No, Anita. that’s an inaccurate explanation. I have a right to process here on this thread all that’s taken place over the past few weeks. I have a right to “name harm”.

B

Give me a chance, Tee, to be real now, to be honest now. Give me a chance to be who I am choosing to be NOW, not as I have been THEN.

Hi Anita,

What I asked in my last reply to you was: do you mean that it’s okay for you, Tee, at this point and onward (being that I will no longer refer to you negatively and indirectly, and being that you are welcomed to communicate with me directly)- to discuss me negatively with other members (whether I join the conversation or not)?

Hmm… so you’re suggesting that from now on, I cannot speak about your posts to me, or my posts to you (i.e. our exchange on this thread), with anyone else but you? Even if those posts are on a public forum?

But Anita, you’ve expressed new grievances against me – accusing me of rallying people to attack you – in your post on Sept 8, 11:50 am. What if someone were to comment on that post? (like Brandy did – thank you Brandy for noticing how disturbing Anita’s new allegations were). Am I not allowed to respond to them and share my impressions?

In other words, why do you think it’s okay to ban possible negative comments about you – when you freely, and publicly, express negative comments about me?

Doesn’t it remind you of the situation with your SOCJ journal at the end of July, where you asked people not to post, while continuing to speak badly of me and Alessa (and possibly other members of the forum)? You allowed yourself to speak badly of others, but tried to prevent those same others (or anybody else who would come to their defense) to respond.

Is that your idea of a safe space: safe for you to say whatever you want, no matter how hurtful it is, and then be shielded from any negative feedback?

Tee- I’ve been reading Every Single One of your hundreds+ of posts for years. You are not a stranger to me- I feel like I got to know you over the years: your rationality and your emotionality.

And yet, you felt it’s okay to accuse me, rather harshly, and to keep accusing me, even in your recent post (Sept 8, 11:50 am), of all manner of things? In that post, you’ve apologized for speaking badly of me in your SOCJ journal in July/August, but you came up with new accusations regarding how I interact with other members. You haven’t replied to my post (Sept 9, 1:46 am), in which I’ve shared my perspective on your new accusations – but instead, you’re trying to limit whom I can speak to?

I want to resolve the conflict with you, Tee. Please give me a chance. Just you and me- for now. I am real. I am honest.

If you were honest, Anita, you wouldn’t try to silence me. You would have replied to my post and we could have kept the conversation going, perhaps. But you chose a different route: the route of trying to silence me, to convince me that I shouldn’t speak to anyone else but you.

I’m sorry, Anita, but I’m not interested in playing by those rules. It doesn’t seem like a gesture of goodwill, but of control.

You’re now speaking of love:

As I am now= hopeful, wanting connection, wanting to love and be loved, no optics, no pretenses.. just simple love, nothing weird.

But control is not love. I wonder if you can see that?

Hi Tee

I’m sorry, I didn’t give you a proper reply before because I was hoping that the conversation would be more constructive for you after an apology. I’m sorry that things are still challenging. ❤️

I’m feeling better after taking a break from the conflict. I’m happy to continue supporting you on this thread. ❤️

I understand that Anita has expressed a desire for me to stop doing that for her.

I can understand the your need to be heard and acknowledged first before a compromise.

I guess, I just think of things in a different way. Personally, I don’t need a common understanding to acknowledge pain initially. My primary focus is on being treated with respect first and foremost. I would rather be unheard, than to be treat disrespectfully. I feel like being treat in a respectful way naturally precedes a willingness to listen.

You weren’t trying to be hurtful were you? The purpose was to protect yourself from the similar things happening in the future and preventing harm to yourself.

I can understand that you don’t see things in the same way though. It is okay. I think we just have different perspectives.

Ah well, I can clarify what I meant by Anita might be feeling like she isn’t heard. I meant that she might not be feeling heard in the most recent argument.

Your perspective is that you apologised initially in the initial conflict and tried to meet her needs at then and that she hadn’t tried to apologise to you yet. It was her turn to do that next. Essentially? That is fair.

You wanted things to be fair and not feel like you are begging or putting in an undue amount of emotional labour. I can understand that, it isn’t a pleasant feeling begging to be heard.

You do deserve to be heard and not blamed. ❤️

What was tough for you about the conflict?

I can share my perspective about respect – showing due regard for someone’s feelings, wishes or rights.

Do you feel like you were respected in the argument?

I can understand that, it is honestly very hard in a conflict like this to stay open. Yes, I think so. But it is not your fault. It is a difficult situation to be in. You are a good person being open to reflection. ❤️

I feel like people can change their minds during conflicts, perhaps I’m naive and overly optimistic. ❤️

Hi Everyone

I had this friend who has C-PTSD. He constantly fought with everyone. He would gossip about the fights to his friends and it created a culture of fear to criticise him. Fearing criticism he could never learn by reflecting on how he created his own situation. ❤️

People would eventually get fed up and end up losing their temper with him, by holding in their pain and he would cast them aside for being mean to him, gossip and blog about his fights with them too, ignoring the pain he had caused others. Focusing only on his own pain. ❤️