Cult I was born into finally exposed.

@dj2becker said
Come to think of it I didn’t really peg you as an attention seeker. But maybe that does explain all the trolling.

It’s not trolling, it’s ridicule.

@fmf said
Then you should approach what I say accordingly. You must have some good reason not to believe me. Assuming you do, I suggest you are open and forthright about it, call a spade a spade, and tackle what I say on this matter in a way that is firmly based on your suspicion that I am lying.

So, you get to make the 'approach' rules for this forum.

I have every reason not to believe you, and I don't have to share even one of them with you if I don't want to.

Besides, nobody knows better than you why I shouldn't believe you. So why should I tell you what you already know?

Edit: "That's fine by me" you said once after I said I don't believe you. Why the sudden change? Are you paranoid I know something about the real you?

😶🤐😎🤣

@fmf said
I haven't "twisted" anything. I am addressing the story about what his parents chose to do on the night of the rape. I am ignoring the different version of events that he has subsequently offered presumably because the moral implications of the original version, which he clearly had not contemplated, made him uncomfortable, and a new and more convenient version was needed.

I don't believe your "version" simply because I know how you manipulate what others say.

You have a reputation for creating chaos in these threads.

Now why don't you ask me how that is in spite of the fact that I've enumerated your tactics many times. Can't you remember?

@fmf said
I think all that is happening here is that I am saying things that you don't agree with or don't like.

What are you on about?

Everyone says things somebody doesn't like or agree with. So what? When was the last time you agreed with me about anything?

You're not proving anything with that.

@fmf said
Who thinks I am "stating the obvious"?

Do you?

Didn't you?

@fmf said
"The effects of systematic and prolonged abuse" make it all the more crucial that there is discussion of the moral implications and obligations. Those effects do not preclude such discussion. Hardship and adversity do not make moral clarity obselete.

That's the obvious.

Badgering the victim is your means. You're more interested, it seems, in browbeating the victim of abuse with questions relative to his "moral obligations" than you are in a discussion about the moral failure of the perpetrator of abuse.

It seems you're hell bent on prosecuting dj2becker as a victim, than you are in having a discussion about how to expose the perpetrators of abuse.

Get it?

@secondson said
So, you get to make the 'approach' rules for this forum.

I have every reason not to believe you, and I don't have to share even one of them with you if I don't want to.

Besides, nobody knows better than you why I shouldn't believe you. So why should I tell you what you already know?

Edit: "That's fine by me" you said once after I said I don't believe you. Why the sudden change? Are you paranoid I know something about the real you?

Let me reiterate. If you think I have been lying, if you feel you have every reason to think so, even if you don't want to share your reasons, even if you don't know why you should tell me what you believe I already know, even if you believe this is a sudden change, even if you think what I have said to you is me being paranoid about blah blah blah blah, then I still suggest that you approach what I say accordingly. There, I think I've answered your post thoroughly.

@secondson said
Badgering the victim is your means. You're more interested, it seems, in browbeating the victim of abuse with questions relative to his "moral obligations" than you are in a discussion about the moral failure of the perpetrator of abuse.

I don't think I have been badgering or browbeating anyone.

@secondson said
It seems you're hell bent on prosecuting dj2becker as a victim, than you are in having a discussion about how to expose the perpetrators of abuse.

Like I said, "the effects of systematic and prolonged abuse" make it all the more crucial that there is discussion of the moral implications and obligations. Those effects do not preclude such discussion.

Hardship and adversity do not make moral clarity obsolete.

The fact that dj2becker insists that he did not suffer psychological abuse and that most of what he knows is second-hand hearsay stuff that he's heard and pieced together in the meantime, means that he is well placed to discuss this issue with moral clarity and I don't see how that discussion is helped by you desperately trying to play a victim card on his behalf.

The way he is conducting himself and the way you are conducting yourself are part of the discourse. Same goes for me.

@secondson said
What are you on about?

Scroll back and see what it was I was referring to. It's only a couple of pages ago.

@divegeester said
It’s not trolling, it’s ridicule.

Tomayto tomato.

@fmf said
Let me reiterate. If you think I have been lying, if you feel you have every reason to think so, even if you don't want to share your reasons, even if you don't know why you should tell me what you believe I already know, even if you believe this is a sudden change, even if you think what I have said to you is me being paranoid about blah blah blah blah, then I still suggest that you approach what I say accordingly. There, I think I've answered your post thoroughly.

Fascinating that within a framework of moral relativism you think lying is such a big deal. What does lying even mean if truth is relative? There is no consistency to your logic. I predict more deflection here on on your part. At least that is consistent with your world view.

@dj2becker said
Fascinating that within a framework of moral relativism you think lying is such a big deal. What does lying even mean if truth is relative? There is no consistency to your logic. I predict more deflection here on on your part. At least that is consistent with your world view.

I haven't told any lies on this forum. I don't think anyone should. However, if SecondSon believes I have lied on this thread ~ which is what he has said ~ then it isn't a big deal to me. As for what "lying" means, and as you know because we have discussed many times before: I believe "lying" is when someone states something they know to be untrue in order to deceive.

@fmf said
I haven't told any lies on this forum. I don't think anyone should. However, if SecondSon believes I have lied on this thread ~ which is what he has said ~ then it isn't a big deal to me. As for what "lying" means, and as you know because we have discussed many times before: I believe "lying" is when someone states something they know to be untrue in order to deceive.

How in your mind can anything be untrue if truth is relative?

@dj2becker said
How in your mind can anything be untrue if truth is relative?

Give me a scenario.

Or, if you prefer, let's use the one that caused SecondSon to say that he didn't believe what I had said was true.

I said I had done a fair bit of work in the field of helping victims who are victims of domestic violence, sexual violence, and sex trafficking.

That is either something that is true or it is something that is not true.

I am saying that it is true.

How does your "How can anything be true or untrue if truth is relative?" prism process this?

And if SecondSon shares your "How can anything be true or untrue if truth is relative?" prism ~ and if he subscribes to your subjective "absolute truth" ideology ~ what bearing does it have on the fact he says he believes my claim is untrue.

@dj2becker said
How in your mind can anything be untrue if truth is relative?

This is a repeat of the question I answered. I'd be interested in your response to what I posted, rather than just a repeat of the question I posted a response to. Here is the long and short of it:

As for what "lying" means, and as you know because we have discussed many times before: I believe "lying" is when someone states something they know to be untrue in order to deceive.