EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badly, what to do now?
Robert Maas
I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
Kris posted a loveletter for me, but I mistakenly thought it was from
Janet and responded appropriately. I don't wish to embarass Janet
further by giving more details here. Please advise me how to make it up
to Janet.
Rosana Rosanada: There's always something!
Murphy: If anything can go wrong, it WILL, and in the worst possible
way.
Y2K: A simple mistake involving only two digits in a critical place can
have profound disasterous consequences for the world at large.
Will Grzanich
>
> I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
> I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
A bit of an over-reaction; she'll get over this more quickly than your
foot would heal from a gunshot wound.
> Kris posted a loveletter for me, but I mistakenly thought it was from
> Janet and responded appropriately. I don't wish to embarass Janet
> further by giving more details here. Please advise me how to make it up
> to Janet.
You *apologize* to her, knuckle-head! You've already done that. All
you can do now is hope she accepts it -- which, while I don't know her
well at all, I can comfortably say she very likely will.
Oh, you can also stop posting those seriously fscked-up sexual fantasies
regarding her. They're obviously disturbing her greatly. Is that what
you want to do to her? (They're also indicative of a problem that
likely runs much deeper than shyness, but I'm no psychologist.)
-Will
--
-= "Soul Brother #1" =- | Visit the Asylum at
"All you need is love." | www.ews.uiuc.edu/~grzanich!
-John Lennon | Contains no MSG!
Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)
Robert Maas <r...@shell.netmagic.net> wrote in message
news:7ai0he$p4j$1...@remarQ.com...
>I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
>I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
>
>Janet and responded appropriately. I don't wish to embarass Janet
>further by giving more details here. Please advise me how to make it up
>to Janet.
>
My opinnion...
1) Appologize
2) Go easy on the "I love you Janet", "You are the girl of my fantasies",...
You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone IMHO.
Okay, you might have some feeling for Janet but you seem to be
over-amplifying things and letting your imagination take over reality. Take
things slowly...
Sebby.
Will Grzanich
> Thank you very much for offering help (advice) in my time of need.
No problem.
> I would like to think that, but I fear not. I fear I may have
> permanently humiliated her. I remember being traumatized in second
> grade and not yet getting over it. That's a shitload of years for a
> psychological hurt to remain unhealed. I was shy way back then. Janet
> probably has been shy all her life too, and may take as long as I take
> for psychological wounds to heal.
You give yourself too much credit, Robert. Someone Janet's never met
who posts an erroneous message on USENET doesn't have the power to
"permanently humiliate" anyone.
> Why did you demean me by calling me "knuckle-head". Do you think anyone
> who ever makes a mistake, such as falling asleep at the wheel and
> driving off the road into a busy sidewalk, or mis-reading the
> intentions of Fidel Castro and Nikiti Khrushchev, and thereby creating
> a crisis whereby we almost had a TOTAL NUCLEAR EXCHANGE, or picking the
> wrong bank to save one's life savings and that bank goes broke and
> there wasn't any FDIC at that time (1929), is a knuckle-head?
No, no! Never!
Well, yes...yes, a bit. The "knuckle-head" was just a light-hearted
jab, Rob. I'm called worse things in jest daily. On the other hand, if
the shoe fits, eh?
> Whatever
> happened to the saying "to err is human, to forgive is divine"? There
> are over 600 unread messages in alt.support.shyness, should I have just
> let them stay unread, and go to bed, instead of stay up until 4AM
> trying to catch up a little, way past the point when my error rate is
> near zero, was it bad judgment to answer UseNet when I'm sleepy?
> (That's a real question. Perhaps the answer is YES, I should never
> answer UseNet until I am no longer disabled with sleepy spells.)
Probably a good idea. If I come upon a newsgroup with 600 unread
messages, the one thing I'm most likely to do is select the "Mark
Newsgroup As Read" option, and look for replies to any of my posts. And
it might not be a bad call to put sleep before USENET -- not only
because it seems to me to be a superior priority order, but also in the
way that it's a good idea to read posts before sending them, and even
consider whether it's worthwhile to send it at all.
> Ok, if you say so. I won't rush her on this. I'm also planning to ask
> somebody else to forgive me.
What for? Who else was harmed by this?
> Would it be possible for you to list which specific articles contain
> the texts you consider fucked up, so I can learn what's OK and what's
> not OK?
Not really. Thing is, Robert, just about all of the posts from you I've
seen are, if not "fucked up," at the very least exceedingly
inappropriate. I have, however, been able to pick out a couple of the
most horrible ones:
http://x14.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=445649711&CONTEXT=919388616.107544673&hitnum=3
http://x14.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=445663097.1&CONTEXT=919388991.109445160&hitnum=0
> I need guidance. I wish you weren't 1500 miles away, so you
> could come over here and I could use DejaNews to efficiently bring up
> everything I posted that mentions her name, and you could look at my
> screen and point out which ones to worry about, and I can flag them and
> study them later on my own time, thereby maximizing benefit for minimal
> your time.
Okaaayyyy...
> <<They're obviously disturbing her greatly. Is that what you want to
> do to her?>>
>
> No.
Then stop posting that sort of message. Robert, no matter how much you
would disagree, I find it very unlikely that you do not, in fact, love
Janet. At any rate, you may as well stop, as you've already blown it
completely; explicit descriptions of ejaculating on a woman and
spreading her labia apart are very poor methods of wooing her.
> I've been unable to convince Kaiser or Medi-Cal to provide me with the
> counseling I need. Would you be able to summarize my problem and e-mail
> it to me privately, then I can FAX it to Kaiser and Medi-Cal to try to
> get them off their butt to provide me the service I'm supposed to be
> getting?
Was some part of "but I'm no psychologist" unclear...? If you want
proof of your problems to show anybody, fire up DejaNews and print out
all the articles you can find posted by you and containing the word
"Janet." You may need to purchase another ream of paper for this.
Take care,
Will Grzanich
> <<2) Go easy on the "I love you Janet",>>
>
No, not "maybe." *Definitely.* Trust me.
> Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
> ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
> all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
> relate to people.
No, it wasn't "best"; it wasn't even realistic. All anyone can -- and
should -- do is try his best not to hurt people without sacrificing his
happiness.
> Janet has totally changed my social life. From being afraid to say "hi"
> to hardly anyone, to not omitting ANY candicates that I find attractive
> or feel like flirting with, not to mention my improvement in chatting
> skill with people I'm not interested in at all but am merely
> socializing with because it's more fun to socialize now than to be
> alone. I never experienced that before yesterday, in my whole life. I
> owe Janet my entire social life.
>
> "some feeling" is an understatement. Enthusiatic gratitude and warmth
> is more accurate. Plus, from her, genuine appreciation and warm fuzzies
> for my labors, when I'm working on her case, which make me feel better
> about helping anybody other than myself. Gratitude for her acceptance
> of some of my help, hope she'll accept more and more, hope her problem
> will be alleviated and perhaps cured.
>
> <<but you seem to be over-amplifying things and letting your
> imagination take over reality. Take things slowly...>>
>
> No no no, it took only about 8 days from when I read her first posting
> until my social life reached an excellent level. That's awfully fast,
> and I would never want to drag it out longer by going more slowly with
> my personal growth. I don't know whether Eric said this, but I think
> it's his belief: It can take decades to make any progress if the
> patient is resisting or dragging his/her heels or the therapist is
> incompetant or if there's a mismatch betwen therapist or patient, but
> if there's competance and match and willingness, progress can be very
> rapid, it doesn't really need to take ten years of therapy to cure
> shyness if it's done correctly. Janet and I "click" when it comes to
> her helping me. The two months before her, by comparison, did very
> little to help me, Eric and I don't "click" most of the time, although
> I value his expert opinion on what I should do IF it's something I am
> capable of doing, which it usually isn't, but it's still nice to
> understand why I wasn't improving.
Robert, you really are going too far. The earliest recorded post in
Deja, unless I've missed something, from you to Janet was posted on
February 13. In other words, it hasn't even been a *week* yet, and
you've already decided you're madly in love with her. (If I'm wrong
about the date, I apologize; at any rate, I get the feeling it's not too
far off...)
Guess what?
It doesn't work that way. Sheesh, if the concept of "love at first
sight" is generally considered to be far-fetched, the concept of "love
at first post" -- even after *several* posts -- is even moreso. Listen,
I've done the blind infatuation thing before, too, and I can tell you
that you've got a one-way ticket to Unhappiness. I can only advise you
to get off the train as quickly as possible and start walking back home.
electro lyte
Robert Maas wrote:
> > > I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
I don't know how she feels but if it were me, I'd hate to have all this stuff posted
about me. I'd say, take it private and don't metion her name here any more.
> <<Oh, you can also stop posting those seriously fscked-up sexual
> fantasies regarding her.>>
Yeah, I obviously agree. I'd take it one step beyond that tho' and avoid any posting
about her at all. Period.
> <<They're also indicative of a problem that likely runs much deeper
> than shyness, but I'm no psychologist.>>
>
> I've been unable to convince Kaiser or Medi-Cal to provide me with the
> counseling I need. Would you be able to summarize my problem and e-mail
> it to me privately, then I can FAX it to Kaiser and Medi-Cal to try to
> get them off their butt to provide me the service I'm supposed to be
> getting?
I think you may want to consider paying out of pocket. Perhaps you can find a
provider that offers a sliding scale fee. Either that or try to get a different type
of insurance.
Kym
--
It takes more distress and poison to kill someone who has peace of mind and loves
life.
-Bernie S. Siegel, MD
Jackie...@webtv.net
I can accept your apology if you stop telling me/the NG about your
fantasies and what you'd like to do to me or anyone else. I think Yakima
deserves an apology, too, as you've said some inappropriate stuff to her
as well.
You seem to want to blame it all on what you call a "love letter" by
Kris, which was maybe 2 or 3 sentences long, giving you a cyber hug and
(jokingly) "more if you wouldn't be offended." Even if you did think I
said that, it doesn't excuse the countless rambling posts and e-mails
about getting together and doing your so-called "36 step plan," etc.
etc.
I find it hard to believe you can't even understand which things are
appropriate/not appropriate to say. When you talk about your "Janet
Lewinski" fantasy or hoping I'd someday show you my [southern anatomy],
or about rubbing your semen on my stomach, I think it'd be safe to say
those things are UNappropriate... There are countless other offensive
posts but I think we've heard enough...
I wish you would get help. When I told JerryO what street I lived on,
you took it as if I was trying to "hint" to you where I lived so that
you could come find me. Also, you said you went to the post office to
try to look up my phone #. This is not normal behavior, Robert.
Please take everyone's advice and try to seek counseling. Again, I can
forgive, but you need to take some steps in controlling your behavior.
Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)
>> be...@interlinx.qc.ca Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby) at
news.interlinx.qc.ca
>
>Thank you very much for offering help (advice) in my time of need.
>
>
>Done right after I discovered the mistake, before posting the appeal
>for help what to do to make it up to her.
Good! Then my next advice would go along what Will said. Leave Janet alone
for now, and when she will forgive you then she make the decision to talk to
you. You really freaked her out, so give her some time...
>Janet was my first true virtual friend in many years. I hope she can
>accept my occasional mistakes (and I hope I never again make such a
>gross mistake).
>
><<You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone
>IMHO.>>
>
>Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
>ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
>all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
>relate to people.
Withdrawing from society won't make you any better. You mainly have to learn
to deal with reality as it is and not go overboard like you did with Janet.
If you learn to do that, it's gonna be a great step in the good direction.
Use what you learned from the situation and make the best out of it.
Sebby.
Eric Pepke
> Please advise me
Cease and desist and seek professional help. You have no sense of the
line between appropriate and inappropriate attention, which suggests a
problem far deeper than shyness. This is the last thing I will say on
the subject.
-Eric
Will Grzanich
> Of course you mean never met in RL.
Right.
> Ok, but I guess I was touchy today because Social Security is trying to
> screw me I just found out today.
I'm sorry to hear that.
> What kind of fucking shit remark is that?
I suppose it was uncalled for; I apologize. (But I'm not going to do
anything more than apologize in an effort to "make it up to you." :))
On the other hand, some of the examples you offered -- the person who
falls asleep at the wheel, particularly -- did sort of shout
"Knuckle-head!" at me. If you're sleepy while you're driving, pull over
and sleep! Or let someone else drive!
> That's not possible: If I mark all articles as read, EVERY article
> becomes completely inaccessible, I can't even see what threads exist.
> (This is'tin' on Linux.)
Okay. Obviously, your choice of newsreader is yours, but, if you're
open-minded enough, you might try other readers. (Under Linux, I use
the same thing I use under Windows -- Netscape 4.5. Works beautifully.)
> Thanks, I'll look at those when I have time. How long before those URLs
> expire, so I can plan my time?
I don't believe they do expire. Take your time...
> <<I find it very unlikely that you do not, in fact, love Janet. >>
>
> I agree, thanks for the confirmation of my feelings. Or is this a
> set-up for coming back tomorrow and claiming you typed it backwards??
What are you talking about? Ack! I must offer my most sincere and
humble apologies; I did, in fact, mean that it is "very likely that you
do not" love her -- or "unlikely that you do," as you prefer. I realize
this makes me look like a bit of a fool. Again, I apologize. (Perhaps
I should take my own advice and more carefully read my posts before I
send them!)
> <<explicit descriptions of ejaculating on a woman ... are very poor
> methods of wooing her.>>
>
> Hey, that was about the two bi-lesbians, not Janet. Please read my
> posts more carefully before criticizing them.
*ahem*
"Janet is making more and more horny, not for
fucking, but for foreplay, for touching Janet such that she'll have
orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate myself and squirt it
all over her tummy and use it as massage oil."
> <<explicit descriptions of ... spreading her labia apart are very poor
> methods of wooing her.>>
>
> I that was advice to some guy having trouble with a girl, with no
> relationship to Janet at all?
I wouldn't say "no relationship"...
"Maybe Janet will let me see hers after we get
to that step of 38?"
> If I tell somebody else that the inside
> of a vagina is very beautiful, to help HIM, not your are Janet, what
> business do you or Janet have eavesdropping claiming my comments to him
> are offensive to you or Janet?
Er...we have every right to do so. And I'm not "claiming" that your
comments were offensive to me.
Soul Surgeon
remember seeing the offending posts but Robert Maas strikes me as the
creepiest person I have ever come across on Usenet and that includes all
the porn ng's I've seen.
To Robert - Aim a little higher than the foot.
To Janet - if he still this bothersome in April I plan to try to be in
San Jose for the Stones shows which isnt too far from Mountain View and
perhaps a personal visit would be more effective than a thousand emails
and usenet postings....
Robert Maas
Thank you very much for offering help (advice) in my time of need.
> Robert Maas wrote:
> > I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
> > I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
> A bit of an over-reaction; she'll get over this more quickly than your
> foot would heal from a gunshot wound.
I would like to think that, but I fear not. I fear I may have
permanently humiliated her. I remember being traumatized in second
grade and not yet getting over it. That's a shitload of years for a
psychological hurt to remain unhealed. I was shy way back then. Janet
probably has been shy all her life too, and may take as long as I take
for psychological wounds to heal.
<<Will: You *apologize* to her, knuckle-head!>>
Why did you demean me by calling me "knuckle-head". Do you think anyone
who ever makes a mistake, such as falling asleep at the wheel and
driving off the road into a busy sidewalk, or mis-reading the
intentions of Fidel Castro and Nikiti Khrushchev, and thereby creating
a crisis whereby we almost had a TOTAL NUCLEAR EXCHANGE, or picking the
wrong bank to save one's life savings and that bank goes broke and
there wasn't any FDIC at that time (1929), is a knuckle-head? Whatever
happened to the saying "to err is human, to forgive is divine"? There
are over 600 unread messages in alt.support.shyness, should I have just
let them stay unread, and go to bed, instead of stay up until 4AM
trying to catch up a little, way past the point when my error rate is
near zero, was it bad judgment to answer UseNet when I'm sleepy?
(That's a real question. Perhaps the answer is YES, I should never
answer UseNet until I am no longer disabled with sleepy spells.)
<<You've already done that.>>
Yes, the first thing I did when I read her complaint about it, was to
start a reply to her acknowledging that I was checking what happened,
then did check and discovered to my horror indeed I had blown it
grossly, then went back to the in-composition message to confirm her
claim and sincerely apologize, then post that so she can see it, then
find my mistake and cancel it. I left out the list of what I already
did, when asking what to do, in case my apology got trashed. But you
confirmed you saw the apoloy, for which I thank you, one less thing for
me to worry about.
<<All you can do now is hope she accepts it>>
Well, I was going to do that anyway, thanks for validating my plan.
<<which, while I don't know her well at all, I can comfortably say she
very likely will.>>
Ok, if you say so. I won't rush her on this. I'm also planning to ask
somebody else to forgive me.
<<Oh, you can also stop posting those seriously fscked-up sexual
fantasies regarding her.>>
Would it be possible for you to list which specific articles contain
the texts you consider fucked up, so I can learn what's OK and what's
not OK? I need guidance. I wish you weren't 1500 miles away, so you
could come over here and I could use DejaNews to efficiently bring up
everything I posted that mentions her name, and you could look at my
screen and point out which ones to worry about, and I can flag them and
study them later on my own time, thereby maximizing benefit for minimal
your time.
<<They're obviously disturbing her greatly. Is that what you want to
do to her?>>
No.
<<They're also indicative of a problem that likely runs much deeper
Robert Maas
Thank you very much for offering help (advice) in my time of need.
<<1) Appologize>>
Done right after I discovered the mistake, before posting the appeal
for help what to do to make it up to her.
<<2) Go easy on the "I love you Janet",>>
Reduce strokes given to Janet. Maybe. Considering.
<<"You are the girl of my fantasies",...>>
Not at all! My fantasy for a wife would be Julie (Marcia Strassman??)
on Welcome Back Kotter. My fantasy to turn my fondest crush into a
gorgeous girlfriend to fornicate with, would be Maureen McCormick from
Brady Bunch and Love Boat. My fantasy for somebody I can help, someone
I can cuddle and comfort, is Brenda (Julie Kavnar) from Rhoda. I've
never had any fantasies about anyone who looks like Barbra Streisand,
although she's nice enough looking that I'd take her if she wanted me
and promised NEVER to sing me to sleep with "People who need People",
her most stupid song ever (I'd even take that crap about reincarnation,
"On a clear day you can forever", better).
My reality, recognizing my personal needs, is that I want to be wanted
by somebody nice. All my life nobody has ever wanted me. Brenda Lee's
1960 hit song by that name is my current #1 theme song.
My reality, my other personal need, is for friends, and until last
night when I
<Begin metphor> accidently dropped a hydrogen bomb on Moscow because
I used the remote control box to change channels on my Presidential
VCR, I accidently picked up the Red Box instead of the correct box
<End metaphor>
Janet was my first true virtual friend in many years. I hope she can
accept my occasional mistakes (and I hope I never again make such a
gross mistake).
<<You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone
IMHO.>>
Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
relate to people.
<<Okay, you might have some feeling for Janet>>
Janet has totally changed my social life. From being afraid to say "hi"
Robert Maas
doesn't have the power to "permanently humiliate" anyone.>>
Of course you mean never met in RL. We've met quite a lot over the net,
and given each other a fair size chunk of advice. Making that one
correction, I think you're right, I should be able to make it up to her
somehow without busting a gut over it. But I can't figure out how. I
don't like the idea of being like those third-world nations whose debts
are "forgiven".
<<The "knuckle-head" was just a light-hearted jab>>
Ok, but I guess I was touchy today because Social Security is trying to
screw me I just found out today.
<<On the other hand, if the shoe fits, eh?>>
What kind of fucking shit remark is that? Didn't you understand the
point of my previous article, that even if people try to do their best,
once in a while they'll make a mistake, and it's NOT POSSIBLE for a
human to be absolutely perfect, that's reserved for you know who only,
right? Homer Simpson is knuckle-head. He's so sloppy that he causes
many accidents to happen. I'm not a knuckle-head. I try my best to be
careful, even more than the average person because I'm so sensitive
that I get very upset when I make a mistake that hurts somebody I feel
is a good person, so I like to avoid such upsetness, but every so often
I make mistakes which are inevitable.
<<If I come upon a newsgroup with 600 unread messages, the one thing
I'm most likely to do is select the "Mark Newsgroup As Read" option,
and look for replies to any of my posts.>>
That's not possible: If I mark all articles as read, EVERY article
becomes completely inaccessible, I can't even see what threads exist.
(This is'tin' on Linux.)
> > Ok, if you say so. I won't rush her on this. I'm also planning to ask
> > somebody else to forgive me.
> What for? Who else was harmed by this?
Not somebody who was harmed, but somebody who forgives everyone who
asks forgiveness, the same fellow who told Noah to build the ark.
<<just about all of the posts from you I've seen are, if not "fucked
up," at the very least exceedingly inappropriate.>>
Please unmark ALL of my articles still on your newsreader, then take a
quick look to see if you remember that one was inappropriate, and if so
then post a followup citing at least thing in that particular article
that you find very inappropriate.
<<I have, however, been able to pick out a couple of the most horrible
ones:>>
Thanks, I'll look at those when I have time. How long before those URLs
expire, so I can plan my time?
<<I find it very unlikely that you do not, in fact, love Janet. >>
I agree, thanks for the confirmation of my feelings. Or is this a
set-up for coming back tomorrow and claiming you typed it backwards??
<<explicit descriptions of ejaculating on a woman ... are very poor
methods of wooing her.>>
Hey, that was about the two bi-lesbians, not Janet. Please read my
posts more carefully before criticizing them.
<<explicit descriptions of ... spreading her labia apart are very poor
methods of wooing her.>>
I that was advice to some guy having trouble with a girl, with no
relationship to Janet at all? If I tell somebody else that the inside
of a vagina is very beautiful, to help HIM, not your are Janet, what
business do you or Janet have eavesdropping claiming my comments to him
are offensive to you or Janet? If you find my advice bad for him, fine,
say so, and provide your own advice to him. But a lot of the advice
here to one or another person isn't appropriate for lots of other
people, so just ignore the advice if it isn't addressed to your
particular problem or one similar. (Or did I stick my foot in my mouth
by asking Janet to get a mirror so that she could appreciate how
beautiful her own body was? If I did, sorry.)
<<If you want proof of your problems to show anybody, fire up DejaNews
and print out all the articles you can find posted by you and
containing the word "Janet." You may need to purchase another ream of
paper for this.>>
Not to worry: I have a FAX modem, and Kaiser-pshch's FAX number.
Mel Matsuoka
>Janet was my first true virtual friend in many years. I hope she can
>accept my occasional mistakes (and I hope I never again make such a
>gross mistake).
Just because someone gives you a "virtual hug" on USENET and responds to your
posts with lots of smileys does not mean that they're (or even intend to be)
your best net-buddy. Theres a difference between being friend and being
friend-LY. Janet is clearly the latter, and you certainly "blew it", as you
said, by inflating her simple acts of friendliness into sickening and very
disturbing expressions of true "love".
><<You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone
>IMHO.>>
>
>Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
>ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
>all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
>relate to people.
Please forgive me if I don't play along with your sorry attempt to garner
sympathy with this paragraph.
I'll just move on...
><<Okay, you might have some feeling for Janet>>
>
>Janet has totally changed my social life. From being afraid to say "hi"
>to hardly anyone, to not omitting ANY candicates that I find attractive
>or feel like flirting with, not to mention my improvement in chatting
>skill with people I'm not interested in at all but am merely
>socializing with because it's more fun to socialize now than to be
>alone. I never experienced that before yesterday, in my whole life. I
>owe Janet my entire social life.
If Janet's posts have given you the self-confidence to engage people in REAL
life, then thats wonderful! Just remember, though, that turning someones
apparant "interest" or friendliness with you into a personal obsession will
"blow it" for you every time.
People do not like to be around people who talk and act desperate/depressed all
the time. I'm a shybie who recently dropped his "i'm pathetic/no-one likes me/im
ugly and unattractive" act, and have suddenly realized how very unattractive
such behavior is. People IRL think im "great" and "nice" and respect me for my
talents, but its clear to me now that many of them didnt like "hanging around"
with me, because i acted like such a pathetic loser, unconsciously hoping to
gain thier sympathy. So when a girl would act very freindly and "sweet" to me, i
would develop a crush on her, which is clearly not healthy, since i should have
been concerned with using the knowledge that people /do/ like me and think "im
okay" to bolster my self-confidence.
So just because a girl may smile at you or says hi to you in the hallway,
doesn't mean that you should fall in "love" with them. It seems clear that you
dont really "love" Janet, but you really just have a "crush" on her because she
was the only one here who was "sweet" to you. It's great that you have found
such acts-of-kindness to be confidence-boosters, but you place a great deal of
unwarranted (and unfair) pressure on her by constantly expressing your feelings
of "love" and fantasy-based "affection" for her...even moreso when you do it on
a public forum such as USENET.
I know you probably hate to hear it over and over again, but you DON'T really
"love" Janet. It's simply not possible, since shes only been here for 2 weeks or
so, and havent even talked IRL. You have a crush, plain and simple. You just
took it WAAAAAY too far.
I would strongly concur with my fellow a.s.s.'ers and advise you to seek out
some sort of professional therapy. And if you claim that your insurance policy
wont cover it, I would suggest asking around and find a reasonably-priced
therapist which you can pay for out-of-pocket. Your emotional health is much too
important to let the fact that your insurance doesnt cover a therapist destroy
your life.
Aloha
____________________________________________________________________________
mel matsuoka Hawaiian Image Video Productions
Editor/Digital Media Dude http://www.hawaiianimage.com
mel@EATTHISSPAMFORDhawaiianimage+com
Nebulous Rex
<be...@interlinx.qc.ca> wrote:
>2) Go easy on the "I love you Janet", "You are the girl of my fantasies",...
>You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone IMHO.
>Okay, you might have some feeling for Janet but you seem to be
>over-amplifying things and letting your imagination take over reality. Take
>things slowly...
Seeing all this makes me sad, since I used to act this way myself. I
had this weird idea that all just telling a woman she was "beautiful"
was my key into her kingdom, and love should move at the speed of
light just because I wanted it to and never mind reality since that'll
just get me down.
It really is possible to fall in love with someone you don't know, you
just do it all in your mind. You fill in all the gaps you don't have
real information for, and since you "know" she's the one, it's okay to
fill in all those gaps with the best things you can think of. And of
course, she secretly longs to be with you, she's just too shy to admit
it. Unfortunately, what you really do is fall in love with a
"perfect" fictional character who has nothing in common with the real
person. But by then it's too late, and her rejection is like a mortal
wound. And it should be, since you've invested all that time and
thought and emotion into her. But then, it really shouldn't be, since
you shouldn't fall in love with fictional characters. I eventually
learned that, and was able to carry on some "normal" relationships
after an ugly period of losing all my friends and wallowing in
self-pity for a year or three.
Anyway, my hope is that Robert realizes he's treading dangerously
close to schizophrenia here, and gets some professional help. Who
knows, he might save a few years.
cyn...@yahoo.com
melo...@nospam.gov wrote:
> On 19 Feb 1999 01:05:50 GMT, r...@shell.netmagic.net (Robert Maas) wrote:
> I know you probably hate to hear it over and over again, but you DON'T really
> "love" Janet. It's simply not possible, since shes only been here for 2 weeks
or
> so, and havent even talked IRL. You have a crush, plain and simple. You just
> took it WAAAAAY too far.
> I would strongly concur with my fellow a.s.s.'ers and advise you to seek out
> some sort of professional therapy. And if you claim that your insurance policy
> wont cover it, I would suggest asking around and find a reasonably-priced
> therapist which you can pay for out-of-pocket. Your emotional health is much
too
> important to let the fact that your insurance doesnt cover a therapist destroy
> your life.
mel matsuoka Hawaiian Image Video Productions
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Robert Maas
fantasies and what you'd like to do to me or anyone else.>>
Ok. If I post something that's borderline, and you think it's across
the line into offensive material, please send e-mail or followup citing
just a little of it that you find most offensive and telling why you
think it's offensive (such as "this is a fantasy of what you wish to do
to/with a woman") so I know which behaviour-restriction you're
referring to.
Also, I really wish I could make it up to you somehow, such as: washing
your dishes, listening to an hour of music I can't stand, teaching you
something about math or science or computers; probably all bad ideas
because they are things I thought of; any ideas you have that you'd
really like me to do to make it up to you? I don't want to be like
those South American countries who borrow money, can't pay it back, and
then the benevolent USA bails them out and the loans are forgiven.
<<I think Yakima deserves an apology, too, as you've said some
inappropriate stuff to her as well.>>
I don't recall ever saying anything inappropriate to her, but if I did
I'd like to know about it so that I can consider an appropriate
apology. Can you quote each offensive remark (not whole article) so
that I can look up the article in DejaNews to see the full article and
the context?
<<You seem to want to blame it all on what you call a "love letter" by
Kris, which was maybe 2 or 3 sentences long, giving you a cyber hug and
(jokingly) "more if you wouldn't be offended.">>
No, I'm not laming Kris at all. Kris, whoever he or she is, simply
chose to flirt with me, which flattered me, but I mistakenly thought it
was you, somebody who would NOT likely flirt with me some of that stuff
(specifically that more-than-hug part) for real, so I was sure you were
putting me on, which I didn't like. Anyway, that was all a horrible
mistake.
Is Kris a man or a woman? What city? If the person is local, then I
would appreciate more than a hug, but different more perhaps depending
on gender, although some the same, such a maybe Kris can go out with me
to witness my meet-women skills and advise me on improvements if any.
Perhasp I'm doing all the right things, but I'm "shooting myself in the
foot" by saying something grossly inapprorpriae that scares he woman
and ruins my attempted relationship-opening.
<<I find it hard to believe you can't even understand which things are
appropriate/not appropriate to say.>>
In my whole life the only guidelines that were ever taught to me were
that any mention whatsoever of body parts or functions or sex in any
form was wrong, a totally Puritanical straightjacket making it
impossible for a man to even ask his SO whether she wants sex tonight
or not, forcing him to just start doing it and she must then push him
away to stop him, not a good relatoinship. Nobody, until just now (the
past day or so) has anybody pointed out anything specific bad vs. good
in reasonable non-Puritanical way.
<<When you talk about your "Janet Lewinski" fantasy>>
That was an alternate Universe, where Monica was in your place and
would do that, but in this universe YOU are in that place and
definitely wouldn't, I'm sure. I thought I made that point pretty well,
but I guess I don't know how to communicate well enough to avoid people
misunderstanding what I tried to say.
<<hoping I'd someday show you my [southern anatomy]>>
I thought the point of that was that a vagina is really pretty and
every woman should look at hers and every husband should look at his
wife's, to better appreciate the beauty of the body. I don't recall
saying that I wanted to look at yours (but of course if we had a
relationship where that was reasonable, then I'd want to), but on
re-reading that passage you still say I said that, please quote the
critical lines (not whole message) so that I can look it up and see if
I really did say that (I agree) horribly inappropriate request on your
(ficticius) exhibitionist services.
<<I wish you would get help.>>
Whata kind of help, and who is supposed to provide to me? Except for
this support group, I've been unable to get any help of any kind for
all the several years I've been trying. (For this particular topic,
I've been seeking help, but none was offered to me, since I was in
college.)
<<When I told JerryO what street I lived on, you took it as if I was
trying to "hint" to you where I lived so that you could come find me.>>
In that case, you were at fault. You deliverately posted your street
name and cross streets to a public newsgroup that virtually anyone in
the world can read. If you intended that only Jerry see that info, then
posting to the newsgroup was VERY stupid. You should send any
confidential info by e-mail instead. I might scare you because of your
paranoia that I'm "weird" because I like you very very much and tell
you as much. But, and please forgive me if this frightens you but you
ought to know, there are rapists, the real kind, out on parole or on
bail prior to trial, and even in prison where InterNet is accessible
(provided for free), who also get this same info, and might use it for
purposes which are so obvious and horrible I won't need to mention them
here. Those kinds of people won't tell you via a support group how they
pledge their love to you, and how they have a plan for going very slow
step by step. They would just want to immediately do step 36 by
physical force to a nice virgin who is complaing about never been
kissed, so that at the trial for rape they can claim they were
responding to our posted wishes, and thereby get just one juror out of
12 to have reasonable doubt. I'm not going to go on any more with that
warning except to say, please don't ever again post to the public
newsgroup any confidential information that a criminal might use to
find you easily and hurt you. We all care for you and don't want you
hurt, OK?
<<Also, you said you went to the post office to try to look up my phone
#. This is not normal behavior, Robert.>>
Actually that's pretty common whe someone is in unrequeted love and
wants to be able to talk to the lovee. It was silly, but we lovers do
things like that from time to time, love is crazy, it makes people do
things they'd neve do otherise, both good and not exactly bad but
neverthess scary. In my case I was mostly trying to confirm your last
name so I could joke with you that I discovered your last name was
"Wahl". That is if within the "Wahl" listings I found one on your
street in the correct range, it's a good bet it's you, so I could
discard the actual number but keep your parent's name and send you a
tease message asing how is ((your mother's name)) and enjoy your reply
asking how I discovered that was your mother's name. It would have been
just a tease. But I got nothing for my search. I might, had it worked,
called the number just once to verify it's Janet's number (assuming it
ws listed under your parent's name), and maybe to hear your voice just
once and say "hi". I'm too shy to call again if you say don't call,
however I might want to hear your voice again and again, that's just
not me calling every day to hear your voice. (Anticipating your next
question: If it's not Robert, how did Robert conceive such a strawman
idea? I see such harassing behaviour on TV cop shows and murder
mysteries etc., it's acommon theme, in fact I distinctly rmember an
episode of Alfred Hitchcock where a very young Bruce Dern was flirting
with a married woman, and someone else was making harassing calls, and
woman killed Bruce Dern because she thought he was making the calls,
and right after she killed him the phone rang with another of those
calls. But I would never do that Hitchcock kind of crap.)
<<Please take everyone's advice and try to seek counseling.>>
I've been doing that for sevearal years. Would you like me e-mail you a
list of all the agencies I've asked for help and their responses
(usually "we treat only Axis 1 psychiatric, and since your Social
Phobia is Axis-2 you don't qualify for our services")? If you don't
believe I've tried and tried, you can call those agencies yourself and
verify I've repeatedly begged the for services.
If there's some particular agency you can suggest, I'll try them and
tell you what the result was.
<<Again, I can forgive, but you need to take some steps in controlling
your behavior.>>
Yeah: With specific feedback from you and others, I'm finally learning.
By the way, how are you doing with your learning not to put people in
categories then believe all such people have the majority trait rather
than just most people? I posted a rather nasty rebuke of your repeate
stupidness in this are when I saw you whining that you didn't do
anything wrong (when you assumed that because somebody Hawaiian then
they MUST be beautiful) but somebody got mad at you and you wish people
wouldn't get mad at you unless you did something wrong. So I bitched at
you that you DID INDEED do something wrong, and explained the
mathematics/logic of it in the hope you'd finally get it. I hope you
now realize you wre rong and I was right and the perosn who bitched at
you on the chat channel or whatever was right too.
By he way, I personally find a lot of Hawaiian women to be quite pretty
too, but every so often I see one that is VERY ugly, which demonstrates
lack of universality. I liked Hawaii-5O because McGarrett used his
brains and evidence instead of magic to solve crimes, a very good
representation of detective investigations, but I also appreciated the
frequent young female Hawaiian eye-candy.
And thanks for being on e-speaking terms with me so soon after my
horrible gaffe. You're a "regular sport".
Also, I appreciate how you (and generally but not universally the
others) say specifically what you mean most of the time, so I have
something to work from in making changes or even in investigating facts
to determine what happened before deciding on change. So many people in
Real Life don't have that capability. For example, my previous SO
couldn't say anything more specific except "you're always putting me
down" or "I hate you" or "you don't like me" or "the neighbors are
eavesdropping on us" etc., except when her psychosis was acting up in
which case she told me the neighbors had put a voodoo control device in
her clock FM radio, which is why it made weird squealing sounds that
told her to break our dishes. She tried to use a kitchen knife to pry
the radio open to find the device, but I caughther in time and used a
screwdrive, and she pointed to the FM discriminator transformer as the
voodoo control device, and wanted to pry it out of the radio and throw
it way, and would not accept my explanation that if she removed that
the FM radio would no longer work.
By the way, if you're wondering why the clock radio had a discriminator
transformer instead of an all-electronic chip: This was a VERY VERY old
clock radio she bought at a second hand store, which didn't have liquid
crystal displays (they hdn't yet been invented), but instead a set of
ten single-digit flags (for each position) that were pulled around an
oval loop so that each one would fall over and drop in front of the
prevoius one hiding it from view. The transistor had been invented, but
not the integrated circuit, not even simple ones like single TTL gates.
Anyway, I had to terminate the relationship with that SO, and I know
you would agree my decision was appropriate. (For a couple years I
begged her to go with me to Kaiser for couple counseling, but she
refused, and because I didn't have any friends (which was because I was
too shy to approach anybody to become a friend, and lacked social
skills if I ever did approach anyone), I couldn't ask a friend to come
over and ask her not to beat me up or ask her to take my advice about
getting couple counseling.)
But that now reminds me: I might soon be able to find a girlfriend
who'll cuddle etc. with me (35 of 36), but I still don't know how to
find male friends for support if my SO beats me up or whatever. I'm too
shy, when at Go club, to ask the other Go players (mostly men) which of
them would come over and visit me not for Go but for general
friendship. I have no idea how to approach a man for friendship without
him getting the mistaken idea that I'm 'gay' and want him for THAT.
I'll have to ask the support group about that after I finish solving
the loneliness and companionship problem (where the opposite gender
does seem to work better for me, I'd rather cry on the shoulder of, and
get a sympathatic hug from, a woman than a man).
I hope nobody forms a betting pool for when Robert Maas will first get
a woman into his apartment for cuddling. :-)
That sort of thing would, however, be sort of fun: Each time some
member of the group gets close to accomplishing some significant
anti-shyness goal, such as the guy who was afraid to get on the dance
floor even if he went to the dance, we could bet on when the goal will
be accomplilshed. :-)
How come you write such good essay questions that my answers are always
ten times as long as the questions? :-) :-) :-)
Robert Maas
I suggest you first tell me where to get the money to put in my pocket.
I am very good at programming computers, but need adaption for my
disabilities, which employers aren't willing to provid, they'd rather
hire a non-disabled perosn. I wrote a computer program that teaches
pre-school children how to read and spell, but I don't have the money
to buy what it takes to port to other computers that other people have.
I need to find neighborhood families where the parents don't want to
wait until first grade because their kid is already begging to be taught
to read, who can walk their kids over to my apartment to use my program
(under the parent's supervision) for 10-20 minutes per day, but I'm too
shy to go door to door soliciting volunteers. If I could get my program
evaluated and ported and marketed, I'd have millions of dollars, but I'm
at a deadlock currently, unless the local school principal agrees to
allow slow first-graders to come over and see whether my extra help can
put them back up with the clsss.
ANTICIPOINTMENT
In article <36d9ebaa....@news.supernews.com>,
melo...@nospam.gov wrote:
> On 19 Feb 1999 01:05:50 GMT, r...@shell.netmagic.net (Robert Maas) wrote:
>
> >Janet was my first true virtual friend in many years. I hope she can
> >accept my occasional mistakes (and I hope I never again make such a
> >gross mistake).
>
> Just because someone gives you a "virtual hug" on USENET and responds to your
> posts with lots of smileys does not mean that they're (or even intend to be)
> your best net-buddy. Theres a difference between being friend and being
> friend-LY. Janet is clearly the latter, and you certainly "blew it", as you
> said, by inflating her simple acts of friendliness into sickening and very
> disturbing expressions of true "love".
>
> ><<You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone
> >IMHO.>>
> >
> >Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
> >ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
> >all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
> >relate to people.
>
> Please forgive me if I don't play along with your sorry attempt to garner
> sympathy with this paragraph.
>
> I'll just move on...
>
> ><<Okay, you might have some feeling for Janet>>
> >
> I know you probably hate to hear it over and over again, but you DON'T really
> "love" Janet. It's simply not possible, since shes only been here for 2 weeks
or
> so, and havent even talked IRL. You have a crush, plain and simple. You just
> took it WAAAAAY too far.
>
> I would strongly concur with my fellow a.s.s.'ers and advise you to seek out
> some sort of professional therapy. And if you claim that your insurance policy
> wont cover it, I would suggest asking around and find a reasonably-priced
> therapist which you can pay for out-of-pocket. Your emotional health is much
too
> important to let the fact that your insurance doesnt cover a therapist destroy
> your life.
>
> Aloha
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> mel matsuoka Hawaiian Image Video Productions
> Editor/Digital Media Dude http://www.hawaiianimage.com
> mel@EATTHISSPAMFORDhawaiianimage+com
> I must agree that you are probably freaking janet"out"..I have been in
similar situations to Janets..I am not saying that you are not a nice
guy..etc.I just want you to know that in my situation I had to stop posting
,change my user name etc..It was very inconvienient..
If love were all...
anticipointment
Robert Maas
<<Will 1-back: I suppose it was uncalled for; I apologize. (But I'm
not going to do anything more than apologize in an effort to "make it
up to you." >>
Why should you do that? Your remark was standard flaming technique,
which sometimes just needs a retraction. What I did with my screwup was
much more serious because I screwed up attributions on something very
sensitive then based my entire reply on thinking Janet instead of Kris
had made a pass at me. (Yes, I think now that it was a pass rather than
just flirting, when he/she explicitly offered me more than a hug. I
wish somebody would tell me what Kris's gender is!)
<<On the other hand, some of the examples you offered -- the person who
falls asleep at the wheel, particularly -- did sort of shout
"Knuckle-head!" at me.>>
Man needs to work night driving vehicle to support family. One day
there family emergencies causing him to lose some of his sleep. He
calls boss to ask for night off, but boss says he's neede for urgent
delivery of medical supplies to a disaster scene, and he'll be fired if
he can't do the job. He Has his wife lay out his clothes and get
everything ready including brown-bag dinner to take with him to eat en
route, as he uses all the remaining time to nap before his shift. But
all that preparation isn't enough, he falls asleep and runs off the
road two miles before the delivery at 8AM.
Should he not even have made that effort to keep his job so he could
prevent his family from becoming homeless in the winter in Chicago?
<<If you're sleepy while you're driving, pull over and sleep!>>
If you realize it. If he sleeps in truck two miles from destination, he
delays supplies 2 hours and is fired despite all that effort. If he
drives those last 2 miles, he keeps his jolkkjsdjsfskzzzzzzzz CRASH!!
(That special effect is his falling asleep in middle of deciding what to
do.)
<<Or let someone else drive!>>
Not an option in that example.
<<Obviously, your choice of newsreader is yours,>>
No, it's supplied by the iSP.
<<Under Linux, I use
the same thing I use under Windows -- Netscape 4.5.>>
Does that run under VT100 dialup port?
<<Will: I find it very unlikely that you do not, in fact, love Janet. >>
<<Robert: I agree, thanks for the confirmation of my feelings. Or is
this a set-up for coming back tomorrow and claiming you typed it
backwards??>>
<<Will, not yet seeing the problem: What are you talking about?>>
<<Will, finally realizing his gaffe: Ack!>>
<<Will, trying to undo the gaffe: I must offer my most sincere and
humble apologies; I did, in fact, mean that it is "very likely that you
do not" love her -- or "unlikely that you do," as you prefer.>>
That's what I had thought likely, but I wanted to make you sweat the
flipped bit before I took up contesting what you really meant. That was
fun how you prostrated your self on the floor before me to offer our
apologies. But the fact is I do indeed love her but don't want to
debate it with you because then she'll have to see it ONE MORE TIME
(like the band keeps playing that same song over and over and announces
ONE MORE TIME each time they're going to do it again).
And now for an interruption, a joke I thought of right now, and since I
feel like we're in a conversation, I'll post it right here in real
time: This is a new pickup-line I thought of just then: Man goes to
pretty lady, fakes like he's drunk, which she believes, he says "Yoooou
are buuuutiful." Lady says "And you're drunk" and starts to turn and
walk away, and guy fakes again "Well, in a ew hours I'll be sober, but
you'll still be beautiful." This is adapted from a Deep Space Nine
skit where the man really drunk, but my ideas is the drunkennes is
faked so it can be used as a pickup line generally.
And now, back to the regular conversation:
<<I realize this makes me look like a bit of a fool.>>
But nowhere near how bad I felt when Janet herself was the first person
to notify me of my gross attribution mistake, so in any case the
biggest piece of harm had already been done.
<<Again, I apologize.>>
Now you're whining. It was just a little mistake because you tried to
get too smartypants about putting multiple negatives in a single sense
and it was too difficult for you to proofread. The real lesson you need
to learn is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid). If you didn't have so many
negatives, you could have proofread it correctlly before posting.
Anyway, it's funny watching you squirm just because you deny that Janet
is such a great lady that it's hard for some guys to avoid loving her.
I have no SO, not even a friend or acquaintance, so I have all my
feelings pent up with nobody to spend them on, so when a really nice
lady shows that she really cares about me, really tries to help me on
multiple occasions and adds virtual hugs to the mix several times,
which is more than my latest actual Real Life SO (Significant Other)
did, in short she's not only a better friend to me than anyone else in
the past nine years but she's also expressing affection at me every
time I give her the slightest provocation such as I say something very
protective or caring toward her, and furthermore she makes it clear
that she lives in San Jose which is not too far from here for meeting
and dating her if our affectionate friendship goes that direction, not
much considered by me yet, or for live therapy in addition to online
therapy, which is much more likely and is essential for solving some of
her problems.
As long as you're prostrate on the rug, this seems as good a place as
any to get to the point about Janet's case plan for her kissing phobia,
which is the biggest problem she expressed when she first posted.
(Sure, saving step 36 for marriage will be very stressful if she
doesn't have any alternative way(s) to release her sexual tension, but
the MAIN problem is that feels like some kind of weirdo for never
having gotten a kiss at her age, and that feeling is distinctly NOT
healthy.)
I have generally listed about 36 steps of touching, from hand-shake to
coitis, and maybe not clearly enough applied these to her problems, so
let me clarify now:
For the kissing phobia, whereby she never had even one date until last
Fall, and then at long last she had a chance to kiss but was too afraid
etc., and making up excuses that she didn't feel like he was the right
guy to kiss her, so couldn't even allow a kiss then and now really
worries she never will, she needs to learn one by one and very slowly
how to "let go" with an appropriate guy and allow him to hold hands, or
allow him to caress her brow, or whatever level of affection is
appropriate for how strongly she feels affectonate toward that
particular guy. My idea is that she'd start with step 1 and see if that
seems appropriate. If so, do it. Then consider step 2. If appropiate
then do it also. Learn the steps only one per session, so she isn't
rushed to levels that she'll regret later, and so she can relish the
feeling of each level instead of only the main levels, stopping when
she feels the next step isn't appropriate for her current partner.
Anyway, I really think that breaking the path from eye contaact to
intercourse into 36 tiny steps,and having Janet do just the very first
few she's comfortable with, and even them only one per session, is best
for her getting comfortable with affection so that she'll eventually be
able to accept a kiss, and I haven't seen anybody say what's really
wrong with my plan or provide an alternate plan.
<<Perhaps I should take my own advice and more carefully read my posts
before I send them!)>>
Yes, in general, but there's a point of diminishing returns. Be sure
you catch any major things such as totlaly inverting sense of what you
try to say.
I've been up all night, now 7:30 the next day, gotta stop your reply,
marked pickup point, will finish another day.
JerryO
My take is that he's fallen in love with being in love because he wanted
to bad to have someone love him.
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Nebulous Rex wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999 16:48:39 -0600, "Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)"
> <be...@interlinx.qc.ca> wrote:
>
> >2) Go easy on the "I love you Janet", "You are the girl of my fantasies",...
> >You're freaking Janet out... Well you're freaking almost everyone IMHO.
--
For more information about this service, send e-mail to:
he...@anon.twwells.com -- for an automatically returned help message
ad...@anon.twwells.com -- for the service's administrator
ano...@anon.twwells.com -- anonymous mail to the administrator
Will Grzanich
> (Yes, I think now that it was a pass rather than
> just flirting, when he/she explicitly offered me more than a hug. I
> wish somebody would tell me what Kris's gender is!)
He's already replied to your post, saying that he's male.
[snip driving accident stuff, which I concede if only because it's a
silly thing to argue about.]
> <<Obviously, your choice of newsreader is yours,>>
>
> No, it's supplied by the iSP.
Since when? You dial into your ISP to make the connection, then use the
software of your choice to make use of that connection. Does your ISP
also dictate what browser you use?
> <<Under Linux, I use
> the same thing I use under Windows -- Netscape 4.5.>>
>
> Does that run under VT100 dialup port?
Hell, I don't even know what that means.
> That's what I had thought likely, but I wanted to make you sweat the
> flipped bit before I took up contesting what you really meant. That was
> fun how you prostrated your self on the floor before me to offer our
> apologies.
"Prostrated?" I assure you, I was sitting upright the entire time.
Don't flatter yourself.
> But the fact is I do indeed love her but don't want to
> debate it with you because then she'll have to see it ONE MORE TIME
> (like the band keeps playing that same song over and over and announces
> ONE MORE TIME each time they're going to do it again).
Er...you've been doing this anyway.
> <<Again, I apologize.>>
>
> Now you're whining.
No, I was apologizing. Just a friendly suggestion: invest in a good
dictionary. Apologizing is not whining, and smiling at, making eye
contact with, and waving at a woman is not "almost scoring." :)
> It was just a little mistake because you tried to
> get too smartypants about putting multiple negatives in a single sense
> and it was too difficult for you to proofread.
It had nothing to do with...er...smarty-pantsness? I just made a
knuckle-headed mistake. "Oops." Only one of said negatives was
intended to be there.
"I don't not think it unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from
loving Janet..."
> Anyway, it's funny watching you squirm just because you deny that Janet
> is such a great lady that it's hard for some guys to avoid loving her.
When did I deny that Janet might be a "great lady?" I don't even know
her. For that matter, neither do you, really.
> As long as you're prostrate on the rug...
Keep it up, and I'll get offended. Just in case you care.
> I have generally listed about 36 steps of touching, from hand-shake to
> coitis, and maybe not clearly enough applied these to her problems, so
> let me clarify now:
Please don't. I mean, you're thinking way too hard about this. I
guarantee that nobody else here has a 36-step touching plan, and for
good reason.
> Anyway, I really think that breaking the path from eye contaact to
> intercourse into 36 tiny steps,and having Janet do just the very first
> few she's comfortable with, and even them only one per session, is best
> for her getting comfortable with affection so that she'll eventually be
> able to accept a kiss, and I haven't seen anybody say what's really
> wrong with my plan or provide an alternate plan.
What's wrong with your plan is that it's just plain weird. That might
be a good way to cure somebody of a more conventional phobia, but this
one is much too intimate for such a process. I'd prefer to refer her to
Marc or another NLPer for such help which doesn't involve actually
kissing or having intercourse with anybody.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>My take is that he's fallen in love with being in love because he wanted
>to bad to have someone love him.
That's a good assessment. "Desperate men do desperate things," as
they say.
Andrew Venor
> I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
> I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
>
Now their is a good reason for a mandatory waiting period for the purchase
of handguns.
ALV
JerryO
>
> > <<Under Linux, I use
> > the same thing I use under Windows -- Netscape 4.5.>>
> >
> > Does that run under VT100 dialup port?
He obviously has a slip account. Go Pine,go!
>
> Hell, I don't even know what that means.
> > able to accept a kiss, and I haven't seen anybody say what's really
> > wrong with my plan or provide an alternate plan.
>
> What's wrong with your plan is that it's just plain weird. That might
> be a good way to cure somebody of a more conventional phobia, but this
> one is much too intimate for such a process. I'd prefer to refer her to
> Marc or another NLPer for such help which doesn't involve actually
> kissing or having intercourse with anybody.
Or plain simple 'hi,how are you. Would you like to go out sometime?'
..and take it from then on, playnig by ear.
What you shouldnt do in a post, is add paragraphs like this:
<now,if you dont go out with me,that's okay. I I can sit in front of your
door until you get used to my presence, and then you will open the door
and say hi to me,and you will let me in. I will have brought some flowers
but since I dont know how long you will take to get used to me sitting by
your doorstep, I am clever that I will bring a jar with water..but iffor
some reason I let the jar tip and the water drains away, will you lend me
a glass of water so I can put in my jar so the flowers are not dead by the
time you are confortable with opening the door? then we can move to step
two.I will bring a detailed chart with all the 36 teps , so we can
robotically follow those steps..I can even bring a marker in case you
dont have one,so you can check off the steps we've done,and you can feel
happy about yourself that you're managing to acocomplish all these little
successes that eventually will build into greater self esteem. blah blah>
(I suppose I could be a net.actor and roleplay exotic characters) :)
Basically Robert, what you're forgetting about what goes on between two
people, is that there has to be _intimacy_ , and the person has to feel
_confortable_ with *you*(as in, your personality, your way of being, as
'you' as an individual -not as 'you' as in a 'person'..) so like Will
Gretzky writes, following a predetermined step by step plan could work
with other phobias, WRT kissing and hugging, it's just plain..er..weird.
What *you* should work with when trying to establish a relationship with
other
women( Janet is a lost case for you now) , is to *not* overwhelm them with
so much information, *not* overwhelm them with so much attention, is to
take little steps to see if you two are really a match, and if you two
share the same perspective of the world, and same passions or ideas. When
two people find themselves in the other person, that's when intimacy
'begins',and that's when the kissing and hugging comes into play. It needs
not follow a 36 step plan(hence why everyone thinks it's weird) because it
comes almost naturally..maybe it's steps, for we certainly can steppize it
1) hug 2) kiss 3) holding hands 4) make out 5) sex (this is just a very
loose definition and only for exemplification purposes) ..regardless,even
if you think of these as steps, they certainly need *not* be brought to
the person's consicous attention. " oh cool..according to our 36 step, we
should do this.' because it's something you *feel*(again, back on this
issue) and not think rationally about.
That is your big problem,Robert, and Mark's (hey,Mark, I remmeber!).
Relationships cant be made to be predictable to the n-th move. You cant
make up a plan in your mind, trying to cover all bases, and then expect
the reality to conform to it.
Hope it helps,
Jerryo
(as a matter of fact, why have you tried to get psychological help before?
what were your problems?)
Robert Maas
seek out some sort of professional therapy.>>
I'm rather fed up with people recommending something that I have been
trying to do for many years, but NOT telling me how I'm supposed to do
it. Would you like me to post a list of the agencies I've requested
services from, every one of which has either flat-out refused me ("you
don't have an Axis-I diagnosis, only Axis-II, so we aren't funded to
help you) or simply refused to reply to any of my queries about what
services are available? So far the ONLY therapy I've been able to get
for my disability is this newsgroup. Would you please tell me the name
of some other agency near where I live which provides services to
disabled people such as myself? Put up or shut up.
<<find a reasonably-priced therapist which you can pay for
out-of-pocket.>>
And you of course will pay me to program computers for you, thereby
putting the money in my pocket in the first place, right? What platform
would you like me to program on for you? What hourly rate will you pay
me?
Robert Maas
make the decision to talk to you.>>
I did leave her alone, but she's such an amazing lady that she took so
little time to forgive me somewhat that she already re-opened some
communication with me BEFORE you posted your advice to leave her alone.
I think the best answer now is just to be VERY careful what I post to
or about her. I can give her credit for much of my recovery to date,
where such credits are appropriate (and in fact in an article I posted
just a few minutes ago, announcement of milestone in my treatment,
where I gave credit to Steve Kudlak, and to ancient Chinese culture,
where the MOST important credit goes to Janet, sigh I didn't think of
giving her credit there until I already posted it, sigh. (Sorry Janet,
that's the one place where mentionning your name really would have been
appropriate, sorry sorry sorry that I post sexual fantasies that offend
you, but then forget to post the proper credit you truly deserve. Oh
well, I gave you credit for essentially the samething, just not so formal,
elsewhere, so you know I appreciate your help and virtual affection.)
<<You really freaked her out,>>
Yeah, and the sad thing was it was totally an accident where Murphy's
law happened in the second form "and at the worst possible time", I
screwed up attributions right at the top, and based my whole response
on that false attrigution, and to top it off it was in a very sensitive
(potentially embarassing) area, so all the shit came together in one
place to make a truly collosal goof on my part. If I had just checked
the attributions once more, it wouldn't have happened, so it truly
was my fault, just like if you don't look at the temperature guage
on your car for a half hour and by coincidence that was the day your
fan belt had broken and the engine overheats and is destroyed. Any
other day, not checking the temperature guage (attributions) wouldn't
have produced a disaster, but that day I failed to check carefully
enough when I really should have recognized the potential for big
disaster and double-checked.
Also, I see there are a bunch of followups after this one. I want to
openly thank the lot of you, including Janet herself, for responding to
my "how to make it up to her" appeal with thoughtful advice here and
there. In Real Life it's not like that. If I were to make a goof that
humiliated an important person in the orginzation, such as the hostess
of the company socials, or the wife of the minister, or the biggest
benefactor, etc., when I then came into the next meeting everyone would
just give me glares and tell me why, and ONLY if I have a close
personal friend would that friend take me to the side and explain it
like this (hypothetical RL big-goof): Robert, do you remember when I
handed that stick of very personal medical examinations from Diane's
gynocologist and asked you to mail that to her husband so he can see
how the cancer is under control? And when I handed you that quarterly
report and asked you to make copies and send it to all the employees?
Did it ever occur, when you put the report in the auto-copy auto-mail
machine, to check an extra time to make sure you hadn't switched the
two packets? (long pause, not a word spoken, suddenly Robert's eyes
open with a look of astonishment, then his face turns violet, then he
passes out)
<<so give her some time...>>
Yeah. If something comes up in an article I'm reading, like she once
again tells somebody they aren't really shy if they have more than
three friends or some such stereotype mis-application, I still want to
politely inform her of her mistake, but I'll omit any hugs and kisses
and caresses in such public message until she's comfortable flirting
with me using virtual affection once again. And I'll postpone serious
work on my case plan for her until she's ready to deal with it. Etc.
Just the bare minimum appropriate for UseNet folowups to total
strangers, nothing personal for a while.
Will Grzanich
> He obviously has a slip account. Go Pine,go!
Ewww...I didn't even know they still did those. :)
> ...so like Will Gretzky writes...
Ghahahahahah...! Don't piss me off, "JerryO," or I'll start using your
real name -- and don't you think I've forgotten it! ;^)
> That is your big problem,Robert, and Mark's (hey,Mark, I remmeber!).
> Relationships cant be made to be predictable to the n-th move. You cant
> make up a plan in your mind, trying to cover all bases, and then expect
> the reality to conform to it.
Exactly. The best you can do is make up a plan in your mind based on
what you know, take into account what you *don't* know, and cross your
fingers.
Will Grzanich
> <<You really freaked her out,>>
>
> Yeah, and the sad thing was it was totally an accident where Murphy's
> law happened in the second form "and at the worst possible time", I
> screwed up attributions right at the top, and based my whole response
> on that false attrigution, and to top it off it was in a very sensitive
> (potentially embarassing) area, so all the shit came together in one
> place to make a truly collosal goof on my part. If I had just checked
> the attributions once more, it wouldn't have happened, so it truly
> was my fault...
Robert, do you truly not see that, even had you gotten the attributions
right, Janet would still have been "freaked out," and that, indeed, she
was "freaked out" even *before* that slip-up?
Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)
><<I would strongly concur with my fellow a.s.s.'ers and advise you to
>seek out some sort of professional therapy.>>
>
>I'm rather fed up with people recommending something that I have been
>trying to do for many years, but NOT telling me how I'm supposed to do
>it.
Well i would help you there if i had a clue, i don't know how the american
system works for this and i definitivly don't know any therapists in the
Mountain View area.
One thing you have to understand however is that your problems are deeper
rooted than simple shyness. Honestly i think your shyness is a manifestation
of some "defense" mechanism to protect you from your other problems. This
newsgroup is a support group about shyness and no one here is a professional
in the field. We can simply provide suggestion and advice but no cure. And
since i think your core problem is not shyness itself, i don't think we can
be of big help.
I seriously think that if you want help, you can find it. I suggest to look
for help but keep in consideration that i don't think your problems are
mostly with shyness so keeping this in mind might help you find more
apropriate help.
Sebby.
Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)
><<You really freaked her out,>>
>
>Yeah, and the sad thing was it was totally an accident where Murphy's
>law happened in the second form "and at the worst possible time", I
An accident???? Okay you beleived she might have some interest in you cuz of
a virtual hug that didn't come from her... Then the next thing we know,
you're telling her (ON THE NEWSGROUP) about your "Squirting semen on her"
fantasies... Oh... Pluueeeeeezzzzeee...
>
><<so give her some time...>>
>
>Yeah. If something comes up in an article I'm reading, like she once
>again tells somebody they aren't really shy if they have more than
>three friends or some such stereotype mis-application, I still want to
>politely inform her of her mistake, but I'll omit any hugs and kisses
>and caresses in such public message until she's comfortable flirting
>with me using virtual affection once again. And I'll postpone serious
>work on my case plan for her until she's ready to deal with it. Etc.
>Just the bare minimum appropriate for UseNet folowups to total
>strangers, nothing personal for a while.
It never occured to you that se might not be interested at all in you???
WAKE UP!
Sebby.
Andrew Venor
> Robert Maas <r...@shell.netmagic.net> wrote in message
> news:7akoah$3h9$2...@remarQ.com...
> ><<I would strongly concur with my fellow a.s.s.'ers and advise you to
> >seek out some sort of professional therapy.>>
> >
> >I'm rather fed up with people recommending something that I have been
> >trying to do for many years, but NOT telling me how I'm supposed to do
> >it.
>
Robert, now that I know you are near by in the South Bay, check around at the
bookstores and see if you can find a free quarterly paper called Common Ground.
Aside from a few articles, it is a publication that advertises places for
"personnel growth."
In there is a section where therapist in the San Francisco Bay Area advertise.
With this listing you can call around and find a therapist that you can work
with. I do remember that several therapists in there advertise as specializing
in shyness.
How's that for a start for you.
ALV
yakima
wrote:
> <<I think Yakima deserves an apology, too, as you've said some
> inappropriate stuff to her as well.>>
>
> I don't recall ever saying anything inappropriate to her, but if I did
> I'd like to know about it so that I can consider an appropriate
> apology. Can you quote each offensive remark (not whole article) so
> that I can look up the article in DejaNews to see the full article and
> the context?
I'm sure she's referring to the explicit sexual fantasy you wrote about me
under the thread "I can't believe my weekend." Several other people also
found it extremely disturbing and inappropriate, as evidenced by the
followups to that thread.
> <<Also, you said you went to the post office to try to look up my phone
> #. This is not normal behavior, Robert.>>
>
> Actually that's pretty common whe someone is in unrequeted love and
> wants to be able to talk to the lovee.
It's also pretty common behavior for stalkers. You are very close to
crossing that line, if you haven't crossed it already.
-yakima
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>What you shouldnt do in a post, is add paragraphs like this:
>
><now,if you dont go out with me,that's okay. I I can sit in front of your
>door until you get used to my presence, and then you will open the door
>and say hi to me,and you will let me in. I will have brought some flowers
>but since I dont know how long you will take to get used to me sitting by
>your doorstep, I am clever that I will bring a jar with water..but iffor
>some reason I let the jar tip and the water drains away, will you lend me
>a glass of water so I can put in my jar so the flowers are not dead by the
>time you are confortable with opening the door? then we can move to step
<etc...>
Damn. That's just scary, man. I had to check Deja News to make sure
that wasn't an old quote of his before I believed you wrote it. Label
me impressed! :)
(Okay, it was actually the "like robots" part I snipped that tipped me
off, but that's still a bang-up job.)
Robert Maas
had this weird idea that all just telling a woman she was "beautiful"
was my key into her kingdom, and love should move at the speed of
light just because I wanted it to and never mind reality since that'll
just get me down.>>
Actually there are people who can occasionally get by with that. For
example, imagine if Elvis Presley, before he died, had gone to JerryO's
mother, or my mother for that matter, and told her she's really good
looking (and gave approprate faked body language of astonishment upon
first seeing her, so she believed he was attracted to her even before
he first opened his mouth) and asked her if he could make love to her.
If Las Vegas oddsmakers gave 40 to 1 against her accepting the offer
and actully copulating for at least 5 seconds before Candid Camera X
was revealed, on which side would you bet?
Telling a woman honestly how you feel about her is important to do and
should not be omitted. But it's tricky to get the words right, and to
get the timing right, and to get the repeat frequency right. For
example, with a wife who is TERRIBLY insecure, such as "Brenda" (Julie
Kavnar), it has to be every day like clockwork with no missing and no
extra even when she's especially beautiful, else:
Monday: Hi beautiful, you look lovely today.
/ Thank you honey.
Tuesday: Hi gorgeous, you look pretty today.
/ Thank you honey.
Wednesday: Hi sweetie, you look nice today.
/ What's the matter, I'm no longer gorgeous already?
(Is that an excellent rendition of "Brenda" or what??)
Please somebody give me literary critique on that. I'm proud of it
being an accurate portryal of "Brenda" character on "Rhoda" series, but
I'm insecure, and so I need either a stroke or a burst bubble asap, but
only from people who liked that show and watched it enough to get a
feelfor that lovely darling pathetic character when they saw it
somewhere such as Nick at Night, not if they just heard of the
character or maybe saw just part of an episode and didn't fully
appreciate her character.
Back to topic: for ordinary mortals (not Elvis et al), doing everything
exactly correctly is NOT a key to get into her kingdom or front door or
anything of hers. Remember, this is a randomocracy, and "there's always
something" to quote Rosana Rosanadana (Gilda Radner unless I've blown a
fuse in my brain). You try your best, and hope you get something going,
maybe not exactly what you expected on the schedule you expected it,
maybe not what you expected EVER. What hurt me so much was that things
NEVER clicked for me, not ever in ten or twenty years. The best I got
was years of abject social deprivation alternating with almost exactly
2.5 momtns of a monogamous "girlfriend" relationship each time. My duty
cycle for having a SO was about one of those 2.5-month relationships
every 4 years. Lately it's been even worse. I dearly wish it gets
better now that I've solved one of my shyness-related syndromes
(approaching women in semi-public places). My only prevoius similar
cure was about ten years after I started folk dancing I finally was
able to ask a lady to do a couple dance with me. For the first ten
years I did only line dances, except 'mixers' (when I could ask a girl
just to start the dance, and she wouldn't be stuck with me for the
whole dance as a result, so Ididn't feel like I was imposing my ugly
face and inept dancing skills on her as much) or during teaching. Do
you know how I acomplished that? I didn't, somebody else did. Two older
women, Marge (with grouchy personality) and Helen (mexican) had seen me
dancing for a long time, and for unknown reasons started dragging me
into dances, telling me (sometimes a blatant lie) the dance was easy
enough I could pick it up as the music played and she physically
dragged my arms around and hoped my feet would somehow follow. Thanks
both of you old ladies! For example, the Israeli dance Livratini has
really nice music, so I always wanted to learn it from the very first
year I started dancing, but it wasn't ever taught because every one
else (except myself) already knew it or had a regular partner ot teach
it to them. But I had no regular partner, and without some coaching
it's horribly difficult to figure out from watching, so after ten years
of loving the music and wishing to learn the dance, I hadn't even
started learning it. But one of those two old (each well over 50)
ladies (I forget which) dragged me through it each time it came on
during Debbie Weissman's Israeli folk dances, and the first several
times were horribly clumsy, she was VERY patient to let me ruin her
favorite dance repeatedly, but finally I started to get the patterns in
my mind well enough that sll she had to do was tell me the general
character of the part that comes next and I'd remember the appropriate
detailed motions.
Contrary to what people say, some people really can start to really
love others within a short time after first encountering them, if the
target of the love is an exceptional person (such as Janet) or
sometimes for no obvious reason at all (in the case of Bente, last name
omitted to avoid embarassing her, like Janet she might not like to hear
that I love her). I met Bente at folk dancing, was soundly rejected by
her, but I was still attracted to her, nothing clicked, then she
started going out of her way to run away from me when I hadn't even
noticed her before she made the big chase scene. Body language says she
was very shy, too shy to tell me in normal ways that she likes me now
but is too sly to come to me to tell me, so using strange games to get
my attention so that I'll come to her. Unfortunately I was only 24
years old at the time, never had a girlfriend before, never had a
friend, never dated except very briefly, hadn't taken the appropriate
psychology course, had no idea that body language can be wrong if the
body-person comes from a different society or is very young.
Intellectually I was pissed off at her blatant nasty treatment of me,
so I posted a sign near her home, saying how badly she had treated me,
to shame her in front of her neighbors. But deep in my subconscious my
reading of her body language was working on me, and after a day or two
I realized that my true feeling was that I was in love with her. So I
took down the hate sign and replaced it with a love sign, or somesuch.
My strongest desire was that she have no doubt whatsoever that I loved
her, so that she would NEVER get lonely thinking nobody loved or even
like her, thereby altruisticly saving her from the terrible loneless
that I have experienced most of my adult life. For about one year I was
absolutely totally in love with her, then the love spell tamed down and
I've just loved and cared about her ever since, to this very day. If
she came to me right now and asked me to make it up to her, how I had
humiliated her, I would make it up to her without question. I will
always love her and care about her, and be there if she ever needs me.
True love will never die. Don't try to tell me such is just an
infatuation that has lasted over twenty years with no letup except that
transition from intense love to background love after the first year.
It is true love, alwasy was after that triggering event that took only
1-2 days to switch from anger to love, so that's an example that true
love can come on rapidly. The test is whether it's unselfish, wanting
to help her more than or instead of having sexual or even passionate
affectionate relationships with her. The test is not necessarily how
long you've known her. Sometimes I get the hots for a woman I truly
love, in which case the caring unselfish love and the sexual passion
are of about equal strengths.
Here's another example of rapid-onset true love: My very first real
girlfriend (intimate kissing and baseball 4th, and that's about as far
as we went, lasted about 2.5 months, was that the figure you guessed,
she broke up with me (I described out last two dates in another post),
then a few months ago she tried to be my friend by introducing me to
Carol Drummond, who was very good looking at that time. I played a game
of Chess with her, using my pocket chess set, the first girl I ever met
who was pretty and played Chess (the second who played chess at all), I
defeated her massively, sigh for her, and while I was watching her
think out each next moves I noticed how terribly lovely her lips were,
more and more by the minute. I had an uncontrollable lust to kiss those
absolutely gorgeous lips!!! So after the game I thanked her for the
game and told her I had a special surprise for her and would she please
close her eyes until I give it to her, she did, I pressed my lips
gently but medium-firmly against her incedibly nice lips, the kiss felt
absolutely wonderful to me, she got mad at me and stopped liking me.
I've loved her ever since (the lust to kiss her turned into shame when
she was so upset/hurt/embarassed/disgusted by the kiss, then somehow I
cared about her being hurt an wanted never to hurt her again, and I
began to love her in a caring way, and do to this day. Many years later
I saw her again at folk dancing, and she updated me on her life
hsitory: She had gotten married, but the marriage didn't work, so she
was divorced now. She had long ago forgiven me for stealing that kiss,
appreciated that I still loved her, but still didn't want either
another kiss nor a relationship with me. She was a really nice person
that time I saw her, very understanding that I felt normal feelings
based on her terrific beauty, understood how I was overwealmed by her
beauty so much, she was an older and wiser, but still attractive, woman
after a marrioage and a divorce. From first being interested in her to
loving her was less than a day, but it lasted over 20 years, another
counterexample to the onset-speed test for infatuation vs. love. Ccrol
Drummond, if you are on the net and see this, and don't believe me, I
sincerely mean it, you can get a hug or friendship or evenhelp with a
problem any time you ask, the offer hasn't gone away yet and probably
never will, because I still love you.
Apply all that evidence, in the obvious way, to the new woman I love,
and don't be so quick to dismiss it. One test of love is how long it
lasts. So give her time to get over the grossly stupid accident that
humiliated her, and give me time to see if I still think she's so great
and still ardently want to help her recover from shyness after n
months.
<<It really is possible to fall in love with someone you don't know,
you just do it all in your mind.>>
Yes, but you're missing the essential point, that love is ALWAYS
exactly a feeling in your mind, nothing more, nothing less. It's
"relationship" that is between two people. It's perfectly valid for me
to say I still love Barb and Bente and Carol and Estelle and Lisa and
Rosana and now maybe Janet (if it stands the test of time), but as far
as I know NONE of those women loves me in return except probably
Estelle (the 2.5 + 2.5 month, manic-depressive, which I described in
another post). Estelle and I will probably separately feel caring love
for each other forever, but I know we're incompatible not just because
of her bipolar disorder, but because she has this idiotic psychological
belief of feeling happy by wishing it upon yourself, the Power of
Positive Thinking dead-end, which she tries to push (but only
occasionally when she feels it's appropriate) on anyone around her she
cares for. When I knew her she was sweet (except when M/D set in both
ends at same time), even when manic (when I was at work all night but
she didn't know it, so she came with her guitar to seranade me, so sat
with her guitar playing it all night until the police carted her away,
and I found out about it the next afternoon when she called me from
Sequoia Hospital to tell me about it. If that isn't a sweet way to make
a terrible nuisance of herself, I don't know what is. She's also the
only woman who ever raped me in my sleep, in the middle of what was
supposed to be a monogamous sexual relationship between me and another
woman, but that's another story for another time.
<<You fill in all the gaps you don't have real information for, and
since you "know" she's the one, it's okay to fill in all those gaps
with the best things you can think of.>>
True love accepts a person for better or for worse, assuming the worse
isn't too overwealming, even if some of the worse she failed to reveal
to you at the outset of the relationship. After you fall in love, your
learning about her doesn't stop, you continue to learn more and more,
so that after loving her for ten years in an active monogamous
relationship you might know a hundred times as much about her as you
did when you first fell in love with her. Does that mean the first
three years of marriage, when you knew less than half as much as you
know now, you didn't REALLY love her at all? No!!! It's the feeling,
and willingness to commit your services and attention to her, that
makes it love, not how much of what you think she's like is knowledge
vs. intelligent guesses. This is a difference of opinin. Eric Fromme is
allegedly the expert on this, but I forget whether he agrees or
disagrees with my position on this question, does anybody has his
classic book handy to look up the topic.
Wai-wai-wait a minute. Why are you talking about love, when the topic
of this thread was about a stupid mistake that humiliated someone nice?
How on Earth did you manage to trick me into debating an off-topic
point in my own thread??? Shame on me for falling for the trick. I just
look at what's said and answer anything said, and dom't bother to
filter what's on- and what's off-topic. Oh well, c'est la vie!
<<And of course, she secretly longs to be with you, she's just too shy
to admit it.>>
No, I don't think so at present. I am pretty sure she seriously cares
about my welfare, wants to help me any time she sees a way to help, and
isn't afraid to say things that confirm in no uncertain terms that she
cares (nose hairs, and kick butt, specifically). I like having a
therapist who not only truly cares about my welfare in a personal way,
but is available on UseNet for free, and is female so she understands
the other side, and is open enough to finally share with me for the
first time since Greta Torp what she thinks about my case and how she
feels about things I do or say (not directly now that I think of it,
I haven't heard any "I statements" from her, such as "I get scared when
you post that you tried to find my phone number, because I'm still
terrified that some madman might rape me, and although I think you're a
great guy I still don't know you enough to be absolutely billion-to-one
sure you aren't secretly an escaped rapist witha false identity, so if
you please, respect mywish NOT to meet you for another week ortwo,
Robert?", which is my best fill-in-missing-gaps guess as to her feeling
about that item she jumped on me about. (Janet, if that's far from your
true feelings opn that particular point, please tell me, e-mail or
NetNews per your preference).
Opinion question to everyone: I have seen little or no "I messages" in
this newsgroup. Should we all perhaps try to use them more often, or
are they overrated as a benefit to deep personal communication such as
in a therapy or support group?
<<Unfortunately, what you really do is fall in love with a "perfect"
fictional character who has nothing in common with the real person.>>
If the shoe fits on you, fine, but don't project that to others. I know
that Janet is very mentally ill in one area, fear of physical intimacy.
If she never wanted it in the first place, who cares, but she is torn
between her phobia and her cravings, and she understands herself better
than an awful lot of people I've encountered, so she knows the cravings
will only ge tworse through the years, so it's best she work on the
phobia asap, and she came here to do it, and we'll see how things work
out. Her pulling-apart problem is much as I was torn between my
desperate need for an intimate man-woman relationship and my lack of
social resources/skills to find a suitable mate and establish the
desired relationship with her. I'm still totally alone, haven't had a
good hug or kiss for years (every time I think of Janet NEVER yet being
kissed, I "count my lucky stars" I don't have HER exact problem;
kissing, when it was available, on a regular basis for 2.5 months at a
time, and occasionally other times casually, is about the only major
true pleasure I've experienced in my whole life, and the thought of not
even having that for a lifetime is too terrible to have empathy for
without crying), can't even get one or another of the SouthBay ShyGuys
to visit me once in a while so that I can meet a real live shy person
other than myself, and chat with them, and maybe we can go some
semi-public place to practice meeting or at least flirting with
attractive women, and the furthest I've gotten with any woman lately is
kissing her hand, but given the passion those four women listed in my
"Formal announcement .. treatment milestone" article quite obviously
felt for me, I truly believe I'm "on a roll" and will find somebody to
hug and kiss very soon and a SO maybe not long after.
<<But by then it's too late, and her rejection is like a mortal wound.
And it should be, since you've invested all that time and thought and
emotion into her. But then, it really shouldn't be, since you
shouldn't fall in love with fictional characters.>>
Given that after 20 years of marriage you still don't know half of her,
where is your boundary of fraction known vs. fraction not yet known
that determines the first time you should allow yourself to love
somebody?
I say bullshit: Anybody deserving of your love should get it as soon as
you get the info to make that decision. Just realize that love isn't
the same thing as a successful relationship. Witness Estelle and I who
still do each love the other, but don't have any hopes up for a good
relationship, although if she showed up at my door and wanted to hang
out with me from time to time, and if she assured me she wouldn't
interfer with my women-meeting expiditions, it sure would be nice
getting her hugs and penis fondling again.
<<my hope is that Robert realizes he's treading dangerously close to
schizophrenia here, and gets some professional help.>>
No way. All my psychological tests come out competely negative for
that. What they do come out positive for are psychosomatic illness such
as low energy levels and sore muscles and headaches (yes, the same kind
of headache a wife gets when her husband stresses her too much with
too-frequent attempts to coerce her to engage in a form of sexual
activity that doesn't please nor satisfy her), induced by stress caused
by factors they can't diagnose (but I can: lonelness caused by not
having any meaningful human companionship on any regular basis for
years at a time, caused by lack of social skills and services to meet
anybody nice who wants to spend any time with me, maintained by lack of
any available services to alleviate said shyness until a week ago when
my recovery began), and they also come out for Avoidant Personality
Disorder (wanting to meet people, but being afraid to try because of
expectation of resultant emotional pain), as contrasted with Janet's
Social Phobia (where she doesn't want to meet anyone in RL the first
place, similar to but less severe than Greta Garbo who later regarded
her self-imposed hermitude as a terrible terrible mistake she
infinitely regretted at the time of her out-from-hermitude interview).
Remember the words of the Jimmy Rogers song "The world I used to know":
.. for love is just a state of mind.
I wish I had the full lyrics to post, those lyrics are classic,
like "Vincent" or "Bright Elusive Butterfly of Love", poetry to music.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Apply all that evidence, in the obvious way, to the new woman I love,
>and don't be so quick to dismiss it. One test of love is how long it
>lasts.
You want to know what the ultimate test of love is? Imagine you're
married to her. Now imagine she gets in a terrible car wreck and is
horribly disfigured: facial scars, bodily scars, metal plates, gains
weight, trouble walking, can't work, the whole nine yards. Could you
still see yourself loving her? That's the quickest "love or
infatuation" test I know of, so long as you really see it and really
be honest with yourself.
>years I did only line dances, except 'mixers' (when I could ask a girl
>just to start the dance, and she wouldn't be stuck with me for the
>whole dance as a result, so Ididn't feel like I was imposing my ugly
>face and inept dancing skills on her as much) or during teaching. Do
Well, look, you have a penchant for finding beauty in ugly women,
right? Have you ever considered teaching women to do the same to you?
I mean, you know the profound effect it can have on you, so imagine if
you could teach other women to do it? Perhaps you can get Marc M. to
help model it for you?
>that I love her). I met Bente at folk dancing, was soundly rejected by
>her, but I was still attracted to her, nothing clicked, then she
>started going out of her way to run away from me when I hadn't even
>noticed her before she made the big chase scene. Body language says she
>was very shy, too shy to tell me in normal ways that she likes me now
>but is too sly to come to me to tell me, so using strange games to get
>my attention so that I'll come to her. Unfortunately I was only 24
That's possible, but hey, we can't know. You've mentioned before your
fears of being arrested for approaching women. Well, a good way to
avoid that is to take red light signals at face value. That is to
say, if she runs away, RED LIGHT. If she seems uncomfortable with
your looking at her, RED LIGHT. If she paints you a big red sign that
says "fuck off," RED LIGHT. Basically, if you see anything that
immediately strikes you as a red light, back off. Clear your mind
when you get the urge to analyze it. Stop any voices. Move on.
JerryO
Hehhe.. thank you for appreciating my effort :) you deserve a cyber hug,
where are you from? if you are ever in california let me knwo i can give
you a rain check on the cyber hug and make it a real one. I would give you
a real cyber hug, only it wouldnt be cyber anymore. I just hope you wont
feel too embarassed that I will hug you so tight that you might even be
alittle bit short on breath. If I do this, dont esitate in telling me,so I
can correct myself ,and so next time I hug you I wont use the limit of my
strength..*..ops..I was getting carried away again ;)
It's interesting to run my brain on 'Robert mode', all you gotta do is:
1) write about future events to the tiniest detail you can think of
2) write about future possibilities,and wirte about waht you'd do, and if
that fails,what you would do next.
3) predict stuff that has low chance of happening,and expand it a few
levels of guessing forward.
4) bring up 'normal' actions or events,and explain it to the most intimate
detail to the point that it looks disturbing to you.
I wonder if this somehow can make me be 'inside' Robert's mind..
Hey, you too can do it! I'll start teaching a seminar!
Martin
> hire a non-disabled perosn. I wrote a computer program that teaches
> pre-school children how to read and spell, but I don't have the money
> to buy what it takes to port to other computers that other people have.
Are there any kind of enterprise startup or similar grants you could
apply for? If you can put some kind of buisness case, I believe there
are some orgainsations which are willing to give startup cash (there
certainly are in the UK).
> I need to find neighborhood families where the parents don't want to
> wait until first grade because their kid is already begging to be taught
> to read, who can walk their kids over to my apartment to use my program
> (under the parent's supervision) for 10-20 minutes per day, but I'm too
> shy to go door to door soliciting volunteers. If I could get my program
> evaluated and ported and marketed, I'd have millions of dollars, but I'm
> at a deadlock currently, unless the local school principal agrees to
> allow slow first-graders to come over and see whether my extra help can
> put them back up with the clsss.
Could you do things the other way around, and offer to bring the
computer and program to them? Transportation might be a bit of a
problem, but they would probably be more willing to help with that
than they would to send the kids somewhere outside the school.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Hehhe.. thank you for appreciating my effort :) you deserve a cyber hug,
>where are you from? if you are ever in california let me knwo i can give
>you a rain check on the cyber hug and make it a real one. I would give you
>a real cyber hug, only it wouldnt be cyber anymore. I just hope you wont
>feel too embarassed that I will hug you so tight that you might even be
>alittle bit short on breath. If I do this, dont esitate in telling me,so I
>can correct myself ,and so next time I hug you I wont use the limit of my
>strength..*..ops..I was getting carried away again ;)
Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
unbelievable butt-cheeks I've ever seen. I just met her and her
butt-cheeks, but she got mad when I did the test and stopped loving
me. At first I felt really bad, like a big, black, violent vortex of
hate and rage was welling up inside me because I knew she really loved
me but she had to act like she didn't because that's what non-shy
society that doesn't understand shyness expects. So I was so pissed
off that I sent her a Crocodile Dundee tape, even though I know it's
illegal to dub tapes, I dubbed it and sent it anyway, so if any of you
want to sue me, you'll have to talk to the SSA here, and you'll find
out I'm bereft of funds and you're just wasting your time. After I
sent the tape I was sitting at home in my tattered orange chair that
has strips of tattered orange fabric hanging off it, and it looks like
a rotten orange skin that's been left out in out in the sun to dry and
rot and have maggots crawling inside and outside of it, inside and
outside, inside and outside until it starts oozing a thickish, whitish
liquid, but the chair has this neat place on it where bands of white
thread stretch across some of the yellowish foam interior (which
reminds me of the color Jane Nelson's hair. She had the most
voluptous breasts I've ever seen. They began above her flat tummy,
extending down exactly 270 degrees from an upright Cartesian plane
whose y-axis aligned with her spine, and very smoothly and roundly
rolled around to 90 degrees where her gorgeous nipples poked out of
her tight shirt, and then those two love bubbles met with her chest
again at a perfect 70 degree angle. Jane, if you're reading this as a
lurker, I still love you, and I'd love to give you a big loving hug
and follow you through each loving step of my 36-step plan, please
call me at 999-555-1212!) and I realized that it wasn't apathy I was
feeling for her butt love! So I rushed down to the post office and
tried to get the tape back but the morons had already sent it, and
gave the lame excuse that I sent it three days ago. So I got in my
car right then and there and drove to her house! On the way there I
saw this ugly woman driving a car. I mean, it looked like her face
had been cut with a big heavy rlusty industrial-strength
face-shredding face shredder, but above the scars and hair and moles
and pimples and makeup and ooze and pus and harrid war-torn
gangreenous death was the most beautifully contoured nose I'd ever
seen! It was shaped a lot like Jane Nelson's breasts, except it
didn't start perfectly 270 degrees down and bulb voluptiously around
to 90 degrees, but extended exquisitely out at 180 degrees and then,
hey, this is off-topic! I only respond to what I read, so it's your
fault I responded off-topic. I'm prefect, even though I'm horribly
ugly and need a girlfriend and some friends and some money and a
girlfriend and some girlfriends. So anyway, I knew the ugly car woman
with the pretty nose was my only chance at step 36 that day, because
unshy society doesn't recognize that we shy people need a lot more
step 36 than non-shy people, and deserve it more, so I speed up beside
her, and rolled down my window and started honking and waving, and she
looked over and sort of smiled, and I knew at exactly that instant she
was thinking how lucky she was to have me there to keep her from being
lonely, and I bet she started thinking about step 36 right at that
moment, because she doesn't know how very sexually pleasurable I can
make the other 35 steps. So I'm honking and waving, and she starts
veering off the road, obviously indicating she wants to pull over and
have sex, but unfortunately we were on a bridge and she drove off the
side. Well what the fucking shit was all that all about? I guess she
was just stupid. Although as I wrote that, now I realize maybe I
really loved her. Please someone call me at 999-555-1212 and give me
some free help to get out the depression I'm about to program myself
to wallow in. So I got to the Crocodile Dundee woman's house and got
out of my car and there was the mailman, with my tape hanging out of
his brownish, bumpy sack! I took it and replaced it with a video I'd
made. It was a slide show of all the ejaculation pictures I could
find on the net, as well as my extensive 412.3337 issue collection of
porn magazines, many of which unfortunately were of truly hideous men
ejaculating on nymph-like women, which could be like me and Janet, and
that really turns me on, Janet, please come to the shy-support
get-together so I can hfug you, so I replaced the crocodile dundee
tape with it. I don't know what she did with it, but I still love her
to this day, which is perfectly natural and okay and defensible, since
that love has stood the test of time, because it happened 20 years ago
an I've never forgotten her. Well, I'm lonely now, so since this is a
big friendly shy-support get-together, I think Janet should cume two
(if you're reading this Janet, I really am sorry about what I did, and
I'm saving a special shy-support hug just for you, even though that's
all the way to step 10, I'll do it if you're okay with doing it, then
maybe we can go back and do it some of the other steps on the way to
step 36, which will represent your full recovery from your extreme
social illness of never having kissed another man that I know you're
in and that I'd take the great pleasure in working out of you, because
I take great pleasure in helping women, especially nice, beautiful
women like I know you are, because I really do love you, even though I
know you don't love me right now, I'm sure in a few months you'll
realize that you really do love me, and we'll be able to have that big
hug and the rest of the 35 steps, but only as incredibly fast as you
want to take them, and if anyone else wants to cume and watch me fuck
Janet, that's great, but don't get jealous that she really loves me
and not you). Well, it's 3:35 am and I haven't slept in 74 hours, so
I'm going to nap. If any of you want to call me at 999-555-1212, my
ringer will be off until it's on again, so give me a call and I'll
answer.
>It's interesting to run my brain on 'Robert mode', all you gotta do is:
>1) write about future events to the tiniest detail you can think of
>2) write about future possibilities,and wirte about waht you'd do, and if
>that fails,what you would do next.
>3) predict stuff that has low chance of happening,and expand it a few
>levels of guessing forward.
>4) bring up 'normal' actions or events,and explain it to the most intimate
>detail to the point that it looks disturbing to you.
>
>I wonder if this somehow can make me be 'inside' Robert's mind..
>
>Hey, you too can do it! I'll start teaching a seminar!
Oh cool! You can call it RLP <tm> <c> <r> and then sue all your
students when they actually go use it! ;)
yakima
(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
ROTFLMAO! Thank you, JerryO and Nebulous Rex, for making me laugh about
psychosis--again.;)
> >It's interesting to run my brain on 'Robert mode', all you gotta do is:
> >1) write about future events to the tiniest detail you can think of
> >2) write about future possibilities,and wirte about waht you'd do, and if
> >that fails,what you would do next.
> >3) predict stuff that has low chance of happening,and expand it a few
> >levels of guessing forward.
> >4) bring up 'normal' actions or events,and explain it to the most intimate
> >detail to the point that it looks disturbing to you.
Don't forget:
5) Compare a person or situation to an actress or a television show.
-yakima, it's been a long week, and I really needed to laugh like that.
JerryO
But sorry dude, I dont think that was Robert Style 100%. :)
For one, Robert doesnt use 'so..' or 'even though'..it implies a shift in
the thought,and at least how i perceive it, he sort of 'rambles' in one
direction only, possibly divergnig,but never going back. I dont think he
uses difficult words like 'vortex', or enumerates several adjectives as in
'big,black, violent' ..
It was kind of long..I didnt even finish reading it, so maybe in that
aspect you get an A+ for trying.
On Sat, 20 Feb 1999, Nebulous Rex wrote:
> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
>
> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
> unbelievable butt-cheeks I've ever seen. I just met her and her
> butt-cheeks, but she got mad when I did the test and stopped loving
> me. At first I felt really bad, like a big, black, violent vortex of
> hate and rage was welling up inside me because I knew she really loved
> me but she had to act like she didn't because that's what non-shy...
> >Hey, you too can do it! I'll start teaching a seminar!
>
> Oh cool! You can call it RLP <tm> <c> <r> and then sue all your
> students when they actually go use it! ;)
>
>
>
Mel Matsuoka
>DAmn.. you really got into it?..it goes on and on and on!..
>
>But sorry dude, I dont think that was Robert Style 100%. :)
>
>For one, Robert doesnt use 'so..' or 'even though'..it implies a shift in
>the thought,and at least how i perceive it, he sort of 'rambles' in one
>direction only, possibly divergnig,but never going back. I dont think he
>uses difficult words like 'vortex', or enumerates several adjectives as in
>'big,black, violent' ..
And Robert uses WAY more rambling, run-on sentences that that :P
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>DAmn.. you really got into it?..it goes on and on and on!..
>But sorry dude, I dont think that was Robert Style 100%. :)
I know. I kept wondering if I should tame it down, but caricatures
are my spaciality, so I couldn't resist. :)
>For one, Robert doesnt use 'so..' or 'even though'..it implies a shift in
>the thought,and at least how i perceive it, he sort of 'rambles' in one
>direction only, possibly divergnig,but never going back. I dont think he
>uses difficult words like 'vortex', or enumerates several adjectives as in
>'big,black, violent' ..
Well, he did use the word "ameliorated" once, but I guess it's harder
to picture that than a "big, black, violent vortex." You gotta admit,
though, the Cartesian plane thing was right on. ;)
>It was kind of long..I didnt even finish reading it, so maybe in that
>aspect you get an A+ for trying.
Hey, cool!
Robert Maas
Lines 84 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 10 of 41
grza...@uiuc.edu Will Grzanich at The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champa
Thread 133 of 156, Resp 10/14 (page 4): Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Ja
> > Hey, that was about the two bi-lesbians, not Janet. Please read my
> > posts more carefully before criticizing them.
> *ahem*
> "Janet is making [me] more and more horny, not for
> fucking, but for foreplay, for touching Janet such that she'll have
> orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate myself and squirt it
> all over her tummy and use it as massage oil."
Phew, I finally found time to investigate this allegation which has
been made against me. I checked the articles I carefully composed at my
leisure offline and uploaded, and found no such text. I then ordered a
DejaNews search:
masturbate&Janet&horny&massage&oil&orgasm&squirt
~81000 ~1900 68 =3
(Numbers above are numbers of hits for expression from left margin to
that point on the line. When it was down to 3, I looked at the
results:)
1. 99/02/18 051 Re: Newbie Alert! alt.support.shyness JackieChanFan
2. 99/02/18 047 Re: Newbie Alert! (Capt. Cel alt.support.shyness Robert Maas
3. 99/02/18 044 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accident alt.support.shyness Will Grzanich
I see that Will Grzanich took my remarks out of context. Here is the
complete text:
] Are we talking about my idea of two bisexual women and myself in a
] 3some? Is it possible? Janet is making [me] more and more horny, not
] for fucking, but for foreplay, for touching Janet such that she'll have
] orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate myself and squirt it
] all over her tummy and use it as massage oil. But she's taking so long,
] and teasing me, by the time we meet it'll be November, then there won't
] be enough time to go step by step to reach the steps I'm craving for.
] So maybe if Janet doesn't let me hug her by her birthday, you'll fix me
] up with a couple bi-Fs to satisfy my sexual cravings until Janet
] finally accepts me?
Notice that I was correct in that I proposed obtaining two bi-lesbians
to perform the actual act, rather than do it with Janet. But my memory
failed when I denied it having to do with Janet, since it did indeed
deal with my fantasies about doing the act with Janet because of my
horniness for Janet. The difference between the accusation and the
(what I actually wrote) was smaller than the difference betwen what
Bill Clinton was accused of doing and what he actually did with Monica
Lewinsky.
I can claim various excuses: I was desperately trying to catch up with
this newsgroup, rushing to post followups, with not enough time to
think twice before posting anything. It was probably late at night
(DejaNews doesn't show the time-of-day, only the date) when I was very
groggy and should have been in bed but then I would have been talking
out loud what I wished to say to Janet and still not gotten any sleep
anyway, at least this way I could accomplish some catch-up during the
time I couldn't sleep anyway. My hormones were over-active, this being
the first woman I've loved since Lisa Aschmann (the song-writer/singer,
whose voice is almost identical to Jeanette MacDonald's The Breeze and
I) who cared for me in return, giving me sweet notes and virtual hugs
and even a threat to pull out my nose hairs if I don't accept her
therapy and do the self-esteem exercise she ordered (stop saying I'm
ugly). Janet had mentionned that she used to read Playgirl, and that
she craved the physical sex act and realized that the longer it takes
before she finds a husband the more her withholding of sexual
gratification will tear her emotional state apart and ruin her joie de
vivre, therefore it is URGENT that she very quickly obtain the training
I offered her, specifically to very gradually acclimatize her to a
sequence of degrees/kinds of initially non-intimate but (very
slightly-) affectionate touching, which will allow her to be
comfortable with said affectionate but non-sexual touching of men to
tide her over until she finds the right man to become her SO, whereupon
she can get into more intimate touching up to but short of intercourse,
which will tide her over until her wedding night.
All of those are true, but as an adult I should have exercised proper
judgement, just as Bill Clinton cannot be forgiven by the fact that
Monica Lewinsky was in love with him and repeatedly solicited personal
and private relations with him, essentually tempting him to sin as with
Eve tempting Adam. Janet did not tempt me to sin in any way. But the
Lewinsky metaphor is nevertheless operationally valid. She tempted me
toward feeling friendship and caring love for her, and toward wanting
physical affection with her, when she showed in various ways: (1) how
much she liked what I had posted about her case and felt affectionate
toward me on occasion when {hug} slipped from her fingers into articles
directed at me, and (2) how VERY much she cared about my welfare and
wanted me to not dismiss her attempts to help me. I suspect Janet was
as unaware of the effects on my feelings (curiosity, then desire, then
outright love) that her postings would have, as Monica was unaware that
her flagrant pass-making at Bill would result in a situation where he
abused her. Given that she was very unexperienced, never having been
kissed on the mouth yet at age approaching 34, she cannot conceivably
be blamed for her error in judgement, and I should have known better
than to assume she knew what she was doing. The first time I saw her
virtual hug, I should have warned her that virtual affection is a
substitute for the real thing when friends or lovers are away from each
other, such as "XXX" at bottoms of letters from soldiers back to their
wives meaning they wish they could kiss them right now but can't so
would their wives please imagine they are home kissing and feel good
and not cheat on them (listen to the song by the Andrews Sisters to
that point, Don't Sit Under the Apple Tree With Anybody Else But Me).
But the idea of possibly being the first person ever to kiss her, if I
could first get her to accept me as a helpful friend (accomplished when
she sent the first "sweet" note), care about my needs as I already
cared about hers (accomploished with the pull-nose-hairs note), then to
meet me in person (currently on hold), then to allow me to touch her in
tiny affectionate ways such as a caress on the back of her hand, and to
then maintain that affectionate friendship until it becomes a romance
and she finally accepts me as a boyfriend and is ready for me to kiss
her, at which point I give her the most elaborately-planned glorioiusly
erotic preparation for a kiss (starting with light lip-touches on her
hands then up her arms to her ears and cheeks) ever known, being the
physical equivalent of Elizabeth Barrett Browning's love sonnets --
Desire to give such a gift to the woman I care about was too powerful
to allow my resoning ability to work to full power, causing me to make
terrible mistakes in judgement not just once but sevearl times, each
time embarassing or humilating Janet. I humbly and profusely apologize
for this and another I'll mention in my next post (I have only about 15
minutes remaining to finish composing this and get it posted).
When I was at the library yesterday, practicing approaching women and
flirting with them, I saw a delightful quote from some newspaper, to
the effect that Clinton was accused of an impeachable offense, namely
"High crimes and misdemeanors", but he was guilty only of "low crimes
and misadventures". I hereby pleady guilty of the social (non-physical,
merely speech) equivalent of "low crimes and misadventures", and appeal
to Janet's inner kindness to eventually forgive me.
Will Grzanich
> > > Hey, that was about the two bi-lesbians, not Janet. Please read my
> > > posts more carefully before criticizing them.
>
> > *ahem*
>
> > "Janet is making [me] more and more horny, not for
> > fucking, but for foreplay, for touching Janet such that she'll have
> > orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate myself and squirt it
> > all over her tummy and use it as massage oil."
>
> Phew, I finally found time to investigate this allegation which has
> been made against me. I checked the articles I carefully composed at my
> leisure offline and uploaded, and found no such text. I then ordered a
> DejaNews search:
[snip]
> I see that Will Grzanich took my remarks out of context. Here is the
> complete text:
>
> ] Are we talking about my idea of two bisexual women and myself in a
> ] 3some? Is it possible? Janet is making [me] more and more horny, not
> ] for fucking, but for foreplay, for touching Janet such that she'll have
> ] orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate myself and squirt it
> ] all over her tummy and use it as massage oil. But she's taking so long,
> ] and teasing me, by the time we meet it'll be November, then there won't
> ] be enough time to go step by step to reach the steps I'm craving for.
> ] So maybe if Janet doesn't let me hug her by her birthday, you'll fix me
> ] up with a couple bi-Fs to satisfy my sexual cravings until Janet
> ] finally accepts me?
>
> Notice that I was correct in that I proposed obtaining two bi-lesbians
> to perform the actual act, rather than do it with Janet.
How so? True, you open with the bi-sexuals, and you close with the
bi-sexuals, but I see only Janet in between. "...for touching Janet
such that she'll have orgasm repeatedly at my hands while I masturbate
blah blah blah. But she's taking so long, and teasing me, blah blah..."
> But my memory
> failed when I denied it having to do with Janet, since it did indeed
> deal with my fantasies about doing the act with Janet because of my
> horniness for Janet.
But you didn't say, "Oh, I'm horny for Janet, so I keep thinking about
doing these things with imaginary bi-sexual women," though that still
would have been more information than anyone here wanted to know.
> The difference between the accusation and the
> (what I actually wrote) was smaller than the difference betwen what
> Bill Clinton was accused of doing and what he actually did with Monica
> Lewinsky.
There is no difference between the accusation and what you actually
wrote. I'm not saying that you *meant* to write what you wrote, but you
did write it. It's right up there; I can see it. :)
Take care,
cyn...@yahoo.com
> >and don't be so quick to dismiss it. One test of love is how long it
> >lasts.
>
> married to her. Now imagine she gets in a terrible car wreck and is
> horribly disfigured: facial scars, bodily scars, metal plates, gains
> weight, trouble walking, can't work, the whole nine yards. Could you
> still see yourself loving her? That's the quickest "love or
> infatuation" test I know of, so long as you really see it and really
> be honest with yourself.
few ppl pass this test. luckily for most of us..
consider how many have affairs as the spouse gets old and insecure...
[]
>
> Well, look, you have a penchant for finding beauty in ugly women,
> right? Have you ever considered teaching women to do the same to you?
> I mean, you know the profound effect it can have on you, so imagine if
> you could teach other women to do it? Perhaps you can get Marc M. to
> help model it for you?
great concept. if he does this well flirting, he should advertise low
cost 'grand opening' flirt tutoring/coaching.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
-----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------
Brandon Campbell
SoulS...@webtv.net (Soul Surgeon) wrote:
> remember seeing the offending posts but Robert Maas strikes me as the
> creepiest person I have ever come across on Usenet and that includes all
> the porn ng's I've seen.
I personally find that very insulting, as I was once like him (although
somehow I managed to not make my feelings quite so public). There's a
difference between accidentally being a little too forward with someone,
and being a genuinely creepy person. He has admitted to his mistake, and
is sincerely looking for help as to avoid this type of incident in the
future. Lay off of him. Calling him "creepy" without saying anything
helpful goes totally against what this newsgroup is about, and will only
serve to force him deeper into his shell and make him afraid to even think
about trying to say anything to a woman ever again. When it happened to
me, it set my social progress and self-esteem back several years.
> To Janet - if he still this bothersome in April I plan to try to be in
> San Jose for the Stones shows which isnt too far from Mountain View and
> perhaps a personal visit would be more effective than a thousand emails
> and usenet postings....
This is exactly the sort of paranoia that this newsgroup is supposed to be
a haven from. It's a *support* group where people come to take a break
from the crazy messed-up society we live in and converse with people who
understand them. He needs help, *not* threats. Four years ago, during my
first year of college, in the dorms, I made a similar mistake to him, and
I clearly remember how helpless it felt, having done something that seemed
like the only thing I knew how to do at the time, and then suddenly
finding out it went horribly wrong. I can assure you he feels 10 times
more terrified than Janet possibly could, at this point, and further
intimidation will *not* help. Janet doesn't need anyone else to say
anything for her, or to rub his nose in the proverbial dog turd. This is
something he has to be left alone to think through for himself.
--
Brandon Wayne Campbell
bwc...@airmail.net
http://people.unt.edu/~brandonc/
Brandon Campbell
wrote:
> > No, it's supplied by the iSP.
>
> Since when? You dial into your ISP to make the connection, then use the
> software of your choice to make use of that connection. Does your ISP
> also dictate what browser you use?
Sounds to me like he has a Unix shell connection, as opposed to a PPP
one. So he isn't able to use WinVN or Free Agent or other Windows-based
programs, only what the ISP has installed on their Unix system, probably
either tin or nn.
Brandon Campbell
> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
>
> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
Michael :-)
<1BF0764F570968FC.53533E11...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
>>
>> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
>> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
>> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
>
>
>--
>Brandon Wayne Campbell
>bwc...@airmail.net
>http://people.unt.edu/~brandonc/
I agree. Admittedly, I did laugh when I first read Nebulous' and Jerry's
posts, but then I thought that although Robert's posts are certainly
disturbing, perhaps his pleas for help are genuine and this sort of
humiliation could be what sends him over the edge. He might see this group
as his last chance to get help so maybe we should give him the benefit of
the doubt. He has said that part of his problem is that he is genuinely
unaware of the implications of some of the things he says. I think we can
*all* help in that area if, rather than make fun of him, we just stick to
clearly explaining why what he says can be disturbing and try to offer
helpful advice without discouraging him from expressing what he feels the
need to express.
--
~Michael~
electro lyte
Brandon Campbell wrote:
<STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.>
Thank you Brandon for saying this. I too was feeling really uncomfortable
with the jokes at the expense of Robert. Robert is a fellow human being. I
get frustrated with him at times too. But he's trying to find help and
support. Right now he's in a very bad place. Jokes will not help him.
"Be kind for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." -Plato
I may not have that quote just right but that is the gist of it.
Kym
--
It takes more distress and poison to kill someone who has peace of mind and
loves life.
-Bernie S. Siegel, MD
Robert Maas
Lines 74 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 6 of 49
grza...@uiuc.edu Will Grzanich at The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champa
> > Perhaps the decision I made in graduate school, to avoid hurting anyone
> > ever again, by withdarwing from all social activities, was best after
> > all, and I should stuck with it instead of trying to learn how to
> > relate to people.
> No, it wasn't "best"; it wasn't even realistic. All anyone can -- and
> should -- do is try his best not to hurt people without sacrificing his
> happiness.
I'm very good at figuring out the consequences of mathematical or
physical systems, but terrible at figuring out the consequenes of
psychological systems. I haven't found anyone in all my more than 35
years who would take me under his/her wing and "show me the ropes",
except this group that helps me learn specifically how to work to
overcome shyness (but Janet was about 80% of the help I got so-far,
very little for two months, then a flood of help the past week).
<<it hasn't even been a *week* yet, and you've already decided you're
madly in love with her.>>
Not "madly", more like I really care what happens to her and want to
help her. I've never seen what she looks like, so except fantasies
(guessing what she might look like, or believeing her self-description
as "young Barbra Streisand without the nose"), I can't very well be
madly in love with her. I know she's a very nice woman who suffers a
terrible paranoia about some things which I won't mention here, some of
which I sincerely believe I can help with. I just love her very much in
a caring helping and protecting way, that's all (but that's something).
<<Sheesh, if the concept of "love at first sight" is generally
considered to be far-fetched, the concept of "love at first post" --
even after *several* posts -- is even moreso.>>
It wasn't first post. Janet first posted on Feb.05, and when I saw her
introduction (Newbie Alert!!) I immediately became interested in her
curious situation, and I tried to help her via the newsgroup, but she
seemed to ignore what I said because she didn't respond to it. But then
after she'd been in the group a week, it was on Feb.12 when I sent her
something including the following:
R> I hope you first find a whole bunch of right guys for friendship,
R> starting with that friend you already have, next me for friendship and
R> confidence-building and hugs and companionship and eventually your
R> first kiss, next a bunch of other guys you can compare to the first two
R> and NOT accept anybody new unless they're at least two thirds as good
R> as the first two, and eventually you'll have a reasonable amount of
R> friends and a couple boyfriends. Then you'll be ready about age 36 to
R> find the one VERY right guy for marriage.
which she thought was so sweet that in response she sent her famous
sweet-note and virtual-hug reply. That's when realized she really did
want to accept my friendship and offer of hugs and first kiss, and I
started to have special feelings beyond caring about her situation and
wanting to help, and that's when my own case started to improve thanks
to her accepting my friendship and help and I could look forward to
hugging her and giving her her first kiss.
P.S., Will, I consider you to be a sort of friend for finding those
terrible sexual gaffes I posted when I was zonked out from lack of
sleep, and for agreeing that withdrawing from ALL social activities
just to avoid occasionally accidently hurting somebody I care about,
was a stupid mistake, that the correct view is to do my best, keep
trying, and not worry about accidently "hurting" the people I care
about once in a while, so long a my overall effort is FOR them rather
than AGAINST them. I posted that very old nieve decision in order to
obtain validation that my current view it was a mistake is correct, and
you provided that validation of my current view. Would you be curious
to read my diary for the section when my biggest efforts to meet women
resulted in NOTHING except rejection right and left and claims that I
had "hurt" somebody when in fact I was hurting myself ten times more
than I ever hurt those abusive women, and I made that fateful bad
decision? The decision is announced in my diary, if I can remember it
correctly, something like "I hereby withdraw from all social activities
whatsoever". Your blood will chill when you are reading along about all
these rejections and hurts and lonely tims, and suddenly that hits you
in the face as if your girlfriend has been hit by a car.
If you're ever in this area, give me a call, to arrange an in-person
visit (assuming you don't smoke, or can avoid it around me), do you
have my phone number? Or do you consider me so weird that neither you
or anyone else would ever resonably want me as a friend, and you'd
rather see me paralyzed? (Bob Dylan -- Positively Fourth Street, I'm
crying as I think of those utterly true lyrics, I need to transcribe
them and post to the newsgroup.)
DejaNews search to avoid manually repeating that transcribing:
Positively&Fourth&Street¶lyzed
1000 5
Linkname: Search Results
http://www.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/dnquery.xp?ST=PS&QRY=Positively%26Fourth%26Street%26paralyzed&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1&format=terse&showsort=score&maxhits=25&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=&authors=&fromdate=&todate=
3. 96/11/20 035 Re: "Positively 4th St" and rec.music.dylan Queen of Infini
(Just the complete lyrics with no commentary.)
5. 97/06/14 033 Re: He's a Lover #2/2 rec.music.dylan Margaret Andrea
(Explanation why those lyrics are so great.)
Robert Maas
Lines 79 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 12 of 49
melo...@nospam.gov Mel Matsuoka at Ministry of Silly Walks
M> Just because someone gives you a "virtual hug" on USENET and responds
M> to your posts with lots of smileys does not mean that they're (or even
M> intend to be) your best net-buddy. Theres a difference between being
M> friend and being friend-LY.
I had previously offered her my friendship and more:
R> I hope you first find a whole bunch of right guys for friendship,
R> starting with that friend you already have, next me for friendship and
R> confidence-building and hugs and companionship and eventually your
R> first kiss, next a bunch of other guys you can compare to the first two
R> and NOT accept anybody new unless they're at least two thirds as good
R> as the first two, and eventually you'll have a reasonable amount of
R> friends and a couple boyfriends. Then you'll be ready about age 36 to
R> find the one VERY right guy for marriage.
She apparently accepted my offer, including hugs, when she replied:
J> Thanks for your sweet post! :)
J> ...
J> Thanks again, Robert. :) {hug}
Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby)
>Question for Janet: I was always taught never to make friends in church,
because
>it's a place to worship the Lord not a place to pick up girls or anyone
else
>for that matter. How did you ever manage to get your only RL friend (so
far)
>in church? I'm Protestant, are you Catholic where rules are different?
>I so, maybe I can try your 9:30 service this coming weekend and
>meet you in church (across from front of high school, right?)?
>
Robert, why don't you grow up... Get over it... And leave Janet alone before
she has to get a restraining order from you...
Shy needs help? Maybe, but not from someone who wants to take advantage of
her.
Sebby.
JerryO
> Brandon Campbell wrote in message
> <1BF0764F570968FC.53533E11...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
> t>...
> >In article <36d22c5a...@news.feist.com>, fake...@detoxotedetox.com
> >(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
> >
> >> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
> >>
> >> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
> >> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
> >> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
> >
> >STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
> >
> I agree. Admittedly, I did laugh when I first read Nebulous' and Jerry's
> posts, but then I thought that although Robert's posts are certainly
> disturbing, perhaps his pleas for help are genuine and this sort of
> humiliation could be what sends him over the edge. He might see this group
> as his last chance to get help so maybe we should give him the benefit of
> the doubt. He has said that part of his problem is that he is genuinely
> unaware of the implications of some of the things he says. I think we can
> *all* help in that area if, rather than make fun of him, we just stick to
> clearly explaining why what he says can be disturbing and try to offer
> helpful advice without discouraging him from expressing what he feels the
> need to express.
>
Not trying to point fingers at anyone, I found it curious that the first
'wacky' posts of Robert were totally ignored, even after his sexual
descriptions. I felt like most people were ignoring him, and then I posted
'enough with the porno posts',and suddenly everyone's coming up with this
type of response. I suppose, it's a typical 'group mentality' at work.
Just pointing it out..
Will Grzanich
> W> He's already replied to your post, saying that he's male.
>
> A male made a pass at me, should I assume he's homosexual, or what?
> In case there's any doubt, I need friends of both genders, but I have
> no interest in hugs or more with males.
No, he's straight. He's just goofy.
> Why are you changing the topic from newsreader (UseNet) to browser (WWW)?
[snip SLIP stuff]
Sorry about all that; it didn't occur to me that you were using that
kind of account. I've been spoiled by network internet access and PPP
accounts. :)
If you're looking for text-based newsreaders, though, the only other one
I know of is Pine. I don't know if there's a native version for Linux,
or what, but it's what our school (and many others) uses.
> Did you get all that, or do you
> need to read "Serial Data Communication for Dummies"?
Oooh...burn. ;)
> Type shell or your PPP login: shell
What happens if you type in your PPP login? Or is that just some sort
of unused feature of the software they use? Well, whatever. I
apologize -- I was a little snottier than I needed to be.
> <<and smiling at, making eye contact with, and waving at a woman is not
> "almost scoring.">>
>
> It depends what you count as a score. For example, if my goal is a good
> hug, then if a woman says it's OK for me to hug her, and I do, and she
> allows the hug to proceed for normal length with close cuddly body
> pressure, and afterward she smiles like she liked it and seems to look
> forward to being with me again, then I score it 100%.
Ah. I was using the conventional definition of the verb "to score" when
applied to such contexts, which is "to have sex with." :)
> <<I don't not think it unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from
> loving Janet...>>
>
> Hmm, you're testing me to see if I really placed first in the whole
> county in the MAA/Lockheed math contest when I was a senior in school?
[snip]
> Well, you're half right. I'll be sure she never forgets my offer of
> friendship and hugs and first kiss that accepted, but I'll tone down my
> repeats if you guys will just stop posting so many questions like this
> to which I must reply to avoid losing face.
Hah...you weren't supposed to reply to it. It's a joke I adapted from
one of my favorite computer games. It's funny! Laugh! Ha! Ha! :)
> You're funny. After that mess with the VT100 techo-illiteracy, I was
> almost going to withdraw my acceptance of your friendship, but you're
> back on my side of that thin line where effort equals reward.
Oh, goodie!
As for techno-illiteracy...first of all, it's a little silly to base a
friendship on computer-savviness. Secondly, you're the one who keeps
using the phrase "when the Y2K shit hits the fan." There is no Y2K
"shit," for the record, and neither is there a fan with which it will
collide. To the best of my knowledge, only systems running legacy COBOL
programs have big problems, and many of these are being fixed. I read
an article recently reporting that, as people learn more about the
deadly Y2K problem, they become much less afraid of it. Obladi, oblada,
life will go on. :)
Besides, if I'm going to become a computer engineer, I hope I won't be
described as "techno-illiterate...!"
> <<I guarantee that nobody else here has a 36-step touching plan, and
> for good reason.>>
>
> Most likely the same reason nobody is mining resources from the Moon,
> becuse they don't realize it's going to be a good idea as soon as it's
> actually tried decently?
Ah, that must be it.
> <<I'd prefer to refer her to Marc or another NLPer for such help which
> doesn't involve actually kissing or having intercourse with anybody.>>
>
> Let's see if I understand this: You say she should be taught to spend
> her entire life NEVER getting kissed, and somehow just accept it as
> "normal"? Go buzz off.
You don't understand this. I'm suggesting that if Janet truly has a
phobia of kissing, then seeing a NLPer might be a better idea than what
you suggested, because NLPers have a high success rate dealing with
various phobias and the process wouldn't itself involve kissing or
intercourse.
Will Grzanich
> I'm very good at figuring out the consequences of mathematical or
> physical systems, but terrible at figuring out the consequenes of
> psychological systems. I haven't found anyone in all my more than 35
> years who would take me under his/her wing and "show me the ropes",
> except this group that helps me learn specifically how to work to
> overcome shyness (but Janet was about 80% of the help I got so-far,
> very little for two months, then a flood of help the past week).
Ahh, the wonders of USENET!
> Would you be curious
> to read my diary for the section when my biggest efforts to meet women
> resulted in NOTHING except rejection right and left and claims that I
> had "hurt" somebody when in fact I was hurting myself ten times more
> than I ever hurt those abusive women, and I made that fateful bad
> decision?
No thanks...I can imagine well enough. It really is important to
realize that causing a few moments of irritation and mild unhappiness in
a woman's life is a small price to pay in the quest for your own
happiness. You'd have to go to drastic measures to hurt a woman in this
quest such that she won't recover hideously quickly.
> If you're ever in this area, give me a call, to arrange an in-person
> visit (assuming you don't smoke, or can avoid it around me), do you
> have my phone number? Or do you consider me so weird that neither you
> or anyone else would ever resonably want me as a friend, and you'd
> rather see me paralyzed?
I do consider you pretty weird, but it's a moot point since I'm very
unlikely to ever be in your area. But I appreciate the offer. :)
Jackie...@webtv.net
<<<I've never seen what she looks like, so except fantasies (guessing
what she might look like, or believeing her self-description as "young
Barbra Streisand without the nose"), I can't very well be madly in love
with her. I know she's a very nice woman who suffers a terrible paranoia
about some things which I won't mention here, some of which I sincerely
believe I can help with. I just love her very much in a caring helping
and protecting way, that's all (but that's something).>>>
First of all, please quit talking as if I'm this "phobic" person. You
are blowing this entirely out of proportion! I have not been kissed
because I never even went on date until last October. (At least not a
"real" kiss.) Though he was nice and all, Rafael was just not my type,
and I could not bring myself to kiss him. To do so would have also led
him on, which would not have been fair, since I really didn't think he
was right for me. We did hug and hold hands, though. I would certainly
be scared/very nervous when I do receive my first kiss, but that doesn't
mean I don't want to ever do it! It is going to have to be with someone
I'm in love with. I couldn't kiss someone just because he bought me
dinner!
Secondly, regarding your "I just love her in a caring way" comment, you
do not want me to go there...
<<<That's when realized she really did want to accept my friendship and
offer of hugs and first kiss>>>
Robert, you are delusional! I never, ever said or hinted that I wanted
hugs/kisses/nor any of your other famous 35 of 36 steps you were
thinking about!
<<<Question for Janet: I was always taught never to make friends in
church, because it's a place to worship the Lord not a place to pick up
girls or anyone else for that matter. How did you ever manage to get
your only RL friend (so far) in church? I'm Protestant, are you Catholic
where rules are different? I so, maybe I can try your 9:30 service this
coming weekend and meet you in church (across from front of high school,
right?)?>>>
It took me a second for it to click! I know what high school you're
talking about, and there is a Catholic church in front of it! What the
$%^#@^% are you doing over here near my neighborhood, when you live 20+
minutes (by freeway) away in Mountain View?????!!!!!! You even know what
time the service starts????!!!!!
I looked in DejaNews and saw that you post to alt.athiesm and are an
athiest. Is the only reason you want to go to church to meet me?!
Robert Maas
Lines 96 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 21 of 49
grza...@uiuc.edu Will Grzanich at The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champa
R> (Yes, I think now that it was a pass rather than
R> just flirting, when he/she explicitly offered me more than a hug. I
R> wish somebody would tell me what Kris's gender is!)
W> He's already replied to your post, saying that he's male.
A male made a pass at me, should I assume he's homosexual, or what?
In case there's any doubt, I need friends of both genders, but I have
no interest in hugs or more with males.
?> Obviously, your choice of newsreader is yours,
R> No, it's supplied by the iSP.
W> You dial into your ISP to make the connection, then use the software of
W> your choice to make use of that connection. Does your ISP also dictate
W> what browser you use?
Why are you changing the topic from newsreader (UseNet) to browser (WWW)?
In either case, the answer is yes, unless I want to spend two weeks of
my time figuring out how to install another newsreader or browser that
handles VT100 text mode. Lynx is the ONLY text-mode browser generally
useful as far as I know. For newsreader I preferred 'rn' instead of
'tin', but I don't think it's supported on Linux. Do you know
otherwise?
W> Under Linux, I use the same thing I use under Windows -- Netscape 4.5
R> Does that run under VT100 dialup port?
W> Hell, I don't even know what that means.
I run a VT100 screen emulator on my Macintosh. It interfaces between
keyboard&screen and serial modem port. Does that make any sense to you?
A modem is plugged into the serial modem port, and when it's not in use
it's in command mode, whereby any data sent to it is treated as a set
of commands. I assume you know what all that means?
I type a command on the keyboad, such as:
ATDT 941 4190
which is sent out the serial port and received by the modem, which
commands it to dial that number and try to establish a connection. When
a connection is established, the modem says:
CONNECT 19200
and the modem switches from command mode to transparent data mode, i.e.
from now on (until disconnection) anything typed on the keyboard goes
all the way through emulator to port to cable to modem to phoneline to
remote modem to remote computer system. Did you get all that, or do you
need to read "Serial Data Communication for Dummies"?
After a few second pause while the remote computer is recognizing that
the dialup port has become in-use, the remote computer types the
following which appears on the screen of my VT120 emulator (the "shell"
is the part I type myself at that point, which gets echoed all the way
back so it appears here too):
Type shell or your PPP login: shell
Then the dialup controller computer goes into shell-transparent mode, so
data from my keyboard (except ctrl-] which is dialup escape code)
now goes all the way from
keybord -> ... ... -> dialup compute -> shell.netmagic.net Linux Loginbash.
Loginbash then asks me for account and password, and connects me to
regular bash. Then I type "tin -r" to start the newsreader.
Back to intelligent discussion instead of telecomm-dummy-lessons:
<<and smiling at, making eye contact with, and waving at a woman is not
"almost scoring.">>
It depends what you count as a score. For example, if my goal is a good
hug, then if a woman says it's OK for me to hug her, and I do, and she
allows the hug to proceed for normal length with close cuddly body
pressure, and afterward she smiles like she liked it and seems to look
forward to being with me again, then I score it 100%. If by comparison
during the hug she squashes her pelvis and private parts into my
corresponding spot, and rubs up and down against me to give me an
erection, and lifts her legs so I'm holding he in the air, and spreads
her legs around my hips and locks her ankles behind my butt, and starts
wet-kissing me, that gets a score much greater than just a 100% hug.
(That actually happened to me once just before folk dancing at Mitchell
Park.)
<<I don't not think it unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from
loving Janet...>>
Hmm, you're testing me to see if I really placed first in the whole
county in the MAA/Lockheed math contest when I was a senior in school?
Hmm:
refraining from loving Janet...
(Bad idea to suppress true love.)
avoid refraining from loving Janet...
(Yeah, avoid such unhealthy suppression of feelings.)
that you don't avoid refraining from loving Janet...
= bad suppression
unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from loving Janet...
= good expression of my feelings, like the boy who climbed the tree in
"Forever Young"
not think it unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from ...
= think I'll hold back
I don't not think it unlikely that you don't avoid refraining from ...
= think I'll be sure Janet knows how I feel.
Well, you're half right. I'll be sure she never forgets my offer of
friendship and hugs and first kiss that accepted, but I'll tone down my
repeats if you guys will just stop posting so many questions like this
to which I must reply to avoid losing face.
You're funny. After that mess with the VT100 techo-illiteracy, I was
almost going to withdraw my acceptance of your friendship, but you're
back on my side of that thin line where effort equals reward.
<<I guarantee that nobody else here has a 36-step touching plan, and
for good reason.>>
Most likely the same reason nobody is mining resources from the Moon,
becuse they don't realize it's going to be a good idea as soon as it's
actually tried decently?
<<I'd prefer to refer her to Marc or another NLPer for such help which
Robert Maas
Lines 11 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 22 of 50
alv...@ix.netcom.com Andrew Venor at Netcom
R> I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
R> I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
A> Now their [sic] is a good reason for a mandatory waiting period for the
A> purchase of handguns.
If I understand that, you are on the side of my physical health, that
you would saddened if some freak combination of circumsances caused me
to lose my foot? Then I should consider you somebody who cares for my
health and happiness, or just my health but damn the happiness?
Robert Maas
Lines 88 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 24 of 50
anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
J> Or plain simple 'hi,how are you. Would you like to go out sometime?'
Unfortunately the usual connotation of "go out" is dating, in the sense
of guy pays and girl gives body in return as if a prostitute. I want to
just visit and chat and listen to our own music, not go out on the town
or to a party etc. The only place I like to go out would be folk
dancing.
<now,if you dont go out with me,that's okay. I I can sit in front of your
door until you get used to my presence, and then you will open the door
<<and say hi to me,and you will let me in. I will have brought some
flowers but since I dont know how long you will take to get used to me
sitting by your doorstep, I am clever that I will bring a jar with
water..but iffor some reason I let the jar tip and the water drains
away, will you lend me a glass of water so I can put in my jar so the
flowers are not dead by the time you are confortable with opening the
door? then we can move to step two.I will bring a detailed chart with
all the 36 teps>>
In olden days that was called "camping on her doorstep", which was a
very romantic thing greatly appreciated by the townspeople. All the
relatives and friends of the girl then said he must really like her so
maybe he should go to the annual picnic with him even if he's not as
cute as the guy who got away.
But I really like your "Step 1 for Dummies", the first book in a set of
36 books, about the same total size as Compton's Encyplopedia. I almost
think that's what Janet will need, except she's getting (if she accepts
my help) the live tutor instead of the printed issue.
Anyway, as long as you broght this up: Last Sunday evening at nearly
6PM I successfully desensitized a moderately overweight but very pretty
young lady named "Rosana" who was sitting in the pew waiting for the
6PM mass to start. After she refused to hold my hand, or even to just
touch the back of my hand lightly for a moment, despite her obvious
attraction to and flirting with me earlier which is why I sat next to
her in the first place, I then touched the back of her hand
light&brief, and she looked puzzled and asked me why I did that, and I
said it was a sign of affection, and suddenly she smiled like she liked
me more than before and had a warm feeling toward me. So at least I
know step 0.6 works on at least one very pretty women who is
nevertheless shy! By the way, the woman sitting next to her looked sort
of like Barbra Streisand, sigh, another reminder of you know who.
<<what you're forgetting about what goes on between two people, is that
there has to be _intimacy_>>
You call that little thing between Rosana and me to be "intimacy"?
Maybe, if you define the word that widely inclusive. But...
<<the person has to feel _confortable_ with *you*(as in, your
personality, your way of being, as 'you' as an individual -not as 'you'
as in a 'person'..)>>
I'm not sure I see your point. Do you mean she must like me as
contrasted with anyone else, instead of just treat me as an anonymous
'john'? Or did you mean something else. I think both Janet and Rosana
think of me as individuals, not indistinguisable from everyone else. If
I hadn't touched Rosana's hand and answered her question with such a
romantic answer she liked so much, that might not be true, I might be
just one of a hundred guys who have said 'hi' since she got old enough
to be pretty in a sexually attractive way.
By the way, if I ever meet Janet in person, we could then go together
to that 6PM mass whereby I could show her who Rosana is and
prove my story, and even if Janet is too shy to let a man touch her
like that, she could nevertheless post to the newsgroup verifying my
claim of success for step 0.6.
<<take little steps to see if you two are really a match,>>
Or actually train her to be a match, using my program. The question of
match or not match is appropriate only when people can go in different
ways and not ever have time to take both paths. But for normal
development and for recover from phobia, it's best to get EVERY person
ot of phobia, at which point all recovered phobics will be compatible
on that issue.
I need only hugs and cuddles with my SO to be fully satisfied, so it
takes only a few steps to get any phobic such as Janet or Rosana up to
where we can find a compatible level of affectionate activity.
<<and if you two share the same perspective of the world, and same
passions or ideas.>>
I tried that already. It doesn't work. People with similar interests or
passions or ideas etc. don't have any interst in friendship of any kind
with me. Take Marvin Minsky for example. He and I have a lot of views
in common, yet he doesn't even answer my e-mail, so I gave up on
friendship with him.
By the way, JerryO, as long as we're on the line together here: Has
Janet ever called you on the phone so that you can hear her voice, or
is she doing the same trip on you that she's doing on me (cupons not
redeemable in RL)? (If the answer is YES, predict my next question and
answer it.)
<<When two people find themselves in the other person, that's when
intimacy 'begins',and that's when the kissing and hugging comes into
play.>>
B.S. detector causes me to switch into flip-reply mode: So if I put my
hand in between her breasts, and she responds by putting her foot into
my anus, that's considered good? :-) :-)
<<we certainly can steppize it 1) hug 2) kiss 3) holding hands 4) make
out 5) sex (this is just a very loose definition and only for
exemplification purposes) >>
That ignorance you display is the whole point I'm trying to make! There
are lots of other things you can do between those big steps you list,
and people who aren't aware of those intermediary steps suffer from
stress in worrying about and often arguing about and sometimes
physically fighting about when is the right time to take the next big
step. Many breakups are caused by the guy wanting to go from baseball
to fucking in one big step, when the girl isn't ready for that, and the
guy can't think of any compromise between where they are now and what
he wants to jump to. Liberace could look at a plain vanilla piano score
and improvise wonderfully flowery bridges between each note and the
next, producing a master piece most of whose notes were never written
anywhere. But a total piano klutz such as myself couldn't even play the
basic notes correctly except with much practice.
The same goes with lovemaking. Erich Fromme or Ruth Westheimer would
probably be the Liberace equivalent for lovemaking, but most shy people
are more like Woody Allen who have trouble keeping the book from
falling into the winebucket with all that icewater and getting the
pages wet so they tear out just when you need the book most.
With 36 small steps listed clearly, a Dummy can just follow step by
step instructions the first time through, and worry about improvising
after the basics have been practice enough times. With those small
steps, where a Dummy such as you would need to read my book, you can
take the next tiny step any time you both feel like it (except for the
last step which requires marriage first if you're Christian, and in
that case you can (*) improvise between steps 35 nad 36 to achieve as
much novel gratificaiotn as you need without having to take that last
step).
* (By the time even a Dummy has reached step 35, he/she has enough
sexual experience he isn't such a Dummy any longer, and can often think
of something to improvise, perhaps combinations or variations of
earlier steps, such as: rub her private parts with the outer edge of
your foot, instead of with your fingers as in the book; or rubbing one
breast with one hand while patting other breast from all sides with the
other hand; or the woman puts her breast repeatedly into and out of his
mouth, as he sucks it in as soon as possible and tries to suck hard
enough to keep it from exiting as long as possible, instead of her on
her back doing nothing except enjoying the feeling while he does all
the motions as in the book, for example.)
<<I can even bring a marker in case you dont have one,so you can check
off the steps we've done,and you can feel happy about yourself that
you're managing to acocomplish all these little successes that
eventually will build into greater self esteem.>>
Hey, we're talking about ONE step at most per week, this is a
nine-month (*) course! The partners have at least a week to memorize
where they are before they move to the next. No need to mark up the
fine book, so it can be shared among multiple couples, in an old folks
home for example. (Why are they there instead of living with their
childen? What children? (***))
* (Before you ask: Purely a coincidence, period (**).)
** (NO you utter Dummy! That was NOT meant to be a sexual pun!!)
** (Anwser in back of book: They are working forward from step 1, so
obviosly they remained virgins to old age, like Janet is heading if she
doesn't let me teach her how to hug intimately, and short of another
miracle it's difficult to have childen that way.)
<<... trying to cover all bases ..>>
Um, do you realize what that means in this context?
I have a better idea than all this dismissing of my plan without even
trying it (despite apparent success of step 0.6 with very-shy (*)
Rosana on first attempt, which you will probably conveniently ignore):
We could have you and Janet rendezvous at my apartment, JerryO and I
acting as chaperones for each other, with JerryO arriving before her so
that JerryO can't loiter in hallway to be alone with her when she first
arrives, and I'll give Janet just step 1 (or step 0.6 if she's too shy
for even step 1 yet), then we all listen to music, then Janet leaves
first and gets in her car and goes, then 10 minutes later JerryO leaves
but promises not to drive 100 MPH to catch up with her on the freeway
to follow her home to find out where she lives on King near that
darling Spanish-style house with giant palm tree dominating the front
yard.
* (Shy about physically touching a guy. By comparison, she's fine about
conversation, not shy at all in that department.)
<<why have you tried to get psychological help before? what were your
problems?)>>
Because I was lonely. But I learned from experience (with therapists)
that they can't halp me in that way except by advising me to accept
being alone all the time and cease wanting any human contact, then I'll
be happy as a hermit the rest of my life. I chose to refuse their
inappropriate advice.
Nebulous Rex
Campbell) wrote:
>In article <36d22c5a...@news.feist.com>, fake...@detoxotedetox.com
>(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
>
>> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
>>
>> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
>> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
>> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
>
>STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
Keep in mind, however, that I've also given Robert a lot of helpful
advice, as have many others--advice that has been completely
disregarded, evidenced both by his lack of replies and his continued
posting of stories embracing the same behaviors and beliefs that got
him in trouble the first time (for instance, he continues to write
desperate pleas to Janet). In other words, I don't think much of what
we're writing is getting through to him, good or bad.
Nebulous Rex
<electr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Thank you Brandon for saying this. I too was feeling really uncomfortable
>with the jokes at the expense of Robert. Robert is a fellow human being. I
>get frustrated with him at times too. But he's trying to find help and
>support. Right now he's in a very bad place. Jokes will not help him.
I agree my joke was in bad taste. However, think about this. What if
Robert finds he gets some negative attention (or no attention) every
time he himself behaves negatively, and conversely, he gets positive
attention whenever he behaves positively? Don't you think he'd start
behaving more positively? And isn't that what he wants?
Angelique
bwc...@airmail.net (Brandon Campbell) wrote:
>In article <36d22c5a...@news.feist.com>, fake...@detoxotedetox.com
>(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
>
>> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
>>
>> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
>> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
>> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
>
>STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
Funny.. I didn't see your name listed as group moderator in the FAQ.
-ang
JerryO
> J> Or plain simple 'hi,how are you. Would you like to go out sometime?'
>
> Unfortunately the usual connotation of "go out" is dating, in the sense
> of guy pays and girl gives body in return as if a prostitute. I want to
No. THat's wrong. Dont ever assume that if you pay for a date, that you
have the right to expect her body in return.
> just visit and chat and listen to our own music, not go out on the town
> or to a party etc. The only place I like to go out would be folk
> dancing.
Robert,robert.Havent you been in this ng long enough to understand that
'dating' is just two people going out and enjoying themselves? 'sex'
'hugs' or 'kiss' isnt even brought up into this conversation, unless the
*two* people feel confortable about it.
> In olden days that was called "camping on her doorstep", which was a
> very romantic thing greatly appreciated by the townspeople. All the
> relatives and friends of the girl then said he must really like her so
> maybe he should go to the annual picnic with him even if he's not as
> cute as the guy who got away.
These days it's just FREAKY. (and you might get a restraining order if you
try this).
> But I really like your "Step 1 for Dummies", the first book in a set of
> 36 books, about the same total size as Compton's Encyplopedia. I almost
> think that's what Janet will need, except she's getting (if she accepts
> my help) the live tutor instead of the printed issue.
Get this: if she needs help, she will ask for it. And even if she asks
it,there is no guarantee that she will ask specificlaly to you. I mean,she
could ask me, or any other shybie in the bay area. Given that you scared
her, this is most likely.
> Anyway, as long as you broght this up: Last Sunday evening at nearly
> 6PM I successfully desensitized a moderately overweight but very pretty
> young lady named "Rosana" who was sitting in the pew waiting for the
> 6PM mass to start. After she refused to hold my hand, or even to just
> touch the back of my hand lightly for a moment, despite her obvious
Why would she hold your hand?
Social rule: PEOPLE DONT HOLD HANDS WITH PEOPLE THEY BARELY MET
> <<what you're forgetting about what goes on between two people, is that
> there has to be _intimacy_>>
>
> You call that little thing between Rosana and me to be "intimacy"?
> Maybe, if you define the word that widely inclusive. But...
Dude, you only mentioned Rosana on your reply to my orignal post.how could
I possibly be talking about something that you hadnt written when I
composed my post?
> <<the person has to feel _confortable_ with *you*(as in, your
> personality, your way of being, as 'you' as an individual -not as 'you'
> as in a 'person'..)>>
>
> I'm not sure I see your point. Do you mean she must like me as
> contrasted with anyone else, instead of just treat me as an anonymous
> 'john'?
Yeap. For her to engage in hugging, kissing and cuddling, the lady in
question has to see you as an individual. This is why most women will not
hug or kiss or do whatever with you if you only met them. This is why it's
weird to ask for them to hold you rhand if you barely met them or you
dont even know your name.
Or did you mean something else. I think both Janet and Rosana
> think of me as individuals, not indistinguisable from everyone else. If
> I hadn't touched Rosana's hand and answered her question with such a
> romantic answer she liked so much, that might not be true, I might be
> just one of a hundred guys who have said 'hi' since she got old enough
> to be pretty in a sexually attractive way.
She gold old enough?..how old is she?
> By the way, if I ever meet Janet in person, we could then go together
> to that 6PM mass whereby I could show her who Rosana is and
> prove my story, and even if Janet is too shy to let a man touch her
> like that, she could nevertheless post to the newsgroup verifying my
> claim of success for step 0.6.
What makes you think that Janet would want to do that? Why do you think
she would care about who Rosana is?
> <<take little steps to see if you two are really a match,>>
>
> Or actually train her to be a match, using my program. The question of
But be sure to ask her if she wants to try the program.If she refuses, are
you willing to accept her decision?
> I need only hugs and cuddles with my SO to be fully satisfied, so it
> takes only a few steps to get any phobic such as Janet or Rosana up to
> where we can find a compatible level of affectionate activity.
You assume she would be your SO. She isnt.
> <<and if you two share the same perspective of the world, and same
> passions or ideas.>>
>
> I tried that already. It doesn't work. People with similar interests or
> passions or ideas etc. don't have any interst in friendship of any kind
> with me. Take Marvin Minsky for example. He and I have a lot of views
> in common, yet he doesn't even answer my e-mail, so I gave up on
> friendship with him.
No wonder. People has told you repetedly how you are scarying everyone,
and how you are in need of psychiatric help. Why do you think people are
saying this to you,Robert?
> By the way, JerryO, as long as we're on the line together here: Has
> Janet ever called you on the phone so that you can hear her voice, or
> is she doing the same trip on you that she's doing on me (cupons not
> redeemable in RL)? (If the answer is YES, predict my next question and
> answer it.)
Not that it's relevant to any of this, she has not called me. As for the
'coupons', that's wehre we're on different lines: I never assumed that she
telling me where she lives was an indication of anything else. If she
wishes to meet or anything else, I'm sure she will say so explicitly.
> <<When two people find themselves in the other person, that's when
> intimacy 'begins',and that's when the kissing and hugging comes into
> play.>>
>
> B.S. detector causes me to switch into flip-reply mode: So if I put my
> hand in between her breasts, and she responds by putting her foot into
> my anus, that's considered good? :-) :-)
Why do you have to resort to such explicitly visual imagery? Do you
understand that that kind of touch action happens between two people
should stay between those two people?
> <<we certainly can steppize it 1) hug 2) kiss 3) holding hands 4) make
> out 5) sex (this is just a very loose definition and only for
> exemplification purposes) >>
>
> That ignorance you display is the whole point I'm trying to make! There
> are lots of other things you can do between those big steps you list,
> and people who aren't aware of those intermediary steps suffer from
> stress in worrying about and often arguing about and sometimes
> physically fighting about when is the right time to take the next big
> step. Many breakups are caused by the guy wanting to go from baseball
> to fucking in one big step, when the girl isn't ready for that, and the
> guy can't think of any compromise between where they are now and what
> he wants to jump to.
Yes.But if the guy wantsto go from baseball to fucking,and the woman
doesnt, do you think they should be together?
> With 36 small steps listed clearly, a Dummy can just follow step by
> step instructions the first time through, and worry about improvising
> after the basics have been practice enough times.
Good. Why dont you hire a prostitute and practise with her?What you dont
understand, and you're ignorant about,is that you *cant* practise with
feelings. To begin with step 1 implies the person *likes* you already.
Janet does not like you in a romantic sense.
> * (By the time even a Dummy has reached step 35, he/she has enough
> sexual experience he isn't such a Dummy any longer, and can often think
> of something to improvise, perhaps combinations or variations of
> earlier steps, such as: rub her private parts with the outer edge of
> your foot, instead of with your fingers as in the book; or rubbing one
> breast with one hand while patting other breast from all sides with the
> other hand; or the woman puts her breast repeatedly into and out of his
> mouth, as he sucks it in as soon as possible and tries to suck hard
> enough to keep it from exiting as long as possible, instead of her on
> her back doing nothing except enjoying the feeling while he does all
> the motions as in the book, for example.)
Are you turning yourself on as you write this?
> ** (Anwser in back of book: They are working forward from step 1, so
> obviosly they remained virgins to old age, like Janet is heading if she
> doesn't let me teach her how to hug intimately, and short of another
> miracle it's difficult to have childen that way.)
You think you're the only one capable of teachign her?
> <<... trying to cover all bases ..>>
>
> Um, do you realize what that means in this context?
>
> I have a better idea than all this dismissing of my plan without even
> trying it (despite apparent success of step 0.6 with very-shy (*)
> Rosana on first attempt, which you will probably conveniently ignore):
Considering I've already have sexual experience, I can say based on that
that I learned just fine without your dummy 36 step.
> We could have you and Janet rendezvous at my apartment, JerryO and I
> acting as chaperones for each other, with JerryO arriving before her so
> that JerryO can't loiter in hallway to be alone with her when she first
> arrives, and I'll give Janet just step 1 (or step 0.6 if she's too shy
> for even step 1 yet), then we all listen to music, then Janet leaves
> first and gets in her car and goes, then 10 minutes later JerryO leaves
> but promises not to drive 100 MPH to catch up with her on the freeway
> to follow her home to find out where she lives on King near that
> darling Spanish-style house with giant palm tree dominating the front
> yard.
Why couldnt I loiter with her in the hallway? Jealous?
> <<why have you tried to get psychological help before? what were your
> problems?)>>
>
> Because I was lonely. But I learned from experience (with therapists)
> that they can't halp me in that way except by advising me to accept
> being alone all the time and cease wanting any human contact, then I'll
> be happy as a hermit the rest of my life. I chose to refuse their
> inappropriate advice.
Do you realize that you just freaked everyone out with yoru recent posts?
Robert Maas
Lines 29 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 7 of 49
Jackie...@webtv.net WebTV Subscriber
<<Janet: I think Yakima deserves an apology, too, as you've said some
inappropriate stuff to her as well.>>
I was so busy with Y2J amelioration that I didn't have time to read
this trouble report until just this morning, but it looks urgent, so:
Beginning DejaNews search to see what you might be referring to:
~a (r...@shell.netmagic.net) & ~g (alt.support.shyness) & Yakima = 17
Re: I can't believe my weekend
Author: Robert Maas <r...@shell.netmagic.net>
Date: 1999/02/17
Message-ID: <7ad37e$mvf$4...@remarQ.com>
<<yakima: ... with severe acne and halitosis. I had a very hard time
believing that men could find me sexually attractive, and this was
compounded by the fact that I didn't think much of my non-sexual
attributes.
Sigh, standard brainwashes of commercial media trying to sell you
medication for those two ailments. All you need is a guy who can see
through the pimples to the skin between, and a guy who will kiss you on
the mouth (it's not possible to smell bad breath while kissing, I
discovered with my first girlfriend Barbara Ann Hall, to whom I
dedicated the obviously appropriate Beath Boys song).
<<JerryO: I find you sexually attractive>>
This is where the trouble started. What the fucking business does
JerryO have telling a woman he's never even seen in person or via
picture such a remark? That's far worse than Janet insisting I stop
calling myself ugly, when Janet never saw me either and doesn't know
whether I might in fact be ugly to her eyes. I complained to Janet once
about her argument from ignorance (*), but JerryO is ten times as bad
and it's high time I jump on him VERY HARD, as I'm doing here.
Anyway, I made the mistake of "joining the crowd" with JerryO's
inappropriate topic, with the following result:
<<Robert: Based on what I've read of hers on the net, I personally don't find
yakima sexually attractive at all, although she seems to be intelligent
and understands the topic of this newsgroup so often makes wise remarks
here. If she didn't have a SO already, and if she lived near me, I
might like to meet her just so I can have somebody intelligent to share
thoughts with once in a while in real time. ... Now if I met her in
person, who knows. I don't often find oriental women attractive, but
sometimes I do, not horribly rarely.>>
That part was just fine, i.e. Yakima's posts don't cause me to have
sexual feelings about her, the way JerryO claims for himself. I do
consider Yakima to be worthy of my friendship based on what she posts,
and would seriously want to meet her in person to try said RL
friendship if she were ever in the area, and now that I'm fully Y2J
functional in regard to enjoying briefly chatting with tens of total
strangers in a neighborhood during a 1.5 hour tour, I'd extend that
meet-in-person offer to even if she were just visiting this area for a
short time and was able to meet with me in person for as little as a
half an hour.
Let's see, that's analagous to JerryO buys a pizza and offers me a
piece, so I try a piece with him, but I remove the pepperoni because I
don't like them whereas JerryO does.
<<And if she took off her clothes and showed me her breasts, it's quite
likely I'd find something worth kissing, because there are very few
sets of breasts that aren't pretty, and orientals do generally have
nice breasts,>>
WHOOOPS!!! I agree that was out of line. I hereby apologize to Yakima.
Please accept my apology, and ask Jesus to forgive me (to err is human,
to forgive is divine, only our Lord can forgive, people can't forgive
but they can ask Jesus to do it for them and hope He agrees).
<<although perhaps not quite as super as Serpico's wife in the bathtub
in the movie (was that actress Linda Day George??>>
Nothing wrong with that part, in and of itself, but the foot was
already shot above, nothing can save it now.
* (argument from ignorance = the fallacy that because I don't know of
something, it can't be true. It's often used by creationists to say of
things such as that they can't think of any way that a worm could
evolve to a human, so it must be impossible.)
<<Robert: In my experience, as soon as this here unattractive guy says
EITHER of those, it doesn't make any difference which, I'm rejected,
and accused of being a male chauvinist pig for being more interested in
her body than what's inside her mind.>>
Correction: This was true when I was shy, but I'm so charming in RL now
that I can make passes at nearly anyone and get a smile of some kind,
such as a shy blush, or a radiant excited turn-on of passion. Four days
ago, when I wrote the above quote, I didn't yet have enough accumulated
evidence to refute more than 30 years of past bad experiences. Now I
do, as of yesterday's house by house friendly chatting, including
telling a very attractive lady in a car how beautiful she was and then
blowing her a virtual hug which made her smile blatantly.
This shows that the delivery IS important. Exactly the same message
from a truly shy and pathetic guy or from an outgoing cheerful
flirtatious guy has opposite effects on the recipient of the
physical-attribute remark.
<<I've never had a friend, nor even a personal acquaintance or
therapist, willing to do that for me,>> (Go out with me approaching
women and give me feedback on my technique.)
I'm still waiting for some SouthBay Shybie of either gender to offer to
go out with me demonstrating my newfound skill at approaching women
with favorable responses but offering me feedback how I might do it
even better (maybe actually start a relationship with somebody such
that we ever see each other again by deliberately telephoning to make a
date, i.e. get a woman to give me my phone number so that I can ask her
for a friendship date).
<<I had a big crush on Julie Kavnar as "Brenda" in the Mary Tyler
Moore spinoff "Rhoda". She was so cute the way she put herself down. If
I met her in real life I'd really try to get her to realize I'm in love
with her because she's exactly good enough for me.>>
That's different now. I would need to convince her that even though
I've now grown far beyond her, I still love (*) her and would accept
her as she is and then I'd help her to grow to my level.
* (Not the kind of real love we're talking about normally, such as how
I continue to feel a caring sweet love for Bente & Carol & Estelle &
Lisa & Janet, but just a sweet affection for a pathetic but charming
character/role on a TV show.)
<<Yakima I think?: but thankfully, I've found more worthwhile things to
do with my time and energy, like cleaning out the dirt under my
fingernails.>>
<<Robert: Suddenly I feel a sexual desire toward you. I have a way of
cleaning out that dirt which I could show you. It's really stimulating
(sexually) to have somebody else clean under your fingernails, a lot of
sensitive nerves in there,>>
For some reason the remark about cleaning under Yakima's fingernails
really did sexually excite me, so what I said was a true feeling check,
but it was not appropriate to reveal in the public forum, so again I
apologize, sorry. But now you know if you ever do meet me in person and
want to turn me on, that's one way to do it, the cat got out of the
bag.
<<and if the guy is gentle enough yet firm enough, by the time he gets
the oily dirt all removed you are quivvering with anticipation of him
washing your breasts with soap and water in the shower with him, and
with your nicely shaped breasts I'd like to do that too, if your SO
doesn't mind of course.>>
What a beautiful fantasy to send to Yakima by private e-mail to give
her a thrill, but what a grossly stupid thing for me to post in public.
I doubly apologize for this gaffe!
<<I need to take a nap before I get so turned on that I try to seduce
Gloria Steinham again!!>>
This seems innocent enough, after all G.S. is a public figure who is
very attractive, even if she would not appreciate being told by a total
stranger of a man. But read the context: I get so turned on BY MY
FANTASY ABOUT YAKIMA TRIGGERED BY THE CLEAN-FINGERNAIL REMARK. So even
this remark deserves an apology to Yakima (but not to Gloria who should
lighten up if she hasn't yet), sorry Yakima, and this cupon {hug} is
hereby redeemable for a full hug, even if you just rode a horse and
smell bad from it, you're a good person and I owe you the hug, no
strings attached, for the way I embarassed you.
<<Yakima??: Ah, a master manipulator.>>
<<Robert: In my current horny mood, I'd rather take that in a way you
probably didn't intend, such as I'll manipulate your clitorus so that
it twitches with little salutes/erections (I actually did that with my
fiancee on two different occasions before she broke up with me) and you
can manipulate my penis until I cum. (Assuming your SO al[l]ows it, of
course.)>>
Fuckity shit, did I really post that? (Yes, I even remember saying it
now that I see it again.) My lesson is that when I get horny I should
go offline and masturbate to those fantasies, and get those feelings
out of my system before I go back online, instead of posting my
fantasies to the whole net. Or would Yakima like such fantasies by
e-mail? I don't really know. Anyway, my indescretion is so huge already
by now that I openly ask Yakima to propose suitable penance, something
worse than just smelling the body odor of somebody who was riding a horse.
(That reminds me of one of the VERY few times I rejected a very pretty
young woman who seemed to want to date me: Her name was Sharon Grigsby,
and she was tall and thin and very pretty, and I had a crush on her,
and one day she acceped my offer of a hug, but she smelled sickening,
and I mentionned it, and she said she had just been riding a horse,
which she does all the time, so I'd just have to get used to the smell,
or something like that. I wish I could have accepted her smell and
married her way back then, and suffered 15+ fewer years of loneliness,
sigh. Maybe I should have thought of getting an "oxygen mask" to use
whenever I want to make love to Sharon right after she's been riding?
She was so sweet&cuddley except for that horse-riding smell, sigh.)
<<Robert: Hmmm, what's the command for cancelling this from tin?>>
And to top it off I confess knowledge of the crime right in the post,
so I can't use "but I didn't know what I was doing" as a defense.
Yakima, please compose a menu of reasonable ways I can make it up to
you, and post to newsgroup in this thread so I'll find it easily,
currently over 1100 unread articles, sigh. I humbly apologize again.
Thanks, Janet, for pointing out this problem. Well, that's one article
(in DejaNews search results) down, 16 to go, I hope I didn't do as bad
in those other 16, and need to spend the next week apologizing, sigh.
But officer, when I verbally raped that woman, I truly thought I had
already fallen asleep and was just posting in my dreams. :-)
Appropriate song lyrics, hope you like them and make you feel better:
BRIGHT ELUSIVE BUTTERFLY OF LOVE -- Bob Lynn
You might wake up some morning,
to the sound of something moving past your window in the wind.
And if you're quick enough to rise,
you'll catch the fleeting glimpse of someone's fading shadow.
Out of the new horizon,
you may see the floating motion of a distant pair of wings.
And if the sleep has left your ears,
you might hear footsteps running through an open meadow.
Don't be concerned, it will not harm you,
it's only me persuing something I'm not sure of.
Across my dreams, with nets of wonder,
I chase the bright, elusive, butterfly of love.
You might have heard my footsteps,
echoed softly in the distance through the canyons of your mind.
I might have even called your name,
as I ran searching after something to believe in.
You might have seen me running,
through the long abandoned ruins of the dreams you left behind.
If you remember something there
that glided past you followed close by heavy breathing,
Don't be concerned, it will not harm you,
it's only me persuing something I'm not sure of.
Across my dreams, with nets of wonder,
I chase the bright, elusive, butterfly of love.
Robert Maas
Lines 31 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 30 of 61
be...@interlinx.qc.ca Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby) at news.interlinx.qc.ca
<<i think your core problem is not shyness itself, i don't think we can
be of big help.>>
The core problem is that I'm physically disabled and also suffer from
learning disabilities, and nobody wants to have a friend, or even an
acquaintance, who is disabled. If you are going to exclude me from this
support group because I'm physically and learning disabled, then fuck
you and go to hell because the world dosn't need people like you making
an already difficult life for the disabled even more difficult.
Robert Maas
specializing in shyness.>>
Are they free or take medi-cal?
Robert Maas
I get that from EVERYONE, so if I follow your rule I should avoid
approaching anyone whatever, just sit home on my butt and never get any
social contact at all.
Robert Maas
Lines 55 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 35 of 61
anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
<<... you deserve a cyber hug, ... ... I just hope you wont feel too
embarassed that I will hug you so tight that you might even be alittle
bit short on breath. If I do this, dont esitate in telling me,so I can
correct myself ,and so next time I hug you I wont use the limit of my
strength..*..ops..I was getting carried away again>>
JerryO is scaring me. Would somebody get him to leave me alone?
Hey everybody, it's Janet's birthday now!! I'm going offline now...
Andrew Venor
While free is an unreasonable expectation, you are going to have to call
them and ask whether ot not they accept medi-cal.
ALV
JerryO
> Sat, 20 Feb 1999 00:35:16 alt.support.shyness Thread 133 of 202
> Lines 55 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 35 of 61
> anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
>
> <<... you deserve a cyber hug, ... ... I just hope you wont feel too
> embarassed that I will hug you so tight that you might even be alittle
> bit short on breath. If I do this, dont esitate in telling me,so I can
> correct myself ,and so next time I hug you I wont use the limit of my
> strength..*..ops..I was getting carried away again>>
>
> JerryO is scaring me. Would somebody get him to leave me alone?
If you were actually serious,then perhaps you know how you are making
other people feel. Seriously, I'd love to hug you and make all these cyber
hugs I gave you real. If you dont want to,or feel unconfortable, I can sit
by your door,since I knw where you live, I just went to the post office
and I got your address off your phone #. Anyways, I'll just wait until you
feel confortable with the idea of me giving you a hug and many many kisses
too, because I was raised in Europe and in some european countries people
will greet guys and girls with a kiss on the cheeks. But dont worry if I
also try to grope your butt because you wrote how women felt attracted to
you because of it,so I feel that I might succumb to such temptationand
give you a gentle squeeze on your butt.
>
> Hey everybody, it's Janet's birthday now!! I'm going offline now...
>
>
>
JerryO
> Fri, 19 Feb 1999 18:59:20 alt.support.shyness Thread 133 of 202
> Lines 31 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 30 of 61
> be...@interlinx.qc.ca Sebastien St-Laurent (Sebby) at news.interlinx.qc.ca
>
> <<i think your core problem is not shyness itself, i don't think we can
> be of big help.>>
>
> The core problem is that I'm physically disabled and also suffer from
> learning disabilities, and nobody wants to have a friend, or even an
> acquaintance, who is disabled. If you are going to exclude me from this
You know computers. Learning disabilities?
How are you physically disabled? I had the impression you were
'normal',since you even attended the boink from ba.singles, im assuming
not in a wheelchair.
cava...@my-dejanews.com
fake...@detoxotedetox.com (Nebulous Rex) wrote:
> I agree my joke was in bad taste. However, think about this. What if
> Robert finds he gets some negative attention (or no attention) every
> time he himself behaves negatively, and conversely, he gets positive
> attention whenever he behaves positively? Don't you think he'd start
> behaving more positively? And isn't that what he wants?
Maybe he'll be happy just to get any attention at all though. Perhaps
negative attention is better than being ignored for him.
cav
-----------------------------------------------------
All about Me! http://www.geocities.com/soho/2601
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
cava...@my-dejanews.com
r...@shell.netmagic.net (Robert Maas) wrote:
> <<JerryO: I find you sexually attractive>>
> This is where the trouble started. What the fucking business does
> JerryO have telling a woman he's never even seen in person or via
> picture such a remark? That's far worse than Janet insisting I stop
robert, jerryo was using an advanced form of teasing.
Notice that he didn't write several pages describing
anything in graphic detail. And, from his established
prior interaction with yakima, he knew that she would
not take it as a come-on. He could get away with it
becasue he knew the context which his statement would
be taken in.
In your posts, however, you appear to be quite serious,
and go way beyond what could possibly be considered
teasing. You don't seem to have a good grasp of the
concept of teasing and sexual innuendo. There's a line in
any human interaction that divides teasing/innuendo from
serious intent. the location of this line depends on how
well you know the other person. If you cross it, as you
discovered, your going to freak the other person out.
You, quite frankly, bulldozed past the line with you posts
and emails Janet. Overkill in an exponential way. However,
it is made worse by the fact that you clearly were serious.
Your jumping in the middle of yakima's/jerryo's teasing
exchange with your serious tear-downs was another example
of crossing the line. (you can also tease about negative
things, as long as you don't cross another of those
imaginary lines) Serious rip-downs are never going to
be appreciated.
In all cases, its safer to be on the conservative side
then it is to leap as you tend to do. Since you obviously
don't seem to grasp the concept of teasing and innuendo,
I'd suggest you be cautious about your sexual posts and
comments about other people. You are too likely to go beyond
the realms of good taste.
Kris
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:51:22 -0600, in alt.support.shyness
> bwc...@airmail.net (Brandon Campbell) wrote:
>
> >In article <36d22c5a...@news.feist.com>, fake...@detoxotedetox.com
> >(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
> >
> >> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
> >>
> >> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
> >> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
> >> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
> >
> >STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
>
> Funny.. I didn't see your name listed as group moderator in the FAQ.
Yeah, I mean everybody knows I unilaterally made myself the official a.s.s.
moderator years ago. :)
--
Kris
"An above-average intellect is bestowed upon men for their unhappiness and
torment, since it serves only to keep them in a greater state of turmoil and
anxiety than those men whose intellects are more limited." -Francesco
Guicciardini, "The Ricordi"
Mel Matsuoka
>J> ....,
>J> Thanks again, Robert. :) {hug}
Robert,
It's only "apparant" to you that she "accepted" your "offer" because you've
placed distorted expectations on the very meaning of that paragraph. When I read
it (and im sure i can probably speak for Janet here), all I see is a nice,
encouraging, positive message. I don't get any impression of any kind of
"offer", much less an invitation to accept said mythical "offer".
It seems that one of your biggest foibles is twisting the meaning of other
people's words and actions in order to fit your own, fantasy-based expectations
and wishes of them. For example, the way you interpreted the silly actions of
the "Jack-in-the-Box latino girl" to mean that she had "the hots" for you. It's
commonly referred to as "wishful thinking", and it can get you into a LOT of
trouble (and heaps of humiliation) if you dont realize you are doing it.
--mel
____________________________________________________________________________
mel matsuoka Hawaiian Image Video Productions
Editor/Digital Media Dude http://www.hawaiianimage.com
mel@EATTHISSPAMFORDhawaiianimage+com
Mel Matsuoka
>I have a better idea than all this dismissing of my plan without even
>trying it (despite apparent success of step 0.6 with very-shy (*)
>Rosana on first attempt, which you will probably conveniently ignore):
>We could have you and Janet rendezvous at my apartment, JerryO and I
>acting as chaperones for each other, with JerryO arriving before her so
>that JerryO can't loiter in hallway to be alone with her when she first
>arrives, and I'll give Janet just step 1 (or step 0.6 if she's too shy
>for even step 1 yet), then we all listen to music, then Janet leaves
>first and gets in her car and goes, then 10 minutes later JerryO leaves
>but promises not to drive 100 MPH to catch up with her on the freeway
>to follow her home to find out where she lives on King near that
>darling Spanish-style house with giant palm tree dominating the front
>yard.
It's this sort of talk that makes me feel justified in completely disagreeing
with Brandon Campbell's pleas for leniency and "understanding" in regards to
Robert. That last bit about Janet's street location is downright freaky.
"Normal" people (by that, I mean people who understand that there is a big fat
line between "interest" and "stalking" behavior, and that they shouldnt ever
cross it) dont talk like this, especially on a worldwide, public forum such as
Usenet.
The fact is, contrary to his own claims, he is still "obsessed" with Janet (or
at least the "idea" of a Janet-like person)...his post-"Janet-gate" words makes
this abundantly clear. And these aren't isolated cases, as even the ba.singles
group has formally banned Robert from any future RL events (aka "boinks"), due
to the fear he has engendered towards many female (and i suppose, male) regulars
in the newsgroup. A cursory glance through Dejanews also makes this very clear.
Of course we shouldn't ridicule Robert, and give him insulting nicknames and
such, however, it IS entirely appropriate to continue to describe his actions
and words on a.s.s. (and ba.singles) to be highly inappropriate at best, and
stalker-like at worst. Organized groups of people do not normally threaten
isolated individuals with state anti-stalking laws, unless there is a very good
reason to do so. The ba.singles group has unanimously chosen to do so with
Robert, so I don't think our concerns here on a.s.s. are unwarranted at all.
So while Robert may indeed be "shy", that doesnt negate his responsibility to be
held accountable to the actions and words which cause a great number of people
to fear him IRL. The fact is, Robert has shown little, if any, remorse or
acknowledgement of the highly inapprpriate words he posts to a.s.s. (namely the
ones which people percieve as bordering on stalking). He continues to post
disturbing messages such as this "following Janet home" post. Even though it
describes JerryO doing the following, i can't help but think that the reason why
he even mentioned such a scenario is because he would have done the same thing
himself...im sorry of that rattles anyone's cage, but Robert's very own words
show that he isnt above such behavior.
I'm happy that Robert has apparantly used this fiasco as an impetus to be more
outgoing with people, but he still doesnt understand appropriate behavior in
these situations...the very fact that he insists on challenging the rebukes
given to him by many people on here indicates a certain unwillingness to change
this aspect of his behavior. So imho, it would be entirely wrong of us to NOT
say when his words & actions are "stalker-like".
$.02 (+ 25% interest)
--mel
JerryO
> In article <7atlfb$m2h$1...@remarQ.com>,
> r...@shell.netmagic.net (Robert Maas) wrote:
>
>
> > <<JerryO: I find you sexually attractive>>
>
> > This is where the trouble started. What the fucking business does
> > JerryO have telling a woman he's never even seen in person or via
> > picture such a remark? That's far worse than Janet insisting I stop
>
> robert, jerryo was using an advanced form of teasing.
> Notice that he didn't write several pages describing
> anything in graphic detail. And, from his established
> prior interaction with yakima, he knew that she would
> not take it as a come-on. He could get away with it
> becasue he knew the context which his statement would
> be taken in.
Oh wow. "Advanced" form of teasing.
But, I wasnt too sure I could get away with it :)
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
><<If she seems uncomfortable with your looking at her, RED LIGHT.>>
That's right. The next time you go to the library, find some books
about etiquette. Don't approach anyone. Check those books out, take
them home, sit on your butt and STUDY THEM. Learn what is a red light
and what is a green light. THEN go get some social contact.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:27:48 alt.support.shyness Thread 136 of 206
>Lines 11 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 22 of 50
>alv...@ix.netcom.com Andrew Venor at Netcom
>
>R> I have made a simple oversight which has humiliated Janet.
>R> I would rather shoot my own foot with a gun.
>
>A> Now their [sic] is a good reason for a mandatory waiting period for the
>A> purchase of handguns.
>
>If I understand that, you are on the side of my physical health, that
>you would saddened if some freak combination of circumsances caused me
>to lose my foot? Then I should consider you somebody who cares for my
>health and happiness, or just my health but damn the happiness?
Actually, it's much simpler than that. Andrew was making a joke.
When someone makes a joke, you laugh, and the conversation moves on.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Of course we shouldn't ridicule Robert, and give him insulting nicknames and
>such, however, it IS entirely appropriate to continue to describe his actions
>and words on a.s.s. (and ba.singles) to be highly inappropriate at best, and
>stalker-like at worst.
I partially disagree. He has already been told AND SHOWN that his
actions and words are highly inappropriate. He has also shown, as you
point out, that he totally disregards that direction. Indeed, I think
it's in Robert's worst interest that we continue to reprimand his
behavior. I think it'll make it worse. Consider that he has on
several occasions PUBLICALLY ADMITTED the desire for pity and
instruction. When we give it to him, the behaviors that got it for
him are reinforced. Now, I don't want to name names, but I'll direct
your attention to the last person everyone lavished attention upon.
Where he is now? How much has he improved?
'Nuff said.
Nebulous Rex
>In article <36e426ed....@news.feist.com>,
> fake...@detoxotedetox.com (Nebulous Rex) wrote:
>
>> I agree my joke was in bad taste. However, think about this. What if
>> Robert finds he gets some negative attention (or no attention) every
>> time he himself behaves negatively, and conversely, he gets positive
>> attention whenever he behaves positively? Don't you think he'd start
>> behaving more positively? And isn't that what he wants?
>
>Maybe he'll be happy just to get any attention at all though. Perhaps
>negative attention is better than being ignored for him.
I agree: let this be a call for positive reinforcement. Reward good
with good, and reward bad with nothing.
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Not trying to point fingers at anyone, I found it curious that the first
>'wacky' posts of Robert were totally ignored, even after his sexual
>descriptions. I felt like most people were ignoring him, and then I posted
>'enough with the porno posts',and suddenly everyone's coming up with this
>type of response. I suppose, it's a typical 'group mentality' at work.
>Just pointing it out..
Perhaps no one wanted to read a 500 line post until they found out it
had porn in it? >:)
Nebulous Rex
wrote:
>Oh wow. "Advanced" form of teasing.
>But, I wasnt too sure I could get away with it :)
You're like one of those "Mac Daddies" or something!
Michael :-)
>Not trying to point fingers at anyone, I found it curious that the first
>'wacky' posts of Robert were totally ignored, even after his sexual
>descriptions. I felt like most people were ignoring him, and then I posted
>'enough with the porno posts',and suddenly everyone's coming up with this
>type of response. I suppose, it's a typical 'group mentality' at work.
>Just pointing it out..
So basically you're saying that somebody shouts 'sex' and then everybody
sits up and takes notice. That's hardly news now is it? ;)
--
~Michael~
no2st...@my-dejanews.com
r...@shell.netmagic.net (Robert Maas) wrote:
>
> Unfortunately the usual connotation of "go out" is dating, in the sense
> of guy pays and girl gives body in return as if a prostitute.
Robert, you aren't shy.
You're detached from society.
Not all men are preditors and not all women are whores.
JerryO
The funny thing is, some ex-co workers I told my lil adventure in SC about
also said that.
OTOH, expressmyself is mac momma ;)
JerryO
> On 22 Feb 1999 19:35:18 -0500, anon-...@anon.twwells.com (JerryO)
> wrote:
>
> >Not trying to point fingers at anyone, I found it curious that the first
> >'wacky' posts of Robert were totally ignored, even after his sexual
> >descriptions. I felt like most people were ignoring him, and then I posted
> >'enough with the porno posts',and suddenly everyone's coming up with this
> >type of response. I suppose, it's a typical 'group mentality' at work.
> >Just pointing it out..
>
> Perhaps no one wanted to read a 500 line post until they found out it
> had porn in it? >:)
As porn goes,it was really bad :)
<mind out of the gutter, NOW!>
Angelique
<manhattan_by...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Angelique wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:51:22 -0600, in alt.support.shyness
>> bwc...@airmail.net (Brandon Campbell) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <36d22c5a...@news.feist.com>, fake...@detoxotedetox.com
>> >(Nebulous Rex) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hehe. Alright, I'll try:
>> >>
>> >> Well, I certainly don't see any problem with hugging you, even though
>> >> I'm not homosexual and won't give you the Crocodile Dundee test. One
>> >> time I tried to give the test to this gorgeous woman with the most
>> >
>> >STOP IT. NOW. This is a support group, not a make-fun-of-Robert group.
>>
>> Funny.. I didn't see your name listed as group moderator in the FAQ.
>
>Yeah, I mean everybody knows I unilaterally made myself the official a.s.s.
>moderator years ago. :)
I hope you realize the full importance of a.s.s moderation... did you
take an oath? :)
-ang
JerryO
> On 23 Feb 1999 18:05:40 -0500, anon-...@anon.twwells.com (JerryO)
> wrote:
>
> >OTOH, expressmyself is mac momma ;)
>
> Can I get that with fries and a medium drink?
Enjoy the happy meal.:)
Nebulous Rex
JerryO
> JerryO wrote in message <7ast46$1gv$1...@twwells.com>...
> >Not trying to point fingers at anyone, I found it curious that the first
> >'wacky' posts of Robert were totally ignored, even after his sexual
> >descriptions. I felt like most people were ignoring him, and then I posted
> >'enough with the porno posts',and suddenly everyone's coming up with this
> >type of response. I suppose, it's a typical 'group mentality' at work.
> >Just pointing it out..
>
> So basically you're saying that somebody shouts 'sex' and then everybody
> sits up and takes notice. That's hardly news now is it? ;)
In this ng, everyone's androgynous and asexual :)
Robert Maas
Lines 243 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet baRespno 62 of 90
anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
<Robert: Unfortunately the usual connotation of "go out" is dating, in
the sense of guy pays and girl gives body in return as if a
prostitute.>>
<<JerryO No. THat's wrong. Dont ever assume that if you pay for a date,
that you have the right to expect her body in return.>>
That's precisely why I didn't like the idea of dating, so never did.
Society set up this idea of men pay, women play coy but eventually have
sex (*) they don't enjoy. I thought that was basically prostitution,
and I hated the whole idea of dating.
* (not necessarily coitis: intimate kissing, and breast fondling &
cupping & squeezing, were the most common kinds of things a guy wanted
to do with a girl but she didn't want to do)
<<Havent you been in this ng long enough to understand that 'dating' is
just two people going out and enjoying themselves?>>
When I went to school, when such issues came up, dates usually involved
man paying and wanting sexual payback, so I didn't participate. When I
was out of school, there wasn't a good way to meeting anyone, so the
question was moot.
Robert Maas
Lines 42 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 69 of 90
anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
<<JerryO: Seriously, I'd love to hug you and make all these cyber hugs
I gave you real.>>
If you want to come over and listen to some of my favorite music, and
report back to Janet et al what kind of music I like, I think I'd
accept a simple hug from you when you arrive, providing you don't smoke
or ride horses. Despite all my successful flirting when I approach
women, I've gotten only one hug so-far, and it smelled like ashtray or
horse. I'm quite lonely and would like to have somebody visit for an
hour and share music instead of spend that hour racing around the
library searching for the next woman to try approaching.
<<If you dont want to,or feel unconfortable, I can sit by your
door,since I knw where you live,>>
That sounds like Estelle. Do you play the guitar (she did)?
<<Anyways, I'll just wait until you feel confortable with the idea of
me giving you a hug>>
I'm already at that point, assuming no smoke no horse.
<<and many many kisses too, because I was raised in Europe and in some
european countries people will greet guys and girls with a kiss on the
cheeks.>>
That's not a kiss. When Janet says she hasn't gotten a kiss, I assume
that means on the mouth. I've watched French in Action, where Robert
and whats-her-name meet, but meanwhile all the females are kissing
their cheeks every time they meet. But I'm not from Europe, so that's
forbidden when you visit me.
<<But dont worry if I also try to grope your butt because you wrote how
women felt attracted to you because of it,so I feel that I might
succumb to such temptationand give you a gentle squeeze on your butt.>>
I never had anybody do that to me, so I have no idea what it would feel
like. But let's forbid that also on first meeting.
Except for that one simple hug when you first arrive here, visit should
follow same rules as what I was willing to agree to when visiting Janet
at her home or workplace: No touching whatsoever, stay at least 1 foot
apart at all times.
Robert Maas
Lines 30 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 70 of 90
anon-...@anon.twwells.com JerryO at Anonymous Message Service at anon.twwell
<<You know computers.>>
No, I program them. The manual KNOWs them, and I constantly refer to
the manual for the stuff that isn't common enough for me to have
memorized it yet.
<<Learning disabilities?>>
Yup, near impossibility of memorizing more than one thing at a time.
<<How are you physically disabled? I had the impression you were
'normal',since you even attended the boink from ba.singles, im assuming
not in a wheelchair.>>
Except for nearsightedness (hence eyeglasses), all my physical
disabilities are invisible (except when degenerated spinal disk is so
bad I can walk only hunched over, and when I'm so drowsy I have to lie
down on the floor for a few minutes to avoid passing out and falling
and hurting myself). My quick summaries of my physical disabilties &
ailments is about 6 pages of text.
I got arrested for public drunkedness because some total idiot thought
I was hunching because I was drunk when it was actually spinal disk distress.
Getting put in jail just because a physical disability is acting up is
a VERY unfair thing to do to me, but I can't afford a lawyer to sue the
city a million dollars to deter them from doing it again.
Robert Maas
disabilities, is that I don't emphasize them when looking for women to
meet, nor when trying to work on shyness. No woman wants to have
anything to do with a disabled person. Janet would probably never have
chatted with me at all if she knew from the start that I was physically
disabled. Consider the remark Zsa Zsa Gabor made to the Tolouse Latrek
character in the movie "The Moulon Rouge":
"No woman will ever want you; You are a hopeless cripple."
Robert Maas
Lines 50 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 74 of 90
melo...@nospam.gov Mel Matsuoka at Ministry of Silly Walks
<<It's only "apparant" to you that she "accepted" your "offer" because
you've placed distorted expectations on the very meaning of that
paragraph. When I read it (and im sure i can probably speak for Janet
here), all I see is a nice, encouraging, positive message. I don't get
any impression of any kind of "offer", much less an invitation to
accept said mythical "offer".>>
I'm the one who wrote that offer (or you claim non-offer), and I
specifically intended to offer lots of hugs and her first kiss. Are you
saying that intention wasn't clear in the text I posted (key text
repeated below)??
[[me for friendship and confidence-building and hugs and companionship
and eventually your first kiss,]]
<<the way you interpreted the silly actions of the "Jack-in-the-Box
latino girl" to mean that she had "the hots" for you. It's commonly
referred to as "wishful thinking",>>
She definitely saw me staring at her fantastic boobs, and later shoved
her boyfriend ahead while she turned to me, then when I waved at her
she blushed very prettily.
My "hot" explantion was that she shoved him away so she could make some
fort of flirtatious pass at me.
My alternate explanation was that she decided in her mind during the
watching-me-stare time an emotional bond between us, so that when she
bumped into her boyfriend it was natural to share that bumped info with
the other end of her bond, namely with me, i.e. you show all your
interesting experiences with your friends, and she considered me
somewhat of a friend for a moment so shared with me the silliness of
the bump, i.e. she was showing off for me.
In any case I am pretty sure she was treating me as a special person,
rather than just broadcasting to everyone within sight.
Robert Maas
Lines 17 Re: EMERGENCY: I've accidently hurt Janet badRespno 81 of 90
fake...@detoxotedetox.com Nebulous Rex at Nebulous Rex Inc.
<<let this be a call for positive reinforcement. Reward good with
good, and reward bad with nothing.>>
That would be nice if anybody ever did give me any positive reward. At
one time I thought that Janet had given me positive reward, but it
turns out she didn't mean anything by it. Nobody else ever gives me any
positive reward at all, not even seeming to. The only way I get even
the most trivial amount/kind of positive reward is when I approach
female strangers in RL (library, Jack-in-Box, etc.) and they like my
approach well enough to allow me to shake/hold their hand for several
minutes and still are friendly to me afterward. I like the feel of
holding their hands, so that's my reward, and their continued
friendliness is proof they gave the hand-holding willingly.