From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
Subject: Re: Response to Ed (was RE: SO search)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:55:05 GMT

Teresa Kline (aatresa@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov) wrote:

: It is my guess that, since my name was quite prominently displayed in this 
: message, Ed was trying to draw me out.  Well, I'm here.  And I have a 

Nope, not at all.  Your name was drawn merely as an example.  Anyone would've
done as an example.  Tell you what ... replace "Teresa" with "Person A".  Now
re-read the message.  Does it seem less personal now?  Good!  That is *exactly*
how it was meant - not a personal attack against you, not a snide remark, not
a personal flame, but JUST AS AN EXAMPLE.  IS THAT CLEAR, TERESA?  I hope so.

: >How can you give anyone else something you do not first yourself posess?
: >It's true that you can only love another to the extent that you love
: >yourself.  If others do not love and respect you, it is because they do not
:             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >love and respect themselves - they cannot give what they do not have.  
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: 
: This is patently false when given as an absolute, as you have done here.  
: It could also be because "they" feel them *unworthy* of love and respect.  

Then it seems that, by definition, if one feels unworthy of love and respect,
then there is lacking love for oneself, is it not?

: For example, I do not love *or* respect Charles Manson, G. Gordon Liddy, or 
: any number of other people.  On the more personal level, I do not love *or* 
: respect my perps.  I *do* love and respect myself, at least to a greater 
: extent than I used to.  And even if I come to love and respect myself fully, 
: with no reservations, there will *still* be people that I do not love *or* 
: respect.

No one asked you to love or respect *anyone*.  In my readings, I have, from time
to time, come across psychological reports that talk about perps.  In the ones
that I have seen, the lack of self-love is, in the author's professional
opinion, a motivating factor in the abuse.

: >Being loved by another has as much to do with the other person's self love 
: >as it has to do with who you are.
: 
: To say that this is an absolute is poppycock.  It *might* have something to 
: do with it in *some* instances.  Not always. 

Even though this is another's words, I still stand by it.  I disagree with your
"poppycock" allegation.  But I was talking to someone else - the reply was not
addressed to you.  Of course, you are always free to comment on anything I post,
either by followup or by email.

: >Besides, "whatever you think I am, or want me to be, I am."  Others can only
: >see you through the filtration of their own experience.  Teresa may think I
: >am an ass****, but that's because she can only see me in relation with what
: >she has been through, and what she feels for herself.  
: 
: Ed, please do not presume that you know me *or* what I think.  You know 
: neither.  You do not have my experience (not being a survivor yourself), 

But I *do* know you, and, to somedegree, how and why you think as you do.
You forget that we have had a personal history, and we had been friends in
the past.  Besides, your name was just used here as an example, as I mentioned
before.

: and have no conception of what I think or feel.  Even if you *were* a 
: survivor, your presumption of knowledge would still be false.  My 
: experience does not match any other survivor's.  

Who told you I wasn't a survivor?  You and I have had many long-distance
phone conversations about both my abuse and your abuse.

: If you are *really* interested in knowing what I think, I'll be happy to tell 

I'm always interested in what you have to say, Teresa.  You are a very bright
and intelligent, logically-minded engineer.  I value your opinions.

: you.  I think you place yourself too far above us with your pronouncements on 
: asar, telling us how recovery *should* be done, and YOU ARE NOT A SURVIVOR.  

Again, how can you make such absolute statements when you *know* that they are
false?

: At least, not as far as you've told us.  I find it difficult to 
: understand why it is that you believe you know what we should think, feel, 
: and do.  And, when someone questions what you say, you go on the attack 
: instead of trying to explain further.  In other words, it *appears* as if you 
: feel that you know everything there is to know and have no need to explain 
: yourself to others.  Since we are survivors and you are not, it would seem 
: that perhaps we know more than you about survivors' issues, and that you 
: might learn more by *listening* to us.  IMHO.  

You make the distinction between *us* and *you*.  Curious - why do you do this?
Do you see yourself so separate from me?  I hardly know *everything* there is to
know - I am just passing along what I have learned, and what works for me.
Perhaps I have not made that very clear in my posts.  I shall endeavour to do
so in my future posts.  I have *never*, to my knowledge, told *anyone* here
what to do, say, think, or feel.

: >Stephen, on the other hand, may see me as a loving person, but (again) that's 
: >because he sees me in relation to what *he's* been through.
: 
: Could be.  Why don't you ask him?

Well, like I said before, his name, too, was just used as an EXAMPLE.  But why
did you take the post so personally, seeing as (1) it was NOT addressed to you,
and (2) it was pretty clear that it was an example?
--
Ed Carp			erc@apple.com, erc@saturn.upl.com	801/538-0177

"There is nothing to seek and nothing to find.  You're already enlightened, and
all the words in the world won't give you what you already have.  The wise
seeker, therefore, is concerned with one thing only: to become aware of what
he already is, of the True Self within."  -- Zen maxim
-- 
Ed Carp			erc@apple.com, erc@saturn.upl.com	801/538-0177

"There is nothing to seek and nothing to find.  You're already enlightened, and
all the words in the world won't give you what you already have.  The wise