</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by onlywords:
<strong> ML,

Ok then, someone called Suzette on something (I wasn't around maybe? Don't know anything about that), and now she is calling someone else out on the same thing....what is wrong with that? Maybe Suzette learned something from what happened to her and is trying to hold others accountable as well? Geez, this is ridiculous.

Onlywords </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Onlywords, she is not in any moral position to attack ANYONE since she does this VERY THING herself unapologetically. What is wrong with that is that her righteous indignation is phony and hypocritical. She ain't in a position to hold ANYONE "accountable." And yes, it is very ridiculous..............and very catty.

ML,

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">She ain't in a position to hold ANYONE "accountable." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">As I see it , NONE of us really are, when it comes right down to it.

And what it looks like is her past actions are being brought to the forefront to define her current actions. Do you think that's fair?

As for righteous indignation, I have to say I sense a bit of that in your response . It's a vicious circle.

If we were to behave this way in our marriages, where would we be?

Onlywords

onlywords, do you think it's fair or productive to behave hypocritically in ANY situation?

When someone practices a specific behavior themselves, they are in no position to lecture and condemn others for doing the same thing. That is just simple common sense.

If you smoke cigarettes do you feel that you are in a position to LECTURE and CONDEMN your friend for smoking?

<<<<<<<still scratching head. Guess it's because I'm a young member! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

Sorry, double post

<small>[ August 02, 2004, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Suzet* ]</small>

ML,

Well, I'll just tell you where my thinking is at on this...

I had an affair.

Husband and I work it out and several years go by, things seem fine.

I find out he's been getting a bit too cozy with another woman.

Now, do I have any right to speak my mind openly on this or not? Or do I have to keep my mouth shut because I had done the same thing years ago?

Would that be hypocritical of me?

Or maybe it would mean MORE coming from me since I had been in that position myself and can see the danger of what is occurring?

I will say this....the MANNER in which someone is confronted makes a BIG difference. The motivation BEHIND that confrontation makes a big difference. I do not know what Suzette's motives are. Nor do I know Pep's or Max's.

Onlywords

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by MelodyLane:
<strong>Onlywords, she is not in any moral position to attack ANYONE since she does this VERY THING herself unapologetically.</strong>

AND

<strong>Onlywords, do you think it's fair or productive to behave hypocritically in ANY situation?

When someone practices a specific behavior themselves, they are in no position to lecture and condemn others for doing the same thing. That is just simple common sense.

If you smoke cigarettes do you feel that you are in a position to LECTURE and CONDEMN your friend for smoking?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Melodylane, I promised myself I would restrain myself from responding to you, but I have some thing to say to you:

I recall how you accused Broken Vessel of NAME-CALLING and preached to her about name-calling AFTER you have called me some ugly names in the threads you're referring to YOURSELF… And you DARE talk about hypocrisy and moral positions while you do the exact same thing??? I can't believe this... Haven't the moderators CLOSE that threads (one of them started by YOU) and requested us NOT to talk about that threads or the content of it again??? But now you're bringing this ALL up again, LIE about it and trying to give all the people reading here a bad impression about me in order to paint yourself as this wonderfull, innocent person... You accused me of talking behind your back and now you dare talking about my back on THIS thread. I even reach out a hand to you back then and APLOGIZE to you for any misunderstandings, but you wasn't willing to accept my apologies but in stead continue the arguments. And now you want to continue this again... I don't have anything further to say to you.

Bye

<small>[ August 02, 2004, 09:22 AM: Message edited by: Suzet* ]</small>

Suzet, of course you have nothing to say to me, because you know I have you dead to rights, dear. [and no, I have never seen an apology from you and have never called you names]

You know what? This sordid little psycho-drama was propelled out of all proportion when Pep suggested that someone's attachment to JL might not be appropriate.

Right, wrong or indifferent, instead of answering Pep in a sane, rational, sincere manner and moving on, she was repaid with personal attacks, and a constant piling on.

The couple administering the attacks were all crying that BV had been "attacked" [asking BV a question is an "attack" in thier minds] out of the other side of thier mouths. So they actually have nothing against so-called attacks, only when they feel it is in the direction of one of them. The viciousness directed towards Pep, one of the most productive, experienced members on this board, has been unrelenting and OUTRAGEOUS.

I am just flabbergasted at this overreaction. All that was necessary was a straight, sincere, answer. What is so hard about saying: "Pep, I don't agree with you, but I thank you for your thoughts?" Instead its like someone threw some holy water into a room full of vampires with this vicious [over]reaction.

Folks, you are doing to Pep the exact same thing [X100] you say was wrongly done to BV. Don't you see that? It is almost like we have a TERRORIST organization on this board now with this constant harrassment. I have never seen such a level of harrassment in all my years on this board and it makes me sick.

This has to stop, folks. Look around you. We have thread upon thread of very hurting people. This is not the time or the place to play out your school girl agendas. Please, let's get back to helping people and knock this off!

<small>[ August 02, 2004, 09:23 AM: Message edited by: MelodyLane ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by onlywords:
<strong>

I find out he's been getting a bit too cozy with another woman.

Now, do I have any right to speak my mind openly on this or not? Or do I have to keep my mouth shut because I had done the same thing years ago?

Would that be hypocritical of me?

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">ok, onlywords, lets look at the definition of hypocrisy. It means professing a belief that you don't personally believe or practice in your life. NOW.

So, if you are currently practicing adultery in your life, then yes, you would be a hypocrite. If you practiced it 2 years ago and NEVER repented, then yes, you would be hypocrite.

However, if you QUIT practicing adultery and changed your ways, then, of course you wouldn't be a hypocrite.

In Suzet's case, just 2 short months ago she was doing the VERY THING she is accusing Pep of and then DENIED it. She never apologized. That tells us that she has nothing against this behavior AT ALL and does not believe there is anything wrong with this practice.

hy·poc·ri·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies

The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
An act or instance of such falseness.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hypocrisy

This continuing tiff between Suzet and MelodyLane makes me very uneasy. I think it is the same feeling I get when two of my friends argue with each other. I guess I feel that if I like them both, why cannot they also like each other?

I think Suzet and ML are actually saying the same thing! It's not a good idea to talk about people behind their backs - especially on a public message board. People's feelings get hurt. And it sounds like both Suzet and ML don't want that.

But so much STUFF has built up between them, they cannot see the forest for the trees anymore. Curious. I sure do like my lady from South Africa, and my lady from Texas. I sure wish we could all get along.

And, risking a Texas [censored] whipping, I do agree with onlywords - just because someone has made poor judgements or unwise decisions in the past, does not mean they are incapable of changing their behavior - or calling others out on theirs. I am not saying that is what happened - I am just saying the argument is strong that past actions cannot dictate how a person is in the present.

Goes back to the post from Kat on "Why Stay with a Cheater?" We, as BS, stay with our FWS's because we love who they are NOW. Not their poor behavior of the past. Right? Am I missing something?

SS

SS, I appreciate your kind words, but I would only point out that this is not AT ALL about a "tiff" between Suzet and I. Sure, I have a low regard for her, but I don't carry grudges.

This is about the constant piling on of Pep, which I find very cruel, offensive and unjust. Every day, there is a new attack and it simply has to stop. Sure, she made a smart crack on this thread, but that does not constitute these scathing attacks on her.

As far as hypocrisy goes, onlywords is not correct at all according to the definition. Hypocrisy has a specific definition that cannot be changed to suit one's agenda. What Suzet is doing to Pep is clearly hypocritical and I showed how it is.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Spider Slayer:
<strong>We, as BS, stay with our FWS's because we love who they are NOW. Not their poor behavior of the past. Right? Am I missing something?

SS </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">SS, and that is exactly my point. Did you read my previous post? We are saying the same thing. Hypocrisy means professing a belief that you DO NOT personally practice or believe. If one has an affair, repents and changes their ways, then they are not a hypocrite because they don't practice it nor do they believe in it.

But if someone practiced adultery last month, denied it and believes there is nothing wrong with adultery, they would be a hypocrite if they condemned someone else for the same practice.

See the difference?

Is Pep being attacked on this thread? I haven't read any "attacks," unless you are referring to Suzet's post a couple pages back where she specifically called Pep out on what Suzet thought was an inappropriate reply. I guess I see a small issue, with a lot of STUFF piled on top of it.

I have seen Pep take up for herself several times. As I recall, she even told KiwiJ:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by KiwiJ:
Pep and Max, post reported to mods as rude and inflammatory.

Jen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good... follow your conscience KiwiJ. That's what it's all about.

Pep
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I just don't understand.

SS

SS,

I do see it as an attack and it has been going on ever since Pep make her comment to BV on the other thread. There has been a constant piling on Pep's head. As I said in my earlier post, Suzet even admonished and accused Pep of a practice that she herself practices on this forum. [and was admonished by the mods for doing so] I would even classify it as orchestrated harassment and it really needs to stop.

Hey ladies! (and RH too.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> )

One poster who I really, really RESPECT doesn't like me one whit!

Know who?

Nellie1

She thinks I am over the top. And she tells me when she thinks so.

She and I disagree a LOT .... and she came after me once (BIG TIME) on a thread when she thought I had crossed the line (this was about 2 years ago and concerned a poster named "Honey").

I totally respect anyone who has the balls to disagree with me, my ways of posting, or anything else!

I think this debate is cool.

Kiwi's telling me she reported my post as well as Madmax's was, I thought, a sign of her integrity!

Suzet* has the balls to criticise me all the time. That's cool! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

I think this is actually very useful dialogue.

Spider Slayer, the challenge for me, and perhaps for you as well, might be to NOT come to the rescue of someone else! Not to own arguements that don't belong to us. Give friends at war with each other the opportunity to work it out themselves.

Have the integrity to speak your mind irregardless of the chance of offending your friends.

What if this forum represents our individual agrueing *style*? Might it show how we deal with the very real problematic issues we argue about with friends and family in our personal lives?

Are some of us pouters?
Runners?
Rescuers?
Agressors?
Passive aggressive?
Verbally abusive?
Sneaky?
Verbally skilled?
Dumb as dirt?
Smart as a whip?
Stubborn?
Honest?
Dishonest?
Intuitive?
Insightful?
Prejudiced?
Disrespectful?

Not all things will be settled with a smile and a hug.

It takes strength and courage and integrity to say what you mean in the face of opposition.

Good for us!

Pep <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

<small>[ August 02, 2004, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: Pepperband ]</small>

ML,

NOW....this has to stop. You said it yet continue to post about it.

I'm done.

Onlywords

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by onlywords:
<strong> ML,

NOW....this has to stop. You said it yet continue to post about it.

I'm done.

Onlywords </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Onlywords, what I said needs to stop is the piling on. You can rest assured I won't stop posting. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Originally posted by onlywords:

The motivation BEHIND that confrontation makes a big difference. I do not know what Suzette's motives are. Nor do I know Pep's or Max's.

Yes, motive of others cannot be derermined easily ....

ESPECIALLY on the internet!

Which is my initial point on this thread.

I 100% agree.

Pep

ML,

I'm DONE trying to get in the last word.

As of this post, on this thread. Honest.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />


Onlywords