Medc,

Wow, this thread was started today and responding to threads is voluntary. I wasn't aware BACK or anyone has had enough time to respond. Personally, I would be a bit more patient but you don't have to.

It appears this thread upsets you. Please consider blocking this thread.

If my posts offend you also, you may want to consider blocking my posts as well.

take care,
L.

deep breaths are very helpful sometimes Orchid!!!

you are doing good Orchid, don't let the background noise get to you.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thanks,
L.

{{Orchid}} You have a kind soul my dear.

Honestly Back Orchid being the one of the "charter" members here....her experience and wisdom is sound and a great thing to have.....Back we may not get along but I will tell you Orchid has been there many times and given me wonderful and helpful advice. She is definatly a treasure to have in your box.....

mama Orchid {{{hugs}}}}

Orchid:

Your restraint is admirable. Your efforts 2 keep things civil are admirable.

You're hereby elevated in sta2re in ol' 2long's view.

(Not that it matters, as I'm just a regular ol' guy, after all).

Some thoughts:

What little I know of the laura/back his2ry I've read only in the last 2ple of days, so it's quite possible I've missed a lot (in fact, I take some measure of pride in admitting that fact - I "squandered" my time yes2rday trying 2 get an old VW pickup running, and helping my daughter and her H reinstall some doors and a daybed at their house).

But her alleged si2ation reminds me of someone I once knew from Bible study (believe it or not, my W and I went 2 Bible studies regularly for a few years after we were M'd). This guy was involved in a very small group of very devout Christians. He developed a crush on one of the members, I think she was. She left the group because she felt uncomfortable with what she felt was inappropriate attention from him. For a few years, he let her go and didn't bother her with his "knowledge" that they were meant 2 be 2gether. But she would hear through the grapevine, and understandably was rather creeped out about it.

At some point, she got married. But the guy with the crush on her still believed that even2ally the Lord would steer her back 2 him and so she'd get a DV and they would be able 2 be 2gether. If I remember correctly, she and her H had 2 get a restraining order against him. But they may simply have moved out of state or changed their names or something so that he couldn't trace her.

Even2ally, and it 2k several more years, the guy let go of the need 2 "have her" for himself, and moved on with his own life.

This was all before anything like MB existed. But I find it interesting, in retrospect, 2 note that the individuals involved all deserve a lot of credit for getting through that time and coming out reasonably emotionally healthy on the other side.

*The woman's H, for sticking by her in spite of the pressure from our acquaintance for many years 2 get a divorce and marry him.

*The woman, for distancing herself from our acquaintance, which was probably the only thing that was going 2 work anyway, he was so determined and convinced he was doing the right thing.

*And even the acquaintance, because apparently he got over her all by himself, by using his head. And even though it 2k him so long and he "wasted" so many years of his own life pining for her. - it's apparently what he needed 2 learn his particular lesson. And so his God gave him that lesson 2 learn.

From wikipedia, on gargoyles:

"...The gargoyle's grotesque form was said to scare off evil spirits so they were used for protection... ...Although most have grotesque features, the term gargoyle has come to include all types of images. Some gargoyles were depicted as monks, combinations of real animals and people, many of which were humorous."

-ol' 2long (gargoyle, one of the humorous kind!)

I have posted several times now that IMHO people should check out the posts from Laura_Lee and Back themselves and then form their own opinions of what's going on.

Unfortunately most of Laura_Lee's posts suddenly disappeared the other day, and so did Back's.
(Rather suspicious that the posts from Laura_Lee recently disappeared but nobody has been posting here as Laura_Lee in years...)

But there is still plenty of evidence left to piece together the story.

There were also some posters from the divorced/dating board that tried to warn us when Back first came to the GQ board about the feuds she had started there. Coincidentally the POV Back was espousing there was the same thing that Laura_Lee had posted as a justification for it being OK to seduce a married man... Apparently in her mind the man wasn't really married to his wife because they had premarital sex, he was really her husband because God and a friend's vision had told her so, and in her mind his wife was the 'OW'.

The similarities in posting styles alone is very telling.
But IMHO it would be very difficult to believe that two different posters came here with such strikingly similar and unusual justifications for going after a married man.

(I've been tempted to post the bizarre justifications that both Laura_Lee and Back used to go after a married man and not call it adultery in the 'examples of WS babble' thread... but she's an OW instead of a WS and I dont' want to be accused of a hate crime against her LOL)

Apparently Back was once really married and divorced her husband. But the man she is now after never was her husband, not the same man she divorced?

OK, that's my understanding of the Laura_Lee and/or Back story. Is that what others have discovered and/or concluded too based on what evidence they got to see before it vanished?

Way wierdness!

mere, I've wanted to say something for a couple nights and wasn't sure where or how to post it:


mere, FWIW I am sorry you have felt hurt by this poster's posts, and not protected or attacked by other MBers; and I believe you.

I don't know if I'm one of those who you felt hurt when/if I may have defended back. I don't know if I ever defended back, but it is something I may have done. I don't agree with the tone of some posts, so I can see myself trying to counter-act those.

If I contributed to your hurt, I am sorry.

The one post I can remember for sure posting to this poster, I deleted after I saw that FH requested others refrain from posting on that thread for awhile.

FWIW my original post was a result of *my* feeling hurt by statements about second marriages. So I certainly don't fault you if you felt hurt by some statements.

I am very opposed to the incredibly hurtful posts that have been flying about. This is my attempt to undo some of that hurt - not to add to it.

I may have "rushed to judgment" about people "rushing to judgment." I want to let you know that the main reason wasn't because I had an agenda or anything. It was simply that I didn't have time to go back and read the many posts that had gone before, and so I just saw what I saw in the posts before me, without knowing the complete history. And without the time to look up the complete history.

I think you are correct. I don't know for sure and so I don't want to falsely accuse; but I want to let you know that I have followed some of the posts you referenced and I see similarities.

What you say about the two posters both trying to plan A and then Plan B someone else's bf/H, I see is true. I see many similarities. I hope I'm not doing more harm than good, but in the interest of helping people be better informed, I would like to post one example.

"I never told him this, but I call him a "Gere Stomper". "What's a "Gere Stomper"?", you say? Well a Gere Stomper is a man who when you see Richard Gere on that cover of People magazine, you say, "Those folks ain't never been to "blank"sville." from http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/sho...true#Post456191

"In other words, take Brad Pitt and George Clooney... 10 years ago... mix them together with their best qualities (imo)... and there you have, IN MY QUALIFIED OPINION,... the ex. (I do love him and love is blind, I know. Yet, I'd look at that man and I'd see the cover of People magazine and I'd think, "Honey, you ain't never been to my town." from http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/sho...rue#Post3345266

I didn't post the above to attack anyone. But I do see many deleted posts, and... well you know, we are supposed to help MBers not be gaslighted, right?

I don't endorse gaslighting, name-calling, Plan-A'ing someone else's spouse, public lynchings, rude comments, poking sticks, or telling BS's that they can never marry again.

I hope this helps, mere.

Thanx Jayne,

And actually I don't remember anything specific that you posted about anything really, so if you were one of the posters I felt (past tense) offended by I don't know.

Actually I was hurt that some of the long-term posters, who I thought knew me better than that, didn't give me and others the benefit of the doubt. It appeared to me that just because Back was accusing us of 'abusing' her there was soem level of belief that accusation MUST be true. It bothered me that some felt Back was truly in need of protection without reading the posts where people HAD tried to converse calmly with her to no avail.

Of course now a lot of the posts revealing what was going on have been deleted or locked...

I do remember seeing your posting name somewhere though - not sure if it was even in a Back-related thread. I noticed your posting name because I have a sister and a SIL named Jayne, spelled that way too! Do you pronounce it 'Jay-Knee'? My sis's is pronounced 'Jay-Knee' but SIL's 'Jane'. Also, my middle daughter's middle name is Jayne... sometimes was say it 'Jay-Knee', sometimes 'Jane' for her... I've changed the way I pronounce her first name to 'MelissY' instead of 'MelissA' too just to tease her LOL. So now my little Melissa Jayne (Jane) is Melissy Jayne (Jay-Knee). I've even gotten a few of her riends to start callign her that LOL Poor kid...

Hi mere,

I pronounce it "jane" but that's interesting, I never thought of pronouncing it "Jay-Knee." I love the name Melissy Jayne!