Hi Kirt,
last thing first:
You agree that we disagree. So do I.
Kirt:
>All very inspiring, but why do you still spare Burger/Meta?
My defenses against bad journalism aren't an excuse for the things, that
really happened. But I have a problem here: what happened really?
This sort of journalism would not even shy to plainly twist reality to
make the story fit. We have a newspaper here in Germany, that is gene-
rally known to lie. Its name is "Bild" (picture in English).
Kirt:
How do you misinterpret pedophilia? It may be that this is part of
>_your_ misunderstanding, Stefan.
Maybe. Given, that the story about Burger and the nine year old girl
is true (at least the ages are totally miscalculated: 1997 - 1964 = 33
and 33 + 9 = 42, not 34), I am not sure if I would damn Mr. Burger for
what he did or didn't prevent.
Say, your little daughter still likes to sleep in mummies and dads
bed and one time the same happens to you. Of course we have to say
clearly here, that penetration started by your daughter would never
succeed without you having an erection. So it's more than leaving her
doing her thing - you are sexually excited. That's it. And one could
endlessly debate this - is it normal for an adult to be sexually ex-
cited by a nine year old child?
A damned difficult question. I am very near to plainly deny it and
say, that the adult is a bloody perverse.
But I learned not to plainly judge behavior, I do not understand. So
I will be more cautious and say: probably this is perverse, but I'm
not sure.
I guess this is not a satisfying answer for you but it's the best I
can offer- my best, as Ellie always writes. :-)
Kirt:
>Yet you seem unruffled in the least (except by the dreaded negativity
>of the journalists' and myself). I understand giving a guy the benefit
>of the doubt, but there does come a time when a line is crossed, no?
Yeah, I'm unruffled. The time, the line is crossed hasn't been
reached for me yet. This is, where we disagree. Show me one child who
was abused on Montrame and let me question him/her and the parents to
make my own mind on the story.
And if it turns out then, that the child was abused intentionally or
negligently, I am the first to call for the police to throw the abusers
in prison.
On the other hand, Jean-Louis wrote:
>What *may* have happened: most children became loving beings, but
>there were some failures, and the worst cases were reported to the
>press. Still, even if there were 999 successes and 1 case of child
>abuse, that's enough to send the guilty person to prison. You can
>save 999 lives, but if you kill one person, you are a murderer.
Seems as if you would have to be a perfect character in order not to
fail these 100% criteria. No problem with murder. That's easy to avoid.
But the situation with pedophilia is more complicated. What you might
have thought to be positive for the child may have been negative - so
you were wrong and what you did was an abuse.
Given the hysteria of society you are likely to fall into this trap on
the long run.
Kirt:
>Burger wasn't arrested for a bad article, but for the alleged abuse of
>children.
The reverse is true IMO, Sir! Reread Peter's initial post:
>"GC Burger has been arrested in Montrame and jailed in Melun Wednesday
>July 2, at midday by the French police for alleged abuse of children.
>Several journalists seem to have thoroughly investigated the past and
>present "meta" practice, found victims and published last week very
>detailed articles (1 to 10 pages) in several magazines of the French
>press presenting the most scandalous aspects of Burger's "meta"
Again, what was the cause here? Who came first, the hen or the egg?
Kirt:
Now, Stefan, before you go on about my negativity here--save it.
I won't complain again since your answer contains only a few negati-
vity and I'm glad to note this.
Kirt:
>Huh? Did I say this to you when you went on about the USA food scene
>(very inaccurately BTW)?
You didn't. But to make things clear then: did you try Orkos' pro-
ducts while being in Europe? When was the last time you tried them?
How long?
Kirt:
It's all point-of-view I guess. To me the end of Guy-Claude/Meta is a
>very positive thing, a free-ing and a fresh start for instincto.
Hm. If this is positive, you should have expressed it more clearly.
Sorry I didn't get it.
I'm not sure whether to be glad about the supposed end of GCB/Meta.
I am unruffled as stated above. (Thanks for this nice word :-))
I do my own psychological investigations as stated in earlier posts.
I'm not so much interested in Burger's meta. I already wrote, that
perhaps he would be better off with caring for the food quality of
Orkos and doing the tests and leaving his fingers off other things.
So I'm not hanging to a sinking ship as you guess. I'm not a passen-
ger of this ship. I'm on my own ship most of my time to stay in the
picture.
Kirt:
>We need a word for this, no? How about "gustism"--which means
..
>Why do you doubt? I just don't get it. Is it like, "There is just no
>way it could be true" in your head? It is appealing to know that the
>translations really sound bad to you. It will be interesting to see
>what you think several years from now...
Ditto for you, concerning the next years.
Why I doubt?
Kirt, I doubt that an instincto is addicted to sex because what I
have heard of other instinctos is, that the urgent need for sex which
lots of the instinctos felt when cooked, fell away when switching to
raw nutrition, be it instinctive or not. And I watched the same for me.
And if my memory doesn't fool me, you wrote about similar experiences.
Then, aggressivity decreased also with raw nutrition. Again a lot of
instinctos watched this, including me. So if there is still a need for
sex (and it would be strange if it disappeared completely) it is at
least not aggressive, therefore most unlikely to harm the partner,
whoever it is.
I think I have rational reasons for my doubts. Can you agree on this?
Stefan:
>>The question would be, what GCB is supposed to recover from. My two
>>cents: his amalgam fillings, he frequently denies to give problems.
>>Hg has severe impacts on psyche and personality. You would be perfect-
>>ly right with your toxic minds explanations then.
Kirt:
>Wow. This is really over the top. What are you saying here? That Burger
>has a severely impacted psyche and personality? (Yippeee! We agree ;))
>That if he had fewer cavities filled he would be as right as rain? In
>English this is called "grasping at straws".
And I thought it is "clutching at straws" - at least my dictionary
claims it. :-)
Don't laugh too early, man. For me it is highly probable that Mr. Bur-
ter's mental problems and imbalances are due to his amalgam fillings.
But I am n o t sure! And his psyche isn't what I would say to be
severely impacted. Ligthly impacted: yes. This I admit frankly.
Kirt:
>>>Somewhere down the road it would be nice
>>>if instincto rubbed elbows with the other emerging paleo-diets and
>>>evolved into something greater than the sum of its parts, but with
>>>Montrame's track record screwing its fledgling reputation up but
>>>good, I wonder how long in the future it might be.
Stefan:
>>Here is a good example of a person, who needs a leader. That's you,
>>Kirt!
Kirt:
>How so? I'm completely baffled. Lead me out of my confusion please. ;)
Uhm, I thought I was clear enough. The cited paragraph, read between the
lines, shows a person, loudly announcing for a leader and something to
lean to.
Sorry, I can't give away my damned psychoanalysis. I'm doing it almost
permanently. ;-)
Thank you for your mostly positive answer to my long ramble.
Instinctive wishes,
Stefan
|