my opposition to CPS
Robert Shepherd
anti-government per se. To be so would be foolish, as even parents
themselves are the prototype and ideal of archetypal AUTHORITY. I am
not talking Jungian theory, I am talking the real world, no Robinson
Crusoe make-believe but the accusations fly, and accuracy gets muddled
in the heat of defensiveness and outrage.
I am outraged not at legitimate authority, but at the abuses and
oppressions that CPS (and such like) perpetrates. That is the kind of
stuff the American Revolution wrote their tracts and broadsides and
essays to expose and denounce. It is the core of the Declaration of
Independence, and it is as germane now as then.
Richard Steven Walz
Then you're slightly more rational than the other breathless child abusers
around here who come on with sloganeering and bullshit and bluster. You
take these family annihilator wannabe's and short circuit their outlet for
their antihumane control of their family in a divorce and they go crazy
because they weren't allowed to kill them all before they got tossed out of
the house!! Most of their attraction comes merely from rage that they got
rejected rather than did the rejecting! MOST anti-CPS boobs are merely
old-style authoritarian knuckle-draggers trying to sound literate online and
mistaking slogans and chants as a way to do that. So they absorb the phony
intellectualization of the "impotent dads for beating people if they disobey
their control fantasy" and regurgitate pseudo-Revolutionary War Enlightenment
rhetoric like a bunch of farmers who want to form a militia and take on the
gubmint. It's all just rage that they aren't allowed to rule their family
with an iron hand like they thought this was still the fucking Dark Ages or
something! If anybody tells you the Dark Ages are over, smash them in the
face with a brick, until we just eradicate this kind of male from the human
race we will continue to have these moron brigades of backassward non-thinkers
like the Taliban kicking up a fuss panicking that western movies and the
culture of freedom were making clitoridectomy unpopular, and freaked that
their wives are all going to leave them and fuck famous hollywood stars!
It's a kind of third world impotence transported to blue collar Amerika.
Steve
Robert Shepherd
> In article <5288895f.02052...@posting.google.com>,
> Robert Shepherd <rs2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Don't ever say I am anti-government. I am CERTAINLY not
> >anti-government per se. To be so would be foolish, as even parents
> >themselves are the prototype and ideal of archetypal AUTHORITY. I am
> >not talking Jungian theory, I am talking the real world, no Robinson
> >Crusoe make-believe but the accusations fly, and accuracy gets muddled
> >in the heat of defensiveness and outrage.
> >
> >I am outraged not at legitimate authority, but at the abuses and
> >oppressions that CPS (and such like) perpetrates. That is the kind of
> >stuff the American Revolution wrote their tracts and broadsides and
> >essays to expose and denounce. It is the core of the Declaration of
> >Independence, and it is as germane now as then.
> -----------------------
> Then you're slightly more rational than the other breathless child abusers
> around here who come on with sloganeering and bullshit and bluster. You
> take these family annihilator wannabe's and short circuit their outlet for
> their antihumane control of their family in a divorce and they go crazy
> because they weren't allowed to kill them all before they got tossed out of
> the house!!
But RSW, you seem pretty riled here, yourself. I suppose as a
theoretical concept, it's better to rage and revile at adults, in sane
surroundings, than to bottle up that testy-ness and unleash it on
those who can't defend themselves. yet doesnt government (like
parents) sometimes do that?
All that power and all that testosterone, and who can we dump on next?
> Most of their attraction comes merely from rage that they got
> rejected rather than did the rejecting! MOST anti-CPS boobs are merely
> old-style authoritarian knuckle-draggers trying to sound literate online and
> mistaking slogans and chants as a way to do that. So they absorb the phony
> intellectualization of the "impotent dads for beating people if they disobey
> their control fantasy" and regurgitate pseudo-Revolutionary War Enlightenment
> rhetoric like a bunch of farmers who want to form a militia and take on the
> gubmint.
Again, Richard Steven, so much militancy and war-farin in your own
"testy" belligerancy. Obviously, you are trying to get your finger on
part of the problem, and I think if you could find it, or get an
accurate "fix" -- it would have a wholesome chunk of validity to it.
But the rage I feel coming from your pen (ie keyboard) is the kind of
stuff our ancestors needed for people beyond hope of persuading. Take
your battle-ax, yor mace, your knout or club or cudgeon.
> It's all just rage that they aren't allowed to rule their family
> with an iron hand like they thought this was still the fucking Dark Ages or
> something!
Well, yes. i suppose it's good that it isn't the fucking Dark Ages
anymore. It's good we can appeal to wisdom and intelligence and
compassion to enlighten or persuade one another. We sure wouldnt want
to go back to the fucking Dark Ages when a local Lord had absolute
power (to torture, to enjoy one's wives and daughter, even to kill)
the inhabitants whom he virtually owned.
Richard Steven Walz
You need to explain yourself better. All I do is turn phrases around here.
>> Most of their attraction comes merely from rage that they got
>> rejected rather than did the rejecting! MOST anti-CPS boobs are merely
>> old-style authoritarian knuckle-draggers trying to sound literate online and
>> mistaking slogans and chants as a way to do that. So they absorb the phony
>> intellectualization of the "impotent dads for beating people if they disobey
>> their control fantasy" and regurgitate pseudo-Revolutionary War Enlightenment
>> rhetoric like a bunch of farmers who want to form a militia and take on the
>> gubmint.
>
>Again, Richard Steven, so much militancy and war-farin in your own
>"testy" belligerancy. Obviously, you are trying to get your finger on
>part of the problem, and I think if you could find it, or get an
>accurate "fix" -- it would have a wholesome chunk of validity to it.
-------------------------------------
I'm finger-fucking it as we speak, I'm quite familiar with it, I'm not
at ALL asking: "Is it in yet?".
>But the rage I feel coming from your pen (ie keyboard) is the kind of
>stuff our ancestors needed for people beyond hope of persuading. Take
>your battle-ax, yor mace, your knout or club or cudgeon.
--------------------------------
I do indeed realize who is beyond hope of persuading and what needs to be
done to them.
>> It's all just rage that they aren't allowed to rule their family
>> with an iron hand like they thought this was still the fucking Dark Ages or
>> something!
>
>Well, yes. i suppose it's good that it isn't the fucking Dark Ages
>anymore. It's good we can appeal to wisdom and intelligence and
>compassion to enlighten or persuade one another. We sure wouldnt want
>to go back to the fucking Dark Ages when a local Lord had absolute
>power (to torture, to enjoy one's wives and daughter, even to kill)
>the inhabitants whom he virtually owned.
---------------------------------
But that venality is precisely the attribute of the classic male ranter at
CPS issues.
Steve
observer
you could find it . . . . "
If Steve found it and plugged it, he would be sitting with his fingers bent into
an unnatural position where the sun doesn't shine.
Robert Shepherd
intelligence down paths of rage and fury.
Why don't you take a deep breath and start over. It is a shame to
waste all your talents, and in fact your articulate and eloquent
verbal power, into this virulent attack on people who, whatever their
syllogistic failings, are basically good people, many of them decent
and involved parents and citizens.
You rage at the classic male ranter at CPS, but are you male? Your
name indicates you are. Your rage and testy-ness seems to exude a male
belligerency or testosterone -- though the target of your ranting is
"classic male ranters."
And you ignore the sins and excesses of CPS.
Richard Steven Walz
Robert Shepherd <rs2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I am sorry to have to say this, rsteve, but you are perverting your
>intelligence down paths of rage and fury.
>
>Why don't you take a deep breath and start over. It is a shame to
>waste all your talents, and in fact your articulate and eloquent
>verbal power, into this virulent attack on people who, whatever their
>syllogistic failings, are basically good people, many of them decent
>and involved parents and citizens.
Having heard things from rage-aholic father-nazi's that are abyssmally
Medieval I know better than to believe these people are just "good people"
who only "accidentally" got nabbed by CPS. These are budding family
annihilators who want everybody to live their way or the highway.
>You rage at the classic male ranter at CPS, but are you male? Your
>name indicates you are. Your rage and testy-ness seems to exude a male
>belligerency or testosterone -- though the target of your ranting is
>"classic male ranters."
-------------------------
Testosterone is a power, like witchcraft, and I only use mine for the
Good and the Right.
>And you ignore the sins and excesses of CPS.
------------------------
Not at all. But I know that anti-CPS ranting by those who are probably just
protesting rage-aholic child abusers will be laughed at by everyone and
give any chance of anything better a bad name.
Steve
observer
fury."
Probably wasted advice since it appears that Steve's wiring is fried. Then,
that seems to be the case with all of the Three Mouthketeers.
Robert Shepherd
> In article <5288895f.02053...@posting.google.com>,
> Robert Shepherd <rs2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I am sorry to have to say this, rsteve, but you are perverting your
> >intelligence down paths of rage and fury.
> >
> >Why don't you take a deep breath and start over. It is a shame to
> >waste all your talents, and in fact your articulate and eloquent
> >verbal power, into this virulent attack on people who, whatever their
> >syllogistic failings, are basically good people, many of them decent
> >and involved parents and citizens.
> ------------------------
> Having heard things from rage-aholic father-nazi's that are abyssmally
> Medieval I know better than to believe these people are just "good people"
> who only "accidentally" got nabbed by CPS. These are budding family
> annihilators who want everybody to live their way or the highway.
>
Hey, I tend to feel pushed away by your consclusions and slant, but I
have to say that your words have an impressive quality that I am sure
others (not just me) probably admire. But, like I say, my views are a
bit more middle-of-the road and actually I feel fairly STRONGLY
pro-parent (generally speaking).
Here's a description I came up with, sitting here. You are sort of a
rhetorical virtuoso (at least - intentionally or not - you show off
these verbal flourishes and fireworks ....)
>
> >You rage at the classic male ranter at CPS, but are you male? Your
> >name indicates you are. Your rage and testy-ness seems to exude a male
> >belligerency or testosterone -- though the target of your ranting is
> >"classic male ranters."
> -------------------------
> Testosterone is a power, like witchcraft, and I only use mine for the
> Good and the Right.
>
Well, I echo that noble sentiment, but we who, whether pagan,
monotheist, philosophical ethical believism, biblical metaphysicalism,
or my own judeo-christian faitheist traditionalism, we are all judged
by our actions. Are we just mouting great ideals? Or do we walk the
talk? Are we doers and not mere perfessors only.
>
> >And you ignore the sins and excesses of CPS.
> ------------------------
> Not at all. But I know that anti-CPS ranting by those who are probably just
> protesting rage-aholic child abusers will be laughed at by everyone and
> give any chance of anything better a bad name.
> Steve
I am sort of an anti-CPS ranter. And I also sometimes have been known
to "rant" against government (other departments and manisfestations
thereof). But I don't like to stay in a rage-aholic mood. I like to
see progress being made. I like to connect even with people of
differing views. Remember, even "us" anti-CPS folk have several
different perspectives. doan doesnt always agree with everything fern
says, fern doesnt always agree with everything observer says, observer
doesnt always agree with everything I say, I don't always agree with
everything LaChrissie says, and so on. And Neal can be counted on to
interject his two cents (or more) on any number of issues related to
the topic at hand.
And then we have yourself and a few others, who also weigh in. Chris
Duggan and his pseudo statistical arrogation of judgmentalism, and
yourself, a virtual warrior against what you see as pervasive dangers
of abuse by parental bullies (my wording, of course).
You might take strong exception to my "review by a lurking critic" --
or at least have some razor sharp (or flambouyant) words to say it
better.
Chris
[snip]
: Well, yes. i suppose it's good that it isn't the fucking Dark Ages
: anymore. It's good we can appeal to wisdom and intelligence and
: compassion to enlighten or persuade one another. We sure wouldnt want
: to go back to the fucking Dark Ages when a local Lord had absolute
: power (to torture, to enjoy one's wives and daughter, even to kill)
: the inhabitants whom he virtually owned.
When you were a child, according to your website, your mother
punished you severely with a belt.
If she had caught you saying the "f" word, back then, what would
her response have been?
It didn't work, apparently.
Chris
observer
abuse by parental bullies . . . . "
Then, what are underachievers, professional students, and fried brain druggies
supposed to do to justify their existence?
observer
had caught you saying the 'f' word, back then, what would her response have been
The phrase "fucking Dark Ages" was originally posted by Steve on May 24 a little
before midnight Greenwich Mean Time and was picked up by Robert on May 29.
Apparently, Robert made the mistake of not putting his reference in quotes as he
mocked Steve.
Robert's use of the phrase was picked up by Steve in a post on the same date,
when he added "finger-fucking" as the activity in which he was engaged while
posting.
However, Steve failed to say whether he was entertaining himself with
auto-stimulation.
Then, our beloved academic referred to the offending phrase on May 31 and
accused Robert of originating it and asking, in the quote referenced above, what
his mother would do.
Richard Steven Walz
And you wish to pretend it is merely some artform that I pursue, instead
of something truly heart felt and developed from ethics and experience.
Bullshit.
>> >You rage at the classic male ranter at CPS, but are you male? Your
>> >name indicates you are. Your rage and testy-ness seems to exude a male
>> >belligerency or testosterone -- though the target of your ranting is
>> >"classic male ranters."
>> -------------------------
>> Testosterone is a power, like witchcraft, and I only use mine for the
>> Good and the Right.
>
>Well, I echo that noble sentiment, but we who, whether pagan,
>monotheist, philosophical ethical believism, biblical metaphysicalism,
>or my own judeo-christian faitheist traditionalism, we are all judged
>by our actions. Are we just mouting great ideals? Or do we walk the
>talk? Are we doers and not mere perfessors only.
----------------------------
Talking is a form of doing, AND what I do matches what I think.
>> >And you ignore the sins and excesses of CPS.
>> ------------------------
>> Not at all. But I know that anti-CPS ranting by those who are probably just
>> protesting rage-aholic child abusers will be laughed at by everyone and
>> give any chance of anything better a bad name.
>> Steve
>
>I am sort of an anti-CPS ranter. And I also sometimes have been known
>to "rant" against government (other departments and manisfestations
>thereof). But I don't like to stay in a rage-aholic mood. I like to
>see progress being made. I like to connect even with people of
>differing views. Remember, even "us" anti-CPS folk have several
>different perspectives. doan doesnt always agree with everything fern
>says, fern doesnt always agree with everything observer says, observer
>doesnt always agree with everything I say, I don't always agree with
>everything LaChrissie says, and so on. And Neal can be counted on to
>interject his two cents (or more) on any number of issues related to
>the topic at hand.
---------------------------
You seem just barely reasonable, and the others are not at all. You seem
to be an apoplogist for them.
>And then we have yourself and a few others, who also weigh in. Chris
>Duggan and his pseudo statistical arrogation of judgmentalism, and
>yourself, a virtual warrior against what you see as pervasive dangers
>of abuse by parental bullies (my wording, of course).
-----------------------------
To me the nuclear family is the enemy, plain and simple. It must be
destroyed. Monogamy was invented to enslave people, not benefit them. It
was an effort to keep us apart, separated, unable to defend ourselves
against feudal slavery, after the bandits enslaved the peaceful tribes.
Parental power over children is as wrong as that of feudal nobles over
serfs, and even more evil! Those who defend it are evil, and must die.
>You might take strong exception to my "review by a lurking critic" --
>or at least have some razor sharp (or flambouyant) words to say it
>better.
------------------------------
You're civilized, given one long night I could convince you as I have done
dozens of others.
Steve
Richard Steven Walz
Shut the fuck up, you ignorant vicious antisexual shit-ass!! There's
nothing wrong with the word fuck!
Steve
Richard Steven Walz
observer <observe...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>" . . . your website, your mother punished you severely with a belt . . . If she
>had caught you saying the 'f' word, back then, what would her response have been
>. . . It didn't work, apparently."
>
>The phrase "fucking Dark Ages" was originally posted by Steve on May 24 a little
>before midnight Greenwich Mean Time and was picked up by Robert on May 29.
>
>Apparently, Robert made the mistake of not putting his reference in quotes as he
>mocked Steve.
>
>Robert's use of the phrase was picked up by Steve in a post on the same date,
>when he added "finger-fucking" as the activity in which he was engaged while
>posting.
>
>However, Steve failed to say whether he was entertaining himself with
>auto-stimulation.
You need to stop lying and re-read the thread.
Steve
Morticia~
"Richard Steven Walz" <rst...@deeptht.armory.com> wrote in message
news:3cf834b4$0$79563$8ee...@newsreader.tycho.net...
Oops.
I see that discussing Steve's mother sends him into apoplectic fits
of teenage angst (even more so than usual). Could you have hit upon
some hidden psychologically damaged nerve in his past?
Or is it that he just believes vehemently in his right to use the
word 'fuck'?
I think we should delve into this part of his childhood to find out
the truth, dig out the dental picks and really get to the bottom of
all this rage, or at least get to watch a pyrotechnical wonder
explode on our screens yet again.
Probably too late, alas, he's onto other things now, having his
finger in numerous pies at this point in time. Must remember to drop
everything once a day to read all about my hero and all his
imaginary subjects bowing and scraping to appease him. Forget about
the Dark Ages, what a great plantation owner he would have made, if
only in his own mind.
*sigh*
Robert Shepherd
Chris, you selectively quote, of course, where I used your precise
locution.
The F word in particular was introduced by you alone to this thread.
and not onece, but two or three times in a single email. I chose to
quote from you, et now I learn that perhaps you have second thoughts
as to the propriety of the very form you introduced. If you question
its use, do as some social science professionals do in academic
textbooks ---- they teach that the best instruction is modelled
instruction.
And as far as your expertise as to how I was raised, or the type of
language we used, or even what version of "Holy Writ: I may have been
exposed to, may I ask you to cite your sources, and assert the level
of confidence you have in your claims to believablility.
I frankly find your style of discussion to be combattive, polemicist,
and in fact emotionally toxic. If violence is contagious, I wonder if
linguistic abusiveness is? What are the chances that "Israel will
defend herself."
You ridicule me be cause my patience with you is drawing short, and I
begin to respond in kind. You taunt me because I show signs of
responding (in self defense), and that I may cease, after all this
time, to turn the other cheek.
Should I show you the language you introduced, il y a une semaine
passe?
It is right there to be shown. But apparently the standard you apply
to yourself you will not extend to others, (at least to me).
You accord yourself the privilege of bald assertions, includint the
pretense that you are anti-spanking. The joke is, if you are
anti-spanking, your effect is precisely the opposite, as I see it. An
effective advocate for the anti-spank position would persuasively win
people to a more tolerant and less abusive style of parenting.
What I see you modelling is nothing if not aggressive, oppressive,
emotionally abusive of others (who you refuse to deign to treat with
anything like decency, equality, or reciprocity of expectations).
You set yourself up as high and mighty, accord yorself the unique
position of judge, and the practical effect of this arrogation is to
drive people away from the very "position" you pretend to espouse.
One would suspect that you are insincere in your soi-disant opposition
to spanking, and that instead you want to put across a picture of
anti-spank proponents as unreasonable, immoderate, fanatical,
closed-minded, and in their style of discourse intolerant and abusive
of others.
If you are this way with your fellow denizens of cyber-space, how do
you think about yourself?
If you fly into a fit when a person deliberately mimics your use of
the word "fuck" --- what kind of balanced counsel could you provide to
someone entering puberty and much confused as to their own sexual
autonomy?
And now, you are the one who cares o so much about sources, you demand
an explanation as to my mother and father's style of punishment (back
before you were even born, sir). No, my parents were not perfect. Yes,
I have many of their own traits, aptitude for language, their faith,
their love of country.
Do I whitewash their style of parenting? No I don't but I certainly
hope I do them honor by my life, and my my effort to conscientiously
weigh issues, rather than attack blindly any and all who may (however
clumsily) attempt to bring into the light issues which get passed over
in heated rhetoric and sound-byte superficiality of discourse.
I continue to try, however clumsily, to bring into the light issues
which get passed over in heated rhetoric and sound-byte superficiality
of discourse.
You, in your turn, seem to be doing precisely the opposite. You seem
to be trying to escalate the level of heat and polemicism.
When I try to claim that I am not 100% pro-spank, or even 80%
pro-spank, you revile me, you rhetorically attack me, you seem to rage
at me, not for anything I said that was false, but because I didnt
pull off a miracle, or "PROVE" to your satisfaction the opinions I
still "stubbornly" hold to.
How about YOU do the "proving" thing for a while. Since you declare me
an imposter, and decree that I am 100% PRO- SPANK.
BELIEVE ME, IF IT WERE UP TO YOU ALONE, AND NO ONE ELSE, I would
abandon my former moderation, my web page, my statements against
excess violence at aLL levels, and I would revert to a kind of
primitive self-defense, as Israel has had to do.
You attack me, and instead of "turning the other cheek" as you say I
should do, I would protect myself vigously, with all the power at my
disposal. You step in my yard and I will be the first one on the
phone, dialing 911 before you took a single step towards those I love.
And dont be so sure that none of my neighborhood would forget the Bill
of Rights, or the second amendment. Or that the first law of nature
is the law of self-defense, as the founding fathers knew, but bullies
like yourself have forgotten.
observer
angst . . . . "
Childhood hang-ups seems to common among the antispanking zealots.
Richard Steven Walz
Nope, I always make sure to respond that way to anyone trying to censor
language. Period. It's my version of a "word alert".
>Could you have hit upon
>some hidden psychologically damaged nerve in his past?
--------------------------
You're wasting your time.
>Or is it that he just believes vehemently in his right to use the
>word 'fuck'?
------------------------
Everyone's.
>I think we should delve into this part of his childhood to find out
>the truth, dig out the dental picks and really get to the bottom of
>all this rage, or at least get to watch a pyrotechnical wonder
>explode on our screens yet again.
-------------------------------
You're wasting your time.
>Probably too late, alas, he's onto other things now, having his
>finger in numerous pies at this point in time. Must remember to drop
>everything once a day to read all about my hero and all his
>imaginary subjects bowing and scraping to appease him. Forget about
>the Dark Ages, what a great plantation owner he would have made, if
>only in his own mind.
>*sigh*
------------------------------
You don't even read what I write, or you wouldn't be so confused.
Steve
Richard Steven Walz
You're projecting. My comment was about censoring language.
Steve
Morticia~
Oh I am more than not confused about you Steve. I have just made it
my mission this week (s?) to have you as a project. As a person with
waaay too much time on her hands AND as a mother, I am just
stating
an
opinion.
And spreading the word to your buddies in sci not to let you
babysit....oops....I meant 'kid-sit' as I just remembered you don't
believe in kid-sex before the "sit n spin" age.
Richard Steven Walz
I have lots of friends to sit for, thanks.
Steve
Chris
: Chris, you selectively quote, of course, where I used your precise
: locution.
: The F word in particular was introduced by you alone to this thread.
: and not onece, but two or three times in a single email. I chose to
: quote from you, et now I learn that perhaps you have second thoughts
: as to the propriety of the very form you introduced.
You have me confused with someone else. I have not used the "f"
word.
You owe me an apology.
Chris
Chris
: I frankly find your style of discussion to be combattive, polemicist,
: and in fact emotionally toxic. If violence is contagious, I wonder if
: linguistic abusiveness is? What are the chances that "Israel will
: defend herself."
I have asked you for citations of the "facts" and "statistics"
you claimed supported your position. Instead of supplying them, or
withdrawing your claim of having such facts and statistics, you have been
posting personal attacks for the past two months.
I repeat my request: cite your sources or withdraw your assertion.
Chris, being "emotionally toxic" again, as usual.
John Larkin
CPS has been officially replaced with Hertz.
Too bad... I sorta liked 'cycles.'
John
Glenn Gundlach
GAK, what a waste of space!!!!!!!
GG
observer
Well, peddle to your heart's content.
observer
Probably. Then, the Three Mouthketeers of antispanking zealotry offer ample
warning as to the treatment they can expect if no-spank ever becomes the law of
the land.
For the most part, the zealots seem to be people with serious unresolved issues
from childhood or else guilt from their own apparently profound disasters in
parenting. As a result, they seem to either be trying to get back at their
parents or distance themselves from their own heavy-handed mistakes.
Richard Steven Walz
observer <observe...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>Probably. Then, the Three Mouthketeers of antispanking zealotry offer ample
>For the most part, the zealots seem to be people with serious unresolved issues
>from childhood
Even though you have no foundation for anything like that.
>or else guilt from their own apparently profound disasters in
>parenting.
----------------------
And you have no basis for that either, and in fact you're totally cold.
>As a result, they seem to either be trying to get back at their
>parents or distance themselves from their own heavy-handed mistakes.
-----------------------
None of the above. If you REALLY want to know where your supposed "anti-
spanking zealots" come from, we come from very respectful uncoercive homes
where we were raised in self-confidence and self-respect, and we were never
frightened, cowed, or guilted into feeling we would be wrong or immature
to demand what we want from the world and get it!! We were raised to be
supremely confident in our own beliefs, and in living by no one else's
morality except our own that we formulated ourselves.
At some point after our early childhood we typically began to see the
really shitty abuse other people visited on their kids and we were
murderously outraged by it like Mother Teresa to a famine!! And that's
the simple truth, just as we have all tried to tell you.
People who were abused as children are terrified of ever criticizing that
kind of abuse, they STILL feel totally unsure of themselves as to whether
the people who abused them were wrong or whether they are simply as totally
immature and insecure as they feel, or whether they are just "bad", and
they fear they will be immature and defective, never quite an adult, never
quite confident all their LIVES!
That is why they hesitantly, yet without proper regard, ignorantly and
self-centeredly slap their own children around, imagining that in their
superficial imitation of their parents that they can capture some barest
semblance of adulthood that they could never REALLY manage because of their
extremely damaged sense of self-esteem.
Steve