If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
Les chiens peuvent aboyer mais la caravane passe. ;-) Doan On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: [color=blue] beccafromlalaland wrote: I'm snipping away portions of text because the forum I use to post only allows 10,000 characters in a single post. The attributions, so we may who is saying what, are badly mangled. I find the free mail program, Thunderbird, does an excellent job of controlling attributions display properly. It will handle, if your IP provides the service, an excellent newsreader as well. I’ll try to sort through your post as best I can, as to who said what when. Bear with me and correct where you see I might have erred. kane Wrote: beccafromlalaland: I was being playfully friendly with you when I asked for your copy...hence the use of the "LOL" I was joking This below is my response. Ordinarily "LOL" is not used playfully. Playful usually consists of smilies. Such as :-) LOL means Laugh Out Loud which is also an acceptable communication of a joking or playful attitude. Sometimes one must read between the lines to catch the meaning. kane Wrote: No, it is more often used derisively. If one is kidding playfully useually a winker smilie is the preferred symbol. 0;- And the problem with written communication, unless people are long time associates and preferably know each other personally, is that no, one should not have to read between the lines. Doing so creates the kind of errors of assumption you made when I asked you if you used the same tactics with your children, as a question. Or, if you insist that we must “understand each other” and you understood me to be asking a question in a accusatory manner, then my comment about stands. You were using LOL derisively. See how badly it works to force the other to read between the lines? If you can't remember and follow a simple dialouge from day to day that's your problem not mine. In a two way conversation if one asks the other to clarify such a reply is extraordinarily rude. I make NO apology for not being able to follow some specific thought of yours if you do not attribute it when you remark later about it. If for nothing else then for accuracy it needs to be seen adjacent to the later commentary about it. No it becomes your problem if you wish me to follow the thread. Please don't assume you are the only person I have conversations with. What is it especially about you that would be so remarkable that I'd remember from day to day? I have a wife I provide that attention to. I don't have a problem remembering who's who and what's what from day to day week to week, but I do have a very good memory which aids in that. Neither do I, beyond the ordinary. I also have a good memory. That does not mean I remember everything, and especially not fine details that I might NOT have given the weight to the other did. Propertly attribute your remarks please. That is NOT and unreasonable request, while yours that I remember whatever detail out of all your postings contents you chose to refer to blindly, is more certainly an unreasonable request. I may be at an unfair advantage given that talent. It would not do you the least good if I remarked on some past comment of mine with poor reference to the content of my prior remark. You do NOT refer to a prior remark clearly enough for me, or anyone, to know what you are referring to. I can remember the plot and characters of nearly every book I've read in recent years, as well as the lines from plays from highschool. One of those weird things that comes in handy for me but can annoy others. Then you are willing to annoy others deliberately? Refusing to accomodate them in such a simple thing is in fact rude. kane Wrote: Having Lengthy bits of conversation floating through posts irritates me, it is redundant and unnecessary....at least for me Then you have a problem with normal Usenet and Web protocols. Snipping the content of a subject then remarking about it is rude. I don't use "Usenet" and 90% of my postings are on forums in which one can easily scroll up to refresh their memory. You are posting to a Usenet newsgroup (Now delivered by Google...or any other newsreader you wish..but still Usenet) and I do NOT have your forums, nor should I be forced to join them to read your prior posts in the thread. Kindly quote the material you are commenting about. Your newsreader, whatever it is, badly screws up the attributions, so that I had to go through and hand correct the various incorrect “” marks. kane Wrote: In fact, below was yet another one. YOUR comments were in double “” when they should have been singles. I have to hand correct them now for any reader to be able to follow. This is not a personal correspondence. We are in a public forum and it’s inconsiderate of the other readers and posters to post incomprehensible material that loses which author is saying what. Perhaps you should do some memory excercises, to aide in your ability to follow along, without a reference to something either you wrote or you read from an earlier post. You are now, since my requests were politely offered, are being harassing and rude. Actually, that was a serious bit of friendly advice. Doing Memory excercises not only improves your short term memory but there is some evidence that it will improve your recall ability in your waning years. And accourding to a researcher friend of mine may even help lessen the severity of memory loss in Dementia patients. You are being deliberately ageist. My memory in fact is far better than most people my age. My request is not out of line, and it is unreasonable for you to ask this of me above to follow YOUR sloppy posting habits. kane Wrote: (again having to snip double attribution marks to singles) Another bit of advice. and yes I am yelling at you in this next portion just so we are clear. Of course. You are rude. I know that. You've demonstrated it before. You've poked Momma bear one too many times, I'm not rude...I'm defensive. Defensive? I have your family here and threaten them? How? My remarks are to YOU, not your children. In fact I’m the one being DEFENSIVE of your children. You are simply defending yourself against what you took as an insult, and may or may not have been. You cannot know unless you ask. kane Wrote: (again you say I am making a statement, but this yelling is YOUR statement. This time I’ll leave the double attributions so you can see it and do something about it, hopefully) NEVER EVER, MENTION MY PARENTING OR THE WAY I CHOOSE TO RAISE MY CHILDREN IN A DEROGOTORY MANNER AGAIN. NOW Kane responds: Sorry. I'll mention it any time I wish. Now who's being rude? I am not being rude. This is a newsgroup titled “alt.parenting.spanking.” There is nothing rude about discussing children, since they are impossible to remove from such a subject. They are the object of the “spanking” in the title. This is about parenting. One parents children. I do not question your parenting ethics...nor do I even mention your children in posts. I would never DREAM of doing something that rude, not even with provocation. You have been repeatedly rude, almost from the start of this ng. You have accused me, for instance, of not answering your questions, only to find that after I had to jostle you famous “memory” that I had indeed answered them ALL, as asked. Even correctly attributing them in my post. kane Wrote: NO I DIDN’T. The forum you post to and through does NOT translate it’s attributions to other formats, such as google, or various newsreaders. The rest of us are standardized...it’s YOUR forum that is not. And I should NOT have to join your forum to discuss these issues with you. This is USENET, not your forum. This is YOU, incorrectly attributed by YOUR forum service. Get it fixed, or use a proper newsreader. Plenty of free ones to not make this jumbled mess. This is YOU: THIS IS THE SECOND TIME YOU HAVE SAID SOMTHING IN A NASTY TONE TO ME ABOUT WHAT YOU PRESSUME ABOUT MY FAMILY. So what? You have seen fit to be rude and nasty to me, have you not? Yes I have said rude things to you, but NEVER in a million years would I poke you about the way you raise your children. You can’t even keep straight whether or not I’ve answered you. You insult my memory, when your own, that you claim is so special failed you miserably over the claim I hadn’t replied to your questions. You were rude then, you are being so NOW. That hardly equates with any justification to lecture me as you are now doing. You can’t even apply the newsgroup title properly. Children are in the subject field of this ng by default. I WILL ask questions about and discuss children here, yours, mine, or anyone’s I choose. Your “orders” are refused. Again. Here’s some of you polite discourse directed at me from prior posts, after you totally screwed up by NOT properly attributing and thus losing YOUR own way and falsely accusing me of failure to respond: “,,,I didn't quote Kane in my prior post because it would have been more confusing trying to filter through the bs...” “ ... I assume you are intelligiant enough to figure out which portionsof your extensive butt cover....erm clarification of your prior posts I am responding to...but I've been wrong before. ...“ You WERE wrong. And yet YOU are accusing me, where I was trying to direct your attention to correcting your error by the use of direct quotes of my posts, with an insulting comment that I was just trying to “cover” my butt. “Until then get off your hobby horse, and learn to play with the grown ups who actually discuss CURRENT research, CURRENT parenting challenges, and CURRENT solutions to their parenting challenges. b~ “ I did not start the insulting in this exchange with you in this thread. You have pushed the boundary of civility constantly. You began with me by calling my response that exposed Doan for the harassing vicious little provacatuer he obviously is, “childish.” You haven’t let up since. I don’t pretend to be nice, or demand it of others, you phony. Before you correct ME, clean your own house. Or we can continue on our merry way insulting each other – and not going indignant about it, phony. kane Wrote: YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MY FAMILY LIFE, Nonsense. Where’s that famous memory of yours. You wrote that you have two high needs children. That's right, and that is why I did NOT presume about your family. I asked IF you behaved toward your children as you do me. Do you not understand the interogatory sentence? What kind of question is that? An ordinary question. You are an adult, not a child. That’s correct. I treat adults in the way adults should be treated, and I treat children in age appropriate fashion. How would I know that unless I asked you? Do you and realize that you confirmed my feeling that your original question was in fact meant as an insult...or are you going to choose to ignore it? Ignore what? Your “feeling?” No, why should I. Given that I had a “feeling” your comment about getting my copy of the Embry study from me ended in “LOL.” Get it? kane Wrote: A question is a question, not an accusation. I could have been speaking rhetorically, but hte only way to tell for sure is to ask me. Not assume, as you just did. One can ask a question in an accusatory fashion. That is what you did. That question asked in the context it was in was inflamatory. Sure one can. And no, you do not KNOW that it was meant to be “inflamatory”[sic]. And stop pretending YOU have not been deliberately insulting since first posting here and continuously ever since. There are just too many examples. “And you are still arguing about it...one word comes to mine It starts with a C ends with a Y and has RAZ in the middle. “ kane Wrote: Ask me if I meant to be nasty about your child rearing methods. Go ahead. I don't need to you already answered it. No I didn’t. Kane said: I asked IF you behaved toward your children as you do me. That statment answers that question...YES In my opinion you meant to be nasty about my child rearing methods. You cannot logically draw from my question that I meant to be nasty. You can infer it, but nothing logically proves it. It’s your feeling, not a fact. That statement, with the “IF” in it does NOT prove that I meantto be nasty. kane Wrote: AND YET YOU FEEL IT'S ALRIGHT TO FORM ASUMPTIONS ABOUT ME, AND HOW I TREAT MY CHILDREN. A question is not an assumption. the context in which you chose to ask that question, turned it from a question to an assumption. if you had not assumed that I treat my children poorly you would not have asked that question. No such logical inference can be made. I could have asked you that question for a number of reasons, none of which was “nasty.” You made a rude accusatory comment toward me. You have a record of doing so throughout this thread and this ng when you posted to it in response to me, and on an occasion toward me when responding to Doan. I want to know if you treat your children the same way. Is my question provoking the very response that I suspected it might, but hoped it wouldn’t? kane Wrote: What I said was, and thank you for this time not snipping my actually comments from the flow: " Do you treat your children the same way? Or were you just being playfully friendly with me?" Do you see the question mark? Twice? How could you miss it and presume I am making an assumption. It's YOU that made the assumption and accused me. Of course I saw the question marks. Again the context in which you asked the question lead me to the assumption that you were presuming that I treat my children poorly. Nope. That was YOUR reaction. I was concerned you MIGHT BE. And even IF I made such an assumption rather than ACCUSE you, I asked for clarification from you. kane Wrote: How do you know that I feel alright to make assumptions about you, without asking me? How do you feel about asking questions that force someone to assume that you assumed something? No one forces you to assume anything. YOU assume it. You did not even come back with a question to find out IF I meant to be nasty. You simply accused me of it. And further more what gave you the idea that it was OK to ask a question that inflammatory? What is NOT “OK” about asking that question? Unless invited one should never speak of anothers children...and from what I can recall I never gave you any inkling of permission to make comment or question after my children. You joined a newsgroup called, “alt.parenting.spanking.” We aren’t discussing fetish spanking here. We are discussing parents, spanking, and by obvious inference, the children that would or would not be spanked. It would be like me asking after your sex life. No it wouldn’t. One's family life is intensly personal, and unless asked to make comment or question or given express permission to do so it's best to leave well enough alone. No it is not “intensely personal.” I do not preform sexually in public, but I do and have parented in public. I don’t discuss my sex life publically, but I do my parenting. As for “unless asked; Not if you join a newsgroup that is expressly about the subject of children. This one is. That means you have given permission to discuss family life in the context of child rearing. kane Wrote: I asked YOU a question. YOU made a bald faced accusation. See the difference? You asked a question that forced me to become defensive. kane Wrote: “Forced” you? You are FORCED to answer my question? To become “defensive?” You have no other choice, or choices? How about you simply ask me my meaning, first? Then you don’t have to become defensive until you are sure I am trying to be “nasty.” IT IS A VERY RUDE THING TO DO. To ask a question about whether or not you are rude to your children as you appear to be behaving toward me? To assume that I would treat my children as I treat an adult, yes. Full circle, and I will remind you of that with the same response as befo A question is not an assumption or an accusation. It’s a question. Because it is YOU get to answer it as you see fit. You chose to come back and accuse me of being nasty. Which of us is being presumptuous? To bring my children and my family life into a conflict between you and I? YES. beccafromlalaland, the name of this newsgroup is “alt.parenting.spanking.” It’s google (Usenet) description is “Discussion about punishment methods for children.” You wish to only discuss this issue by proxie, and other people and their children? kane Wrote: IT IS AN INSULT, BUT OF COURSE YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT BECAUSE YOU INTEND YOUR "QUESTION" AS AN INSULT. Yelling makes it true, does it? How about you ASK me if I meant to be nasty and insulting? How can you be sure of that unless you ask? Are you not making an assumption about my meaning? With out any real cause to do so? I have answered this already. The context that you asked that question was such that it forced me to assume you were being insulting. The context is this newsgroup, which subject is “children” “parenting” and “Discussion about punishment methods for children.” It is NOT automatically an insult to ask, if someone has been posting a long string of insults if they treat their children the same way, but I certainly can see, given your long string of insults why you might take it as one. kane Wrote: I'll ask it again, in fact, no accusation intended but simply a question related to how rude and attacking and accusatory you are being toward me. Are you doing the same with your children? This has been sufficiently addressed. NO, I am not rude attacking or accusatory with my children. I am relieved to hear that. I had both intent to be nasty and insult you, and some concern that you might carry this attitude into parenting situations. See how easy that was when you stop presuming and answered the question? You then didn’t even have to ask me, I told you freely, as I would, had you ASKED. Yes, and you deserved my implication, beccafromlalaland. And you’ll get more if you keep up the stupid insults. Trust me. kane Wrote: And, beccafromlalaland, your response is clearly indicative that you DO know you are being rude and abusive in your language toward me. Or you wouldn't take offense at my specific question asking if you are being so abusive toward your children. I was/am bieng rude to you...as you have been rude to me. But I must stop, while you continue? Interesting take on debate. Perhaps we both need to go back to primary school and relearn the "golden rule" And any parent being asked if they are abusive toward their children would take offense, and defend themselves. Yup, but they also have choices not to, to consider the poster might have more than one reason for asking, and intended no harm to your children. Do you think I intended to harm your children? If not (and it’s obvious I did not) what’s all your ranting about? It’s about knowing, I believe, that you got caught up with on your constant stream of insults and your accusations. Your deliberate presumptions that I’m lying, and Doan is telling the truth, when in fact any objective reading of his past posts on this subject from it’s beginning, that I supplied you by link would have shown you he only recently found the abstract. Have you actually tried to get it and found it if it is actually still available, as he posted from a screen readout? I’ve seen inaccuracies in those before. AAA, for instance, according to him, told him that they have always had it available. They told me differently, but he insists I’m lying. You swallow what he says, and question what I say. Why is that, beccafromlalaland? Because you are a sucker? Or his style of slimy innuendo and clever lies appeals more? Or are you easily patronized? kane Wrote: Frankly, I think you are a fake. That you likely DO spank your children or will. Your need to be in control is excessive. Rather like Doan, though he's more clever and weasel like. That is your solution to everything isn't it. Hyperbole. No, it is not my “solution to everything.” I have many solutions to many things, and this one in particular does not follow if you bothered to look at posts of mine to other “nonspankers.” My disagreement with them, and you aren’t the only one, indicates I do not blindly accept them just because they are “non-spankers.” Doan, on the other hand has accepted and agreed with and defended PEOPLE THAT COME HERE DEFENDING BEATING OF CHILDREN, not just spanking. That someone who doesn't agree with you on every point must be a fake, a puppet. Nonsense. I don’t even agree with LaVonne on ‘every point.” I hold a different view than her’s on “punishment,” I believe, and I’ve said so publically. She hasn’t though done anything that would suggest she a fake or a puppet. YOU have. So have others, that claimed to be non-spankers, one going so far as to claim I “drove” them back to spanking I was so rude. I fear for the children of someone that shallow and weak...except of course I know damn well it was a ringer that had no intention of becoming a “non-spanker” but was here to harass. I am a recovering "spank-a-holic" I try very hard on a daily basis to use Grace based discipline, and Gentle Parenting. And you're right, I need to be in control...it sucks, I hate that about myself. I was not allowed control over anything not even my own body for 17yrs. Everything was in turmoil constantly so forgive me if I crave control. I worked with teens in mental health for many years. The first thing I told them after the three day observation period to determine baseline behaviors was this: “Yes, it’s not your fault you were beaten, raped, neglected, abused – or whatever – but it IS your fault if you impose your reactions to it on ANYONE BUT THE PERP.” In other words, no excuses. Nor will I accept them. You yelled at my once in this newsgroup, “grow up.” And I had perfectly good reason tobe debating a question of honesty with Doan, so your admonition was totally uncalled for. I think my saying to you now, “Grow up” is right on target. I’m much more invested in you being a non-spanker than winning any argument with you. So when you pull this power trip bull**** on me naturally I’m concerned and ASK if you do this to your kids. If I were anything less than honest here you would not be comparing me to doan...I would get my own category, but because you can not make heads or tails of me because I don't fit your mold of what a Non-spanker thinks and feels then I must be a puppet. Your honesty is what you think I compare you to Doan about? R R R R...no, b~ , it’s not your honesty. It’s your tendency to NOT be honest that did that. The accusations you made that turned out upon examination to be false (thanks for the apology, by the way, I may have missed it or forgotten to acknowledge earlier, but reviewed it today) were what inspired my comparison. Along with the kinds of attacks on the Embry Experiment report. You weren’t simply questioning. You even made up things along the way. And your refusal to get it, but continue to attack it based on partial knowledge from my comments were typical of his bs. He spent a year without it, faking it all the while, picking up bits and pieces from citations likely, and pretending he had it, even miss quoting. And if he had it he’d have known about this, which he did not....he was relying on the partial information in an ABSTRACT which of course is partial by natu There were charts of all 33 of the participants in the study. I knew perfectly well the status of them, but he didn’t know that the 20 existed. Until I spoke of it recently. IF he had known he’d have said. 13 observed, and 20 non-observed. He constantly walks into these little places I leave for him to go. And they prove he’s a liar. But you can’t, or won’t let yourself see it. You’d rather fuss oversome exchange between us and blow that up to become indignant over. I have to ask you why you’d prefer to be patronized by him, than challenged by me? kane Wrote: Chill, lady. If I ask a question, it's a question. You can answer it, no matter what meaning you project into it. Ask. Find out. Stop assuming. Find a better context to ask questions. That’s absurd. That simply reserves to you the right to pick what next to get indignant about. I might ask you about you husband, or ask if you used objects to spank, or if you don’t like carnations. I have NO WAY of knowing ahead of time what you already are sensitive about, or just might pick out of thin are to use to duck a tough challenge of mine. You want polite? Go to a moderated group. These correspondences are a feed to and from Usenet and they are NOT in a moderated group here. kane Wrote: I think you are a puppet here at Doan's behest, doing as he directs you. A three dollar bill. Show me were you have ever posted before that you were opposed to spanking. My other online name is coopnwhitsmommy http://tinyurl.com/db977 I Googled coopnwhitsmommy+spank* for you. There is a specific post at gentlechristianmothers.com entitled How to become a gentle mother that you may find interesting. It was the one that started me down the path to Non-spanking. I take it you are referring to this one: “ How to become a Gentle Mother « on: June 29, 2005, 09:54:07 PM » I am a Spanker...I HATE IT. I was raised in a spanking household. I was spanked for every little infraction and I promised I wouldn't do that to my children...but here I am [[icon reference removed-“bang head”]] I think my big problem is I have no tools to deal with misbehavior. HELP ME “ June of last year. You’re new. How you doing with learning alternatives? Now I’m even more surprised at your response to my offerings about the Embry study. You’ve got just 6 months since you started, July last year, through January of this one. Yet you aren’t interested in a program that describes precisely how to teach a child to reduce unwanted behavior? Or have you learned others in that time? And Why I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting...it wasn't long ago I was one of them. I believe it is in the public domain. If you can access the board without logging in you can see my post count is well over 600 and I would gladly let you read any of my other posts if you so wish,just to prove that I am not a fake. Well, it’s easy enough to find. You apparently aren’t faking about your desire not to spank. Nevertheless I find your style here, and your defense of a proven slimy little liar incongruent to that end. Allowing him to divert you from such important work as Embry’s isn’t suggestive of a real interest in learning the methods of non-spanking parenting, in my mind. You mistake my sometimes harsh approach....I think of it as demanding you THINK FOR YOURSELF... for something other than it is. Just a demand. And yes, I DO know how those that have taken up non-spanking generally respond. If you search the archives you can find them here. Rare as they are in this ng. You have NOT been responding like any non-spankers I’ve run into before. They are usually eager to explore. They don’t consider a few minutes reading to be an imposition in something so vital as learning new ways of parenting that you ask for in your post to the above cited forum. I am doing what Doan LIES about doing. Asking you to think for yourself. And I don’t lie about being “neutral,” as he does. I’m honestly and plainly against spanking and other deliberate attempts to hurt and humiliate children to teach them. I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. “I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..” That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don’t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a “spanker,” then you abused them. It’s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. That is the courageous admission you need to make if you truly do not want to revert to spanking and humiliation. Actually DO think for yourself, instead of look for the Doan’s of the world to “excuse you.” He’s a slimy lying creep that has haunted this ng from early on. Snide, nasty, lying and conniving, as he was taught to be. He can’t read a sentence that he can’t twist and misconstrue. Go ahead, read his history of posts. And when you say, “it’s not about you” (Doan and Kane) you are verymuch mistaken. It is most certaily about the debate between the Doans and the Kanes. The spanking advocates and apologists, and those of us that disagree with pain and humiliation being moral or useful as a way to raise responsible citizens. Wallow in Doan's slime, or answer hard challenges. It's up to you. -- beccafromlalaland Kane |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
Doan wrote:
Les chiens peuvent aboyer mais la caravane passe. ;-) Well, I'm sure you wish I'd leave, but no, not going to happen soon. By the way, I don't know much french, but I recognize various old sayings and such in many languages. I'm kind of into things foreign. Take Zodiacs. Don't believe in them but they do provide a laugh once in awhile. "Success goes to your head and you become arrogant and mean to those around you. No-one would hesitate slipping a banana peel under your feet - a pirouette and you're gone! " "monkey Personality Of all the animals of the Vietnamese zodiac, your are the most intelligent. Your pranks, finesse and craftiness get you out of the most delicate situations without a scratch. Particularly at ease in public and at parties with beautiful people, you are charming, surprising and entertaining with the faces you make, and your irresistible, funny stories. You can also laugh at yourself with astonishing lucidity. Your character is that of a "happy pessimist" and you adapt easily to any context - and not without a certain amount of cunning. Confronted by a muscle-bound adversary, you use servility and flattery to lead him by the nose. Your skillfulness in the art of manipulation has no equal and you easily play the actor to soothe those around you. Crocodile tears and shameless lies are part of your daily bread. If you are caught, you have the good grace to recognize the error of your ways and can make others forgive you. You jump from branch to branch, from problem to problem, with an incredible degree of fickleness which borders on childishness. It is difficult to keep you in one place; at the least sign of boredom, you swing to another tree. Your fault : You want to be first at any price... Work Ambitious, inventive and gifted, you work on all fronts with incredible speed. You constantly need new projects to undertake and daring challenges. You are resourceful in business, skillful in negotiations and insatiable in all that you do. Your good humor easily motivates the troops. While success comes to you easily, it quickly becomes difficult for you to manage. Success goes to your head and you become arrogant and mean to those around you. No-one would hesitate slipping a banana peel under your feet - a pirouette and you're gone! Money You love money because it is an exterior sign of your value. A Monkey never works "for nothing" - all the more since you spend your money to create a comfortable, luxurious life for your family. You love to make them happy by giving them sumptuous gifts and often buy expensive, impractical presents on the spur of the moment. You don't hoard money and claim that you will never be lacking in anything. You are lucid and lucky. Love Passion exalts your imagination so you dislike the routine of everyday life. You idealize your partner but can't bear that they are only human with faults and manias like everyone else. But you can't live alone. You are an eternal adolescent, in love with the stars and with a taste for seduction. You are gifted in seducing and ravaging hearts with no sense of guilt. Being funny, imaginative and mischievous are your favorite arms. To seduce you, a person must tell you that you are the best, surprise you every day, laugh at your jokes and never yawn with boredom. " Me, I was was born under the sign of the Pig. (And that has nothing to do with western views of a quite noble animal in Asian belief systems). Quite a nice definition of me actally. And that above is not mine. Wonder why I gave you the name, Monkeyboy? Except for a few points, this is just about right for me: "PIG Personality Honest and upright, you advance in life like a tranquil bulldozer. You hate lies, hypocrites and artifice. If you do something bad you feel terrible and guilty about it for a long time after the fact. For your family and friends you are generous and helpful. Sometimes you are even a little bit too generous because you don't know how to say no: people don't hesitate taking advantage of your good nature. Underneath your exterior hides a ferocious determination for your inner codes to be respected. Nobody can impose their will on you unless you decide to let them. You make your decisions and take responsibility for your failures in private. You don't blame others for your mistakes. When there is a conflict, you take cover until the storm has passed. You may be criticized by others for preferring to run rather than fight but raised voices, fights and power games revile you. If your back is against the wall with no escape possible you become a daunting and violent adversary. Behind your apparent good nature you hide your hypersensitivity and soul of a gambler. You love to experience all the pleasures that life has to offer to a maximum. Your sensuality and your taste for pleasure make you an expert in love - especially physical love. Your only risk is falling into lustful ways! Work You love to work and want to succeed in your professional life but not at any price. You refuse to compete, to be opportunistic and to make deals under the table. You want to be recognized for your talent and competence, and won't resort to political intrigue. So you are not always a diplomat and prefer leaving a business meeting by slamming the door rather than approve an unsound project. You will gladly spend more time on your personal rather than professional life, unless you are your own boss. In this case, you won't count the hours and will see your projects through to the end. Money The Pig symbolizes material wealth in Vietnam so you rarely lack money. Your love of pleasure contributes to turning you into a big spender but you are above all, very generous. You love to have friends for dinner, give your friends presents and take your family on sumptuous trips. A cultivated aesthete, you love to invest in beautiful objects and dream of having a library as wonderful as the one of ancient Alexandria. Sometimes you just can't pass up a work of art or rare book. Still, money doesn't seem to matter to you. Even if you were a billionaire, you would probably continue to drive a beetle! Love You are in love with love in all its forms : tender caresses, romantic gestures and sensuous meals. Although you are faithful in love, you are very possessive and jealous. To be happy, you need a curious cocktail of solitary moments coupled with moments of tenderness and wild passion. You love it when your partner shows their continuing passion and infinite love for you in public. To seduce you, your partner must say yes to everything, especially to the pleasures in life which they will be able to fully partake of in your company! " What's your sign, Drony? R R R R .... now actually have a conversation in french, why don'tcha. Should be easy for you. Doan Kane [color=blue] On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: I'm snipping away portions of text because the forum I use to post only allows 10,000 characters in a single post. The attributions, so we may who is saying what, are badly mangled. I find the free mail program, Thunderbird, does an excellent job of controlling attributions display properly. It will handle, if your IP provides the service, an excellent newsreader as well. I�ll try to sort through your post as best I can, as to who said what when. Bear with me and correct where you see I might have erred. kane Wrote: beccafromlalaland: I was being playfully friendly with you when I asked for your copy...hence the use of the "LOL" I was joking This below is my response. Ordinarily "LOL" is not used playfully. Playful usually consists of smilies. Such as :-) LOL means Laugh Out Loud which is also an acceptable communication of a joking or playful attitude. Sometimes one must read between the lines to catch the meaning. kane Wrote: No, it is more often used derisively. If one is kidding playfully useually a winker smilie is the preferred symbol. 0;- And the problem with written communication, unless people are long time associates and preferably know each other personally, is that no, one should not have to read between the lines. Doing so creates the kind of errors of assumption you made when I asked you if you used the same tactics with your children, as a question. Or, if you insist that we must �understand each other� and you understood me to be asking a question in a accusatory manner, then my comment about stands. You were using LOL derisively. See how badly it works to force the other to read between the lines? If you can't remember and follow a simple dialouge from day to day that's your problem not mine. In a two way conversation if one asks the other to clarify such a reply is extraordinarily rude. I make NO apology for not being able to follow some specific thought of yours if you do not attribute it when you remark later about it. If for nothing else then for accuracy it needs to be seen adjacent to the later commentary about it. No it becomes your problem if you wish me to follow the thread. Please don't assume you are the only person I have conversations with. What is it especially about you that would be so remarkable that I'd remember from day to day? I have a wife I provide that attention to. I don't have a problem remembering who's who and what's what from day to day week to week, but I do have a very good memory which aids in that. Neither do I, beyond the ordinary. I also have a good memory. That does not mean I remember everything, and especially not fine details that I might NOT have given the weight to the other did. Propertly attribute your remarks please. That is NOT and unreasonable request, while yours that I remember whatever detail out of all your postings contents you chose to refer to blindly, is more certainly an unreasonable request. I may be at an unfair advantage given that talent. It would not do you the least good if I remarked on some past comment of mine with poor reference to the content of my prior remark. You do NOT refer to a prior remark clearly enough for me, or anyone, to know what you are referring to. I can remember the plot and characters of nearly every book I've read in recent years, as well as the lines from plays from highschool. One of those weird things that comes in handy for me but can annoy others. Then you are willing to annoy others deliberately? Refusing to accomodate them in such a simple thing is in fact rude. kane Wrote: Having Lengthy bits of conversation floating through posts irritates me, it is redundant and unnecessary....at least for me Then you have a problem with normal Usenet and Web protocols. Snipping the content of a subject then remarking about it is rude. I don't use "Usenet" and 90% of my postings are on forums in which one can easily scroll up to refresh their memory. You are posting to a Usenet newsgroup (Now delivered by Google...or any other newsreader you wish..but still Usenet) and I do NOT have your forums, nor should I be forced to join them to read your prior posts in the thread. Kindly quote the material you are commenting about. Your newsreader, whatever it is, badly screws up the attributions, so that I had to go through and hand correct the various incorrect �� marks. kane Wrote: In fact, below was yet another one. YOUR comments were in double �� when they should have been singles. I have to hand correct them now for any reader to be able to follow. This is not a personal correspondence. We are in a public forum and it�s inconsiderate of the other readers and posters to post incomprehensible material that loses which author is saying what. Perhaps you should do some memory excercises, to aide in your ability to follow along, without a reference to something either you wrote or you read from an earlier post. You are now, since my requests were politely offered, are being harassing and rude. Actually, that was a serious bit of friendly advice. Doing Memory excercises not only improves your short term memory but there is some evidence that it will improve your recall ability in your waning years. And accourding to a researcher friend of mine may even help lessen the severity of memory loss in Dementia patients. You are being deliberately ageist. My memory in fact is far better than most people my age. My request is not out of line, and it is unreasonable for you to ask this of me above to follow YOUR sloppy posting habits. kane Wrote: (again having to snip double attribution marks to singles) Another bit of advice. and yes I am yelling at you in this next portion just so we are clear. Of course. You are rude. I know that. You've demonstrated it before. You've poked Momma bear one too many times, I'm not rude...I'm defensive. Defensive? I have your family here and threaten them? How? My remarks are to YOU, not your children. In fact I�m the one being DEFENSIVE of your children. You are simply defending yourself against what you took as an insult, and may or may not have been. You cannot know unless you ask. kane Wrote: (again you say I am making a statement, but this yelling is YOUR statement. This time I�ll leave the double attributions so you can see it and do something about it, hopefully) NEVER EVER, MENTION MY PARENTING OR THE WAY I CHOOSE TO RAISE MY CHILDREN IN A DEROGOTORY MANNER AGAIN. NOW Kane responds: Sorry. I'll mention it any time I wish. Now who's being rude? I am not being rude. This is a newsgroup titled �alt.parenting.spanking.� There is nothing rude about discussing children, since they are impossible to remove from such a subject. They are the object of the �spanking� in the title. This is about parenting. One parents children. I do not question your parenting ethics...nor do I even mention your children in posts. I would never DREAM of doing something that rude, not even with provocation. You have been repeatedly rude, almost from the start of this ng. You have accused me, for instance, of not answering your questions, only to find that after I had to jostle you famous �memory� that I had indeed answered them ALL, as asked. Even correctly attributing them in my post. kane Wrote: NO I DIDN�T. The forum you post to and through does NOT translate it�s attributions to other formats, such as google, or various newsreaders. The rest of us are standardized...it�s YOUR forum that is not. And I should NOT have to join your forum to discuss these issues with you. This is USENET, not your forum. This is YOU, incorrectly attributed by YOUR forum service. Get it fixed, or use a proper newsreader. Plenty of free ones to not make this jumbled mess. This is YOU: THIS IS THE SECOND TIME YOU HAVE SAID SOMTHING IN A NASTY TONE TO ME ABOUT WHAT YOU PRESSUME ABOUT MY FAMILY. So what? You have seen fit to be rude and nasty to me, have you not? Yes I have said rude things to you, but NEVER in a million years would I poke you about the way you raise your children. You can�t even keep straight whether or not I�ve answered you. You insult my memory, when your own, that you claim is so special failed you miserably over the claim I hadn�t replied to your questions. You were rude then, you are being so NOW. That hardly equates with any justification to lecture me as you are now doing. You can�t even apply the newsgroup title properly. Children are in the subject field of this ng by default. I WILL ask questions about and discuss children here, yours, mine, or anyone�s I choose. Your �orders� are refused. Again. Here�s some of you polite discourse directed at me from prior posts, after you totally screwed up by NOT properly attributing and thus losing YOUR own way and falsely accusing me of failure to respond: �,,,I didn't quote Kane in my prior post because it would have been more confusing trying to filter through the bs...� � ... I assume you are intelligiant enough to figure out which portions of your extensive butt cover....erm clarification of your prior posts I am responding to...but I've been wrong before. ...� You WERE wrong. And yet YOU are accusing me, where I was trying to direct your attention to correcting your error by the use of direct quotes of my posts, with an insulting comment that I was just trying to �cover� my butt. �Until then get off your hobby horse, and learn to play with the grown ups who actually discuss CURRENT research, CURRENT parenting challenges, and CURRENT solutions to their parenting challenges. b~ � I did not start the insulting in this exchange with you in this thread. You have pushed the boundary of civility constantly. You began with me by calling my response that exposed Doan for the harassing vicious little provacatuer he obviously is, �childish.� You haven�t let up since. I don�t pretend to be nice, or demand it of others, you phony. Before you correct ME, clean your own house. Or we can continue on our merry way insulting each other � and not going indignant about it, phony. kane Wrote: YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MY FAMILY LIFE, Nonsense. Where�s that famous memory of yours. You wrote that you have two high needs children. That's right, and that is why I did NOT presume about your family. I asked IF you behaved toward your children as you do me. Do you not understand the interogatory sentence? What kind of question is that? An ordinary question. You are an adult, not a child. That�s correct. I treat adults in the way adults should be treated, and I treat children in age appropriate fashion. How would I know that unless I asked you? Do you and realize that you confirmed my feeling that your original question was in fact meant as an insult...or are you going to choose to ignore it? Ignore what? Your �feeling?� No, why should I. Given that I had a �feeling� your comment about getting my copy of the Embry study from me ended in �LOL.� Get it? kane Wrote: A question is a question, not an accusation. I could have been speaking rhetorically, but hte only way to tell for sure is to ask me. Not assume, as you just did. One can ask a question in an accusatory fashion. That is what you did. That question asked in the context it was in was inflamatory. Sure one can. And no, you do not KNOW that it was meant to be �inflamatory�[sic]. And stop pretending YOU have not been deliberately insulting since first posting here and continuously ever since. There are just too many examples. �And you are still arguing about it...one word comes to mine It starts with a C ends with a Y and has RAZ in the middle. � kane Wrote: Ask me if I meant to be nasty about your child rearing methods. Go ahead. I don't need to you already answered it. No I didn�t. Kane said: I asked IF you behaved toward your children as you do me. That statment answers that question...YES In my opinion you meant to be nasty about my child rearing methods. You cannot logically draw from my question that I meant to be nasty. You can infer it, but nothing logically proves it. It�s your feeling, not a fact. That statement, with the �IF� in it does NOT prove that I meant to be nasty. kane Wrote: AND YET YOU FEEL IT'S ALRIGHT TO FORM ASUMPTIONS ABOUT ME, AND HOW I TREAT MY CHILDREN. A question is not an assumption. the context in which you chose to ask that question, turned it from a question to an assumption. if you had not assumed that I treat my children poorly you would not have asked that question. No such logical inference can be made. I could have asked you that question for a number of reasons, none of which was �nasty.� You made a rude accusatory comment toward me. You have a record of doing so throughout this thread and this ng when you posted to it in response to me, and on an occasion toward me when responding to Doan. I want to know if you treat your children the same way. Is my question provoking the very response that I suspected it might, but hoped it wouldn�t? kane Wrote: What I said was, and thank you for this time not snipping my actually comments from the flow: " Do you treat your children the same way? Or were you just being playfully friendly with me?" Do you see the question mark? Twice? How could you miss it and presume I am making an assumption. It's YOU that made the assumption and accused me. Of course I saw the question marks. Again the context in which you asked the question lead me to the assumption that you were presuming that I treat my children poorly. Nope. That was YOUR reaction. I was concerned you MIGHT BE. And even IF I made such an assumption rather than ACCUSE you, I asked for clarification from you. kane Wrote: How do you know that I feel alright to make assumptions about you, without asking me? How do you feel about asking questions that force someone to assume that you assumed something? No one forces you to assume anything. YOU assume it. You did not even come back with a question to find out IF I meant to be nasty. You simply accused me of it. And further more what gave you the idea that it was OK to ask a question that inflammatory? What is NOT �OK� about asking that question? Unless invited one should never speak of anothers children...and from what I can recall I never gave you any inkling of permission to make comment or question after my children. You joined a newsgroup called, �alt.parenting.spanking.� We aren�t discussing fetish spanking here. We are discussing parents, spanking, and by obvious inference, the children that would or would not be spanked. It would be like me asking after your sex life. No it wouldn�t. One's family life is intensly personal, and unless asked to make comment or question or given express permission to do so it's best to leave well enough alone. No it is not �intensely personal.� I do not preform sexually in public, but I do and have parented in public. I don�t discuss my sex life publically, but I do my parenting. As for �unless asked; Not if you join a newsgroup that is expressly about the subject of children. This one is. That means you have given permission to discuss family life in the context of child rearing. kane Wrote: I asked YOU a question. YOU made a bald faced accusation. See the difference? You asked a question that forced me to become defensive. kane Wrote: �Forced� you? You are FORCED to answer my question? To become �defensive?� You have no other choice, or choices? How about you simply ask me my meaning, first? Then you don�t have to become defensive until you are sure I am trying to be �nasty.� IT IS A VERY RUDE THING TO DO. To ask a question about whether or not you are rude to your children as you appear to be behaving toward me? To assume that I would treat my children as I treat an adult, yes. Full circle, and I will remind you of that with the same response as befo A question is not an assumption or an accusation. It�s a question. Because it is YOU get to answer it as you see fit. You chose to come back and accuse me of being nasty. Which of us is being presumptuous? To bring my children and my family life into a conflict between you and I? YES. beccafromlalaland, the name of this newsgroup is �alt.parenting.spanking.� It�s google (Usenet) description is �Discussion about punishment methods for children.� You wish to only discuss this issue by proxie, and other people and their children? kane Wrote: IT IS AN INSULT, BUT OF COURSE YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT BECAUSE YOU INTEND YOUR "QUESTION" AS AN INSULT. Yelling makes it true, does it? How about you ASK me if I meant to be nasty and insulting? How can you be sure of that unless you ask? Are you not making an assumption about my meaning? With out any real cause to do so? I have answered this already. The context that you asked that question was such that it forced me to assume you were being insulting. The context is this newsgroup, which subject is �children� �parenting� and �Discussion about punishment methods for children.� It is NOT automatically an insult to ask, if someone has been posting a long string of insults if they treat their children the same way, but I certainly can see, given your long string of insults why you might take it as one. kane Wrote: I'll ask it again, in fact, no accusation intended but simply a question related to how rude and attacking and accusatory you are being toward me. Are you doing the same with your children? This has been sufficiently addressed. NO, I am not rude attacking or accusatory with my children. I am relieved to hear that. I had both intent to be nasty and insult you, and some concern that you might carry this attitude into parenting situations. See how easy that was when you stop presuming and answered the question? You then didn�t even have to ask me, I told you freely, as I would, had you ASKED. Yes, and you deserved my implication, beccafromlalaland. And you�ll get more if you keep up the stupid insults. Trust me. kane Wrote: And, beccafromlalaland, your response is clearly indicative that you DO know you are being rude and abusive in your language toward me. Or you wouldn't take offense at my specific question asking if you are being so abusive toward your children. I was/am bieng rude to you...as you have been rude to me. But I must stop, while you continue? Interesting take on debate. Perhaps we both need to go back to primary school and relearn the "golden rule" And any parent being asked if they are abusive toward their children would take offense, and defend themselves. Yup, but they also have choices not to, to consider the poster might have more than one reason for asking, and intended no harm to your children. Do you think I intended to harm your children? If not (and it�s obvious I did not) what�s all your ranting about? It�s about knowing, I believe, that you got caught up with on your constant stream of insults and your accusations. Your deliberate presumptions that I�m lying, and Doan is telling the truth, when in fact any objective reading of his past posts on this subject from it�s beginning, that I supplied you by link would have shown you he only recently found the abstract. Have you actually tried to get it and found it if it is actually still available, as he posted from a screen readout? I�ve seen inaccuracies in those before. AAA, for instance, according to him, told him that they have always had it available. They told me differently, but he insists I�m lying. You swallow what he says, and question what I say. Why is that, beccafromlalaland? Because you are a sucker? Or his style of slimy innuendo and clever lies appeals more? Or are you easily patronized? kane Wrote: Frankly, I think you are a fake. That you likely DO spank your children or will. Your need to be in control is excessive. Rather like Doan, though he's more clever and weasel like. That is your solution to everything isn't it. Hyperbole. No, it is not my �solution to everything.� I have many solutions to many things, and this one in particular does not follow if you bothered to look at posts of mine to other �nonspankers.� My disagreement with them, and you aren�t the only one, indicates I do not blindly accept them just because they are �non-spankers.� Doan, on the other hand has accepted and agreed with and defended PEOPLE THAT COME HERE DEFENDING BEATING OF CHILDREN, not just spanking. That someone who doesn't agree with you on every point must be a fake, a puppet. Nonsense. I don�t even agree with LaVonne on �every point.� I hold a different view than her�s on �punishment,� I believe, and I�ve said so publically. She hasn�t though done anything that would suggest she a fake or a puppet. YOU have. So have others, that claimed to be non-spankers, one going so far as to claim I �drove� them back to spanking I was so rude. I fear for the children of someone that shallow and weak...except of course I know damn well it was a ringer that had no intention of becoming a �non-spanker� but was here to harass. I am a recovering "spank-a-holic" I try very hard on a daily basis to use Grace based discipline, and Gentle Parenting. And you're right, I need to be in control...it sucks, I hate that about myself. I was not allowed control over anything not even my own body for 17yrs. Everything was in turmoil constantly so forgive me if I crave control. I worked with teens in mental health for many years. The first thing I told them after the three day observation period to determine baseline behaviors was this: �Yes, it�s not your fault you were beaten, raped, neglected, abused � or whatever � but it IS your fault if you impose your reactions to it on ANYONE BUT THE PERP.� In other words, no excuses. Nor will I accept them. You yelled at my once in this newsgroup, �grow up.� And I had perfectly good reason to be debating a question of honesty with Doan, so your admonition was totally uncalled for. I think my saying to you now, �Grow up� is right on target. I�m much more invested in you being a non-spanker than winning any argument with you. So when you pull this power trip bull**** on me naturally I�m concerned and ASK if you do this to your kids. If I were anything less than honest here you would not be comparing me to doan...I would get my own category, but because you can not make heads or tails of me because I don't fit your mold of what a Non-spanker thinks and feels then I must be a puppet. Your honesty is what you think I compare you to Doan about? R R R R...no, b~ , it�s not your honesty. It�s your tendency to NOT be honest that did that. The accusations you made that turned out upon examination to be false (thanks for the apology, by the way, I may have missed it or forgotten to acknowledge earlier, but reviewed it today) were what inspired my comparison. Along with the kinds of attacks on the Embry Experiment report. You weren�t simply questioning. You even made up things along the way. And your refusal to get it, but continue to attack it based on partial knowledge from my comments were typical of his bs. He spent a year without it, faking it all the while, picking up bits and pieces from citations likely, and pretending he had it, even miss quoting. And if he had it he�d have known about this, which he did not....he was relying on the partial information in an ABSTRACT which of course is partial by natu There were charts of all 33 of the participants in the study. I knew perfectly well the status of them, but he didn�t know that the 20 existed. Until I spoke of it recently. IF he had known he�d have said. 13 observed, and 20 non-observed. He constantly walks into these little places I leave for him to go. And they prove he�s a liar. But you can�t, or won�t let yourself see it. You�d rather fuss over some exchange between us and blow that up to become indignant over. I have to ask you why you�d prefer to be patronized by him, than challenged by me? kane Wrote: Chill, lady. If I ask a question, it's a question. You can answer it, no matter what meaning you project into it. Ask. Find out. Stop assuming. Find a better context to ask questions. That�s absurd. That simply reserves to you the right to pick what next to get indignant about. I might ask you about you husband, or ask if you used objects to spank, or if you don�t like carnations. I have NO WAY of knowing ahead of time what you already are sensitive about, or just might pick out of thin are to use to duck a tough challenge of mine. You want polite? Go to a moderated group. These correspondences are a feed to and from Usenet and they are NOT in a moderated group here. kane Wrote: I think you are a puppet here at Doan's behest, doing as he directs you. A three dollar bill. Show me were you have ever posted before that you were opposed to spanking. My other online name is coopnwhitsmommy http://tinyurl.com/db977 I Googled coopnwhitsmommy+spank* for you. There is a specific post at gentlechristianmothers.com entitled How to become a gentle mother that you may find interesting. It was the one that started me down the path to Non-spanking. I take it you are referring to this one: � How to become a Gentle Mother � on: June 29, 2005, 09:54:07 PM � I am a Spanker...I HATE IT. I was raised in a spanking household. I was spanked for every little infraction and I promised I wouldn't do that to my children...but here I am [[icon reference removed-�bang head�]] I think my big problem is I have no tools to deal with misbehavior. HELP ME � June of last year. You�re new. How you doing with learning alternatives? Now I�m even more surprised at your response to my offerings about the Embry study. You�ve got just 6 months since you started, July last year, through January of this one. Yet you aren�t interested in a program that describes precisely how to teach a child to reduce unwanted behavior? Or have you learned others in that time? And Why I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting...it wasn't long ago I was one of them. I believe it is in the public domain. If you can access the board without logging in you can see my post count is well over 600 and I would gladly let you read any of my other posts if you so wish,just to prove that I am not a fake. Well, it�s easy enough to find. You apparently aren�t faking about your desire not to spank. Nevertheless I find your style here, and your defense of a proven slimy little liar incongruent to that end. Allowing him to divert you from such important work as Embry�s isn�t suggestive of a real interest in learning the methods of non-spanking parenting, in my mind. You mistake my sometimes harsh approach....I think of it as demanding you THINK FOR YOURSELF... for something other than it is. Just a demand. And yes, I DO know how those that have taken up non-spanking generally respond. If you search the archives you can find them here. Rare as they are in this ng. You have NOT been responding like any non-spankers I�ve run into before. They are usually eager to explore. They don�t consider a few minutes reading to be an imposition in something so vital as learning new ways of parenting that you ask for in your post to the above cited forum. I am doing what Doan LIES about doing. Asking you to think for yourself. And I don�t lie about being �neutral,� as he does. I�m honestly and plainly against spanking and other deliberate attempts to hurt and humiliate children to teach them. I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. �I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..� That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don�t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a �spanker,� then you abused them. It�s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. That is the courageous admission you need to make if you truly do not want to revert to spanking and humiliation. Actually DO think for yourself, instead of look for the Doan�s of the world to �excuse you.� He�s a slimy lying creep that has haunted this ng from early on. Snide, nasty, lying and conniving, as he was taught to be. He can�t read a sentence that he can�t twist and misconstrue. Go ahead, read his history of posts. And when you say, �it�s not about you� (Doan and Kane) you are very much mistaken. It is most certaily about the debate between the Doans and the Kanes. The spanking advocates and apologists, and those of us that disagree with pain and humiliation being moral or useful as a way to raise responsible citizens. Wallow in Doan's slime, or answer hard challenges. It's up to you. -- beccafromlalaland Kane -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
a partial reply
Quote:
Maya Angelou Said, "You did then what you knew how to do and when you knew better... you did better!" There is no sense in beating myself up over what I did, calling myself an abuser would only bring me more pain and guilt than I already feel. Instead I choose to Know better, and Do better. The Ladies at GCM have been immensly helpful to me in stopping the hitting, they are my lifeline right now. There are days when I can barely cope with the stress of it all, perhaps that is why I lash out here, I'm feeling stressed angry vulnerable, and You are an easy target because I know you will return comment with as much venom as I sent it, therefore giving me excuse to be rude and mean again. Not the healthiest way to deal with my emotions...but effective until you come back with something like what you said above and hit the nail on the head, reducing me to a pile of snot and tears...thanks ;-\
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
beccafromlalaland wrote:
a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. “I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..” That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don’t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a “spanker,” then you abused them. It’s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. Maya Angelou Said, "You did then what you knew how to do and when you knew better... you did better!" There isn't a word in it that suggests you have to make excuses for yourself. Ms Angelou gave a day-long seminar at my college many years back. Or I should say, we gave a daylong seminar for her. Most interesting women. You know of course how abused she was, and the tragedy that struck her dumb for part of her childhood, right? We talked with her in seminar about it before she wrote about it as I recall. There is no sense in beating myself up over what I did, calling myself an abuser would only bring me more pain and guilt than I already feel. Really? Why not do it, have the pain, and be done with it, instead of try to dodge it? You abused. It's not the end of the world. Everyone has mistakes they make in life. What comes next is equally or sometimes more important. You appear to not be indulging youself in doing to your children what was done to you. What more can you ask of yourself than that? Don't you understand the importance of that simple fact? You have gone someplace your abusers could not go. And not even our little friend Doan here can go. Or at least so far. Instead I choose to Know better, and Do better. Seems like that to me. Of course this is a very limited medium so I have to guess a lot from just your few words, in comparison to the life you experience outside this place. The Ladies at GCM have been immensly helpful to me in stopping the hitting, they are my lifeline right now. There are days when I can barely cope with the stress of it all, perhaps that is why I lash out here, I'm feeling stressed angry vulnerable, and You are an easy target because I know you will return comment with as much venom as I sent it, therefore giving me excuse to be rude and mean again. Happy to be of service. And I'm not being facitious. I mean it. Not the healthiest way to deal with my emotions... Who says? Might it not be exactly where you want to be at this moment? You are moving forward. Doan is where he was a decade ago. Still hiding. but effective until you come back with something like what you said above and hit the nail on the head, reducing me to a pile of snot and tears...thanks ;-\ You have to be kidding me. You expected to come here to be comforted? You were abused. It was not and is not your fault you were. What you do now is yours and yours alone, to do about that abuse. You can perpetuate it on others, or you can end it with you. So, if this is not the "healthiest way to deal with" your "emotions" then why do it? I have to ask you: what are you doing here? "Hitting the nail on the head," as you say, may be what you are looking for. Possibly you are here seeking something a support group usually cannot give. They usually offer "shelter," but rarely the hard and uncompromising truth that seems to be part of healing and overcoming a problem. They have their place in your schema. And why would you feel guilt and pain if you are doing what you best know how to do? One of the most powerful and effective means of moving through a challenge in one's life is not to hide from any unpleasantness connected to it. Abusers aren't evil horrible weak people, unless they refuse to face up to it and work to change. You appear to be doing the "work." Using me as our scapegoat for YOUR guilty feelings is non-productive. It keeps you from facing what you did, and moving on. And I have no trouble with you being rude and mean to me. As you've said in an earlier post, I'm an adult. I disagree with your assessment about this not being "the healthiest way to deal with" your "emotions," though. Why not consider this part of the process. Right along with your support group? If you aren't ready for this yet, then so be it. But ... and I say this with regard for your feelings ... Stop whining. You know you were abusive. It's not new or unusual and it IS a product of your own life experience. That's the toughest part for folks sometimes. If you admit you have been abusive, then you have to face that you were abused. Doan can't do it. He's weak. I sometimes think it's far more insidious for those that were less abused. YOU can see you were, and know sooner that it was real and you didn't deserve it. He, and those like him that were "spanked with love," are trapped. And he has the added handicap of being so intelligent. None can better construct excuses and rationales so well as the more intelligent. You've already moved decades past him in getting a handle on this problem. He probably looks strong to you, but in fact he's in denial and practicing it by being here all these many years, running the same self deluding numbers, over and over again. It's darned hard word to maintain such a high and thick facade. I pity him. He doesn't question himself like you are doing. He doesn't allow himself to face the pain. This is his "support group" for his maintainence of his self delusion that he's alright and his parents were alright. Neither is true. By battling me and others he props up his beliefs that protect him from ever facing that childhood pain. He denies there was any. YOU are alright. Because you are fighting. He's given up. And was made a coward by his parents. Bright, intelligent, and using it all to maintain his protective facade. You may have to leave, as a step in your work, but you'll be back here, or somewhere similar, as you take further steps to grow where he cannot. He can't heal, because he'd have to admit to the abuse he suffered at his parent's hands. YOU can, because of a sad, but important advantage. My guess from a few things you've said is that you were seriously abused. One thing victims of more extreme abuse have that those with the more subtle and less accessible and identifiable abuses of "safe spanking," is that YOU have little to NO doubts about what happened to you. In a way I feel far more sadness and pity, if that's the right word, for him than for you. You have the advantage. And apparently more strength. He was tricked into believing his abuse was "right." You know better. You are using your capacities and strengths to face it. He's using his to avoid it and seal himself off from it. "It" being the betrayal of the pain causing parent. If that were not so what would he be doing here for all these years? And still no change? Becca, I can't predict which way you'll go as far as this ng is concerned, but obviously you are moving in the direction best for you and your children. Feel free to contact me privately any time you like. Don't let yourself be taken in by those you are leaving behind. For all his slick smarminess and patronizing stroking of you my guess is your instincts won't let you down. Not if you suffered abuse as a child. Such folks have a built in **** detector that kicks in....just like yours did when you 'got mad' at me for hitting the nail on the head. You just identified what you were looking for, I believe and can smell the stink of the patronizers. You know perfectly well that's what you were looking for. Someone not committed to providing "safety" like a support group. Looks like you found what you wanted. And your kids are that much safer for your courage in coming to this much tougher place to be. Best wishes. Kane -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. “I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..” That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don’t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a “spanker,” then you abused them. It’s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. So you admit that you ABUSED your kid when hit him/her, Kane? Or are you hiding from it! What a hypocrit! ;-) Doan |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
Doan wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. �I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..� That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don�t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a �spanker,� then you abused them. It�s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. So you admit that you ABUSED your kid when hit him/her, Kane? Or are you hiding from it! What a hypocrit! ;-) Tell you what, drony, why don't you POST the content, fully, of my comments on that. Then and only then will people start to figure out you been taking Anti-Truth Meds for years. 0:- Doan -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. �I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..� That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don�t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a �spanker,� then you abused them. It�s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. So you admit that you ABUSED your kid when hit him/her, Kane? Or are you hiding from it! What a hypocrit! ;-) Tell you what, drony, why don't you POST the content, fully, of my comments on that. Then and only then will people start to figure out you been taking Anti-Truth Meds for years. Now you really don't want me to do that, ignoranus kane0! Otherwise, you will have to start saying it's a "mistake" not a lie again. ;-) Doan |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
Doan wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: Doan wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. ?I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..? That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don?t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a ?spanker,? then you abused them. It?s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. So you admit that you ABUSED your kid when hit him/her, Kane? Or are you hiding from it! What a hypocrit! ;-) Tell you what, drony, why don't you POST the content, fully, of my comments on that. Then and only then will people start to figure out you been taking Anti-Truth Meds for years. Now you really don't want me to do that, ignoranus kane0! Otherwise, you will have to start saying it's a "mistake" not a lie again. ;-) What's a "mistake?" Doan Kane |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
On 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: Doan wrote: On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: a partial reply 0:- Wrote: I disagree, by the way with your definition about abuse and spanking, and the intent of parents. ?I don't feel spankers are abusive, that they are misguided in their parenting..? That reads, if you go on, as an excuse for yourself. You don?t want, apparently, to think of yourself as having abused your children by spanking them. If you hit them to cause them pain, which you did if you were a ?spanker,? then you abused them. It?s not complicated, and it does not allow for excuses. You did it. Admit. Decide not to do it. And move on. You are absolutly correct. I don't want to think that I abused my son, I did the only thing I knew how to do at the time....that was to spank. Yep. But you are now facing what you know is the truth. That's hard, and courageous. Nothing like Doan's decade long hiding from it. So you admit that you ABUSED your kid when hit him/her, Kane? Or are you hiding from it! What a hypocrit! ;-) Tell you what, drony, why don't you POST the content, fully, of my comments on that. Then and only then will people start to figure out you been taking Anti-Truth Meds for years. Now you really don't want me to do that, ignoranus kane0! Otherwise, you will have to start saying it's a "mistake" not a lie again. ;-) What's a "mistake?" If you have to ask, you CAN't afford it! ;-) Doan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | October 29th 04 05:23 AM |
The regret mothers now feel ("Why are these parents not shocked over the pain?"): | Pointed Elbow | Pregnancy | 1 | October 9th 04 02:06 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | September 29th 04 05:17 AM |
Parent Stress Index another idiotic indicator list | Greg Hanson | General | 11 | March 22nd 04 12:40 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |