From: Steele, Kirk A (SteeleKA@nafm.misawa.af.mil)
Date: Tue Jan 22 2002 - 02:17:46 MST
-----Original Message-----
From: Mermaid . [mailto:britannica@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 5:59 PM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Braking for Kirk.
I went back and checked Hermit's post about Yash's complaint after reading
it in Blunderov's addendum to his latest post in CoV. I have to admit that I
did not read Hermit's post fully after his mostly predictable initial verbal
garbage.
I can imagine how my flippant 'where can I report it' must have sounded to
you in light of Yash's action. In contrast to Yash's tone and intent when he
threatened to send a letter, I did not mean it. What Yash did was stupid and
irresponsible.
What then looked like a carelessly placed lie by Hermitabout Yash combining
virtual and real life issues makes sense now.<He never slips so
obviously..which is why I made my query> I do feel very strongly about one's
right to privacy. But I am going to back off now. This is not the right time
or place to confront you. I do not support Yash's decision. I am sorry if
you would have to face any sort of grief because of his spite.
Mermaid.
From: "Steele, Kirk A" <SteeleKA@nafm.misawa.af.mil>
Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com
To: "'virus@lucifer.com'" <virus@lucifer.com>
Subject: virus: Well, here is yet another belief based memeplex.
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:32:36 +0900
As Chitren did previously, we see another instance of this archetype
asserting a red herring so as to distract from the original topic of
similarities between the originals emotive styles and her own.
It is worth noting the amount of emotional investment placed in the
esoterisms of Chitren by her. In no small or partial form has the
consequences of this been pointed out to her. The only response to this is a
outpouring of displaced aggression, in similar fashion to Chitrens.
Here, she is plaintively and seemingly in a civil manner asking for critical
clarification from a person she has routinely reviled and assailed. This is
not consistent with a rational response to critical analysis. She is
swapping out the locus of her anger from one to another in an attempt to
garner egoistic support. This is a clear indication of either low self
esteem or perceived learned helplessness. Usually these aspects occur
simultaneously.
This is a pattern which has been repeated previously and no doubt will be
subsequently.
Memeplexes of esoteric assertion will usually have such defensive
mechanisms. As a rule the vector will usually incorporate this defensive
style first as it requires less effort to scaffold than would an actual
rational emotive cognitive reaction formation. The purely emotive reaction
formation is asserted directly from the ego in defence of whatever the
cognition asserts a priori. From this perspective, anything beyond the
emotive reaction is superfluous and detracts from the emotive stance,
therefore abandoned.
Further, no attempt will usually be made to directly associate the emotive
reaction to the faulty cognitions. Instead, any responsive will be solely
attributed to the self. There is no distinction between the ideations of the
self and the actual self. In this case the two are the same. An attack on
the ideations of the self are perceived as an attack on the self. Since
emotive reaction formation was what was asserted a priori, it will be the
method of response to such perceived attacks on the self.
Again, belief based ideations, memeplexes if you will, are defended with
emotive reaction formations. It is nice to note that the forum provides
itself with plenty of observational study subjects. Here with 'Mermaid' we
have an example of highly emotive reaction formation used to support belief
based assertions. Previously, she condemned other persons of being emotively
avoidant in coping strategy. But when this observation is made with a person
who embodies similar belief based memeplexes, she responds in like fashion.
And when this observation is made of her, her emotive reaction formation
follows the same patterns as that which she previously condemned.
And now that this too has been pointed out, she switches to an apparently
cognitive reaction formation with, OF ALL PEOPLE, Hermit. Aggression is one
of the primary defensive coping reactions to having ones BELIEFS assailed;
aggression, overt or otherwise. This other, talking nice to Hermit -
reaction is part and parcel to the concomitant avoidance coping strategy so
permanently affixed to belief based memeplexes.
It will be interesting to watch her continue this arrested reaction
formation and perspective analysis.
Kirk Steele
-----Original Message-----
From: Mermaid . [mailto:britannica@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 1:36 PM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Checking...
[Hermit]Because no matter how you dance and squirm and wriggle and try to
create your own projection of Kirk Steele, he did not take this match from
the virtual and into the real world, and attempt to cause harm. Yash did.
[Mermaid]Purely for research purposes...can you please explain the above?
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:41 MDT