I'm Sorry

"Will in New Haven" wrote in message
...


Groucho Marx, although he said "club" instead of "group. I doubt that
he was the first to use that, though. Some jokes and even whole
routines are very old. The famous "Who's on First" skit was old before
Abbot and Costello were born.

--
Will in New Haven

================================================

Really? I didn't know that - thanks for the trivia fact. I guess the human
condition hasn't changed that much over the millennia, so our humor must not
have changed much either.

Hugs,

CatNipped

"Granby" wrote in message
...
"inside a dog it's too dark to read"

I would say something like "not if you read Braille" but that would
be tacky.


That's OK. At the rate we are going right now, someone would be happy
to point out to you that it was tacky.

Kind of cute. I'd phrase it "but I read Braille!"

Jo

"CatNipped" wrote in message
...
"Will in New Haven" wrote in
message
...


Groucho Marx, although he said "club" instead of "group. I doubt
that
he was the first to use that, though. Some jokes and even whole
routines are very old. The famous "Who's on First" skit was old
before
Abbot and Costello were born.

--
Will in New Haven

================================================

Really? I didn't know that - thanks for the trivia fact. I guess
the human condition hasn't changed that much over the millennia, so
our humor must not have changed much either.

Hugs,

CatNipped
Even the stories in most of Shakespeare's work were far from original.
He had a real gift for the turn of a phrase. But many of the stories
are as old as time.

Jo

"CatNipped" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
Cheryl wrote:

End Of Rant.

I have less of a problem with Kyla than I do with people who feel they
have the right to chastise people for anything they write that is goes
against how they happen to view the world and, specifically, this group.
This is an unmoderated forum and nobody has been elected to be the PC
policeman/woman.

It's sad when someone is made to feel ashamed for posting a joke or
expressing an opinion. Personally, I think that if you don't like what
someone writes, unless it is directed towards you, then ignore it. If you
don't like a poster, killfile them. But *PLEASE* don't make it
uncomfortable for people here to express their true beliefs and feelings
for fear of becoming the object of a witch hunt!

Hugs,

CatNipped
Right on the nose Lori
NOW if they listen


Ps sending thoughts to dissipate that hurricane heading towards Texas

Granby wrote:

"Lesley via CatKB.com" u27720@uwe wrote in message

Reminds of one of my favourite Groucho comments: "Outside of a dog
a book is man's best friend- inside a dog it's too dark to read"
"inside a dog it's too dark to read"

I would say something like "not if you read Braille" but that would be
tacky.

Granby, I don't think that's tacky at all. I laughed!

(I've also always gotten a laugh out of the quote.)

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

"Candace" wrote in message
...
On Jul 22, 12:21 am, wrote:
Candace wrote:

Whoa, as an "outsider," who mostly posts on rpchb (which I know many
of you find disgusting, annoying, and offensive but which is actually
just plain boring right now), this thread has a definite old rpchb
feel to it. I have to say that to say what you said in your first
paragraph is pretty harsh and if someone really does have emotional
problems (and I'm not going to judge that--at least not publicly), it
seems pretty cruel to say what you did.

Worse than calling her a drama queen?

And what is so bad about saying someone has emotional problems? If
I said that so-and-so had cancer, or diabetes or some other serious
physical problem, would that be considered harsh? It's only harsh
if you think that emotional problems are an indication of something
bad about the person. I don't blame her for it, or think that she is
less worthy of respect or compassion than anyone else. But I think
that if you read her posts, you can see that she has a lot of mood
swings, strong, painful emotions, and does a lot of impulsive things.
So I'm not pointing anything out that most of us have not already seen.

The point of my post was simply that I don't think Kyla is deliberately
being a drama-queen. I think that she's going through a lot and it
sounds to me like it's pretty overwhelming. Why is saying that an insult
to a person? I'm just asking people to cut her some slack because I
don't see how she's hurting anyone. And if she's not hurting anyone,
then there's no legitimate reason for anyone to object to what she does.

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

Yes, I think it's worse than calling someone a drama queen. "Drama
queen," just by its implication, is meant to be sort of funny. We
call several of my co-workers that to their faces. I've been called
it before. No one gets upset by that. I think even calling someone a
f'ing nutcase is less cruel than what you said. I don't know quite
how to explain it.

When I was in college, many, many years ago, I lived in a coed dorm
and, late at night, several of my friends and acquaintances would play
what we called the "Truth Game." Well, when you're 18 or 19, at least
back then, we were all kind of vulnerable and the rule of the game was
that, if you played and stayed in the room to hear everyone else, you
agreed to truthfully answer any question asked of you. You can
imagine how people that age try to go for the weaknesses in others
sometimes just to get a laugh or have a little fun. People in the
group would be dissolved in tears over what they felt they had to say
and it was kind of awful but not awful enough to stop. And it was the
sort of thing where everyone felt the need/desire to "shrink" everyone
else and, really, what could you know at the age of 18 when you're
taking Psych 101? But the vulnerable, hurt, crying person would take
to heart what the others said. It was only later, when talking about
it to someone older and wiser, that I realized that people can damage
other people by their lack of knowledge. I'd much rather someone call
me a freaking whackjob than seriously discuss, for all the world to
see, why they think I'm mentally ill or emotionally unstable. People
need to save face and people maybe need to invent who they are, to
some extent. "We tell ourselves stories in order to live." (Joan
Didion, a writer who had some massive emotional/mental problems)

I guess you didn't mean it viciously, I'm sure you didn't, but it's
sort of pop psychology or psycho-babble, isn't it? And that can harm
people. Everyone on Usenet forms opinions about people from what they
write and, cripe, I've flamed with the best of them (well, in my
opinion) in some groups but this group has a different bent...the
kinder, gentler newsgroup. I'm surprised sometimes how some of the
people here put themselves so blatantly "out there" for all the world
to see. It just seems cruel to shoot someone down who has done that
when it seems so encouraged here. And, face it, you guys are a little
"cliquey," but it's not a private group, anyone can read it and join
in. There's plenty of stuff about myself I wouldn't post here but a
lot of people here do it.

I realize I haven't explained anything and I'm beginning to bore even
myself. I was just shocked by what you wrote and I was embarrassed
for the person you directed it to. I wouldn't want to see that
written about me after I had opened myself up to so many people. I
would be very hurt and mortified. It's like I don't mind ****ing
people off or being a little bitchy to them but I don't really want to
hurt someone on a personal level. And that seemed hurtful to me.

Candace

***

Well said, Candace!

I would add that telling the world someone has an illness, whether it is
mental or physical, is not the thing to do. A person's health is their
business. If they want to share it, fine. If not, they should be allowed
their privacy.

Joy

On Jul 22, 2:39*pm, "Joy" wrote:
"Candace" wrote in message

...
On Jul 22, 12:21 am, wrote:





Candace wrote:

Whoa, as an "outsider," who mostly posts on rpchb (which I know many
of you find disgusting, annoying, and offensive but which is actually
just plain boring right now), this thread has a definite old rpchb
feel to it. I have to say that to say what you said in your first
paragraph is pretty harsh and if someone really does have emotional
problems (and I'm not going to judge that--at least not publicly), it
seems pretty cruel to say what you did.

Worse than calling her a drama queen?

And what is so bad about saying someone has emotional problems? If
I said that so-and-so had cancer, or diabetes or some other serious
physical problem, would that be considered harsh? It's only harsh
if you think that emotional problems are an indication of something
bad about the person. I don't blame her for it, or think that she is
less worthy of respect or compassion than anyone else. But I think
that if you read her posts, you can see that she has a lot of mood
swings, strong, painful emotions, and does a lot of impulsive things.
So I'm not pointing anything out that most of us have not already seen.

The point of my post was simply that I don't think Kyla is deliberately
being a drama-queen. I think that she's going through a lot and it
sounds to me like it's pretty overwhelming. Why is saying that an insult
to a person? I'm just asking people to cut her some slack because I
don't see how she's hurting anyone. And if she's not hurting anyone,
then there's no legitimate reason for anyone to object to what she does..

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

Yes, I think it's worse than calling someone a drama queen. *"Drama
queen," just by its implication, is meant to be sort of funny. *We
call several of my co-workers that to their faces. *I've been called
it before. *No one gets upset by that. *I think even calling someone a
f'ing nutcase is less cruel than what you said. *I don't know quite
how to explain it.

When I was in college, many, many years ago, I lived in a coed dorm
and, late at night, several of my friends and acquaintances would play
what we called the "Truth Game." *Well, when you're 18 or 19, at least
back then, we were all kind of vulnerable and the rule of the game was
that, if you played and stayed in the room to hear everyone else, you
agreed to truthfully answer any question asked of you. *You can
imagine how people that age try to go for the weaknesses in others
sometimes just to get a laugh or have a little fun. People in the
group would be dissolved in tears over what they felt they had to say
and it was kind of awful but not awful enough to stop. *And it was the
sort of thing where everyone felt the need/desire to "shrink" everyone
else and, really, what could you know at the age of 18 when you're
taking Psych 101? *But the vulnerable, hurt, crying person would take
to heart what the others said. *It was only later, when talking about
it to someone older and wiser, that I realized that people can damage
other people by their lack of knowledge. *I'd much rather someone call
me a freaking whackjob than seriously discuss, for all the world to
see, why they think I'm mentally ill or emotionally unstable. *People
need to save face and people maybe need to invent who they are, to
some extent. *"We tell ourselves stories in order to live." (Joan
Didion, a writer who had some massive emotional/mental problems)

I guess you didn't mean it viciously, I'm sure you didn't, but it's
sort of pop psychology or psycho-babble, isn't it? *And that can harm
people. *Everyone on Usenet forms opinions about people from what they
write and, cripe, I've flamed with the best of them (well, in my
opinion) in some groups but this group has a different bent...the
kinder, gentler newsgroup. *I'm surprised sometimes how some of the
people here put themselves so blatantly *"out there" for all the world
to see. *It just seems cruel to shoot someone down who has done that
when it seems so encouraged here. *And, face it, you guys are a little
"cliquey," but it's not a private group, anyone can read it and join
in. *There's plenty of stuff about myself I wouldn't post here but a
lot of people here do it.

I realize I haven't explained anything and I'm beginning to bore even
myself. *I was just shocked by what you wrote and I was embarrassed
for the person you directed it to. *I wouldn't want to see that
written about me after I had opened myself up to so many people. *I
would be very hurt and mortified. *It's like I don't mind ****ing
people off or being a little bitchy to them but I don't really want to
hurt someone on a personal level. *And that seemed hurtful to me.

Candace

***

Well said, Candace!

I would add that telling the world someone has an illness, whether it is
mental or physical, is not the thing to do. *A person's health is their
business. *If they want to share it, fine. *If not, they should be allowed
their privacy.

Joy-

Frankly, I don't even want to know about my OWN health. Symptoms are
for people less squeamish than I am. I want my friends to be well,
whether they are cats or hoomins or d*gs, or others. I want them to be
happy and functional and get along. Given the way the universe works,
it IS too much to ask but I ask it anyway.

On the other hand, details of symptoms and treatments I can do
without.

--
Will in New Haven

Candace wrote:

Worse than calling her a drama queen?

Yes, I think it's worse than calling someone a drama queen. "Drama
queen," just by its implication, is meant to be sort of funny. We
call several of my co-workers that to their faces. I've been called
it before. No one gets upset by that. I think even calling someone a
f'ing nutcase is less cruel than what you said. I don't know quite
how to explain it.

It might just be that we have different frames of reference about what
is seen as acceptable commentary and what goes over the line. I know
what you mean about "drama queen" being a joke in some circumstances,
but I've also heard it as a real slam against a person, something that
people would say behind each other's back to ridicule them. So I guess
it's just what you're used to.

And it sounds like the truth game you played in college was deliberately
cruel, where people went for the jugular and ridiculed each other's
insecurities and vulnerabilities. I don't think that's what I was doing.

Many people consider "emotional problems" something to be ashamed of,
something one shouldn't mention openly. I don't see it that way. We all
have emotional stuff, some more daunting than others. Why do people feel
fine about saying they have chronic back pain, or heart disease, or
sleep apnea, but not chronic depression? Why can we say we're on
thyroid meds or insulin, but not anti-depressants? (Actually, on this
newsgroup, many people have spoken openly about depression and about
the meds they take for it, so it's not completely true that emotional
stuff is considered too shameful to talk about - here, anyway.)

I guess you didn't mean it viciously, I'm sure you didn't, but it's
sort of pop psychology or psycho-babble, isn't it?

You know, I really didn't say very much actual content about her state
of mind, *why* she does what she does, etc., and that's because I don't
know. Maybe the most specific I got, which you might categorize as
"babble", was saying "she doesn't have good boundaries." However, this
wasn't meant as psychological analysis. I was observing behavior. She
doesn't conform to certain social expectations in her interactions, and
some people have talked about it feeling invasive, or "too forward",
etc. Her behavior also strikes me as impulsive. Again, I don't know
why, and I didn't offer a reason. It's just what I see. Those things
alone wouldn't cause me to conclude that someone has emotional issues,
but when someone talks about crying their eyes out every day because
some people have gotten mad at her, that seems like a lot of emotional
pain to me. Again, it's not analysis. I don't know what the pain is
about or what caused it, I can just see that there *is* a lot of pain.

It sounds like you're saying that even if it's obvious, it's not good
form to state it openly - is that it?

I'm surprised sometimes how some of the
people here put themselves so blatantly "out there" for all the world
to see. It just seems cruel to shoot someone down who has done that
when it seems so encouraged here.

First, many people here use pseudonyms for that very reason. They might
not be quite so forthcoming if they were posting under their real name.

Second, I'd like to be clear that I did not shoot anyone down. It's
not a put-down to observe that someone appears to be having a very
difficult time emotionally. It's only a put-down if you think that
having emotional problems is something to be ashamed of.

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)

wrote in message
...

It sounds like you're saying that even if it's obvious, it's not good
form to state it openly - is that it?

Exactly. It's the same thing as seeing someone in a wheelchair and
commenting on that fact. It is rude, to say the least.

Joy

Joy wrote:

I would add that telling the world someone has an illness, whether it is
mental or physical, is not the thing to do. A person's health is their
business. If they want to share it, fine. If not, they should be allowed
their privacy.

But Joy, I'm not privy to any more information than anyone else. I
wasn't violating any confidences. I was just offering my own opinion
based on what I see, which is pretty much what everyone else sees.

I just think we should all give Kyla a break and not take her actions
to heart, because they seem motivated by a lot of pain and need, and
do not seem to be motivated by maliciousness or even thoughtlessness.

I know that if I were in a lot of pain, and if because of that I behaved
in ways that annoyed other people, I would appreciate someone sticking
up for me and saying, "Hey, Joyce is having a hard time, so could we
all cut her some slack?" This is particularly true if the "hard time"
is not due to a Socially Approved Reason, such dealing with death,
illness, poverty, trauma, etc. Everyone knows to be nice to people who've
just lost a loved one or who was just in a bad car accident or something.
But what if the hard time is caused by internal problems? People are not
quite so understanding or forgiving about that. And I think we should be,
because internal causes of pain are just as legitimate as life circumstances.

Anyway, it's just my observation and my own opinions, so take it for
what it's worth. I don't expect everyone to agree, but opinions are like
a******s, everyone has one.

--
Joyce ^..^

(To email me, remove the X's from my user name.)