Thank You to Lizzy :)
It is!?! I had no idea on that, Margaret! LOL ~ you're sooooo right that I still didn't get it. Now, of course, I get the movement reference, albeit I was taking it to be sexual motion. Geez! Be sure you sit next to me at any Brit comedy clubs we may go to ~ however, I should have gotten that one, being as the meaning's the same in the U.S. I guess it's just that loo humour t'ain't my forte. I've never cared for it, anyway. As C2 says, it's the easy out, just like profanity is....people tend to laugh out of embarrassment as much as, or even moreso than being truly humoured.
Thanks for clueing me in
.
~ Lizzy
Thanks for clueing me in
.~ Lizzy
Dear Hillary ~
To add a couple things. I hope you'll continue to express your ideas ~ in your way ~ here [I truthfully can't imagine it otherwise, but I still want to say that]. As I said, if I could as effectively pulled that lesson together, I would have been more likely to. Of course, it's all the more effective when you aren't the one being discredited, and have no 'reason' [per se] to speak out.
When I speak of my, perhaps, being an example to someone, I'm including in that, that I could also be serving as an example of how someone does not want to express themselves. That's back to that individual thing.
When I say things, I try to pass them through a grid and filter of how might I speak to, or in the presence of, Roshi; how might he speak to me and others; how might I speak to Leonard, or might Leonard speak to me or others. I feel there's a little more latitude with Leonard than with Roshi, of course. Even so, that's the standard I try for. There are [obviously, for anyone who's been here right along] times that I don't meet with that standard, when the ego is just so damned determined to express itself, in the most accurate fashion of how it's feeling at the moment, and I just 'go for it.' No paragon of virtue here
! It's all a process, this learning to be a kinder person, and I hope that in years to come, there won't be any seam between my intentions and the results. I've always been goodwilled, and have always tried not to react with bitter feelings [or at least not hold on to them, if I do] in my personal response to negative things occurring in my life, so I think those two things probably work in my favour. I'm still not to the point of thanking the universe for those negative things. They may be a lesson for me, but so far I have to pretty much rely on retrospect for that perspective.....at least as far as the 'thanking' goes whilst they're occurring. No paragon of virtue here, either !
Now, back to that "Don't walk beside me . . . " thing [that I have on a very small plaque, because I've always loved it], if I'm wrong in my take on C2'c intent with that, then I have an issue with C2! If the element of surprize was the goal, that goal was superceded. If you feel at all disrespected by it, please say so, because that's simply not acceptable.
Love,
Lizzy
To add a couple things. I hope you'll continue to express your ideas ~ in your way ~ here [I truthfully can't imagine it otherwise, but I still want to say that]. As I said, if I could as effectively pulled that lesson together, I would have been more likely to. Of course, it's all the more effective when you aren't the one being discredited, and have no 'reason' [per se] to speak out.
When I speak of my, perhaps, being an example to someone, I'm including in that, that I could also be serving as an example of how someone does not want to express themselves. That's back to that individual thing.
When I say things, I try to pass them through a grid and filter of how might I speak to, or in the presence of, Roshi; how might he speak to me and others; how might I speak to Leonard, or might Leonard speak to me or others. I feel there's a little more latitude with Leonard than with Roshi, of course. Even so, that's the standard I try for. There are [obviously, for anyone who's been here right along] times that I don't meet with that standard, when the ego is just so damned determined to express itself, in the most accurate fashion of how it's feeling at the moment, and I just 'go for it.' No paragon of virtue here
! It's all a process, this learning to be a kinder person, and I hope that in years to come, there won't be any seam between my intentions and the results. I've always been goodwilled, and have always tried not to react with bitter feelings [or at least not hold on to them, if I do] in my personal response to negative things occurring in my life, so I think those two things probably work in my favour. I'm still not to the point of thanking the universe for those negative things. They may be a lesson for me, but so far I have to pretty much rely on retrospect for that perspective.....at least as far as the 'thanking' goes whilst they're occurring. No paragon of virtue here, either !Now, back to that "Don't walk beside me . . . " thing [that I have on a very small plaque, because I've always loved it], if I'm wrong in my take on C2'c intent with that, then I have an issue with C2! If the element of surprize was the goal, that goal was superceded. If you feel at all disrespected by it, please say so, because that's simply not acceptable.
Love,
Lizzy
as risks go I thought it was a tiny one! of course not aimed at Hillary, I am a serious fan of both you two. It was merely an attempt at surprise and perhaps showing that very occasionally swearing works.lizzytysh wrote:Dear Hillary ~
Now, back to that "Don't walk beside me . . . " thing [that I have on a very small plaque, because I've always loved it], if I'm wrong in my take on C2'c intent with that, then I have an issue with C2! If the element of surprize was the goal, that goal was superceded. If you feel at all disrespected by it, please say so, because that's simply not acceptable.
Love,
Lizzy
-
linda_lakeside
- Posts: 3857
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea..
I admit I haen't read the entire thread here, I just wanted to address Lizzy's repsonse to 'Hillary' and her thoughts on expression. I know that since I've been in the 'elections thread', I'm having difficulty jumping in to conversation that might require 'opinion' of a nature that all might not agree with. All the negativity in that thread really did make me see how important it is to edit, edit, edit and when you're sure you're done ....
Yet we don't really have that luxury here. When Lizzy spoke of the 'grid and filter' - I wish I could do the same yet some of my 'opinions', never mind the expression of them, would not pass the grid and filter test.
I strive to be a kinder person yet I also am a flawed person and I don't know how to effectively join the two. It is all a learning process and I guess I'm going to just have to 'jump in' and learn along the way. The ego will speak out (even if you don't want it to) in some fashion. Many will jump on that assuming that is the entire story, as it were.
Anyway, the above is probably convoluted and applicable to nothing that's going on in this thread. Lizzy, I find your thought process, or the grid and filter must be working for you as your 'nature' comes through loud and clear. Since I've been in this site - yours are the most obvious posts - in that they are everywhere and you do an admirable job of keeping an even keel. If I've confused the topic further, sorry. I just wanted to say that expression is difficult in this medium and misunderstandings occur daily. However, if one hangs out in this site long enough - the obvious happens. You begin to see the people behind the post. Oh my, am I ever getting bogged down! Yes, I should've read the entire thread as I'm losing my thread. Let's put this down as 'just a thought'.
Yet we don't really have that luxury here. When Lizzy spoke of the 'grid and filter' - I wish I could do the same yet some of my 'opinions', never mind the expression of them, would not pass the grid and filter test.
I strive to be a kinder person yet I also am a flawed person and I don't know how to effectively join the two. It is all a learning process and I guess I'm going to just have to 'jump in' and learn along the way. The ego will speak out (even if you don't want it to) in some fashion. Many will jump on that assuming that is the entire story, as it were.
Anyway, the above is probably convoluted and applicable to nothing that's going on in this thread. Lizzy, I find your thought process, or the grid and filter must be working for you as your 'nature' comes through loud and clear. Since I've been in this site - yours are the most obvious posts - in that they are everywhere and you do an admirable job of keeping an even keel. If I've confused the topic further, sorry. I just wanted to say that expression is difficult in this medium and misunderstandings occur daily. However, if one hangs out in this site long enough - the obvious happens. You begin to see the people behind the post. Oh my, am I ever getting bogged down! Yes, I should've read the entire thread as I'm losing my thread. Let's put this down as 'just a thought'.
~ The smell of perfume in the air, bits of beauty everywhere ~ Leonard Cohen.
Linda I have always posted on the basis of my honest opinion and I have often got the wrong end of the stick or showed my ignorance about something but thats life. There are people on this forum who are a lot more intelligent than I there are people who word things a lot better there are more compassionate people and more intolerant people than I but I continue to stick my oar in. Just because I can and just because you can you should post what you feel without editing the content for fear of upsetting or getting it wrong. You don't want me to be the only divvy person on here do you 
We can't all be spiritual beings searching for some higher plane some of us just stumble from day to day doing the best we can. I haven't got a spiritual bone in my body and I get by OK.
Actually when I think about it I am probably not the sort of person you would equate with being a Cohen fan. I swear, I smoke, I make distasteful jokes, I can't write poetry, or paint I have no artistic tendencies whatsoever and I play Bingo
We can't all be spiritual beings searching for some higher plane some of us just stumble from day to day doing the best we can. I haven't got a spiritual bone in my body and I get by OK.
Actually when I think about it I am probably not the sort of person you would equate with being a Cohen fan. I swear, I smoke, I make distasteful jokes, I can't write poetry, or paint I have no artistic tendencies whatsoever and I play Bingo
-
linda_lakeside
- Posts: 3857
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:08 pm
- Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea..
Paula:
Thanks for the reply. I don't play bingo but I do all the rest. I suppose divvy is as divvy does (?) - therefore, I do intend to participate where I can - I think the diversity of personalities on the board makes the whole experience richer. I just became bummed out over a session which I'm obviously letting interfere with my further participation. So, my oar is in the water (I just hope I don't drop it).
Cheers,
Thanks for the reply. I don't play bingo but I do all the rest. I suppose divvy is as divvy does (?) - therefore, I do intend to participate where I can - I think the diversity of personalities on the board makes the whole experience richer. I just became bummed out over a session which I'm obviously letting interfere with my further participation. So, my oar is in the water (I just hope I don't drop it).
Cheers,
~ The smell of perfume in the air, bits of beauty everywhere ~ Leonard Cohen.
-
Medusafern
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:50 am
- Location: Wisconsin
Hey You...
Dear Lizzy,
You wrote that you hope I am not offended, and I think you are referring to C2's editing of "don't walk beside me..." which appeared to be, but may not actually have been, directed at me. If that's the case, or if anything else is the object of possible offense, no, don't worry, I am not offended. Who could be sad or grumpy when listening to Jane Siberry's gorgeous album "When I Was A Boy"? Certainly not me, this music is ethereal and it makes a bee-line straight for my soul from its first note onward
Besides, even if I weren't listening to Jane Siberry, I'd still be at peace right now. Whatever sweetness of Spirit has taken up residence in me of late is too great to be swayed by harsh words penned from thousands of miles away. Now, if I had someone here shouting in my face directly, I might be a little more likely to react with persecution and tears.
Anyway, when I open up my mouth or let my fingers do the speaking of the kinds of things I've been thinking and feeling recently, I almost expect an unpleasant reaction. It's like what happens when I sit in an A.A. meeting and say my truth is that the ISM with respect to alcohol has been removed from me. Not put in remission, but through alterations at a cellular level from whatever miracle engine exists in this Universe, it has been rooted out from me. When I say this I can almost hear the heavy whisperings of heresy, for none in those rooms are willing to believe there is any power out there capable of rendering an alcoholic into someone who is no longer that. This is the sort of radical that got women burned at the stake not too many centuries ago.
In any case, I know I might be terribly off-topic, but I was trying only to convey that the space in which I find myself provides a kind of cushion or protection amidst anger. And that when I say things, wrong or right, which may be difficult to receive, I must know that backlash may occur. God, I do try to be reasoned and fair...
Thank you as always, Lizzy, for your sparkle and your insight You always bring a smile to my face!
Sincerely,
Hillary
You wrote that you hope I am not offended, and I think you are referring to C2's editing of "don't walk beside me..." which appeared to be, but may not actually have been, directed at me. If that's the case, or if anything else is the object of possible offense, no, don't worry, I am not offended. Who could be sad or grumpy when listening to Jane Siberry's gorgeous album "When I Was A Boy"? Certainly not me, this music is ethereal and it makes a bee-line straight for my soul from its first note onward
Besides, even if I weren't listening to Jane Siberry, I'd still be at peace right now. Whatever sweetness of Spirit has taken up residence in me of late is too great to be swayed by harsh words penned from thousands of miles away. Now, if I had someone here shouting in my face directly, I might be a little more likely to react with persecution and tears.Anyway, when I open up my mouth or let my fingers do the speaking of the kinds of things I've been thinking and feeling recently, I almost expect an unpleasant reaction. It's like what happens when I sit in an A.A. meeting and say my truth is that the ISM with respect to alcohol has been removed from me. Not put in remission, but through alterations at a cellular level from whatever miracle engine exists in this Universe, it has been rooted out from me. When I say this I can almost hear the heavy whisperings of heresy, for none in those rooms are willing to believe there is any power out there capable of rendering an alcoholic into someone who is no longer that. This is the sort of radical that got women burned at the stake not too many centuries ago.
In any case, I know I might be terribly off-topic, but I was trying only to convey that the space in which I find myself provides a kind of cushion or protection amidst anger. And that when I say things, wrong or right, which may be difficult to receive, I must know that backlash may occur. God, I do try to be reasoned and fair...
Thank you as always, Lizzy, for your sparkle and your insight
You always bring a smile to my face!Sincerely,
Hillary
-
Medusafern
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:50 am
- Location: Wisconsin
Woops, C2
Oh C2, I just saw your reply in which you stated you'd hadn't directed that example of the effectiveness at swearing at me, and I'm glad for that, but I hope you know you're quite free to blow off steam at me if I ever do or say anything to deserve it, okay?
Thanks,
Hillary
Thanks,
Hillary
Well, this all came through a refreshing mist, beautiful waterfall, and lovely conclusion. As soon as I came here, I went straight to the Member's poetry section, and this thread, where I saw Hillary's name as the last poster. I was, of course, looking for your response to my comments made earlier today.
The first post I read was C2's confirming my suspicions as to his intent, more pointedly, lack of it. Ah! Relief from the get-go. Thanks for making that crystal clear, C2 , and for your choice of affirming words. Ditto !
Then, Linda ~ how great it is to see you showing up in other threads and discussions. You jumped right in, on-target actually, with the jist of where our exchanges had been and were leading. When I speak of the grid and the filter, I hope my other comments made it clear that, at times, despite my 'best' ~ or lazy ~ efforts make for huge, gaping holes in both grid and filter, and I just plunge on through. However, I do still try to remain conscious of "do unto others . . . ", and specifically picturing Roshi or Leonard really helps in that. I don't compromise the fact of their being my opinions and my expression of them being honest. It's just the condition of the vehicle, in which they travel to their destination, that I try to take care with. Thanks for your "even keel" observation. I'll put that in the column labeled "Proof that 'grid and filter' works."
I felt some consternation when I saw your comment about, "I just became bummed out over a session which I'm obviously letting interfere with my further participation." I came ready to implore Hillary to continue posting; however, if need be, I stand ready to switch my implorations [I doubt Webster's gotten wind of that one, yet ] to you. Contrary to getting bogged down, this comment of yours even bears repeating, "However, if one hangs out in this site long enough - the obvious happens. You begin to see the people behind the post." That's the truth in a nutshell. Actually, for me it's not the extremes of opinions that are concerning, but how those extremes get expressed. Sticking to [attacking?] the issue, not the personality [the Christian expression is "principle over personality"] seems the most important thing in that. I was glad to see your thoughts on all this, as when it comes to opinions in the elections threads, mine are incredibly aligned with your own. I was heavily involved, early-on, when it felt like we might not be powerless regarding the invasion of Iraq, and now I'm finding the political discussions to just be exhausting.
That's not to say that they shouldn't go on, but rather that that's my own, physiological response to reading them. I ignore the elections thread for a couple days at a time, and then read a bunch of postings at once, figuring, "At least I'll only feel worn out, and like a threadbare dishrag, once every couple days, instead of daily." I expressed my overwhelming visceral reaction to it all when I described my imagined painting. That remains. Nothing other than a new world scene is likely to change it
.
Paula is always Paula. Straightforward and true. We're also a great example of how sticking it out here can result in some amazing transformations
. I do take issue with your comment on not having a spiritual bone in your body, though, Paula. It's just not the kind that happens to show up on x-rays.
"I think the diversity of personalities on the board makes the whole experience richer." You got that right, Linda!
Love,
Lizzy
The first post I read was C2's confirming my suspicions as to his intent, more pointedly, lack of it. Ah! Relief from the get-go. Thanks for making that crystal clear, C2
, and for your choice of affirming words. Ditto ! Then, Linda ~ how great it is to see you showing up in other threads and discussions. You jumped right in, on-target actually, with the jist of where our exchanges had been and were leading. When I speak of the grid and the filter, I hope my other comments made it clear that, at times, despite my 'best' ~ or lazy ~ efforts make for huge, gaping holes in both grid and filter, and I just plunge on through. However, I do still try to remain conscious of "do unto others . . . ", and specifically picturing Roshi or Leonard really helps in that. I don't compromise the fact of their being my opinions and my expression of them being honest. It's just the condition of the vehicle, in which they travel to their destination, that I try to take care with. Thanks for your "even keel" observation. I'll put that in the column labeled "Proof that 'grid and filter' works."
I felt some consternation when I saw your comment about, "I just became bummed out over a session which I'm obviously letting interfere with my further participation." I came ready to implore Hillary to continue posting; however, if need be, I stand ready to switch my implorations [I doubt Webster's gotten wind of that one, yet
] to you. Contrary to getting bogged down, this comment of yours even bears repeating, "However, if one hangs out in this site long enough - the obvious happens. You begin to see the people behind the post." That's the truth in a nutshell. Actually, for me it's not the extremes of opinions that are concerning, but how those extremes get expressed. Sticking to [attacking?] the issue, not the personality [the Christian expression is "principle over personality"] seems the most important thing in that. I was glad to see your thoughts on all this, as when it comes to opinions in the elections threads, mine are incredibly aligned with your own. I was heavily involved, early-on, when it felt like we might not be powerless regarding the invasion of Iraq, and now I'm finding the political discussions to just be exhausting. That's not to say that they shouldn't go on, but rather that that's my own, physiological response to reading them. I ignore the elections thread for a couple days at a time, and then read a bunch of postings at once, figuring, "At least I'll only feel worn out, and like a threadbare dishrag, once every couple days, instead of daily." I expressed my overwhelming visceral reaction to it all when I described my imagined painting. That remains. Nothing other than a new world scene is likely to change it
.Paula is always Paula. Straightforward and true. We're also a great example of how sticking it out here can result in some amazing transformations
. I do take issue with your comment on not having a spiritual bone in your body, though, Paula. It's just not the kind that happens to show up on x-rays."I think the diversity of personalities on the board makes the whole experience richer." You got that right, Linda!
Love,
Lizzy
Dear Hillary ~
Now, my second source of relief! I'm glad to read that you did not internalize C2's exercise in surprize . I have no idea who the singer, Jean Siberry [though her name seems slightly familiar, I think it's just because it's somehow similar to another ~ Jane Oliver(?)/Olivor(?) ] is, but you sure make her sound appealing.
"Whatever sweetness of Spirit has taken up residence in me of late is too great to be swayed by harsh words penned from thousands of miles away. Now, if I had someone here shouting in my face directly, I might be a little more likely to react with persecution and tears." Exactly. That's how I feel. It's the not knowing how vulnerable a person may be that's my concern, at least as far as it relates to me, directly; and in some cases beyond me, as well.
I had to smile, okay laugh a little, as I read your comments on the AA meetings and your own status regarding recovery. I've not been an alcoholic, but I've sure claimed some ground as an enabler, years back. I've been to some Al-Anon meetings, but moreso to Open AA ones. Between those and the treatment centers I've worked in, I feel there's some serious merit in exploring the common idea of "switching substances" in the area of addiction to nicotine, caffeine, sugar, and lifelong meetings ~ all in great abundance and high visibility at any given meeting. I believe, heart and soul, that Bill is personally responsible for millions of saved lives. However, at what point in an emerging, healthy lifestyle, does living a full and healthy lifestyle become acceptable? I'm not an alcoholic, but does living a life of multiple meetings a week in smoke-filled rooms necessarily represent full, ongoing recovery?
I would never submit that someone should not go to meetings. However, I feel it is valid that someone can truly change, as you say, at a molecular level, and be freed once and for all to live on a higher plane ~ period. No more meetings. No more smoke-filled rooms. Shamanic healing is also a reality. There are others, as well. Christianity has been successful in the healing of addictions. Spiritual components are powerful and need not be maligned. I don't believe that Bill Wilson would begrudge anyone this level of freedom. In the realm of affirmations, "I am an alcoholic" isn't necessarily the most complete, or represent the highest goal or good, either. You're so right on the 'attitude' you experience in those rooms when you 'heretically' speak in the terms you do. Again, I do not, do not speak against people going to meetings. There just seems to be an invisible ceiling, akin to the one that has held women back for years.
I knew you were tough ~ it's just good to see this direct evidence of it here. All's well that ends well .
Love,
Lizzy
Now, my second source of relief! I'm glad to read that you did not internalize C2's exercise in surprize
. I have no idea who the singer, Jean Siberry [though her name seems slightly familiar, I think it's just because it's somehow similar to another ~ Jane Oliver(?)/Olivor(?) ] is, but you sure make her sound appealing."Whatever sweetness of Spirit has taken up residence in me of late is too great to be swayed by harsh words penned from thousands of miles away. Now, if I had someone here shouting in my face directly, I might be a little more likely to react with persecution and tears." Exactly. That's how I feel. It's the not knowing how vulnerable a person may be that's my concern, at least as far as it relates to me, directly; and in some cases beyond me, as well.
I had to smile, okay laugh a little, as I read your comments on the AA meetings and your own status regarding recovery. I've not been an alcoholic, but I've sure claimed some ground as an enabler, years back. I've been to some Al-Anon meetings, but moreso to Open AA ones. Between those and the treatment centers I've worked in, I feel there's some serious merit in exploring the common idea of "switching substances" in the area of addiction to nicotine, caffeine, sugar, and lifelong meetings ~ all in great abundance and high visibility at any given meeting. I believe, heart and soul, that Bill is personally responsible for millions of saved lives. However, at what point in an emerging, healthy lifestyle, does living a full and healthy lifestyle become acceptable? I'm not an alcoholic, but does living a life of multiple meetings a week in smoke-filled rooms necessarily represent full, ongoing recovery?
I would never submit that someone should not go to meetings. However, I feel it is valid that someone can truly change, as you say, at a molecular level, and be freed once and for all to live on a higher plane ~ period. No more meetings. No more smoke-filled rooms. Shamanic healing is also a reality. There are others, as well. Christianity has been successful in the healing of addictions. Spiritual components are powerful and need not be maligned. I don't believe that Bill Wilson would begrudge anyone this level of freedom. In the realm of affirmations, "I am an alcoholic" isn't necessarily the most complete, or represent the highest goal or good, either. You're so right on the 'attitude' you experience in those rooms when you 'heretically' speak in the terms you do. Again, I do not, do not speak against people going to meetings. There just seems to be an invisible ceiling, akin to the one that has held women back for years.
I knew you were tough
~ it's just good to see this direct evidence of it here. All's well that ends well .Love,
Lizzy