More Parroting

 
sparkle8faery apparently had a few things to say after my last post.

For somebody who said they would have happily answered me if I’d emailed them with any questions, she seems quite reluctant herself to do so.
 

    I find it very interesting that  fig367‘s  recent crap contained precisely similar questions as sparkle8faery’s.

 
I have had no personal dealings with sparkle8faery of any kind before now.   I don’t know her, she doesn’t know me.   So we have no history together and no reasons that I know of to conflict now.

Her sudden interest in me, combined with

  • her repetition of content I have seen before from  fig367
  • her sudden disproportionate and unexplained escalation of hostility
  • asking me to prove stuff about herself which she must already know
  • no clear reasons why the answers she seeks will be useful to her
  • her strikingly similar questions to those I have asked  fig367  before

give me no reason to conclude that she is hassling me for any independent reasons of her own.

Although she is clearly acting on behalf of others whom she neglects to mention or identify, I would like to reiterate that sparkle8faery is so far only one of a very few people to harass me using their own name.
 

    sparkle8faery believes in what she is saying enough to put her name to it, so I would like to emphasise how much I do respect that.

 
These are the questions she posed.
 

  • which bit of my answer did i parrot, and parrot in exactly what way?
  •  
    These were your assertions which I specified already in my previous post:

    • “making a big deal out of nothing on your blog”
    • “no great mystery”
    • “no hidden agenda”
    • “no conspiracy theory”
    • “the whole world isnt out to get you”

     
    My reasons for concluding that you had invented or parroted those ideas are as follows.   Since

    1. I have made none of those claims, never have, nor used those words
    2. the only people claiming otherwise include  fig367/dunravin2002
    3. claiming I said those things only benefits  fig367/dunravin2002
    4. claiming I said those things benefits nobody else

    how or why else would you have invented or parroted those things independently?   How would doing that benefit you?
     

     

  • the only people who have used those words im apparently friendly with […] which people? what kind of relationship are you talking about? and prove how we are friends.
  •  
    I’m surprised, don’t you already know yourself who are or are not your friends?   Why do you need me to prove that to you?

    Since  

    • fig367  is the owner of bdsmireland/Nimhneach
    • you run the Nimhneach group on fetlife
    • fig367  is a member of that group
    • fig367‘s  membership indicates that he agrees, approves and supports that group and its administration
    • I have only ever seen friendly interactions between you and  fig367

    I thought all that indicated pretty strongly that you and  fig367  are friendly with each other.

    Are you saying that

    • fig367‘s  membership of your group is accidental, incidental, or meaningless?
    • you run the Nimhneach group on fetlife without or contrary to  fig367‘s  agreement, approval, and support, despite his membership of it?
    • you and  fig367  are  not  friendly, in contact or on speaking terms?
    • you don’t know if you are or are not friends with  fig367?
    • you don’t know who your friends are without my help?
    • you need somebody else’s proof to tell you who you’re friends with?

    I mean, if you’re  not  friends with  fig367  why not just say so?
     

     

  • “your last statement implied fig has friends helping him, give me a specific example of this, with hard evidence that links me looking at your group to me conspiring with fig.”
  •  
    Yes, I said that  fig367  has friends who help him.   So?   Are you saying that  fig367  has no friends and no help?   If you know differently why not just say so?

    I established your link with  fig367  above.

    If you’re  not  friendly with  fig367,  why not just say so?

    What’s the point of demanding proof from me about who your friends are when you already know the answers to that yourself?

    You don’t know me and I don’t know you.   fig367  recently used my name to ask for similar proof which you’re asking for now.   Why would you have any reason for or interest in doing the same if you had no contact with him?

     

  • “so, prove me and every person you have linked me with are in league together”
  •  
    What people?   The only one I named was  fig367  to whom I have already provided a link above.
     

     

  • “prove that i apparently dont have a mind of my own and have been dreadfully influenced by the evil fig”
  •  
    Now that’s just silly, I never said anything of the sort.   Where did you get that from?
     

     

  • “where is the evidence i have choosen to make these individuals my whole world? and exactly which individuals, and exactly which way would i be making them my whole world? define world?”
  •  
    Unfortunately you appear to have misread my words.   I made “if-then” statements which were conditional, not definitive.   What I actually said was:

      If  by  “the whole world being out to get you”,  you meant your friends whom I have specifically mentioned by name,  then  yes, based on the evidence, I suppose they are.”

      and

      If  you personally choose to make those individuals  your  whole world,  then,  y’know, good luck with that.”

     
    Since you yourself said  “the whole world isnt out to get you”  I was hoping you yourself knew what you meant.  

    As I pointed out above, I never said any such thing.   So you either came up with it yourself or got it from somebody else.  

    In either case, only you or the person you got it from knows how  “world”  is defined in this context.   Since I never said it, I can’t help you with this one.  

    Since I don’t know how you defined  “world”  in the context in which you used it, that was why I phrased my response in the conditional  “if”  and not as anything more definitive.
     

     

  • “i explained my actions, youre still harping on about how fig now has friends helping him. so you totally ignored what i said, and still believe this paranoid fantasy of yours, because….?”
  •  
    Yes you did, I think we’re all pretty clear on that now.   Thank you, that was helpful.

    Again, the only claims about my paranoia besides yours were from  fig367/duravin2002  and his friends.

    Clearly  fig367  does have friends helping him, so what?

    If you’ve read my blog as you say you have, then you’ll know very well that I have been targeted over and over and over and over and over again by people within the Irish BDSM scene.   We are both a part of that scene.  

    When I have virtually silent contact from a scene member, followed by suddenly confrontational and hostile words such as you used in your messages to me, my experience has taught me that this is likely to be another attempt to target me.  

    I think that expecting me to assume innocent and benevolent intentions in these circumstances is rather unreasonable, considering that you have given me every reason to draw conclusions to the contrary.

    If your intentions were as innocent as you claim, what benefit could you possibly gain from demanding proof to facts about yourself which you already know, and escalating hostilities like this when we have had no prior contact?
     

      What possible reasons could you have for making our first contact so unpleasant?

     
    Please accept my thanks for expressing yourself to me using your own name.   In all seriousness, that does mean a lot to me, and I sincerely appreciate that you are prepared to stand by what you say to me by putting your name to it.
     

     
    If any of you want to, you can read sparkle8faery’s comment in full.

     

    About Lady Lubyanka

    I am a 45 year old musician, and also a multisexual, polyamourous, Jewish, socially dominant woman within my romantic BDSM relationships.
    This entry was posted in correspondence, exclusion, fuckwitism, Respect, The Scene. Bookmark the permalink.

    One Response to More Parroting

    1. Pingback: Still Confused? « Lady Lubyanka

    Spill yo oh-PIN-yunz after the tone ...

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s