brainfixed

what is the quote reference here?

the premise from the beginning of this discussion was that the good times were used to keep people around. not one person has said they would have stayed if the good times had not been going on. in fact every person has said exactly what i put out the premise to be and that is that they absolutely did stay because of the good times and the good people. doing away with the blaming words like "culpable" and "taking on sins" my original premise has stood the test of this thread and that is that the abusive system used the good times to keep itself fed.

so part of what is going on here is something of a word game? i can do word games! i think i did one with myopic by applying it a little oddly as the only way i have of perceiving people here. does that count? and i think maybe it was just a wee bit of talking the poor cops to tears. probably being "blonde and sassy" didn't hurt anything either.

note of clarification here, i am not recently out of the way but i left when i was 18 and i am much older than that now. my apologies if i haven't made that perfectly clear. i am recently participating here but i have been reading here for about a year or so.

so perhaps it was easier for me to get out when i had the chance? i was of the age to be a "rebellious teenager" and i had spent most of my life waiting for the chance to run far far away and start something new so it was easy for me to cut my ties at the time, and that desire to run far far away started before being forced into the way, so maybe it wasn't just easier for me because i lacked any real ties to the way but also because my parents were people i had already wanted to get away from? this is something for me to think about.

i admit that it is but myopic is the only view i have of you or anybody else here and it's the only view you have of me so what're girls supposed to do? also i was writing while you and others were posting so i hadn't seen your latest post to rascal and once i had i began to get a less blurry vision of you. i have felt like you have been attacking me ever since you started doing things like taking things i said from one discussion out of context and putting them into other discussions and directly misquoting me and using those misquotes out of their context and taking things i say with no ill towards anybody and calling them "backhanded" and other things like that, and so i have also felt defensive when reading your writings. i have learned a whole lot about how i feel and perceive things about the way since i made my first post on this discussion and other discussions. for starters i learned how black and white my thinking about it all has been all these years and i have backed off of that quite a bit but i'm not going to be good at not doing it until i practice more and the only place i have to practice is here because i don't associate with anybody in my real life that has a clue of what being in the way was like. my professional support people can and do gently guide me when i use black and white thinking with them but this whole way experience has been mostly untouched because it's like a reserved little corner of my mind with a big DANGER DO NOT PROCEED sign on it all. real human beings have mixed thoughts and feelings and opinons on many things in their lives and in one situation may state something one way and in another situation state something that would be perceived as completely opposite of what they had said before. it's not underhanded but it's just human.

rascal you are absolutely correct about my intentions when writing what jesus said. if you believe that while jesus was hanging on the cross he spoke with such understanding and love for those who were crucifying him then it is a given that jesus knew what he was talking about and perceived that good people with good intentions can get involved in some very bad stuff without knowing what they're doing. can you accept the forgiveness and be at peace? waysider great summation of things! bolshevik i get what you're saying. t-bone i always appreciate your posts and they cause me to think more deeply about things than sometimes i want to think. i do have to say that my way experience was in just one category for me because i was a child forced to participate and as soon as i had a choice i took it and ran like hell far far away and started what i consider to be my real life. i had no opportunity to make good friends because once we all started telling what was happening we were kept separate. i was the proverbial "black sheep" of my family because i would not accept what was being taught and forced upon me as "godly" so i don't have good family ties now, and i made sure i had no "inconvenient" children! it took me many years to stop seeking out the only thing i knew as a "real" man and keep myself out of abusive relationships and i have no man at all right now and really don't want a man in my life for a long time. as for friends right now i have people i know that i do things with, but other than that i am my own best friend and my own best company. i have professionals to turn to in times of crisis and they all agree that there will come a point in my life when i will find myself with good friends and maybe even a good relationship, but i'm not holding my breath but am instead enjoying the freedom and healing of being good to me. geisha do you recognize that you are doing to my words what was taught in pfal to do to the words of the bible? and do you recognize that your fierce refusal to accept people at face value is a telling characteristic of what was taught how to treat people supposedly somehow "less than" in the way? can you and i agree to disagree and leave it at that?

culpable is usually a word used in legal circles and is usually used for the purpose of finding guilt in a criminal matter or fiduciary responsibility in a civil matter. according to the the free dictionary the definition of culpable is culpable adj. sufficiently responsible for criminal acts or negligence to be at fault and liable for the conduct. Sometimes culpability rests on whether the person realized the wrongful nature of his/her actions and thus should take the blame. i don't remember anybody participating in this discussion trying to make anybody who had not done the actual abuse culpable, but maybe i missed something. if by me saying that i think anybody involved in the way for more than a few months abused somebody somehow because abuse was institutionalized in the way means to anyone that i hold anybody but those who actually abused me or ignored the abuse culpable then everything else i've been saying is being ignored because i have gone to great lengths to repeatedly state otherwise. if by rascal feeling a sense of responsibility is in anybody's mind equal to her feeling culpable then i feel that something is not being understood either in what culpability is or in what rascal said or in what rascal feels or maybe i didn't comprehend her correctly. getting an acknowledgement from her of what it was costing others to be in the way has had a healing effect on me. her acknowledgement was not an admission of culpability in my mind, and it was not equal to her saying she was responsible for anything in my mind, and i certainly hope that her good memories of her children and her family are not guilt-ridden and i hope nobody else's is either. what rascal did differently than anybody else that i recall was to say that looking back she can see what it was costing others while she was having her good times. she didn't apologize for her good times. she didn't argue on behalf of her good times. she didn't rationalize her good times. she simply acknowledged that she could look back and see the cost of good people having good times in the way. my first point was and still remains the point that i think rascal got completely and that is that the way was an abusive system that used the good times of the good people to cull more victims. also there is much going on in this discussion that i don't even understand because it seems to be things going on between other participants that i simply have no clue about and don't want to have any clue about. but geisha please hear me because i do not hold you culpable for anything.

yes this is seen everywhere all the time. try making a police report these days about your house being robbed and you will find out that since nobody saw anything then the police will write it all down and "keep our eyes open", and beyond that it might as well go into the circular file. there's something about participating here that is very different than just reading here and i'm not exactly sure what it is except that it becomes far more personalized internally to write my story out here and then read the comments in response instead of just reading other's stories and reading the responding comments. when i was just reading i would skim over what i felt was insensitive and argumentative comments thinking "well they're still very into way thinking". now such comments feel like a slap in my face, and i know not to take things so personally because i don't think i know anybody here and i'm not about to try and find out either, but to read the same thinking patterns here that were typically used against us kids as excuses just smacks me hard.

so say you. i say otherwise. we will more than likely never agree on this but that's ok because we don't have to agree. that's the freedom of being out from under abusive systems.

and anybody in the way more than few months abused somebody somewhere somehow in some way. it was institutionalized that abusiveness was "from god".

i do not hold everybody ever involved in the way responsible for the horrors perpetrated. i could because every little penny sent to hq was assisting the perpetrators, and every other action to promote the way was in the end the thing that kept the horrors happening. but i would feel stupid to hold everybody ever involved responsible. as i've said more than once or twice it is the looking back and acknowledging how everybody was used to perpetrate and perpetuate the abusive system. it is an insult to me when somebody tries to convince me that since they didn't know about and didn't witness and didn't do anything abusive then their memories should remain untainted by the reality of what they were helping to perpetrate regardless of their level or lack of involvement. it's like when my mother says to me that she didn't see or know about so and so do anything to me so she has a right to hold good memories of them. but mom he raped me!

the words of jesus ring in my heart these days, and they are all the more poignant when reading these things. "Father forgive them for they know not what they do". jesus knew.

people with all their teeth? so my mother's "believing" believed all of us kids right out of the way because she refused to get us dental care because her "believing" was enough for her, but not our teeth? thanks mom. really. now i can't go back to the way if ever i have the urge to do such a thing. ^_^

even though i wasn't looking for "help" i found it in rascal's words and now yet again rascal has come forward and said the things i found my heart was yearning to hear. just an acknowledgement of what was happening to others while she was enjoying her good times. it's not blame or accepting responsibility where she had none, but it's just the acknowledgement, just saying "Whenever I think about my *good* times...inevitably the unsettling thought creeps in ....wondering how many excathedras or Kristins were being coerced into sex...how many children like brainfixed and bolshevic were being mistreated...how many people like Tom and Roxanne were driven to suicide....folks who`s marriages and families were being ripped apart....all while I sat on my happy little fanny at any given fellowship, blissfully ignorant." i wasn't out to take away from anybody's good times, and until i read rascal's words i didn't realize that all i really needed to begin a real healing in my heart was to hear the acknowlegement of the price paid for "good times".

uh, right. and this guy's "ministering" to children?

if proceedings like custody, child in need of care, parental rights and others involving juveniles were public record you'd get more terrified than any "terrorist" could plant, and this article involves a juvenile as just a hint at what goes on behind closed courtroom doors. one of the saddest things i've learned while trying to make sense of my childhood is that where i live the largest group protestnig more stringet pedophile laws are legal professionals themselves, and not for the reasons you might think like assuming innonce until proven guilty, but because judges and other court personnel having the power to make or break a child's life feel that children can't tell fantasy from reality so what they testify to in court must be tempered with the understanding that they are making up a majority of they are saying as they go. grand juries and defense attorneys are allowed to ask young children things that include such graphic language that it wouldn't make it on any channel except hbo. maybe the question should be asked was vpw in cahoots with such judges and they taught him a few things about getting around the law.

what a thoroughly educational discussion is happening here! thanks everybody. for one thing i always thought "gaslighting" was lighting your farts on fire. :blink: and i didn't know that "muddy waters" was a famous person or even for what.

so many discussions to respond to in my inbox and i've got about 5 minutes to use right so this is the shortest response i can handle right now. it doesn't have to be about the group itself either being "good" or "bad" but could just be that the equal access act written as it is there might be some other groups asking for access that are not what the residents want but if the residents let in one group they have to let in all groups. or maybe the residents just need to take back their space while internal politics work themselves out. nothing in the article says it has anything to do with the group itself.

ok a good example that is right from here are those articles about home fellowships and bumper stickers and religious groups in public places. the "defendants" for lack of a better word cry "our rights! our rights!" when they don't really care about rights for anybody but them and they're going around doing things like causing traffic problems and then trying to say the county is trying to prevent them from having a home fellowship but what is really happening is the county is trying to prevent traffic problems and other problems that have nothing to do with what type of group it is but what problems are being caused by the group. if any of that makes sense now that i've butchered it. another example is i would try to talk to my mom about what was happening to us kids and i'd lay it out for her and instead of responding to what i had said she would say something like "don't you love me and your sisters and brothers? don't you want to obey me so you can have a long life and it will be well with you? how do you think it makes me look when you can't do one simple thing right?" never once even mentioning the bruises or the ripped areas and in fact making sure it wasn't well with me or that i'd probably not have a long life. and that wasn't exactly what my therapist called it potato but sounds good to me.

it is said that a scam needs a central charismatic character to keep the wool pulled over people's eyes so maybe that's why they hold onto the idea. i don't know how well that holds up in reality because people that want to be blind usually blind themselves voluntarily from the get go. i should say the self blinding is little bit by little bit so that people don't really get it that they're blinding themselves so that when they wake up blind one day they are mighty surprised.

since i was a minor in the way i figured that there was something immature about how i thought but i've noticed on some of the discussions here i see that i still think the same but now that i'm older and supposedly "wiser" (laugh if you want because i am) that some of the very same ways of thinking i thought were odd in the way show up here sometimes. my therapist told me it was some kind of "logic" that is used by people that don't want to really look at what their saying and thinking but i forgot what she called it, but what happens is that a discussion is going on and people are thinking out loud and putting forth their views on the subject at hand and then someone comes along that totally disagrees and instead of talking about the subject they start muddying the waters with irrelevant but emotional jabs at the people speaking or at the thoughts being put forth. to me this is like the training to "answer a question with a question" and is just as deceitful as lying by actual words or by ommission. not many people that were not in the way that i've come across in my life do this except for addicts/alcoholics and batterers and others of the criminal ilk, which i know is the very type of people i knew in the way. is this something learned in the way or is it something people brought to the way and spread it like a disease?

wikipedia information on the equal access act

and one more thing is that anybody not totally intimidated by slavering lawyers would grasp that "equal access" is not about being forced to let a group in but is about if you let one group in you have to let all the other groups in. just because litigation is a bully thing that usually isn't decided by the courts but is given up on by the defendants because of cost and other concerns doesn't mean that the interpretation of the ruling by the bully lawyers is correct.