View Single Post
  #84  
Old 10-30-2013, 09:57 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 7,210
Default

ColorsWolf,

Please accept my sentiment that we have had a good run of it, and have both tried to get along with each other. Now, for the good of each other, and the good of the site, let's take into account the possibility that we may not be capable of getting along, at least not without hurting/offending each other (and making each other lose a lot of sleep).

I don't begrudge you your freedom of expression, and I'm not trying to compose a bunch of "rules" that you have to live by. You don't have to live by any of my "rules." I just hope you'll understand that I, too, have my freedom, and my participation in our conversation is voluntary. So if I bow out of the conversation, I'm not saying that there's something wrong with you, I'm just saying that I personally have my own boundaries that I have to honor if I am to take responsible care of myself.

In a nutshell, if our conversation is over, please don't be disappointed with me or hold it against me. Let's just agree to walk our different paths, and you have a wealth of Polyamory.com members to interact with, regardless of whether I'm personally available for interaction.

Am I saying, "It's over?" Not necessarily. It largely depends on how much my interaction with you matters to you, and on if it matters enough to you to honor the requests I am going to submit to you.

I am concerned that we are wandering dangerously close to the old cycle of me saying inappropriate things that will only make you more and more upset -- or more and more frustrated, whatever word you prefer. Then you try to "defend" yourself against me, which makes me all stressed out, and guess what? We both lose. Meanwhile, how has Polyamory.com benefitted? Has it become a more edifying site? or is it now harboring some distressing and unnecessary drama between two overly-different individuals? I'm actually worried that some of the moderators may be thinking about locking this thread. Can we perhaps avoid that by agreeing to "touch each other" less?

It doesn't make me happy to "cut someone off" from conversation with me. I've never done that before. So, I am willing to keep conversing with you if you can agree to a couple of conditions.

First of all, please make an effort to contain your temper. When I see a bunch of ALL-CAPS TEXT (commonly understood on the web as being shouting), as well as other "fortified text" (such as bold lettering, underlining, italicizing, and combinations of those), I immediately recognize that, "Uh oh, I have pissed this guy off, he is no longer talking to me, he is now shouting at me and lecturing me in strident notes." That can't be helping either of us.

I hope you'll take my word that I'm carefully, conscientiously, reading *everything* you write (at least on this thread). I don't need to be shouted at or talked to aggressively in order to get the point. The sad truth is, if I don't "get" what you're trying to say, then "increasing the volume" isn't going to help me gain any new powers of comprehension. In other words, there's no point in trying to get verbally aggressive with me. It doesn't help me understand you any better, and thus, it doesn't help you to get what you want out of the conversation.

So yes, if we are going to converse, then we need to do it civilly, without "raising our voices" as it were (as defined by internet protocol). Sorry, but I guess that means you'll need to practice *even more* patience where I am concerned. Express yourself and express yourself well, but do it without trying to "force" me to listen to you. Instead, have some trust that I *will* listen, without the use of force or aggression, even if I still (as usual) "don't get it."

Am I forbidding the highlighting of certain words? Certainly not. Especially if a particular word (or short phrase) calls for highlighting by way of its unusual definition or application. But that's a little different from taking a strident tone with your audience just because you suppose they aren't listening (or that they deserve to get hit really hard with the powerful words you're going to say).

Aside that very obvious way of measuring the tone of a conversation, I also ask that you extend some trust towards my sincerity and express that trust in the words you say, even if those words aren't fortified. It's just not going to work if you can't at least trust me to listen and try to understand what you're saying.

Finally, please be willing to accept the possibility that even when I "get you," I may or may not agree. For example, I *cannot* condone violence (especially if it's not bonafide self-defense), no matter how "natural" or "healthy" it may be. It's just not my cup of tea.

I'm sorry that your wearing of black/leather clothes didn't clue your fellow highschoolers into the fact that they needed to stay away from you. Sometimes highschoolers can be pretty clueless. Perhaps they actually thought you were actually trying to be cool in order to attract their company? Regardless of how stupidly they may have missed your point, that still doesn't make it okay to go off on someone physically for the mere sin of an "unpermitted touch."

We've talked a lot about the inherent hatred (often) involved in clothing oneself (i.e. shame = hatred), but man, physical violence is much worse than the misguided wearing of clothing. With all the sympathy I can muster for your hard experiences in life and point of view, that's one point that you and I are doomed to disagree on. Clothes are just clothes. In the end, that's the truth as I see it.

Now, I am sorry if I have asked you the wrong questions about your personal past, or trespassed on your rightful privacy in any way. As said in so many previous posts, I did not mean to offend.

And if you want me to agree with you that there are gray areas in life (versus black and white), you're in luck because I do agree. I also heartily agree that none of us needs to force each other to adopt our own beliefs.

In fact that's my whole point. You are still free to be your own person and think your own logical thoughts, regardless of whether other people react to your person and thoughts in the way that you feel they should. Above all, *I* am not a required part of your personal freedom and integrity. If you feel the need, then I am okay with you saying/thinking, "Screw this guy," and having nothing more to do with me. I wanted to understand you, I really did. But my understanding isn't necessary for either of us to survive, heal, and move on.

You could be right and the whole rest of the world (including me) could be wrong. I don't think of that as a tragic possibility, I just think of it as part of the mystery of what it means to be human.

Now, at this moment, I am still willing to converse with you -- on this thread -- *if* you want me to. If you don't that's okay too. But after this, if I sense that I am angering/offending/frustrating/whatever you again, I will regretfully withdraw.

Will I still communicate with other members on this thread? Probably. Will I still be willing to communicate with you on other threads? Maybe. We'll have to see. But on this thread, for the sake of both of us, and of the rest of the site membership, things will change in that respect.

I suppose you will now feel like I am trying to persecute you or something. Quite the opposite. I am trying to give both you and me the freedom to be ourselves. Yes, I believe we should both have that freedom, even if my way of being myself is unevolved and unwelcome. I welcome your way of being yourself and hope you will reciprocate.

Cautiously and candidly,
Kevin T.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"

Last edited by kdt26417; 10-30-2013 at 10:28 PM.
Reply With Quote