Interaction with Catholic Friend

[alreadyGone]

Genius, from a comedy troop... All of it.

I'll bet those boys could throw a post-production kegger to remember.

 

"He must be a king!"

"How can you tell?"

"Well he doesn't have shit all over him"

 

"Some watery tart lobbing scimitars around..."

[◊ Weezer ◊]

On 8/29/2020 at 1:39 PM, alreadyGone said:

 

Besides, isn't there a shortage of bathroom tissue still?

 

You can use a sock.  

[alreadyGone]

18 minutes ago, Weezer said:

You can use a sock.  

 

Or not.

 

[LostinParis]

On 9/3/2020 at 6:42 AM, Josh19 said:

 

All the answers I got is " it is not for us to understand, God's way is not men's way" 

 
Similarly, christians told me that “We cannot possibly understand the mind of god”.

 

But they know for sure that he hates homosexuality.

[Astreja]

On 8/21/2020 at 6:29 PM, Canada27 said:

I do find his opinion on homosexuality makes my blood boil.  It feels more intense than just a normal difference of opinion on stuff like politics.  This is a central part of who I am.  I'm leaning towards no as to whether hanging out with him is worthwhile or enjoyable.

 

This, right here, is IMO a sufficient reason to keep him blocked.  If it feels like a personal attack to you, it is a personal attack.

[Myrkhoos]

4 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

This, right here, is IMO a sufficient reason to keep him blocked.  If it feels like a personal attack to you, it is a personal attack.

I do not agree. Feelings can deceive you. You might feel attacked and that just might be in your head or because of your own sensitivity. So I would say put some reflection on it as well and then decide. Of course, like I said, hanging out with someone is a personal decision. You could not hang out with someone bk you don t like his hairstyle. :)) and that is ok.

[Myrkhoos]

5 hours ago, LostinParis said:

 
Similarly, christians told me that “We cannot possibly understand the mind of god”.

 

But they know for sure that he hates homosexuality.

But, then, why the enourmous literature of the Christian religion detailing stuff like what, where, how to eat and dress? Why the many commentaries on Scripture? Why did Jesus say to his disciples that now they are his friends because they have shown them the true knowledge? I mean they say cannot understand God but are openly preaching about him and ordered to witness to all nations the true God? Maybe they cannot understand all the mind of God but they sure say they know an awful lot of it.

[AntiChrist]

On 8/22/2020 at 3:02 AM, Canada27 said:

Hi,

 

I'm unsure exactly what I want out of this post, maybe some of your advice.  

 

I had an interaction over text with a friend (not a close friend, but not a stranger) over homosexuality last Sunday.  It has been bothering me ever since, and I feel stuck in my desire to argue with him and tell him how stupid I think his beliefs are.  I know it's not good...it's just an urge I feel   He was telling me that homosexual acts are wrong because they don't generate life, even though being gay in itself is not wrong.  I responded by saying it makes no sense that a loving God (which I don't believe in) would create gay people, and then turn around and say, by the way, don't act on how I made you.  He told me I need to pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance and ended by saying God Bless You.  He wanted to hang out in the near future and play some board games, but instead I blocked his number.  I feel kind of like a douche for doing that, but I also think how can I respect and be a friend with someone who thinks there's something fundamentally wrong with me.  

Yahweh didn't make gay people, this planet did for some reason. It's near impossible to deal with human beings who cling to old superstition on the basis that they'll be roasted in the ovens of eternal flames. I am pretty sure their God wears a BBQ apron that read's 

 

Hail to the chef!

[alreadyGone]

18 hours ago, LostinParis said:

 
Similarly, christians told me that “We cannot possibly understand the mind of god”.

 

But they know for sure that he hates homosexuality.

 

Sort of sums it all up really..

 

Christians are so easily certain that no one else really knows or understands "their God" in quite the same close way they themselves do.

 

I think perhaps 'anthropomorphise' may be the word we're looking for here..

 

So very often they become convinced that God has given them an additional small inner store of higher spiritual truth and understanding, which enables them then to seek and enter into this closer personal relationship..  As reward for their devotion and spiritual sacrifice.

(all too often this comes just before 'speaking in tongues')

 

 

 

And.. I still don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.

 

 

[Astreja]

18 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I do not agree. Feelings can deceive you. You might feel attacked and that just might be in your head or because of your own sensitivity.

 

There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the reason being in one's head, or the reaction being due to sensitivity.  "You're too sensitive" is a trope regularly used by abusive people to deflect the fallout when their victims react to how they're being treated.

[Myrkhoos]

10 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the reason being in one's head, or the reaction being due to sensitivity.  "You're too sensitive" is a trope regularly used by abusive people to deflect the fallout when their victims react to how they're being treated.

What I meant us that somebody may say a joke, for example, and you feel personally attacked, while the intent is very different. Also stuff like magical thinking where you make associations between events with no demonstrable connection, which I think can be quite damaging.

      The fact that abusers use that line does not mean it is always false. Sometimes we can be too sensitive and we should work on that. For example, some people could be raped and then have a traumatic reaction to an odour reminding them of the rapist. Or to a situation. Even in  this unfortunate situation it is mainly the responsability if the victim to find out ways to ease the triggers. With help of course. You cannot expect people to walk on eggshells because of you all the time. Or take an example of someone with a flower or cat allergy. While you can avoid flowers or cats or ask for people not to let a cat in a room with you, you cannot expect other people to get rid of all cats and flowers for your comfort.

       My opinion is that being TOO sensitive or reactive is a reality, regardless of the practice of some abusers to use this accusation for their benefit.

       Like, I think many muslims are TOO sensitive about cartoons about Muhammed. Would you agree?  

[Astreja]

10 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

You cannot expect people to walk on eggshells because of you all the time.

 

That's why severing ties with a stressor is so important.  Allergy?  Stay out of areas where there's a high concentration of the allergen until you've undergone a course of desensitization treatment.  An upsetting situation triggers a fight-or-flight reaction?  Put some distance between yourself and the trigger event or person and then work on your sensitivity, if you want to do so.

 

Not everyone wants to forgive and forget.  Some of us deal with a problem individual by walking away and never going back; some of us deal with it by evicting the troublemaker from our space and making sure they don't sneak back in.  Life is too short to waste it on people who make us feel bad, regardless of what their intentions were.

[Myrkhoos]

6 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

That's why severing ties with a stressor is so important.  Allergy?  Stay out of areas where there's a high concentration of the allergen until you've undergone a course of desensitization treatment.  An upsetting situation triggers a fight-or-flight reaction?  Put some distance between yourself and the trigger event or person and then work on your sensitivity, if you want to do so.

 

Not everyone wants to forgive and forget.  Some of us deal with a problem individual by walking away and never going back; some of us deal with it by evicting the troublemaker from our space and making sure they don't sneak back in.  Life is too short to waste it on people who make us feel bad, regardless of what their intentions were.

I agree with most said except the last line. You will never find anyone anywhere that will never make you feel any pain or suffering whatsoever. My point is that suffering is inevitable and that dealing with difficult feelings is necessary for any relationship, for life in general. If you are willing to sever ties with anyone because they made a joke that kind of hurt you, that makes any relationship impossible. Going with the allergy metaphor. Suppose you live in area with lots of ambrosia plants that cause you allergic reactions, but not severe or incapacitating. You could move, but moving has its own share of suffering associated with it. So you cannot really escape suffering , you just choose a situation with less of it.

       Not to mention that can veer into narcissism. I mean only an extreme narcissist thinks it is other people's job to make them perpetually happy, and not tolerate any kind of frustration, even imaginary frustration.

       There is a continuum here and everyone has to decide their limits/boundaries, but you should never expect full time bliss in a relationship. It is unatainable and hurtful to you and to others. That was my principal point. You seem to be talking about the other extreme, where there is mostly suffering and I agree there.

     However , an ability to tolerate frustration is a necessary skill for life and what that is considered by many if not most religions AND psychologists as a prerequisite for good relationship.

 I mean you needs lots of it to be a caretaker of an infant for instance.

     Life is also too short to spend it on unrealisable fantastic utopias.

[Astreja]

On 11/16/2020 at 1:15 AM, Myrkhoos said:

Going with the allergy metaphor. Suppose you live in area with lots of ambrosia plants that cause you allergic reactions, but not severe or incapacitating. You could move, but moving has its own share of suffering associated with it. So you cannot really escape suffering , you just choose a situation with less of it. 

 

And dumping someone who demonizes one's sexual orientation fulfills the goal of lessening that suffering.

 

Quote

However , an ability to tolerate frustration is a necessary skill for life and what that is considered by many if not most religions AND psychologists as a prerequisite for good relationship.

 

Speaking for myself, I flat-out refuse to cultivate relationships with people whose views I find abhorrent.  Why bother, when I could spend that time hanging out with people who accept me as I am?  Why bother, when I know I'd be happier alone than with them?

 

A personal anecdote to explain where I'm coming from:  I spent 26 years with someone who wanted to do a Pygmalion number on me, usurping my free time, sponging off my paycheque rather than contributing equally in time or labour to the household, demeaning my tastes and even cheating on me.  In the light of hindsight it still baffles me why I tolerated that shit for so long, but when I did make my move it was a total scorched-earth policy -- I literally haven't spoken to them, not a single word, in over 20 years.

 

It was the best thing I ever did, and I would do it again in a heartbeat.

[Myrkhoos]

6 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

And dumping someone who demonizes one's sexual orientation fulfills the goal of lessening that suffering.

 

 

Speaking for myself, I flat-out refuse to cultivate relationships with people whose views I find abhorrent.  Why bother, when I could spend that time hanging out with people who accept me as I am?  Why bother, when I know I'd be happier alone than with them?

 

A personal anecdote to explain where I'm coming from:  I spent 26 years with someone who wanted to do a Pygmalion number on me, usurping my free time, sponging off my paycheque rather than contributing equally in time or labour to the household, demeaning my tastes and even cheating on me.  In the light of hindsight it still baffles me why I tolerated that shit for so long, but when I did make my move it was a total scorched-earth policy -- I literally haven't spoken to them, not a single word, in over 20 years.

 

It was the best thing I ever did, and I would do it again in a heartbeat.

Again, as I said in my previous post you are quoting incompletely, I said that I agree with you about the extreme end of spectrum. Look at the quote below. I am sorry that happened to you and that is left such a big mark. Truly. It is very possible that you did the best thing for yourself. 

 

On 11/16/2020 at 9:15 AM, Myrkhoos said:

You seem to be talking about the other extreme, where there is mostly suffering and I agree there.

And I also said that each person can choose his limits/boundaries. 

          And, for another repetition of my post, every relationship has some modicum of suffering. I doubt that in your current relationships you never had any disagreement. You never made any compromise. You never negotiated. On friend wanted to go to a restaurant, you to anoher, and then one of you settled. 

       I would actually question such type of  as being one-sided. If you reject anyone who has any criticism of you, what is the difference between you and a narcissist for example? I mean, do you really think you are perfect and beyond reproach? I get that criticism can be a traaumatic trigger for you because of your past. I really get that, believe me. But surrounding yourself with exclusive yes men is not the path to healing or growth in my opinion. That can be the other extreme. I believe some sort of middle way is in order. 

 

    

 

[Astreja]

10 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Again, as I said in my previous post you are quoting incompletely, I said that I agree with you about the extreme end of spectrum. Look at the quote below. I am sorry that happened to you and that is left such a big mark. Truly. It is very possible that you did the best thing for yourself.  

 

Thank you for that.  Yes, the experience has been very positive, like getting a second chance at life.

 

Quote

And I also said that each person can choose his limits/boundaries. 

          And, for another repetition of my post, every relationship has some modicum of suffering. I doubt that in your current relationships you never had any disagreement. You never made any compromise. You never negotiated. On friend wanted to go to a restaurant, you to anoher, and then one of you settled. 

       I would actually question such type of  as being one-sided. If you reject anyone who has any criticism of you, what is the difference between you and a narcissist for example? I mean, do you really think you are perfect and beyond reproach? I get that criticism can be a traaumatic trigger for you because of your past. I really get that, believe me. But surrounding yourself with exclusive yes men is not the path to healing or growth in my opinion. That can be the other extreme. I believe some sort of middle way is in order. 

 

I'm actually very good at compromising, and accepting valid criticism.  Win-win situations are my gold standard, and owning up to mistakes and fixing them is integral to the way I roll.

 

Sometimes, though, the dynamic is so biased in favour of one person or the other, not just once but over an extended period of time, that one person does all the giving and the other does all the taking.  That, IMO, is where trauma is actually created -- in the wearing-down of boundaries and repeated dismissal of the other's needs.

 

Getting back to the OP and the problem with the religious acquaintance, perhaps a relationship would be possible if the acquaintance was open to respectful discussion of his anti-gay beliefs, and/or if he agreed to stop opening that particular wound.  I'm not seeing that, though.

[Myrkhoos]

15 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

Thank you for that.  Yes, the experience has been very positive, like getting a second chance at life.

 

 

I'm actually very good at compromising, and accepting valid criticism.  Win-win situations are my gold standard, and owning up to mistakes and fixing them is integral to the way I roll.

 

Sometimes, though, the dynamic is so biased in favour of one person or the other, not just once but over an extended period of time, that one person does all the giving and the other does all the taking.  That, IMO, is where trauma is actually created -- in the wearing-down of boundaries and repeated dismissal of the other's needs.

 

Getting back to the OP and the problem with the religious acquaintance, perhaps a relationship would be possible if the acquaintance was open to respectful discussion of his anti-gay beliefs, and/or if he agreed to stop opening that particular wound.  I'm not seeing that, though.

Mainly agreed.