Rocky

Please remember that. It's actually what I statements are ALL about.

Respectfully, on this thread, I don't find anywhere that I apologized to you for anything. I suppose you disagree with that. If so, please point it out, specifically. Thank you. I wish you nothing but health and happiness, all your days. (this is NOT related to anything I may have said that you believe contradicts what I said herein). What causes me to scratch my head is that your words seem to be saying (what you believe) is going on inside my head. Please clarify how you may have come to search out and determine what's going on between my ears. Thank you.

I have no insight about any aspect of your health, mental or otherwise. I disagreed with you. I did not make any statement, implicit or explicit about you. Not only did I refrain from making any assessment of any aspect of your life or health, I also did not make any statement about what you may or may not remember about anything. Further, I did not direct you to do or refrain from doing anything whatsoever. I wish you only health and happiness.

https://www.bumc.bu.edu/facdev-medicine/files/2011/08/I-messages-handout.pdf Thank you for asking. When you are in conflict, you may have difficulty clearly articulating your situation without escalating the conflict. Using an “I” message (also known as an “assertiveness statement”) can help you state your concerns, feelings, and needs in a manner that is easier for the listener to hear and understand. An “I-statement” focuses on your own feelings and experiences. It does not focus on your perspective of what the other person has done or failed to do. It is the difference, for example, between saying, "I feel that I am not being permitted to participate in office projects to the extent that others are” and "You always let Marge work on office projects, but you never ask me if I’m interested.” If you can express your experience in a way that does not attack, criticize, or blame others, you are less likely to provoke defensiveness and hostility which tends to escalate conflicts, or have the other person shut-down or tune you out which tends to stifle communication. Ultimately, I-messages help create more opportunities for the resolution of conflict by creating more opportunities for constructive dialogue about the true sources of conflict. That is but an excerpt of the handout linked above. Thank you for asking.

Please NOTE: this is an "I" statement. It is NOT an accusation about any aspect of chockfull's intentions, mental states/conditions, or actions is ANY way.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/gaslighting I don't believe chockfull's claim about inadvertently making mistakes constitutes gaslighting is at all correct. Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth.

I certainly don't speak for Oldiesman, but my take was he meant his Mother in Catholicism was encouraging him to go back to Catholicism.

train up a child in the way he should go... there are some wise proverbs in the bible.

Is that all? Each of your points seems to be about what they wouldn't have to do. What WOULD they believe about life and creation? How do you envision answering the child's big questions? You posed an intriguing thought experiment.

I apologize in advance for offending you on this one. Are you sure of timing of the referenced personnel action above and that it was Victor Wierwille who did it?

Look. Fine. I'll kiss your BEE-hind. But I'm not insisting ANYthing about what you do or may not have remembered. THE thing I've been TRYING to do, however, imperfectly, is to redirect this "discussion." I don't give a RATS patootie what you remember or don't remember. You and I are NOT in any kind of relationship in which it would matter, except maybe between your ears. I hope you find peace. Based on your words, it sure doesn't seem like you have been succeeding in that regard the last few days. Take it or leave it however you'd like, but you might find solace in the message of this book: Stillness is the Key. I don't know you in person. I only know your words on GSC. I apologize for disagreeing with you (and therefore, having somehow offended you). ---- In NO way do I consider myself to be a victim of anything you have said or done.

ALWAYS remember that.

Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth. ---- Asking rhetorical questions does not qualify as gaslighting, as I understand it. I will explain this. Rhetorical questions are NOT me feeding you false information (or lies). They are for you to answer your own damn questions. And again, I don't take or obey orders from you. Did your parents ever explain that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar?

Are you not aware of the mission of GSC?

Dude... chill. I don't try to control or give orders to you. I don't take orders from you. I don't have the foggiest idea why you get so upset. But if you want me to explain anything, please spell out how, why and what have I written/said that you believe I was untruthful or counterfactual.

There is NO reason I would feel threatened by you. Me lying? Really? Please just stop it.

This is NOT addressed to anyone specifically. But I believe it's related to forgiveness.

That is remarkably hostile projection, btw. How is your message going to help people trying to escape TWI? Oh, and who's criticizing whom? I'm confident, however, that you understood my message but just don't like it.

Your expectations about me constitute fantasy scenarios between your own ears. You sound like Mike when you accuse people of failing to read your mind. I read your words. When a reader fails to understand your intended message, why do you think it's because of anything other than you not conveying what you intended to convey. Really, you DO sound like Mike. But if you drop the tangential malarkey, I'll forgive you.

Now you expect me to figure out what will help you understand rhetorical questions? Come on.

Do you understand the concept of rhetorical questions?

On the topic of unenforceable rules, I was directed to a definition Fred Luskin included in his book, Forgive for Good. The definition is in chapter 5 of this book. I don't own the book, but you might be able to access it either electronically or in a paper or hardbound book at your local public library. The class (webinar) I referred to provided a including copies of the pages of chapter 5. I plan to read it later this evening.

Anyway, back to the subject of forgiveness, the other day I sat through a writing class on memoir. The topic of forgiveness was a major theme in the class. Associated therewith are the concepts of emotional boundaries and unenforceable rules. I asked a question to see if I could get further insight comparing and contrasting those two ideas. On boundaries, I was given this wonderful clip by Brené Brown. And many of us who read and/or share at GSC know one of the immense and egregious problems of TWI has been, from the beginning, lack of understanding of personal/emotional boundaries or just plain refusing to honor them based on whatever justification... like the social construct that we were somehow the "property of the king." Or otherwise weren't worthy of being given the dignity of having our own agency/choices.

I believe this exchange of yours and mine on this subject starkly (or not?) illustrates and illuminates the inherent limitation of communication without access to each other's non-verbal cues. i.e tone of voice, inflection, facial expressions etc. I only point this out for your readers and mine (likely only on this topic/thread) to hold in mind that we're inherently not contradicting each other or criticizing each other or otherwise INTENDING to cause any "negative" emotion. If I could devise a way for us to more fully communicate on GSC or any other online print only forum in ways that would be less likely to cause misunderstandings and be more likely to foster compassion and forgiveness... well, maybe I'd be able to get rich. Then again, that wouldn't be my goal/objective anyway.

Why would you think I'm telling or asking you to do what I WANT you to do? I posed a rhetorical question. It's up to you to decide what YOU want to do with what said question causes you to consider.