To Forgive--Or Not?

[susnfx]

I have a question for those taking part in this thread, and I'm absolutely serious.
Why do you suppose it is that no women (or very few - since I'm not positive of the gender of some posters on this thread) have posted to this thread or to some of the other OT threads going recently?

Is it that women aren't as contentious? Aren't as intellectual?
Aren't quite so certain they're always right? Or simply aren't as interested in hearing themselves talk?

As I said, I'm dead serious. I'd like to know your thoughts.

Susan

[Nanohedron]

Susan, I'm surprised at you! First, to solicit assumptions from males as to what that more inscrutable gender might be thinking, and second, that your observations border on the sexist. And I thought we had come so far, all of us.

Seriously, I dunno. The issues of this thread had me looking inward, and so my previous -and what would otherwise have been only- post was an offering based on what I see in my own inner dynamics. Nowhere have I laid claim to being right.

C'mon, guys! Should we FORGIVE Susnfx?

[susnfx]

... and second, that your observations border on the sexist.

Well, my feelings would perhaps have been more clear if I could find a "dripping with sarcasm" icon.

[brianormond]

-Others should forgive those who have offended or hurt them. -I, On the other hand, find thumbscrew, rack or iron maiden too good for those who offend or hurt me or mine. So it goes. I don't believe this was the relativity Einstein referred to.

[Bloomfield]

I have a question for those taking part in this thread, and I'm absolutely serious.
Why do you suppose it is that no women (or very few - since I'm not positive of the gender of some posters on this thread) have posted to this thread or to some of the other OT threads going recently?

Is it that women aren't as contentious? Aren't as intellectual?
Aren't quite so certain they're always right? Or simply aren't as interested in hearing themselves talk?

As I said, I'm dead serious. I'd like to know your thoughts.

Susan

Satan is female, of course. It was a woman who first tempted man and brought on this whole mess. Man is marked by original sin by virtue of having been born of a woman. Martha Steward is a woman (I think).

And you still wonder?!?

[elendil]

Brian, outstanding little action group there! I think I recognized myself in the group of talking heads. I was the one who was right.

[brianormond]

Man is marked by original sin by virtue of having been born of a woman.

Yes-Remember how lucky was Macbeth, not of woman born. Instructive.

[Nanohedron]

Man is marked by original sin by virtue of having been born of a woman.

Yes-Remember how lucky was Macbeth, not of woman born. Instructive.

But 'twas MacDuff.

[susnfx]

Satan is female, of course. It was a woman who first tempted man and brought on this whole mess. Man is marked by original sin by virtue of having been born of a woman. Martha Steward is a woman (I think). And you still wonder?!?

Oh, all right. I'll give you that one. Women are not posting to this thread because of guilty feelings.

But how do you explain the Should Nader Run thread? Seven pages and apart from one post by me on the first page and one post by an individual of whose gender I am uncertain, every post is by men.

(Now that I think of it, the fact that I'm the only woman posting to this thread, and possibly the only woman to post to the Nader thread has me worried...)

[Bloomfield]

But how do you explain the Should Nader Run thread? Seven pages and apart from one post by me on the first page and one post by an individual of whose gender I am uncertain, every post is by men.

Now that you mention it. Perhaps we should abolish universal suffrage again.

[brianormond]

Yikes! -It was Macduff even as you say. Sitting here, I stand corrected. (This cultural knowledge from one whom sent his sister
into paroxysms of laughter by pronouncing "chic" as "chick"
*Sighs* I suppose its too late to edit the Macbeth post to appear erudite and make Nano seem non compos. Dang!

[Nanohedron]

...and make Nano seem non compos.

I do that well enough on my own, and will yet again. Give it time... :roll:

[Lorenzo]

Why would evil BEGIN with the loss of self control?

Or limit yourself to one a month; or even one a week would be an improvement.

There's your answer, senator. You sound like Calvin.

Hey, brianormond...

Where'd you find that picture of Janet Jackson?

[mvhplank]

Okay, I'll be the second girl to post.

Well, here we are, Lent's upon us and the topic of forgiveness seems particularly relevant. [snip] Should we forgive one another--and does that depend on circumstances?

This is strictly a personal, non-religious, non-theological answer: I think that not forgiving is corrosive, and even cancerous. If you have anger gnawing at your liver all the time, you're going to be unhappy, stressed, and sick-feeling, if not outright infected from a suppressed immune system.

The last time I was really, really mad at my ex-husband and his father, I started putting cash money in the upturned box turtle shell under the shelf Mr. Buddha sits on. My wish, each time I made a contribution, was to "make the problem go away." You have to phrase these wishes carefully--within a week the problem went away simply because I no longer cared about their actions.

Yes, offering forgiveness and finding a safe mental distance are two different things, but closer to each other than if you chose to maintain a fruitless and unresolved anger.

M

PS--I usually don't hop into these sorts of threads because I don't like to argue. It's probably a "warrior" thing and I'm a pretty solid "villager."

PPS--the money I entrust to Mr. Buddha always goes to charity--sometimes the SPCA, sometimes the Emerge House, which helps local paroled women prisoners develop job skills and stay off drugs.

[elendil]

marguerite wrote:

I think that not forgiving is corrosive, and even cancerous. If you have anger gnawing at your liver all the time, you're going to be unhappy, stressed, and sick-feeling, if not outright infected from a suppressed immune system./quote]
and:

Yes, offering forgiveness and finding a safe mental distance are two different things, but closer to each other than if you chose to maintain a fruitless and unresolved anger.

Thanks for the post, marguerite. What you say is an interesting illustration of the issue we've been discussing. Here's what I mean. You, like most people, approach this issue largely from the perspective of the wronged person. For that person, as you indicate, the issue is frequently one of maintaining a healthy balance, and so it often comes down to simply letting go of anger, deciding not to care about a particular issue anymore, or maybe downgrading its importance in your life. There are often situations in our lives over which we have little or no control, and often this "letting go" is the best we can do.

On the other hand, if you approach the issue from the standpoint of the wrongdoer, it can look a little different. If a wrongdoer approaches the wronged person seeking forgiveness, sincerely, and is told, in effect, go in peace, I've found "a safe mental distance," it's questionable whether the wrongdoer will go away believing that he has been forgiven.

Granted, that response may be the prudent and legitimate response--a type of conditional forgiveness: if you're sincere I forgive you, but for the sake of us both we need to keep a "healthy" distance.

In a way, that's part of what the penal system is all about. But I'll leave that for one and all to work on.

Thanks again, marguerite.