Larry Wachowski unplugs from the Matrix
non-sequitor
Larry to be muy Linda?
Better stop calling them the Wachowski brothers. We hear "Matrix"
co-creator Larry Wachowski is ready for the sex-change operation that
will finalize his conversion to a woman named Linda.
Last May, he wore women's earrings at "The Matrix Reloaded" premiere.
At the time, the estranged husband of an alleged Los Angeles
dominatrix told newspapers that Wachowski was a client of his wife.
The source said he had seen Larry "in her bondage room...lying there
in a dress, no panties and a blond wig."
Several "longtime friends" say Larry - who is in the middle of a
divorce with his wife, Thea Bloom - is now ready for the operation,
reports the Chicago Sun Times.
The agent for Larry and his brother and collaborator, Andy Wachowski,
did not return calls yesterday
computeruser
news:e367c06.04043...@posting.google.com...
From: http://www.thehotbutton.com/today/hot.button/2003_thb/030530_fri.html
Begin Quoted material dated May 30, 2003
~~~
The fact that many rich and famous people act like childish asses does not
make them all into machines who deserve random acts of malice as a way of
bringing them down to earth. The choice to change your sex, whether I
understand it or not, is not one lightly taken by either the person making
the change or the doctors who perform the operation. I'm sure that I will
get mail from religious-based groups detailing horror stories of people who
had sex changes and wanted to go back. All rules have exceptions.
My point is that none of this is blithe. None of this is funny. None of
this is ours to judge.
And back to that wise person whose words started this story. how we react to
this news is more a reflection of ourselves than of Larry Wachowski. So
take a second and look in the mirror. I hope you are happy with what you
see. I hope that I am too.
~~~~
End of Quoted material
computeruser
Siam
>From: "computeruser" cyrano.69.@communist.bastards.go.away
>Date: 4/30/2004 6:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <4092fbe1$0$82230$a046...@nnrp.fuse.net>
I noticed how you switched the topic to OT.
I think the person posted it because Larry Wachowski was a Landmark proponent,
or because Landmark used him as an example of a successful ~graduate~.
I do believe information related to a graduate who endorsed Landmark is
definitely on topic.
You can surmise that perhaps Landmark led him to feel comfortable about his
decision to switch his ~sex~.
Cheers
>
non-sequitor
> "non-sequitor" <paula_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e367c06.04043...@posting.google.com...
> > According to the New York Daily News
> >
> > Larry to be muy Linda?
> >
> > Better stop calling them the Wachowski brothers. We hear "Matrix"
> > co-creator Larry Wachowski is ready for the sex-change operation that
> > will finalize his conversion to a woman named Linda.
>
Begin Quoted material dated May 30, 2003
~~~
And that's an irony, since many of my sources have said that this
"secret" is not something that he is particularly keeping secret. If
you know anything about making a healthy transition of any kind in
your life, you must know that being open and honest with your truth is
a key part of your evolution. And that seems to be the case.
Now, I am dancing around the facts.
But before I explain… I must examine myself and my motivations in this
process. I take what I do very seriously. Probably more seriously
than my subject usually deserves. So be it. But I have to be aware
of my own ego in writing this story. Am I really writing this because
I want to make my small effort to shape how you look at this issue?
Am I doing this man a favor by framing this before the tabloids do or
am I starting a bigger snowball down the hill a little faster than it
need be rolled? Do I just want to be first?
I could just rationalize the idea that he wants to be open and honest
and that I'm a ray of the disinfecting sunshine.
...
computeruser
"Siam" <siami...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040430232450...@mb-m01.aol.com...
No. I found it interesting enough that it was from last May and slightly
agree enough to forward it here. Plus, non-sequitor posts here so rarely any
more I wanted to give her thread some traffic.
> I noticed how you switched the topic to OT.
Yes, see below.
>
> I think the person posted it because Larry Wachowski was a Landmark
proponent,
> or because Landmark used him as an example of a successful ~graduate~.
>
> I do believe information related to a graduate who endorsed Landmark is
> definitely on topic.
As far as I knew of the Wachowski's being Landmark proponents was "rumor" I
didn't see Landmark Education in the credits or any public acknowledgement
of doing any programs at Landmark. I same for Landmark using them a an
example of a successful ~graduate~, "rumor".
If you can document either of these unsubstantiated assertions I will
apologize for switching it to OT.
If Landmark used them as an example in the past, will they do so in the
future after this story plays itself out?
> You can surmise that perhaps Landmark led him to feel comfortable about
his
> decision to switch his ~sex~.
Yes, ~you~ could surmise that. Feel free to surmise what ever you want.
computeruser
> Cheers
>
>
computeruser
> "computeruser" <cyrano.69.@communist.bastards.go.away> wrote in message
news:<4092fbe1$0$82230$a046...@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> > "non-sequitor" <paula_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:e367c06.04043...@posting.google.com...
> > > According to the New York Daily News
> > >
> > > Larry to be muy Linda?
> > >
> > > Better stop calling them the Wachowski brothers. We hear "Matrix"
> > > co-creator Larry Wachowski is ready for the sex-change operation that
> > > will finalize his conversion to a woman named Linda.
>
> > From:
http://www.thehotbutton.com/today/hot.button/2003_thb/030530_fri.html
> >
> Begin Quoted material dated May 30, 2003
> ~~~
>
> And that's an irony, since many of my sources have said that this
> "secret" is not something that he is particularly keeping secret. If
> you know anything about making a healthy transition of any kind in
> your life, you must know that being open and honest with your truth is
> a key part of your evolution. And that seems to be the case.
>
> Now, I am dancing around the facts.
>
> process. I take what I do very seriously. Probably more seriously
> than my subject usually deserves. So be it. But I have to be aware
> of my own ego in writing this story. Am I really writing this because
> I want to make my small effort to shape how you look at this issue?
> Am I doing this man a favor by framing this before the tabloids do or
> am I starting a bigger snowball down the hill a little faster than it
> need be rolled? Do I just want to be first?
>
> I could just rationalize the idea that he wants to be open and honest
> and that I'm a ray of the disinfecting sunshine.
>
> ...
>
~~~~
Now, tell me whether you would be laughing and picking up the phone to share
this gossip if he was a member of your family. Convince me how funny it is
when someone finally comes out of the closet to his or her family. Explain
how hysterical going to a 12-step meeting and admitting your addiction for
the first time is.
Can you imagine anyone who is more emotionally vulnerable than Larry
Wachowski is right now, no matter how sure he is and how proud he is to be
making this change? Money and fame is obviously a lot easier than poverty
and obscurity. Money can ease the burdens of the physical world. But it
can't protect the human heart.
~~~~
> And back to that wise person whose words started this story. how we
> react to
> this news is more a reflection of ourselves than of Larry Wachowski.
> So
> take a second and look in the mirror. I hope you are happy with what
> you
> see. I hope that I am too.
> ~~~~
> End of Quoted material
computeruser
Siam
>From: "computeruser" cyrano.69.@communist.bastards.go.away
>Message-id: <4093fbfb$0$67103$a046...@nnrp.fuse.net>
gave them permission to acknowledge their participation. JimT works for
Landmark.
>If you can document either of these unsubstantiated assertions I will
>apologize for switching it to OT.
That is my only ~documentation~. I personally think JimT wouldn't dare lie
about it seeing that he works for Landmark, but you can never be 100% certain.
Then again, the Internet is full of statements with zero to little
documentation.
>
>If Landmark used them as an example in the past, will they do so in the
>future after this story plays itself out?
>
I don't think this has much to do with Landmark. It could be ~used~ either
way.
The critics --
1) Larry was a complete normal, well-adjusted man before he set foot near
Landmark. After Landmark, he was so confused about his identity that he wanted
to start afresh as a woman. If he didn't do Landmark, he would have been
incredibly stable and a loving husband and doting father.
The pro --
2) Pre-Landmark he was a confused man who didn't know his place in the world.
He put on this charade because that was how he was brought up. All men get
married and have kids. Upon graduation, he had the profound realization that
he didn't need to lie ever again. "I am woman and hear me roar".
I doubt it is either of these cases.
>
>> You can surmise that perhaps Landmark led him to feel comfortable about
>his
>> decision to switch his ~sex~.
>
>Yes, ~you~ could surmise that. Feel free to surmise what ever you want.
That is pretty much what humans are good at. Coming to conclusions with
limited data. The problem is that we rarely have 100% of the information and
have to fill in so many blanks.
Cheers
>
>computeruser
>
>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
computeruser
Does everyone here assume, everyone here reads everything at R&R Live!, and
the Rick Ross Forum?
Since delphi switched to a pay for premium navigation tools they used to
offer as part of the free package I don't go to R&R Live! much. I will
probably pay the 30 or so dollars because I really like that forum, I
haven't taken the time.
As far a JimT working at Landmark; Do you mean "Engaging in a given activity
as a source of livelihood or as a
career" or volunteers there? To me there is a big difference.
> >If you can document either of these unsubstantiated assertions I will
> >apologize for switching it to OT.
>
> That is my only ~documentation~. I personally think JimT wouldn't dare
lie
> about it seeing that he works for Landmark, but you can never be 100%
certain.
> Then again, the Internet is full of statements with zero to little
> documentation.
After I posted I thought documentation might have been unclear. I should
have made it clear that I was looking for crediable documentation from a
reliable source. Really on this issue I'd like to see something on
Landmark's site or from the whatisthematrix.com site which I would consider
reliable.
> >If Landmark used them as an example in the past, will they do so in the
> >future after this story plays itself out?
> >
> I don't think this has much to do with Landmark. It could be ~used~
either
> way.
That was part of my reasoning in switching it to OT, which you noticed and
pointed out here on a.f.l..
> The critics --
>
> 1) Larry was a complete normal, well-adjusted man before he set foot near
> Landmark. After Landmark, he was so confused about his identity that he
wanted
> to start afresh as a woman. If he didn't do Landmark, he would have been
> incredibly stable and a loving husband and doting father.
>
> The pro --
>
> 2) Pre-Landmark he was a confused man who didn't know his place in the
world.
> He put on this charade because that was how he was brought up. All men
get
> married and have kids. Upon graduation, he had the profound realization
that
> he didn't need to lie ever again. "I am woman and hear me roar".
>
> I doubt it is either of these cases.
> >
> >> You can surmise that perhaps Landmark led him to feel comfortable about
> >his
> >> decision to switch his ~sex~.
> >
> >Yes, ~you~ could surmise that. Feel free to surmise what ever you want.
>
> That is pretty much what humans are good at. Coming to conclusions with
> limited data. The problem is that we rarely have 100% of the information
and
> have to fill in so many blanks.
I think I'll parctice being a Human ~having~, as I been a Human Being and a
Human Doing.
:-)
computeruser
>
> Cheers
>
> >
> >computeruser
> >
> >
> >> Cheers
chris
Or as we say in Landmark, where "coming to conclusions with limited data" is
a specialty. "The problem is that we (in Lanmark) rarely have 100% of the
information and have to fill in so many blanks."
You can say that again.
Chris
> Cheers
>
> >
> >computeruser
> >
> >
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Markus Welch
"chris" <ch...@veggies.org> wrote in message
news:c73t46$huu$2...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
Siam does not know how right he is. :)
>
> > Cheers
> >
> > >
> > >computeruser
> > >
> > >
> > >> Cheers
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Ellenestnot
(snip)
> >> You can surmise that perhaps Landmark led him to feel comfortable about
> his
> >> decision to switch his ~sex~.
> >
> >Yes, ~you~ could surmise that. Feel free to surmise what ever you want.
>
> That is pretty much what humans are good at. Coming to conclusions with
> limited data. The problem is that we rarely have 100% of the information and
> have to fill in so many blanks.
Hmmmmm.......
Of course there is no or little chance any of us will know
the truth in this situation any time soon. Over time, however,
pieces of the puzzle may fall into place.
Makes me wonder about hypnotism and the power some people can
excercise over others and the Ofshe and Singer essay I referred
to recently on R&R. I wonder how many people here have read it?
The one titled "Attacks on Peripheral versus Central Elements
of Self and the Impact of Thought Reform?" In this study the
authors talk about "central" elements of self, those most
closely held convictions, ideas, impresssions, feelings, and
"certainties" we all hold about ourselves and the world, our
place in it, and the way things are that are probably formed
in the first few years of life. Among other things these include
sexual identity. If, as Singer and Ofshe suggest, these
core "beliefs" are manipulable by outsiders using the techniques
we are familiar with, what is to stop someone from, say, convincing
a man he is really a woman under hypnosis and other tactics?
I mean, if manipulators can convince young men that there are
seventy-two virgins waiting in heaven for them, what would be
so unusual about this? There are plenty of stories similar to the
one about the guy who jumped out of an upper story window thinking
he could ~create~ flying. I am just speculating and don't imagine
this could really happen but I wouldn't rule it out, either. After
all, cultists have done and believed weirder things.
Ellen
chris
I stuck with the free Delphi Forums option and ignored their blandishments
to pay up for a Delphi Plus service, and I get everything I need and got
before, all free, gratis and for nothing.
Chris
Siam
>From: "computeruser" cyrano.69.@communist.bastards.go.away
>Message-id: <40955d20$0$82212$a046...@nnrp.fuse.net>
I don't know what everyone else thinks save myself. I have seen Patrick
outright lie about something I wrote here.
>Since delphi switched to a pay for premium navigation tools they used to
>offer as part of the free package I don't go to R&R Live! much. I will
>probably pay the 30 or so dollars because I really like that forum, I
>haven't taken the time.
>
>As far a JimT working at Landmark; Do you mean "Engaging in a given activity
>as a source of livelihood or as a
>career" or volunteers there? To me there is a big difference.
I am not sure. I don't believe he is paid. He has a job as an engineer.
This is what JimT wrote on R&R.
****Well, I can end it as a rumor, the staff person in Chicago I speak to
regularly says they (the brothers) are officially in the records as having done
the whole curriculum and have given permission to let this information be
publicly acknowledged.*****
>
>> >If you can document either of these unsubstantiated assertions I will
>> >apologize for switching it to OT.
>>
>> That is my only ~documentation~. I personally think JimT wouldn't dare
>lie
>> about it seeing that he works for Landmark, but you can never be 100%
>certain.
>> Then again, the Internet is full of statements with zero to little
>> documentation.
>
>After I posted I thought documentation might have been unclear. I should
>have made it clear that I was looking for crediable documentation from a
>reliable source. Really on this issue I'd like to see something on
>Landmark's site or from the whatisthematrix.com site which I would consider
>reliable.
Take or leave what I wrote. That is all the info I have.
Cool.
Cheers
>
>
>computeruser
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> >
>> >computeruser
>> >
>> >
>> >> Cheers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
computeruser
"Ellenestnot" <depro...@MailandNews.com> wrote in message
news:2b04d629.04050...@posting.google.com...
I'd say that Karin Winslow did the manipulation.
Who know what she did to his mind with his balls in a vise.
computeruser
Ellenestnot
Yep.......basic premise of the various "Hearts and Minds"
campaigns.
Ellen