Co. wrote: I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? I'm not expressing this the best way, but maybe someone else can. I think you know what I mean though. It's just a truism. A tenet of pyschology. And we're ALL guilty of it. Because, down deep inside, we ALL have some unresolved issues - some hot buttons - some unresolved issues. There are no exceptions that I know of on this planet. Anyway, that's my perspective.

You are forgetting that to some of us, some issues are simply very
interesting because of our personal experiences. That's why some of us
talk about some things. Because we can relate to other people with
similar experience, we like thinking about those issues and what they
mean to us.

i

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?

You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics
interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about
"fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.

>Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas .earthlink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topicsinteresting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about"fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.

Well, I spoke on this topic some time ago... how I don't think that having an
opinion about a subject -- even a strong emotion about it --- means unresolved
issues.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Even Freud accepted that.

Sheila

I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my
irritation with you about this, Bill.

I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make sense
to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that, because I
don't adhere to it, I have some defect.

I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or because
the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much true
in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've gotten older.
And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less willing to accept
the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way it should be"
folks. Because, it is never just that things are different, they are always
*worse* in their eyes.

So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their noses
and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" range on
the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their
noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you suggesting
that I have unresolved issues around quilting????

This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness
to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and
that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone
assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is warranted.

Sheila

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com
actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:
"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas .earthlink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topicsinteresting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about"fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.

It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him,
it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am
guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to
question his own beliefs.

It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God
that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics.

Lauri in WA

I like my email spamless

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040829195525.27025.00000032@mb-m13.aol.com... I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make
sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that,
because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect. I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or
because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much
true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've gotten
older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less willing to
accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way it should
be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different, they are
always *worse* in their eyes. So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their
noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" range
on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down
their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you
suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting???? This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an
unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different
paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is
warranted. Sheila

You know, Sheila, I think I like you.

>> This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and anunwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose differentpaths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air iswarranted. SheilaYou know, Sheila, I think I like you.

Why, thank you, ma'am!

Sheila

WhansaMi wrote: I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect.

I don't think that is all of it, by a long shot. I think you're still
deluding yourself a little bit. Are you going to rule that totally out,
unequivocably, without any doubt? Are you going to tell me that you have
no interest in losing a few pounds (assuming you are overweight)? That
you wouldn't feel better doing so?
I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or
because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've
gotten older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less
willing to accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way
it should be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different,
they are always *worse* in their eyes.

No, you still don't get what I'm saying. For one thing, it's about being
in good shape. Would you be happy of not being in good shape (if that is
indeed the case), when you know perfectly well you could be? (Yes or no).
So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their
noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" range
on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting????

Oh give me a break, Sheila. I guess I should drag in the serial killer
issue here, it would be just as logical as this. Ahhh, you can be so
frustrating (unlike me, of course).
This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an
unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different
paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about
someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is
warranted. Sheila

When I was a smoker, I could have said the same thing - and probably did.
When I was an alcoholic, I could have said the same thing too (except I
never was an alcoholic, so I guess that is a moot point).

Lauri wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The
answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that
hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be
a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you
about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him, it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs. It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics. Lauri in WA I like my email spamless

I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And it
just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a loss.
I'll send ya my prayers!!

WhansaMi wrote: This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as
yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think
such an air is warranted. Sheila You know, Sheila, I think I like you. Why, thank you, ma'am! Sheila

Two in denial? Classic. :-)

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 00:37:59 GMT, "Bill in Co."
<surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote:
WhansaMi wrote:> This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an> unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose> different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid asyours.> It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't thinksuch> an air is warranted.>> Sheila You know, Sheila, I think I like you. Why, thank you, ma'am! SheilaTwo in denial? Classic. :-)
Three, if that's the way you want to see it.

Tara

>WhansaMi wrote: I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect.I don't think that is all of it, by a long shot. I think you're stilldeluding yourself a little bit. Are you going to rule that totally out,unequivocably, without any doubt?

Yes. At my age, coming from where I'm coming from, I can rule that out.

Are you going to tell me that you haveno interest in losing a few pounds (assuming you are overweight)? Thatyou wouldn't feel better doing so?

No, I wouldn't feel better doing so. If I did, I would.

This has been a process for me. I couldn't have said that even a year ago.
Remember, I'm the woman whose husband didn't see her without make-up till she
was hospitalized. But, looking at why I had been yo-yoing with my weight,
looking at why I was *trying* to lose weight, I realized I was truly **only**
losing weight for others. Even the health issues I thought were related to
weight turned out not to be related at all.

A while back, I was starting to have insulin resistance problems. I started
looking for a way AGAIN to lose weight, because that is standard in what they
tell you to do. Long story short, I discovered that I can control that with a
low carb diet. I don't lose a pound, mind you, but my blood work is GREAT! On
a low carb diet, my blood pressure is great. All without losing a pound.

So, no. I'm not interested. Thanks anyway. :-)
I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", orbecause the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I'vegotten older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am lesswilling to accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the wayit should be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different,they are always *worse* in their eyes.No, you still don't get what I'm saying. For one thing, it's about beingin good shape. Would you be happy of not being in good shape (if that isindeed the case), when you know perfectly well you could be? (Yes or no).

I'm in perfectly good shape to do the things I want to do. So, no. I don't
particularly "want" to be in better shape, **especially** if it is going to
have a negative impact on my quality of life (i.e., being focussed on calories,
forcing myself to go to the gym more often, having to give up having fun
dinners with friends).
So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down theirnoses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" rangeon the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting????Oh give me a break, Sheila. I guess I should drag in the serial killerissue here, it would be just as logical as this. Ahhh, you can be sofrustrating (unlike me, of course).

I truly have no idea what you are talking about here.
This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and anunwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose differentpaths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is aboutsomeone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air iswarranted. SheilaWhen I was a smoker, I could have said the same thing - and probably did.When I was an alcoholic, I could have said the same thing too (except Inever was an alcoholic, so I guess that is a moot point).

Eh. You know, we've both said something similar about other poster here.
You'd be surprised how much like him you sound.

Sheila

WhansaMi wrote: WhansaMi wrote: I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't
make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told
that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect. I don't think that is all of it, by a long shot. I think you're still deluding yourself a little bit. Are you going to rule that totally out, unequivocably, without any doubt? Yes. At my age, coming from where I'm coming from, I can rule that out. Are you going to tell me that you have no interest in losing a few pounds (assuming you are overweight)? That you wouldn't feel better doing so? No, I wouldn't feel better doing so. If I did, I would. This has been a process for me. I couldn't have said that even a year
ago. Remember, I'm the woman whose husband didn't see her without make-up till
she was hospitalized. But, looking at why I had been yo-yoing with my weight, looking at why I was *trying* to lose weight, I realized I was truly
**only** losing weight for others.

Not for others, for yourself. For others is just extra gravy.
Even the health issues I thought were related to weight turned out not to be related at all.

But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being in
the normal range is all academic and purely visual?
A while back, I was starting to have insulin resistance problems. I
started looking for a way AGAIN to lose weight, because that is standard in what
they tell you to do. Long story short, I discovered that I can control that
with a low carb diet. I don't lose a pound, mind you, but my blood work is
GREAT! On a low carb diet, my blood pressure is great. All without losing a
pound. So, no. I'm not interested. Thanks anyway. :-) I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is

Do I strike you as being that kind of guy? Boy, you don't know me very
well! I should let you talk with my ex. And an officer in the service
(but that's another story), and a previous work supervisor, and the list
goes on... LOL
pretty much true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced
as I've gotten older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less
willing to accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way
it should be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different,
they are always *worse* in their eyes.

Trust me, I'm very different, and understand that viewpoint more than you
can possibly know. Although you may have seen some hints of it already.
:-)
No, you still don't get what I'm saying. For one thing, it's about
being in good shape. Would you be happy of not being in good shape (if that
is indeed the case), when you know perfectly well you could be? (Yes or
no). I'm in perfectly good shape to do the things I want to do. So, no. I
don't particularly "want" to be in better shape, **especially** if it is going
to have a negative impact on my quality of life (i.e., being focussed on calories, forcing myself to go to the gym more often, having to give up having fun dinners with friends). So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the
"normal" range on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric
collage. Are you suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting???? Oh give me a break, Sheila. I guess I should drag in the serial killer issue here, it would be just as logical as this. Ahhh, you can be so frustrating (unlike me, of course). I truly have no idea what you are talking about here.

Ummm, it was in reference to one of my earlier posts today with JWB about
doing what feels good (eliminating the serial killers and the joy I would
get from doing so) -nevermind.
This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is warranted. Sheila

Well then, we disagree on this one. Maybe we need to agree to disagree
on it.
When I was a smoker, I could have said the same thing - and probably did. When I was an alcoholic, I could have said the same thing too (except I never was an alcoholic, so I guess that is a moot point). Eh. You know, we've both said something similar about other poster here. You'd be surprised how much like him you sound.

Come again? Err, wait a minute. If you going back in time here, I think
I know what you meant. Geeez, am I becoming THAT bad?
GRrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
Sheila

<snip back and forth between Bill and I>
But, looking at why I had been yo-yoing with my weight, looking at why I was *trying* to lose weight, I realized I was truly**only** losing weight for others.Not for others, for yourself. For others is just extra gravy.

No. That's what I mean. I have always done it for others. It has never been
important to me, for me. It was always because the ex wanted me to do it, or I
was going back home and the family (all little tiny, petite women) would think
badly of me.

I hardly notice others' weight. It certainly isn't something that is important
to me. For **me**, my weight is a non-issue. That's why I've stopped dieting.
I am no longer influenced by the only motivation I ever really had.
Even the health issues I thought were related to weight turned out not to be related at all.But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being inthe normal range is all academic and purely visual?

As I said below, my insulin resistance can be resolved without my losing a
pound. It wasn't weight related.


<snip>

> This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an> unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose> different paths,> and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about> someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is> warranted.>> SheilaWell then, we disagree on this one. Maybe we need to agree to disagreeon it.

Works for me.
When I was a smoker, I could have said the same thing - and probably did. When I was an alcoholic, I could have said the same thing too (except I never was an alcoholic, so I guess that is a moot point). Eh. You know, we've both said something similar about other poster here. You'd be surprised how much like him you sound.Come again? Err, wait a minute. If you going back in time here, I thinkI know what you meant. Geeez, am I becoming THAT bad?GRrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

Um, yeah. You do sound that bad.

Sheila Sheila

WhansaMi wrote: This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is warranted. Sheila

Sheila,
I love you :-)
Cal~

Joy wrote: You know, Sheila, I think I like you.

Hehehe.. I just sent her an 'I love you'.. so she's MINE.. back off

Cal~
<EG>

Bill in Co. wrote: But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being in the normal range is all academic and purely visual?

I noticed you did not comment on my earlier post regarding this issue.

That recent research is showing that diabetes causes the weight gain and
obesity, not the other way around. I even posted a link with citations
and everything. It's all right there for you.

Of course, it is important that you ignore anything that might suggest
you might just possible be wrong on an issue.

Cal~

"_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2pffsrFjr3a5U1@uni-berlin.de... Joy wrote: You know, Sheila, I think I like you. Hehehe.. I just sent her an 'I love you'.. so she's MINE.. back off Cal~ <EG>

You're just jealous 'cause I got there FIRST!

Joy wrote: "_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2pffsrFjr3a5U1@uni-berlin.de... Joy wrote: You know, Sheila, I think I like you. Hehehe.. I just sent her an 'I love you'.. so she's MINE.. back off Cal~ <EG> You're just jealous 'cause I got there FIRST!


Yeah, I saw that after I posted. I thought it pretty funny actually to
see your post right after I hit the send button. :)

GMTA
Cal~

"JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.

Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that
you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no
improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet.
All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments
and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound
like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the
right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are
"touched" as Bill said.

We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have
any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others.

"Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect.


How do you arrive at that? I told Bill that because i argue about "x" does
not mean "x" must be an issue with me.


Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said.

you obviously haven't read much of me then - I am very willing to admit
fault.

WhansaMi wrote: <snip back and forth between Bill and I>

No, Sheila. You mean: <snip back and forth between Bill and me>

:-)
But, looking at why I had been yo-yoing with my weight, looking at why I was *trying* to lose weight, I realized I was truly **only** losing weight for others. Not for others, for yourself. For others is just extra gravy. No. That's what I mean. I have always done it for others. It has never
been important to me, for me. It was always because the ex wanted me to do it,
or I was going back home and the family (all little tiny, petite women) would think badly of me.

Well, I sure can't make it important to you, if it's not important to you.
I hardly notice others' weight. It certainly isn't something that is important to me. For **me**, my weight is a non-issue. That's why I've stopped dieting. I am no longer influenced by the only motivation I ever really had.

I notice it. Like if I go to the airport or a movie theatre, and somebody
almost takes up 2 seats, or whatever, and I think, "what the hell"? I
guess I should be more compassionate, but it's hard to do in this case,
because *most likely* they have done it to themselves, and what's worse,
they don't even seem to care! I think that is a bit pathetic,though.
They're just selling themselves short.
Even the health issues I thought were related to weight turned out not to be related at all. But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being
in the normal range is all academic and purely visual? As I said below, my insulin resistance can be resolved without my losing a pound. It wasn't weight related.

In YOUR particular case. Generally there is a relationship, and we both
know that.
<snip>>> This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an>> unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and
choose>> different paths,>> and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about>> someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air
is>> warranted.>>>> Sheila Well then, we disagree on this one. Maybe we need to agree to
disagree on it. Works for me.>> When I was a smoker, I could have said the same thing - and probably
did.> When I was an alcoholic, I could have said the same thing too (except I> never was an alcoholic, so I guess that is a moot point). Eh. You know, we've both said something similar about other poster
here. You'd be surprised how much like him you sound. Come again? Err, wait a minute. If you going back in time here, I
think I know what you meant. Geeez, am I becoming THAT bad? GRrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! Um, yeah. You do sound that bad.

Ooops, that is NOT good. I guess I should "hang my head down, Dooley"?
For maybe it's time to cry"?

Did you see my post today on Doo Wop? and the Drifters, et al?
Sheila Sheila

_calinda_ wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being in the normal range is all academic and purely visual? I noticed you did not comment on my earlier post regarding this issue. That recent research is showing that diabetes causes the weight gain and obesity, not the other way around. I even posted a link with citations and everything. It's all right there for you. Of course, it is important that you ignore anything that might suggest you might just possible be wrong on an issue. Cal~

OK, so let's see if I have this right, since I don't have the post here.
You are saying that somebody who is obese cannot later develop diabetes, as
a result of being obese in the first place? Now THAT is news to me. I'm
not sure I believe that - that goes against what I've heard in the past.
I'm not saying it CAN'T be the other way (sometimes), though. But - are
you saying it can't be the other way?

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> writes:
Two in denial? Classic. :-)

I'm afraid what is _really_ classic is your dismissal of anyone who
disagrees with you as being "in denial."

"Tara D" <manderly@eol.ca> wrote in message
news:iau4j0ddibpasmfel0kbiml6h6vaaj4904@4ax.com...
Two in denial? Classic. :-) Three, if that's the way you want to see it.

Oooooh, oooooh!! Me, me! I get to be number four!

Jennifer, in De Nile

Bill in Co. wrote:
I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? I'm not expressing this the best way, but maybe someone else can. I think you know what I mean though. It's just a truism. A tenet of pyschology. And we're ALL guilty of it. Because, down deep inside, we ALL have some unresolved issues - some hot buttons - some unresolved issues. There are no exceptions that I know of on this planet. Anyway, that's my perspective.

I would agree. I said that when i read _Passionate Marriage_, I had an
"Aha!" experience. I was repeating a thought from a book we have about the
things to be gained from reading.

Doug.
--
Commonwealth Youth Games, Bendigo, Australia- http://www.bendigo2004.com
Drama is life with the dull bits cut out.
-- Alfred Hitchcock. (Of course, he is right. Good drama is life-like.)

Bill in Co. wrote: _calinda_ wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being in the normal range is all academic and purely visual? I noticed you did not comment on my earlier post regarding this issue. That recent research is showing that diabetes causes the weight gain and obesity, not the other way around. I even posted a link with citations and everything. It's all right there for you. Of course, it is important that you ignore anything that might suggest you might just possible be wrong on an issue. Cal~ OK, so let's see if I have this right, since I don't have the post here. You are saying that somebody who is obese cannot later develop diabetes, as a result of being obese in the first place?

What I am saying is that current information *suggests* that it's more a
matter of which came first.. the weight or the disease. It many cases
it's the opposite of what was previously believed. That many people
gained weight *because* they have (undiagnosed) diabetes or
"pre-diabetes", not that they have diabetes because they gained weight.

Chicken-egg thing, you see?
Now THAT is news to me. I'm not sure I believe that - that goes against what I've heard in the past. I'm not saying it CAN'T be the other way (sometimes), though. But - are you saying it can't be the other way?

I'm NOT saying it "Can't" be the other way, what I'm suggesting to you
is to realize that current information suggests that it may very well be
opposite of what was previously thought for many obese, diabetic people.

I'm also not saying that all fat people are diabetic or that this is
correct for everyone.

What it suggests is that it's not a personality flaw for someone to be
overweight. I think having this kind of information is just one more
tool to help those with weight issues who want to lose weight.

And perhaps you might try practicing some of those old fashioned values
you espouse and stop being so judgmental.

Cal~

"_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2pgpnhFkfia9U1@uni-berlin.de... What it suggests is that it's not a personality flaw for someone to be overweight. I think having this kind of information is just one more tool to help those with weight issues who want to lose weight.

Since when would it *ever* be a personality flaw?

Ted

Seeker wrote: "_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message What it suggests is that it's not a personality flaw for someone to be overweight. I think having this kind of information is just one more tool to help those with weight issues who want to lose weight. Since when would it *ever* be a personality flaw?

Good question. I don't think it IS a personality flaw. Ask Bill why he
thinks it is. Regardless of whether he denies this, his words in this
thread and many other's in the last few years DO suggest that he
considers it to be so.

Cal~ Ted

"_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2pgpnhFkfia9U1@uni-berlin.de... And perhaps you might try practicing some of those old fashioned values you espouse and stop being so judgmental.


<BG>

"JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<0jxYc.111517$4h7.16052304@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... > I'd like to suggest something here. > > Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The > answer > is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that > hasn't > been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really > be a > non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these > particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. How do you arrive at that? I told Bill that because i argue about "x" does not mean "x" must be an issue with me.

Your response to his suggestion that when a person has a "strong"
reaction to certain issues was simply cast aside by you with a simple
"nope, not me" type of response. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. you obviously haven't read much of me then - I am very willing to admit fault.

No, I read a lot of what you write JWB and you don't appear as willing
to admit fault as often you think. In fact, this isn't about fault,
it's about imperfections within ourselves. It's about how all of us
have issues, which I don't see as "faults". Unless you have been
raised in some type of bubble, there are going to be topics or issues
that will push a button or two. That's not to say that anytime
someone disagrees strongly that it is necessarily an issue. There is
however, some validity to the fact that when one's buttons are pushed,
there is probably something there. Perhaps one thing that it depends
upon is self awareness and the level of introspection that one is
willing to address.

whansami@aol.com (WhansaMi) wrote in message news:<20040829195525.27025.00000032@mb-m13.aol.com>... I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect.

Was Bill's suggestion about you and a particular thread? I took it
quite differently than you. I read his post as something that I
personally related to in this newsgroup. When my buttons get pushed
in some way-when I really react to issues rather than respond to
issues, there usually is something about me in it.
I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've gotten older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less willing to accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way it should be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different, they are always *worse* in their eyes. So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" range on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting???? This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is warranted.

Either I missed something in this beginning post or this is about
another post. Where did weight come into this? Sheila

"_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2pfg9qFjv51dU1@uni-berlin.de>... Bill in Co. wrote: But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think being in the normal range is all academic and purely visual? I noticed you did not comment on my earlier post regarding this issue. That recent research is showing that diabetes causes the weight gain and obesity, not the other way around. I even posted a link with citations and everything. It's all right there for you. Of course, it is important that you ignore anything that might suggest you might just possible be wrong on an issue. Cal~

Is this the same for pregnancy related diabetes? My sister in law, a
young woman who is obese, had prd and ended up quite unhealthy and was
told that her child would be at risk for diabetes. She remained quite
heavy (like 100 pounds overweight) and had another child. Same thing
but she now has full blown diabetes and both children are at risk for
diabetes. The older boy (7) is already very overweight. Is it
because of the diabetes or because his parents are both obese? At age
2, he would only eat grilled cheese sandwiches or macaroni and cheese.
No fruit. No veggies.

"Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3754f0b3.0408300643.77c71f9b@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<0jxYc.111517$4h7.16052304@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>...> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> > I'd like to suggest something here.> >> > Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The> > answer> > is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that> > hasn't> > been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would> > really> > be a> > non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these> > particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you> about> "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. How do you arrive at that? I told Bill that because i argue about "x" does not mean "x" must be an issue with me. Your response to his suggestion that when a person has a "strong" reaction to certain issues was simply cast aside by you with a simple "nope, not me" type of response.


In this case.

Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. you obviously haven't read much of me then - I am very willing to admit fault. No, I read a lot of what you write JWB and you don't appear as willing to admit fault as often you think. In fact, this isn't about fault, it's about imperfections within ourselves. It's about how all of us have issues, which I don't see as "faults". Unless you have been raised in some type of bubble, there are going to be topics or issues that will push a button or two. That's not to say that anytime someone disagrees strongly that it is necessarily an issue.


That's what i told Bill.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Lauri wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> I'd like to suggest something here.>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't> been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really
be a> non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these> particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him, it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs. It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics. Lauri in WA I like my email spamless I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And it just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a
loss. I'll send ya my prayers!!
Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues?

"Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite
dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... I'd like to suggest something here. Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The
answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really
be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you
about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others.

I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better.

We are perfect examples of what we are.

Does that make any sense to you?

"WhansaMi" <whansami@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040829195525.27025.00000032@mb-m13.aol.com... I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make
sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that,
because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect. I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or
because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty much
true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've gotten
older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less willing to
accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way it should
be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different, they are
always *worse* in their eyes. So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their
noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the "normal" range
on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down
their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you
suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting???? This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an
unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different
paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such an air is
warranted. Sheila

Those kind of "quilters" really piss me off too.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HFuYc.2127$w%6.910@newsread1.news.pas.earthli nk.net... WhansaMi wrote:> This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an> unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and
choose> different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours.> It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think such> an air is warranted.>> Sheila You know, Sheila, I think I like you. Why, thank you, ma'am! Sheila Two in denial? Classic. :-)

Pushing buttons????

"urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09...

I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better. We are perfect examples of what we are. Does that make any sense to you?

It does to me.

Doug Anderson wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> writes: Two in denial? Classic. :-) I'm afraid what is _really_ classic is your dismissal of anyone who disagrees with you as being "in denial."

Look who's talkin...

_calinda_ wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: _calinda_ wrote: Bill in Co. wrote:> But diabetes and other things are linked to obesity. You think> being in the normal range is all academic and purely visual? I noticed you did not comment on my earlier post regarding this issue. That recent research is showing that diabetes causes the weight gain and obesity, not the other way around. I even posted a link with citations and everything. It's all right there for you. Of course, it is important that you ignore anything that might suggest you might just possible be wrong on an issue. Cal~ OK, so let's see if I have this right, since I don't have the post here. You are saying that somebody who is obese cannot later develop diabetes, as a result of being obese in the first place? What I am saying is that current information *suggests* that it's more a matter of which came first.. the weight or the disease. It many cases it's the opposite of what was previously believed. That many people gained weight *because* they have (undiagnosed) diabetes or "pre-diabetes", not that they have diabetes because they gained weight. Chicken-egg thing, you see? Now THAT is news to me. I'm not sure I believe that - that goes against what I've heard in the past. I'm not saying it CAN'T be the other way (sometimes), though. But - are you saying it can't be the other way? I'm NOT saying it "Can't" be the other way, what I'm suggesting to you is to realize that current information suggests that it may very well be opposite of what was previously thought for many obese, diabetic people. I'm also not saying that all fat people are diabetic or that this is correct for everyone. What it suggests is that it's not a personality flaw for someone to be overweight. I think having this kind of information is just one more tool to help those with weight issues who want to lose weight. And perhaps you might try practicing some of those old fashioned values you espouse and stop being so judgmental. Cal~

We are ALL judgemental, it's just that some of us can't admit it. Let's be
honest here.

Caren wrote: "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite com> wrote in message
news:<0jxYc.111517$4h7.16052304@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at dot com> wrote in message
news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>...> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The
answer>> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that
hasn't>> been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really
be a>> non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these>> particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you> about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. How do you arrive at that? I told Bill that because i argue about "x"
does not mean "x" must be an issue with me. Your response to his suggestion that when a person has a "strong" reaction to certain issues was simply cast aside by you with a simple "nope, not me" type of response. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. you obviously haven't read much of me then - I am very willing to admit fault. No, I read a lot of what you write JWB and you don't appear as willing to admit fault as often you think. In fact, this isn't about fault, it's about imperfections within ourselves. It's about how all of us have issues, which I don't see as "faults". Unless you have been raised in some type of bubble, there are going to be topics or issues that will push a button or two. That's not to say that anytime someone disagrees strongly that it is necessarily an issue. There is however, some validity to the fact that when one's buttons are pushed, there is probably something there. Perhaps one thing that it depends upon is self awareness and the level of introspection that one is willing to address.

Exactly. And from what I've witnessed in this world, precious few dare to
tread in that territory.

Caren wrote: whansami@aol.com (WhansaMi) wrote in message news:<20040829195525.27025.00000032@mb-m13.aol.com>... I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect. Was Bill's suggestion about you and a particular thread? I took it quite differently than you. I read his post as something that I personally related to in this newsgroup. When my buttons get pushed in some way-when I really react to issues rather than respond to issues, there usually is something about me in it.

That was precisely my point.
I don't accept things just because "that is the way it always is", or
because the majority of people think it "should" be that way. This is pretty
much true in all areas of my life, and has become more pronounced as I've
gotten older. And, as I've gotten older -- and more confident --- I am less
willing to accept the condescension that usually accompanies the "that's the way
it should be" folks. Because, it is never just that things are different,
they are always *worse* in their eyes. So, yes, it irritates me when folks --- you included --- look down their noses and ascribe characters flaws to folks who aren't within the
"normal" range on the weight guidelines. It also irritates me when some quilters look down their noses on fiber artists who use glue to do fabric collage. Are you suggesting that I have unresolved issues around quilting???? This isn't, for me, about weight. It is about arrogance, and an unwillingness to accept that people can hold different views, and choose different paths, and that their paths may be every bit as valid as yours. It is about someone assuming an air of superiority when I don't think
such an air is warranted. Either I missed something in this beginning post or this is about another post. Where did weight come into this? Sheila

urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Lauri wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The
answer>> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that>> hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would>> really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions
attached>> to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you
about> "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him, it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs. It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics. Lauri in WA I like my email spamless I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And it just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a
loss. I'll send ya my prayers!! Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues?

(I said serenity, not security above).

Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an
exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much, if
any, introspection, either.

Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and me -
and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd! No
biggie...

urf wrote: "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> I'd like to suggest something here.>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The
answer> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that
hasn't> been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really
be a> non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these> particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you
about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better.

Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect! In
fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will ya?)
On second thought, maybe it's LSD? :-)
We are perfect examples of what we are.

(BS)
Does that make any sense to you?

No. Because it's BS (no offense intended, urf). (But, hey, it it makes
you feel better...) :-)

Bill in Co. wrote: urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Lauri wrote:> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB"> <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at> excite dot com> wrote:>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us?>>> The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of>>> us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own>>> psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there>>> would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular>>> issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many>> topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i>> argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue>> with me. Not at all.>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with> him, it's because you're incapable of being honest with> yourself. I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure> within himself to question his own beliefs.>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to> God that he's teaching something factual like math, and not> ethics.>> Lauri in WA>> I like my email spamless I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And it just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a loss. I'll send ya my prayers!! Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues? (I said serenity, not security above). Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much, if any, introspection, either.

So, if someone disagrees with you, then they need to learn a little
introspection, is that it?

Cal~
Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and me - and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd! No biggie...

_calinda_ wrote: Bill in Co. wrote: urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> Lauri wrote:>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB">> <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at>> excite dot com> wrote:>>>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us?>>>> The answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of>>>> us, something that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own>>>> psyches. Otherwise it would really be a non issue - there>>>> would be no such strong emotions attached to these particular>>>> issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>>>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many>>> topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i>>> argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue>>> with me. Not at all.>>>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with>> him, it's because you're incapable of being honest with>> yourself. I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure>> within himself to question his own beliefs.>>>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to>> God that he's teaching something factual like math, and not>> ethics.>>>> Lauri in WA>>>> I like my email spamless>> I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri.> And it just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever> remain at a loss. I'll send ya my prayers!!> Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues? (I said serenity, not security above). Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much, if any, introspection, either. So, if someone disagrees with you, then they need to learn a little introspection, is that it?

That sounds good, Cal. Thanks for putting it so succinctly! Somebody
here has finally seen the Light! :-)

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lhIYc.2663$w%6.1304@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Lauri wrote:> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com> actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer>>> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that>>> hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it
would>>> really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached>>> to these particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics>> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about>> "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him,> it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am> guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to> question his own beliefs.>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God> that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics.>> Lauri in WA>> I like my email spamless I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And
it just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a loss. I'll send ya my prayers!! Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues? (I said serenity, not security above). Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much, if any, introspection, either. Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and me - and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd!
No biggie...

I read the words "I am
guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to
question his own beliefs." posted by Lauri, and so I asked the question.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BlIYc.2743$8d1.2635@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at
excite dot com> wrote in message
news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>...> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer>> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that hasn't>> been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a>> non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these>> particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about> "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be
better. Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect! In fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will ya?) On second thought, maybe it's LSD? :-) We are perfect examples of what we are. (BS) Does that make any sense to you? No. Because it's BS (no offense intended, urf). (But, hey, it it
makes you feel better...) :-)

OK, I understand that you don't understand.

urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:lhIYc.2663$w%6.1304@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> Lauri wrote:>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com>> actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:>>>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The>>>> answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us,
something>>>> that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it>>>> would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong emotions>>>> attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with>>>> ourselves?>>>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics>>> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you>>> about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.>>>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him,>> it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am>> guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to>> question his own beliefs.>>>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God>> that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics.>>>> Lauri in WA>>>> I like my email spamless>> I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And
it> just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at a> loss. I'll send ya my prayers!!> Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues? (I said serenity, not security above). Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much, if any, introspection, either. Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and me - and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd!
No biggie... I read the words "I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs." posted by Lauri, and so I asked the question.

Sure I do. I question my own beliefs about life, and why - or even if - it
is even worth it. Just look at this place - objectively. We NEED a
Second Coming!

Yeah, I know, my views could be skewed here, and (probably) are. I think
that rationally, anyway, but I don't feel that way.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:s1LYc.2904$w%6.1091@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:lhIYc.2663$w%6.1304@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote:> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> Lauri wrote:>>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com>>> actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us?
The>>>>> answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something>>>>> that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise
it>>>>> would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong
emotions>>>>> attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with>>>>> ourselves?>>>>>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics>>>> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with
you>>>> about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at
all.>>>>>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him,>>> it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am>>> guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to>>> question his own beliefs.>>>>>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God>>> that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics.>>>>>> Lauri in WA>>>>>> I like my email spamless>>>> I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And it>> just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at
a>> loss. I'll send ya my prayers!!>>> Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues? (I said serenity, not security above). Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much,
if any, introspection, either. Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and
me - and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd! No biggie... I read the words "I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs." posted by Lauri, and so I asked the question. Sure I do. I question my own beliefs about life, and why - or even if -
it is even worth it. Just look at this place - objectively. We NEED a Second Coming! Yeah, I know, my views could be skewed here, and (probably) are. I
think that rationally, anyway, but I don't feel that way.
Bill, you should practice being less up and down.

I had a second coming last week.

urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:s1LYc.2904$w%6.1091@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:lhIYc.2663$w%6.1304@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> urf wrote:>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:FEuYc.2124$w%6.1393@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>> Lauri wrote:>>>> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:22:31 GMT, "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com>>>> actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote:>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>>>>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>>>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The>>>>>> answer is that it touches or rankles something inside of us,
something>>>>>> that hasn't been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise
it>>>>>> would really be a non issue - there would be no such strong
emotions>>>>>> attached to these particular issues. But can we be honest with>>>>>> ourselves?>>>>>>>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics>>>>> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with
you>>>>> about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at
all.>>>>>>>> It always comes down to this with Bill....if you disagree with him,>>>> it's because you're incapable of being honest with yourself. I am>>>> guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to>>>> question his own beliefs.>>>>>>>> It's scary that he's teaching at the college level. I pray to God>>>> that he's teaching something factual like math, and not ethics.>>>>>>>> Lauri in WA>>>>>>>> I like my email spamless>>>>>> I'm gonna teach you ethics and serenity if it kills me, Lauri. And
it>>> just might. Too bad you won't see this, and will forever remain at
a>>> loss. I'll send ya my prayers!!>>>>> Is "insecurity" one of your personal "hot button" issues?>> (I said serenity, not security above).>> Everybody has a sense of insecurity in some venue. Haven't met an> exception yet. Sure, some say they don't. And some don't do much,
if> any, introspection, either.>> Anyway, this was just about a little spat going on between Lauri and
me -> and it's been going on for a couple of years now, starting back in asd!
No> biggie... I read the words "I am guessing that's because Bill feels too insecure within himself to question his own beliefs." posted by Lauri, and so I asked the question. Sure I do. I question my own beliefs about life, and why - or even if -
it is even worth it. Just look at this place - objectively. We NEED a Second Coming! Yeah, I know, my views could be skewed here, and (probably) are. I
think that rationally, anyway, but I don't feel that way. Bill, you should practice being less up and down. I had a second coming last week.

I was actually up sometime in here? When was that? I've lost sight of
that.

"urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... > I'd like to suggest something here. > > Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer > is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that > hasn't > been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a > non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these > particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better. We are perfect examples of what we are. Does that make any sense to you?

How about, we are all perfectly imperfect.

"urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... > I'd like to suggest something here. > > Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer > is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something that > hasn't > been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would really be a > non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to these > particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better. We are perfect examples of what we are. Does that make any sense to you?

How about, we are all perfectly imperfect.

"Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3754f0b3.0408301421.2437300b@posting.google.c om... "urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om... "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>... > "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... > > I'd like to suggest something here. > > > > Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer > > is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something > > that > > hasn't > > been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would > > really be a > > non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to > > these > > particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves? > > You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics > interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about > "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all. Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet. All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are "touched" as Bill said. We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be better. We are perfect examples of what we are. Does that make any sense to you? How about, we are all perfectly imperfect.

see, I don't like to think that. I'm much more an optimist, and I have more
confidence in myself than that. It seems you subscribe to the school of
thought that everything has a catch, that everything has flaws, that there's
a problem forever lurking. Really - I see a lot of this in you. I honestly
don't think you allow yourself true happiness.

"JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at excite
dot com> wrote in message news:5dHYc.2659$as.691444@twister.nyc.rr.com... That's what i told Bill.

Ummmm, yup.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4bIYc.2654$w%6.1147@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Exactly. And from what I've witnessed in this world, precious few dare to tread in that territory.


Ummmm,....wha?

JWB wrote: "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408301421.2437300b@posting.google.c om... "urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09>... "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408291914.205ba12e@posting.google.c om...> "JWB" <bigtommbtyjb543@servo.com actually, my e-mail is jwb3333 at> excite dot com> wrote in message news:<X1qYc.27035$Ot3.758@twister.nyc.rr.com>...>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:xOpYc.1828$w%6.1068@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>> I'd like to suggest something here.>>>>>> Why is it that certain things said really get to some of us? The answer>>> is that it touches or rankles something inside of us, something>>> that>>> hasn't>>> been fully resolved, in our own psyches. Otherwise it would>>> really be a>>> non issue - there would be no such strong emotions attached to>>> these>>> particular issues. But can we be honest with ourselves?>>>> You're forgetting that some of us (like me) just find many topics>> interesting and like to debate / argue them. Because i argue with you about>> "fat" doesn't mean "fat" is a hidden issue with me. Not at all.>> Your argument against what Bill is saying gives me the impression that> you are perfect. Everything within you is perfect and needs no> improvement. I don't believe that is true of anyone on the planet.> All of us can get better in some area. I hear some of your arguments> and disagreements with what is said in here and sometimes you sound> like a selfish person who believes that whatever you believe is "the> right" way to do it. That in itself shows me areas where you are> "touched" as Bill said.>> We all bring baggage with us and for those that deny that they have> any...well...that says something to me, perhaps not to others. I think that she is perfect. We all are perfect and we can all be
better. We are perfect examples of what we are. Does that make any sense to you? How about, we are all perfectly imperfect. see, I don't like to think that. I'm much more an optimist, and I have
more confidence in myself than that. It seems you subscribe to the school of thought that everything has a catch, that everything has flaws, that
there's a problem forever lurking. Really - I see a lot of this in you. I honestly don't think you allow yourself true happiness.

Caren is right. EVERYTHING (and everybody) DO HAVE FLAWS!!!!

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7dIYc.2656$w%6.631@newsread1.news.pas.earthli nk.net... Caren wrote: whansami@aol.com (WhansaMi) wrote in message news:<20040829195525.27025.00000032@mb-m13.aol.com>... I was thinking about this, and I think I can identify the source of my irritation with you about this, Bill. I hate being told that I should adhere to some standard that doesn't
make sense to me, and I don't personally ascribe to, and then being told
that, because I don't adhere to it, I have some defect. Was Bill's suggestion about you and a particular thread? I took it quite differently than you. I read his post as something that I personally related to in this newsgroup. When my buttons get pushed in some way-when I really react to issues rather than respond to issues, there usually is something about me in it. That was precisely my point.

When Bill?
When was that your point?
Was that when you told us that weighing more than the "federal guidelines"
for our height (obese) was a personal flaw?
Don't make me dig 'em out, they're still on my hard drive.
We can all connect A to B to C.
....and I got's time.
I'm doin' laundry.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ucNYc.3071$8d1.2553@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... WHO is running around telling people they are fat? I don't do that. I don't think many people do, either. (Nice try, though).


"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:PPrYc.1911$w%6.1212@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... YooperBoyka wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:33rYc.1877$w%6.1144@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... They may know it, but choose not to think about it, as much as
possible. And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive. So what
does that indicate to you? It indicates to me that it's none of your f**king business. Why, pray tell, would you feel the need to "point it out to them"??? Hey Yoop, go back to your Turing machine. This is too difficult for you
to grasp. Say hi to Smokey Robinson for me while you're at it.


Nice try, Bill.

In article <S5OYc.3028$w%6.2509@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
Bill in Co. <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote:JWB wrote: "Caren" <caren50@msn.com> wrote in message news:3754f0b3.0408301421.2437300b@posting.google.c om... "urf" <urf@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<0lHYc.4154$hq5.1954@trndny09>...

[snippage, fingers crossed that I got the attributions correct]
> We are perfect examples of what we are.>> Does that make any sense to you?

Yes, though I'll rephrase it some below.
How about, we are all perfectly imperfect. see, I don't like to think that. I'm much more an optimist, and I have more confidence in myself than that. It seems you subscribe to the school of thought that everything has a catch, that everything has flaws, that there's a problem forever lurking. Really - I see a lot of this in you. I honestly don't think you allow yourself true happiness.

Though I'm closer to the 'perfectly imperfect' phrasing myself,
I don't see it as a pessimistic thing, just a bit of realism.
It avoids pessimism on grounds of being perfectly ourselves. We'll
see if I can translate that ok for others:

We're human, so imperfect. That's just a given, same as saying
that we're not all equally tall, or that the sun rises in the east.
It just is; there need not be any moral judgement involved (if it's
being pessimistic, it seems typically to be so because a person is
following up with a moral judgement.)

Being perfectly ourselves is an acceptance also of that reality.
We are (all) our unique selves, wonderful in our own ways. That
I (for example) can't sing very well (an imperfection) doesn't make
me any less perfectly myself, nor mean that I don't deserve to be
happy, etc.

In different vein: If humans are all imperfect, then there's no reason
to let the fact that you're imperfect (too!) prevent you from being
happy, or from enjoying the things you (imperfectly) do.

Yet another phrasing (from Charlie Parker) is: "If something is
worth doing, it's worth doing badly." Hence, since singing is
a good thing, I sing (granted it's in my car, with the windows up).
It's not good singing (though getting better, I think), but it's worth
doing.

Differently: I encouraged my daughter to try a lot of different
sports. Some she didn't like, some she did. Some she wasn't
good at, some she was. They weren't all the same sports -- she
learned my devious lesson that you can indeed enjoy things that
you're not very good at. (It's one I also lived in front of her.)
Caren is right. EVERYTHING (and everybody) DO HAVE FLAWS!!!!

Yes, Bill, they (we) do. But a man's a man for a' that.

--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:S5OYc.3028$w%6.2509@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
Caren is right. EVERYTHING (and everybody) DO HAVE FLAWS!!!!

Of course. My point is, I generally don't dwell on them or (many times) even
acknowledge them. Plus, some of the things others see as "flaws" I see as
plusses. Like you and Caren usually see me as arrogant. I see myself as
confident. In the end, it's my opinion of myself that matters above anyone
else's.

To give you an example, look at you, Bill - in another thread (or maybe it
was this one) you lamented on how there is ageism (and I agree), and how
tough it will be for you to get a job, blah blah blah.... those things would
never enter my mind if I were in your shoes. I'd prefer to tout my
experience, my maturity, my proven track record, etc. You, otoh, tend to
focus on your age and the people who will withhold a job from you. You are
setting yourself up for defeat before you even start.

You could use a bit of JWB-style confidence, actually. I'll get going on my
book.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BlIYc.2743$8d1.2635@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect! In fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will ya?) On second thought, maybe it's LSD? :-) We are perfect examples of what we are. (BS)

Not necessarily. For instance, some people can be perfect examples of an
asshole.

I think you might be confusing urf's "perfect examples of what we are"
illustration with "perfect in comparison with an ideal standard of
goodness". If what somebody is, is a "jerk who lives in rural Georgia in a
rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a whole lot of other
descriptive details to boot", then it would be literally correct to say, as
Urf did, that they are "perfect examples of a jerk who lives in rural
Georgia in a rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a whole
lot of other descriptive details to boot". See what I mean? It is the
difference between "perfect examples" and "perfect examples of what we are".

YooperBoyka wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ucNYc.3071$8d1.2553@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... WHO is running around telling people they are fat? I don't do that.
I don't think many people do, either. (Nice try, though). "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:PPrYc.1911$w%6.1212@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... YooperBoyka wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:33rYc.1877$w%6.1144@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> They may know it, but choose not to think about it, as much as
possible.> And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive. So what
does> that indicate to you? It indicates to me that it's none of your f**king business. Why, pray tell, would you feel the need to "point it out to them"???

I told you already, I don't recall telling somebody that.

Joy wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:BlIYc.2743$8d1.2635@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect! In fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will
ya?) On second thought, maybe it's LSD? :-) We are perfect examples of what we are. (BS) Not necessarily. For instance, some people can be perfect examples of an asshole. I think you might be confusing urf's "perfect examples of what we are" illustration with "perfect in comparison with an ideal standard of goodness". If what somebody is, is a "jerk who lives in rural Georgia in
a rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a whole lot of other descriptive details to boot", then it would be literally correct to say,
as Urf did, that they are "perfect examples of a jerk who lives in rural Georgia in a rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a whole lot of other descriptive details to boot". See what I mean? It is the difference between "perfect examples" and "perfect examples of what we
are".

OK, let's say I'm a serial killer. I'm a perfect example of a serial
killer, then. How trite is this? (very trite)

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sMPYc.3224$8d1.218@newsread2.news.pas.earthli nk.net... YooperBoyka wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ucNYc.3071$8d1.2553@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... WHO is running around telling people they are fat? I don't do that. I don't think many people do, either. (Nice try, though). "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:PPrYc.1911$w%6.1212@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... YooperBoyka wrote:> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message> news:33rYc.1877$w%6.1144@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>> They may know it, but choose not to think about it, as much as possible.>> And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive. So what does>> that indicate to you?>> It indicates to me that it's none of your f**king business.> Why, pray tell, would you feel the need to "point it out to them"??? I told you already, I don't recall telling somebody that.


Didn't you just say this:

And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive.


By reading that, it appears that you have, you know, experience pointing
these things out to people.

Comment?

JWB wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:S5OYc.3028$w%6.2509@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Caren is right. EVERYTHING (and everybody) DO HAVE FLAWS!!!! Of course. My point is, I generally don't dwell on them or (many times)
even acknowledge them. Plus, some of the things others see as "flaws" I see as plusses. Like you and Caren usually see me as arrogant. I see myself as confident. In the end, it's my opinion of myself that matters above anyone else's. To give you an example, look at you, Bill - in another thread (or maybe it was this one) you lamented on how there is ageism (and I agree), and how tough it will be for you to get a job, blah blah blah.... those things
would never enter my mind if I were in your shoes.

You haven't had the life experiences I've had yet, JWB. And you CERTAINLY
know NOTHING about what it's like at 60 - so don't even go there! WHEN
you get there, then you can go there. (It would be like me trying to
really understand pregnancy), or for that matter, getting back into a
teenager's mind. It ain't possible. A sign of maturity is recognizing
that.

"Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uNPYc.3225$8d1.1318@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Joy wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:BlIYc.2743$8d1.2635@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... urf wrote: Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect!
In fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will ya?) On second thought, maybe it's LSD? :-)> We are perfect examples of what we are. (BS) Not necessarily. For instance, some people can be perfect examples of
an asshole. I think you might be confusing urf's "perfect examples of what we are" illustration with "perfect in comparison with an ideal standard of goodness". If what somebody is, is a "jerk who lives in rural Georgia
in a rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a whole lot of
other descriptive details to boot", then it would be literally correct to say, as Urf did, that they are "perfect examples of a jerk who lives in rural Georgia in a rusty mobile home who hates dogs but likes cats with a
whole lot of other descriptive details to boot". See what I mean? It is the difference between "perfect examples" and "perfect examples of what we are". OK, let's say I'm a serial killer. I'm a perfect example of a serial killer, then. How trite is this? (very trite)

Some people really do serve as bad examples.

Also, are you sure trite is the word you were looking for? I thought it
meant hackneyed and overused.

JWB wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:sMPYc.3224$8d1.218@newsread2.news.pas.earthli nk.net... YooperBoyka wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ucNYc.3071$8d1.2553@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>> WHO is running around telling people they are fat? I don't do that.
I> don't think many people do, either. (Nice try, though). "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:PPrYc.1911$w%6.1212@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> YooperBoyka wrote:>> "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message>> news:33rYc.1877$w%6.1144@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...>>>>>> They may know it, but choose not to think about it, as much as
possible.>>> And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive. So what
does>>> that indicate to you?>>>> It indicates to me that it's none of your f**king business.>> Why, pray tell, would you feel the need to "point it out to them"??? I told you already, I don't recall telling somebody that. Didn't you just say this: And if you point it out to them, they get very defensive. By reading that, it appears that you have, you know, experience pointing these things out to people.

As I said, it's nothing that I said directly. It's observed behavior when
you sit down at the table with them and eat together - you can pick up the
cues. (I don't think you have to be psychic).

And some relatives, ex relatives, and friends have been a bit more vocal,
and I've heard what the repercussions were. Or I should say, the fallout.

Joy wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:uNPYc.3225$8d1.1318@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... Joy wrote: "Bill in Co." <surly8ccurmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:BlIYc.2743$8d1.2635@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...> urf wrote:> Hate to disillusion you, but we most certainly are NOT all perfect! In> fact, NONE of us is perfect! (Pass over some of those joints, will
ya?)> On second thought, maybe it's LSD?