ForumGarden

spot;493130 wrote: James, it would be interesting to hear a biographical sketch of your own involvement with people who professed themselves to be Christian.
My involvement with Christians, spot, is limited almost entirely to those I have seen on television and in films (e.g., Songs of Praise, Ben-Hur, The Robe, The Greatest Story Ever Told).

Glaswegian;497799 wrote: My involvement with Christians, spot, is limited almost entirely to those I have seen on television and in filmsHow strange that you should be so obsessed with trying to engage with them then. There are far easier and productive ways of picking fights, socializing and showing off than generating all this write-only drivel.

pompom;497800 wrote: You missed "The Life of Brian" then?
No one is qualified to talk about Christians unless they have seen The Life Of Brian, pompom. Of all the movies ever made about Christians it is the one which provides us with the greatest insight into them. I would say that The Life Of Brian is the Christian movie par excellence. Wouldn't you?

Glaswegian;497799 wrote: My involvement with Christians, spot, is limited almost entirely to those I have seen on television and in films (e.g., Songs of Praise, Ben-Hur, The Robe, The Greatest Story Ever Told).


Wow.

That's sorta like saying the only romance you've been involved in is with Harlequin Romance books. Pity.

OK, you don't like Protestants, Catholics, Alistar Crowley.. . . .

Serious question here, what do you believe in? Besides yourself.

Something horrible happened to you as a child, didn't it? Something you have never been able to come to terms with as an adult. (If you are an adult) Something you asked for or prayed for and didn't get. It doesn't mean there isn't a higher power out there, it just means the answer was no.

I find it strange that, in your ramblings, you would actually call on the one person you claim to despise: 'My God. The pain in that laughter! Doesn't he realise how awful it sounds?'


Do you know Ted from somewhere or is he just the 'pick of the day'? This is a forum, not a counseling office. We don't all come here to bear our souls or share our burdens or talk about our personal lives all the time. I daresay that no one here tells everything about themselves all the time.

Not even you. Obviously.

spot;497769 wrote: at least I stick to punctuation
I admire that, spot - just like I admire you for the way you stick to me....

Glaswegian;498500 wrote: I admire that, spot - just like I admire you for the way you stick to me....You stand as David to my Michelangelo, dear boy. It's a joy to educate you. One day I might even get to enjoy reading something you write, who can tell. You have some command of English, your mind isn't a total cesspit which lifts you somewhere above Frank if nothing else, I have high hopes.

Is your purpose to change people's minds, or to annoy a section of society? There's a laudable aspect to the one that the other lacks.

spot;498575 wrote: You have some command of English, your mind isn't a total cesspit
Oh master! Your kind words have made me so happy. I feel so happy I want to tell everyone. I want to tell the whole world that I could just s**t myself with happiness after you said those nice things about me.

Diuretic;498611 wrote: Spot has seen the Angel in Marble in you G. Sadly I can only see spite and bitterness. You know it is possible to live a life free from religion without hammering those that believe, it makes for better relations.
Ah but he's not free from religion.

Glaswegian;497734 wrote: The above is a typical example of the sterile religious hum-bug which you routinely post in this forum, Ted. The use of the word 'sterile' in the preceding sentence is appropriate because your posts are so sanitised, aren't they? I have always been struck by how carefully washed your posts are. But here's the odd thing I find about reading your well-scrubbed posts. Whenever I read them tiny alarm bells start ringing inside of me. (I refer to these invaluable little bells in the opening post of this thread. But you wouldn't know that since you claim not to have read the OP. And you wouldn't lie about not having read it, Ted, would you? Being a Christian and all that.)

Perhaps there are other members of this forum who, like me, have wondered why your posts are so carefully washed, sanitised and well-scrubbed and why it is so important for you to come across in your posts as ever so innocuous, ever so genial, ever so considerate and oh so, so, so selfless and nice. It is important for you to come across in this way, isn't it Ted? After all, why else would you devote so much care and attention to ensuring that your posts appear so consistently and conspicuously sweet?

Perhaps, like me, other forum members have found that there is something about your posts - and you in them - which is discordant. Something which doesn't ring quite true, something which doesn't quite meet the eye, something which doesn't seem quite right...something suspect. Perhaps these individuals banish the feeling of suspicion that they have about you on reading your posts the moment they become aware of it because it makes them slightly uncomfortable. Perhaps they do this because recognising this suspicion fully for what it is would mean having to admit something painful about themselves as well. Perhaps they're content just to let the feeling of suspicion they have about you lurk quietly in the remotest corner of their bones where it won't bother them too much. Perhaps those members of the forum who are honest enough to clearly acknowledge the feeling of suspicion they have about you are unwilling to express it publicly because they fear that in doing so they might upset the cosy little atmosphere of the forum and thereby meet with disapproval from other members. Perhaps in these and other ways it is more convenient for them to overlook the uneasy presentiment they have about you, Ted.

If there are, indeed, others here who think as I do that the image of yourself which you present to this forum is a false image - that there is something phony and contrived about it, that it is just too obsequious and sugary sweet to be true, that it is actually a mask which you have devised in order to conceal something unwholesome about yourself - then they are completely right to think this. Before I set out the reasons why this is the case - why the persona which you present to this forum is a thoroughly dishonest one and why you are driven to hide behind it - let me first ask you a question....
In your Personal Profile, Ted, you state that you have 'a serious eye disease that makes reading very difficult and will cause blindness'. What I want to ask you is this:

Why have you told the members of this forum about your disease?

Glaswegian;498820 wrote: In your Personal Profile, Ted, you state that you have 'a serious eye disease that makes reading very difficult and will cause blindness'. What I want to ask you is this:



Why have you told the members of this forum about your disease?
How about staying on topic, if you must stay at all.

Yes, that was unacceptable.

Glaswegian.

You really should run along and pull the wings off a few insects.

Human beings aren't so easy to manipulate and I can tell you are really just getting off on the idea that you are hurting someone. It just isn't true. Bondage Bambi awaits. Go have fun that you have to pay for. Victims aren't so easy here.

Accountable;499173 wrote: How about staying on topic
Which means....

How about my staying away from the truth

No.

Glaswegian;499222 wrote: Which means....



How about my staying away from the truth



No.
'kay











your choice.

Accountable;499225 wrote: 'kay











your choice.


That's right.

Now let Ted speak for himself.

Pinky;499250 wrote: Maybe Ted can't be arsed anymore?


I think he's made that pretty clear. He certainly doesn't need anyone else to come to his defense. I've seen him take on worse that anything Glaswegian has come up with. :rolleyes:

Pinky;499250 wrote: Maybe Ted can't be arsed anymore?
Get out of the way, Pinky. Your skirt is blocking my view of Ted.

Glaswegian;499271 wrote: Get out of the way, Pinky. Your skirt is blocking my view of Ted.


I'm sensing a fixation here. I think there is a root problem which you are failing to mention, Glassy. Your one eye is showing a bit too much spirit.

koan;499274 wrote: I'm sensing a fixation here. I think there is a root problem which you are failing to mention, Glassy. Your one eye is showing a bit too much spirit.
Women! Why must they bring sex into everything?

It's okay, koan. I already know.

Glaswegian;499291 wrote: Women! Why must they bring sex into everything?

It's okay, koan. I already know.


Admitting you have a problem is the first step. Not the last, but it's significant.

koan;499274 wrote: I'm sensing a fixation here. I think there is a root problem which you are failing to mention, Glassy. Your one eye is showing a bit too much spirit.
I'm telling ya, it's fear. He reeks of it. He's like the kid that teases the neighbor's dog through the fence, trying to prove he's not afraid & all the while nearly crapping his pants.



Why would goodness, light, and friendship scare him so much?

Glaswegian;499291 wrote: Women! Why must they bring sex into everything?



It's okay, koan. I already know.
She didn't mention sex. You did. Is that where your fear comes from?

Pinky;499314 wrote: Because ultimately that's what you guys fear about us. Our sexual power over you.


Glaswegian needs kid gloves right now, Pinky. He's feeling vulnerable.

koan;499330 wrote: Glaswegian needs kid gloves right now, Pinky. He's feeling vulnerable.
Let 'im get gloves his own size.

Glaswegian wrote: I know what you really want to say to me, Magenta flame. And that if you were to declare your true feelings about me then this might get you banned. But understand this - I do not give myself to just any woman.Magenta flame;499297 wrote: CRICKEY BLOODY MOSES!!! If I wasn't laughing sooo much i'd swear you all thought this topic was actually a serious topic!


What - the topic of your love for me? Let me assure you, Magenta flame, that all of us here do take your love for me seriously. But I can understand (along with a few others as well no doubt) why you try to make light of it by laughing at it - why you need to pretend that what you feel for me is just something silly....just a girlish infatuation.

When you hear the laughter of Glaswegian do you ever wonder why there is so much pain in it? Why it often has the effect of causing tiny alarm bells to start ringing inside of you? Why it can make you solemn and reflective in the way that a great tragedy does? Why you feel a little saddened in its aftermath? Perhaps on witnessing this kind of laughter issuing from Glaswegian's mouth you have been so shocked by it that you have turned away from him, lowered your head and whispered to yourself: 'My God. The pain in that laughter! Doesn't he realise how awful it sounds?'



No reasonable person would blame you for wondering how Glaswegian can be blind to the pain in his own laughter given that the pain which fills it is so stark in nature, so blatant and unmistakable, so flagrant as to be nakedly obvious. This is why even though one finds Glaswegian's laughter excruciating one cannot help but be intrigued by it at the same time. This laughter is so anguished in tone, so forced in its delivery, so hysterical in its outburst that one involuntarily shrinks from it as if from an exploding boil. One feels acutely embarrassed for Glaswegian on hearing his pained and desperate laughter. Indeed, one is even moved at times to pity him because of it. That said, the pain in Glaswegian's laughter is so uniquely awful that it demands an explanation.



The reason why the pain in Glaswegian's laughter creates such a strong impression on rational individuals, and makes them prick up their ears whenever they hear it, is because it reveals more about Glaswegian's inner being in an instant than a very large book could ever do. What this laughter reveals about Glaswegian in such an immediate and striking way is that he is an individual who suffers greatly from himself: more precisely, that he is someone to whom something terrible has been done, something shameful, and that the person who has done this terrible and shameful thing to him is none other than himself. How do we know this? Because Glaswegian's laughter is a laughter which resonates with deep and unrelenting guilt. It is the tortured laughter born of an individual who cannot live with himself, an individual who recognises at some level of his being that he is disgraceful and contemptible, an object to be despised. This is why on hearing it the man of finer feelings and good taste immediately averts his eyes from its source.

[quote=Glaswegian: I have to be cruel to be kind.

Magenta flame;499381 wrote: Name them!
There just isn't enough space, darling....

If we're taking a shot at analysing this and previous threads, here's my thoughts.

I remember how playground bullies operate, James, and you don't have the advantages to emulate them here. You can't resort to physical roughing-up, which is just as well in the circumstances. You're stuck with attempting mental abuse but the playground bully, online or physical, needs at least some passive participants who enjoy the spectacle. That would turn the bullying into at least a debateable validation of the bully's position. You should have tried to make a few friends here before trying to pull it off.

What you've been doing over the last few months is registering serially on bulletin boards which have a religious component. I think you target religious forums because people there have the biggest triggers you think you can jerk. If you can't find a response from that angle you then target all the women in your threads with grotesque sexual harrassment. Both approaches are meant to get a rise. If you ever managed to get hold of a vulnerability, you'd love to play it for all you can, but fortunately you haven't a clue how to succeed at biting anyone or generating the slightest emotional response from your adopted position.

Given those observations, and seeing the evident excitement from what you're doing to yourself, here's a reasonable interpretation. You actively enjoy humiliating yourself in public. So long as you think you have an audience prepared to wince at your posturing, you heap humiliation on your own head and revel in the embarrassment you've brought into being. It fits, I think, with your evident preoccupied delight in discussing masturbation and homosexuality in full view of the world while claiming that you've attracted the admiration of some part of your audience. What we're being exposed to here is a bulletin board equivalent of coprophilia, if you like. I spent some months talking to a victim of a coprophiliac upbringing in the hope that his preference fantasies were less deeply embedded than everyone told me would be the case. It's not something I'd willingly go through again and you lack any apparent mitigation which might induce me to try. You're up to your neck in it with no desire to clean yourself, your self-exposure feeds itself all the generated reinforcement it needs to keep a tight grip.