Replies

Sorry, I've been tearing out a toilet and installing a new one....Just getting to FR in spurts. Didn't mean to ignore you, but really don't have time to do a long thesis.

I asked you to read a very small book, less than 100 pages to better understand where I was coming from. Instead you insist on me giving analysis of what is in YOUR head. That I can't do even if I were willing to do it.
From the book:
1. We ALL invalidate—you, me, the guy next door everyone.
2. It is not up to another person to determine if the validation was on purpose.
3. Only the person doing the validation can determine that
(Your unwillingness to investigate a premise I asked you to look into invalidated me. (It says my information is not of value to you and you do not value my thoughts).
4. The book list many types of validation...most are innocently done,
5. Others are used to control, keep folks in a certain place... Those include abusers, misogynist etc that I mentioned before....even teachers, and parents.
6. People who are targets in this type of relationship often minimize or make excuses for the person who is the invalidator.

I don't know your background and can't answer why you made the comments you did, whether they were intentional invalidation or just innocent comments.

You certainly intentionally minimized anything I said or suggested in your last post that any suggestion I made had no value to you. If I in turn suggested you (get a life) or some other flippant comeback I would be invalidating you, I don't care to do so.
My original intent was just trying to give people some information so that they could handle the onslaught that we are going to be facing against Sarah. I included you because I thought you were interested in the topic. Obviously you're not.
You seem to have taken it personally. Look at yourself ..only you can determine where you stand ....the analysis is yours....Same belongs to the others (all others) on the thread regarding their own comments and intent.

Now I really must get some work done....Hope this helps clarify, Get the book less than $2. used on amazon. for more information.

Been there, done that. I've had my hands in some of the rarest of conveniences from an early age. Replacing toilets and sewer pipe were a few of the tricks my grandfather taught me.

Once you had posted to other people including myself, without responding on point to me, I naturally thought you didn't care to response. I don't think that is all that irrational. I accept your explanation.

If you would have addressed comments to me about invalidation literature, I wouldn't have balked at the concept, if you hadn't done it to my extensive comments. What bothered me was that you linked them to my extensive comments in #402, which I actually perceived as a possible invalidation in and of itself. Further I thought you were possibly inferring I was guilty of certain things. That's why I asked you to explain some things to me, so I could take them in the proper context. A simple response there would have sufficed.

Your unwillingness to investigate a premise I asked you to look into invalidated me. (It says my information is not of value to you and you do not value my thoughts).

I didn't say I wasn't willing. I didn't state your thoughts had no value, and I didn't dismiss them. I responded on point to every issue you raised. I stated I didn't believe it was appropriate to throw those terms out there the way you did, and expect me to leave them hanging while I purchased reference materials, waited for them to come, read them, and then came back to the forum to respond on point. Quite the opposite, I was paying close attention to what you said. I wouldn't have objected if I had dismissed your thoughts. I think that speaks for itself. And what is that comment between brackets there, if not an invalidation of my comments to you? Shouldn't you value my thoughts?

Although we've both been here for a long time, I don't know you well either. All I can do is try to divine what you meant, and ask you to explain something if I have a question about it.

I went to great pains to make sure my reasons were clear for making the comments I did to you in that post. That means that the post was far longer than it needed to be, but I didn't want you to misunderstand anything I said. And yet, you still did.

You reduced the post to this, "You certainly intentionally minimized anything I said or suggested in your last post that any suggestion I made had no value to you." I went out of my way to state that I did not totally dismiss the value of reading your materials. I believe that was the core of your post. So I'm somewhat baffled by your comment that I minimized any suggestion you had made. Look, you use words like bigotry, abuse, and misogyny to me, and then expect me not to react. Again, aren't you doing the very thing you are taking me to task for? You dismissed the validity of the responses I made to your action, didn't you? What you do is you make comments, and if I respond to those comments, I'm invalidating your thoughts. I'm not if I disagree and explain why. Here you're invalidating mine though. That's what it seems like to me.

What I actually did, was call you on every aspect of what I thought you had done, that was inappropriate. Mixed in there, I was also gracious enough to state that yes, the books you referred probably did have value. I just suggested that folks should be careful about how they apply the information in them. I gave examples why. I don't think it's wrong to recognize things for what they are as parts of sentence structure or potentially abusive tools (if you will). I just don't think it's appropriate to characterize every instance of some of those things to be very destructive or manipulative. Of course they can be at times, but people need to realize that at other times they may not be. I all depends on the situation.

No, actually I am interested in this subject matter. I just don't want to have something posted to a post I spent hours developing, that may infer that I'm a bigot, an abuser, a misogynist or all three. Yes, I did take that personally. Who wouldn't?

You state that only I can determine what my intent was. Frankly, I would hope that people could read that post of mine and know damn certain that it wasn't evidence of bigotry, an abusive nature, or misogyny, and for that simply reason NEVER EVER post something to it using terms like those, especially if the fail to flesh out whether I was guilty of them or not.

Your response helped to clarify some things, but it is extremely frustrating for someone to suggest that I need to go read a book so I can stop doing what they are doing.

Look, this post makes it seem like I don't like you. I didn't appreciate your note, but this stops here as are as I am concerned. I'd be glad to talk to you on other threads. I believe you think I am over-reacting here. I don't believe I am, but what the heck.

I realize you're working, so I'll clam up until you return. If you don't want to say more, I do appreciate your response.

Hope you task was completed to your satisfaction.
.