I may not have been posting here much, but I've been a little more active at a few of my haunts.
I am completely in awe and smitten with Chelsea Girl who writes Pretty Dumb Things. I read through her thread on her days as a stripper in New York. I started reading the rest of her blog from the beginning. She has an incredible vocabulary and knows how to use it. The writers that truly impress me, and she's one, are those whose description not only accurately conveys a vivid picture, it does so in a completely new way that gets right to the heart. I don't really like the title of her blog, the only negative thing I could say about it. I adore her sincerity, but the title seems sardonic and self-deprecating...maybe I'm not getting it. I'll post comments there, but mostly consider myself a sycophant, the not-crazy kind.
My friend Sean manages to post several times a day, sometimes his own stuff, many times other stuff floating around the web. Cute youtube kitties, and hilarious quotes from the uber-fundie Christian boards. For some reason his girlfriend has taken a serious dislike to Rosie O'Donnell and I got into it with her, and then with Sean here. Rosie's getting a lot of press lately for her view on The View.
For the record, it is my belief Rosie's getting that negative press because she's effective in getting her progressive anti-war views said. Her "feuds" in actuality were nothing more than her doing her job, expressing her view on The View in a respectful and sometimes comedic way. She's incredibly generous, usually hides how much so, kind, and loving. She actually was able to say some Senator should step forward and impeach Bush. That America needs to show the world, and have it in the history books, that we as Americans were not okay with the way he's managed his presidency. I guess that particular clip isn't making the rounds in YouTube or on ET.
I continue to find Tom Paine a good read, honest and exploratory. His wife has now joined the reading list. Good conversations happen there. Too often I think Tom experiences me as a gadfly, he's often quoting me as having a problem with him or his lovely wife C. Sometimes I think the way he expresses things puts more of a defined boundary on things than he intends. I am glad he appreciates the dialog. I stretch myself on understanding love and relationships there.
Finally, I no longer haunt the Yahoo group spiritualpolyamory. Sadly, the moderator went banishment-happy, and I've been banned. I responded, and was accused of being passive-aggressive for saying "nutcase" in this missive:
You've lost me on this one. You made a somewhat extreme statement, and M made a somewhat extreme statement in response. People have various skill levels as well as cultural differences in addressing disagreements. do you really want one kind of culture in this group?
Usually in open forums like this it's possible to speak the truth, iron out the wrinkles, and learn better ways to deal with differences. Now M has learned exile, and D may wonder if you're a nutcase. There'll be those who read extreme hostility in M's challenge, and agree with your action, and those who wonder, where'd that come from, the language wasn't heated at all to them. So we all learned we must speak a certain language if we are to be included or we could be excluded. Is that how we're going to make the world a more peaceful place?
Chris responded, prompting me to check if I was still a member of the group. Nope. Banished.
My moderator choices aren't determined by what feels "comfortable" to everyone. It's impossible to please everyone.
It's not about matching extreme statements. Her statement was attacking and equating my comment with racial generalizations.
I don't perceive it as my responsibility to make the world a more peaceful place because I can't control what others are acting out. But I do see it as my responsibility to set energetic boundaries.
Monica and Dawn created their experiences, and are not victims.
Yes, if people want to be included in this group they have to use respectful languaging.
I perceive your comment about "nutcase" as passive aggressive
and so I say goodbye to you as well.
This isn't going to be a place where I absorb the negative energy of others.
To backtrack, here's what M said that got her bumped. For the record, I thought this was rather innocuous:
I challenge this statement and wonder how a rational person can state that poly people can handle intense concepts more than non-poly people? That is like saying Mexicans can handle spicy food better cause they are from Mexico. Being poly does not automatically make a group of folk more anything. Poly is an
intensely personal thing and folks within the community run the gamut of personality types... just like in the non-poly world. We are not better.
I've heard since this swift culling that other dissenters have been banned, and at least two people let me know how they responded, one choosing to leave the group. Sadly, we all liked being there because of the combination of spirituality and polyamory. Good conversations were had. I'd always had a feeling Chris had a bit of the narcissist about him, but I let it be, figuring he was a writer and that's par for the course. I've told people his book on polyamory was concisely written and a good introduction. He has some odd ideas, see unification dot com. Not that we don't all have some odd ideas. But now, even if he wanted us back, I would be reluctant. Who knows, perhaps he is trying to cull all who would not be sycophants.