SoupNazi stated: source post
Does someone need a hug?
Yes.
ImNotHer stated: source post
Maybe I don't understand why you're making this seem so life and death. Or am I reading you wrong?
I wouldn't make it that drastic, just how I wouldn't figure that someone like Jim would honestly threaten your views after posting an OP like that that drastically either. It does however serve as a warning sign of future things to be wary of, as well as some present tense sensitivities that people might try to use against you.
It's like you cherry pick from what I say, and try to twist it into this dangerous thing I'm getting myself into.
It's more so the fear of it's own fragility mixed with a sense of conviction that portrays need that has me worried. I have to worry about those sorts of things for myself from how bad that the downfall can be otherwise. If the view is fragile, then it can break, and if the view has too much blind conviction then I'm liable to start tuning people and thoughts out that may be what I actually need to hear, even if I simply need to hear it for the sake of an epiphany through my contradicting them. The combination meanwhile can also risk making it seem like there's no way out once "failure" has happened.
It risks blocking off the potential for both perception and an open mind in favor of an illusion of peace.
I can't agree with you about that, Turn. It's OK for me to stay confident in the path I'm choosing when evidence that it's good for me keeps being provided.
It is okay to be confident about it, but you don't sound entirely confident with it if you're afraid of what a few people on this website could do to it. Confidence can be present without ego being that manner of display.
One person's evidence is another person's confirmation bias if we aren't careful. What could be seen as helpful could instead be enabling of something else. You, they, and I all lack the full picture, so all we can do is guess from what we think we're seeing.
No, I won't let Jim in my head.
But you still think he could?
And that's all I see you doing right now. Trying to tell me that I'm going about it all wrong.
Well? You're talking about all the things we need to do while displaying yourself like you're ahead of the curve (at least in the OP). You bash the idea of the ego while displaying it quite brightly yourself. On top of that, you're expressing vulnerabilities within that perspective rather quickly.
You talk about how ego is bad, but you're still acting on it within a new script.
I should welcome Jim to gaslight me, and see where his creating doubt in myself takes me. I don't need to see where it takes me. I've already seen that.
If you really think you're better than you were, then shouldn't Jim no longer be a threat?
Yes I'm fragile. Because I'm still new at this. So I don't see how riding out into traffic while I'm learning to ride a bike, is better than staying on the sidewalk and being smart about it.
The forum is the sidewalk, while real life is traffic.
I know I can be weak. I'm trying not to give into temptation. How does that raise red flags for you?
The conviction behind the need mixed with the fear is one factor, but also the denial of the self in the face of it. You'll be going through negative self-punishing cycles during the resistance of temptation, while accepting, controlling, and knowing when and where that it's appropriate can give you room to breathe. Denial either goes delusional or bottles if it's fed.
This place is one of many potential outlets.
Would you tell a recovering alcoholic to keep drinking anyway, so they can see if they can stop being an alcoholic while their still drinking?
I personally wouldn't compare this to alcoholism.
This is where you cherry pick. You point out that I bash ego, but ignore that I also say I'm still battling mine and you make it out that I'm oblivious to that.
You tell me Jim shouldn't be a problem for me if I've made any progress in real life, while ignoring that I stated my whole life was falling apart irl, and I was too blinded by anxiety to see how to fix it, but that for the last year, over a year now, I have not returned to that state.
You loved it when I stood up to Sugar, but tell me I'm being too protective of myself when I do the same to Jim.
You want me to take your views into consideration, but you show no signs of considering my views.
You say I act like I'm ahead of the curb, when I repeatedly show that I'm well aware that I'm not.
Your method of trying to teach me something here is seriously flawed. It's no better than my rant in the original post.
And you can't say I've never tried to see things from your perspective TC, because it's what I'm doing right now. I'm trying to make sense of the information I'm receiving from you. You've made some points in the past that I have learned something from. What I need you to accept, is that you're not some all knowing guru with all the right answers for me.
And I'm not protecting my fragility by standing up to Jim, btw. That's the biggest flaw of all in your teaching. When I used to flirt with Jim and play along with his perversions... that was me protecting my fragile ego. So you're not going to convince me I'm missing out on something here. I know that I'm making progress, the evidence is all over this thread. You don't get to take that away from me. Understand?
ImNotHer stated: source post
You tell me Jim shouldn't be a problem for me if I've made any progress in real life, while ignoring that I stated my whole life was falling apart irl, and I was too blinded by anxiety to see how to fix it, but that for the last year, over a year now, I have not returned to that state.
Exactly, so how is Jim a problem now?
You loved it when I stood up to Sugar, but tell me I'm being too protective of myself when I do the same to Jim.
This is entirely different. With the Sugar thing you were drinking it in, while with Jim it didn't show that same natural level of enjoyment. It's claws versus gloves.
You want me to take your views into consideration, but you show no signs of considering my views.
I see your views, but more importantly I see the risky cracks between them. It's not that what you're embracing now is wrong, it's that demonizing parts of yourself tends to not go in a good direction overtime for pretty much anybody, and that a combination of need-driven conviction and tuning out "threats" could go in a bad direction.
You say I act like I'm ahead of the curb, when I repeatedly show that I'm well aware that I'm not.
You oscillate. You'll state how you have room to improve at one point, but the next use yourself as a springboard to talk about how others need to change.
...looking at it typed out like that, I'm not really any better there.
And you can't say I've never tried to see things from your perspective TC, because it's what I'm doing right now. I'm trying to make sense of the information I'm receiving from you. You've made some points in the past that I have learned something from. What I need you to accept, is that you're not some all knowing guru with all the right answers for me.
This is just my opinion. It's not like there's some weird ultimatum if nothing results from it. I've already stated more than once the potential for flaws in what I'm saying (projection, not seeing the full picture, impression). All I can comment on is how things appear to me, and at the very least I can hope that it might coincidentally spring to mind during a time where it's helpful.
And I'm not protecting my fragility by standing up to Jim, btw. That's the biggest flaw of all in your teaching.
You're instead tuning him out entirely and making him out to be this corrosive thing when talking to TPG.
When I used to flirt with Jim and play along with his perversions... that was me protecting my fragile ego.
You don't even have to play along, but your narrative about him makes him seem like he has some sort of potential for influence. You make it seem like you have to protect yourself against him instead of merely brushing him off.
So you're not going to convince me I'm missing out on something here. I know that I'm making progress, the evidence is all over this thread.
I didn't say it wasn't progress, by comparison it is. I'm more going on about the down the line costs, as blind spots and the ego are tricky. I argue in favor of finding a balanced mid-ground from accepting all that is a part of you to try to avoid needless self-punishment and bottling from the platform of someone who is otherwise extremely prone to both.
You don't get to take that away from me.
You make it sound like I'm threatening you.
Understand?
There's no need for that. 
Trust me I tried turncoat, in the wound of that ego to slip some "wake up stop bullshitting yourself to patch up your ego and actually do something to recover", you can't squeeze water from a rock as the turks say. From now all I can see doing is to use her tendency to close like a clam in the face of being questioned and apparent thirst for being seen as normal and "fixed" in a future raid, she's going to be the weakest link for datamining shall anyone choose to trust her. It's sad because it seemed like she was really getting healthy and becoming stronger.
ImNotHer stated: source post
I'm sorry. What was that? I couldn't quite hear you.
Smartass does not become you... it is much more others style, Be you, you are prettier that way.
Are you challenging this forum to change the old dynamic and try something new?
That's funny. I thought that's what I was doing in the original post. :)
It did not go unnoticed...
I guess I didn't do it the right way.
Who said that?
I'm totally down for something new, Virus! Lead the way!
I think you started the lead already...
"Be the change you want to see" as you say. I do practice this preach both here and irl.
Love you... now... go and be you. And let others be them... and I will be... ME.
