BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?

Subject: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:04 PM

Hey-- think about THIS, if you dare.


In every MudCycle I've seen in the last ten years, there has always been at least one favored darling (usually for good reason) for whom people cut lots and lots and LOTS of slack (usually for good reasons).

We care for them... in a million helpful ways... but, sometimes, in the passion of our best intentions, we treat them as dependent children.

Admit it! We do! Mixed in with all the good, WE DO.


So think about it-- on what basis do you allow people to "earn" your "respect," and didja ever think ya might be off base?

Cuz guess what! It happens all the time! :~)

To ALL of us (self included).

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:16 PM

ken i be the coddled darling now? have i been here long enough yet?

pooh! if i am off base please give me a kick up the backside. i'd rather be real than precious. i tell you, some days it takes hard work to put myself in my place.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:21 PM

...i tell you, some days it takes hard work to put myself in my place. ...

What a great line! :~)

But Tam, my dear friend, you were MY "coddled darling" the day you showed up. I can only speak for myself-- so I would say that if I catch you putting yourself in your place.... I may take up a whiskery crowbar and pry yuu right out of it!

:~)

And kindly knock off that little "i", too! :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:23 PM

People are mixed blessings....as the old Quaker said: "Everyone's crazy but me and Thee, and sometimes I think THOU art a little queer."

How to "earn"? I look for those who CAN step out of their eccentric pose and be dead serious when necessary. I know a few of those.

I can affirm though, that even semi-'protected' ones do not get unlimited freedom. There are lines, even if the lines look squiggly and gray at times.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:29 PM

...There are lines, even if the lines look squiggly and gray at times....

Good! Oughtta be that way!

How to "earn" is, I think, the problem. I do not believe people earn that stuff. I believe it is either freely given to all, or it's bullshit, whether the "giver' thinks it is, or not. I think the minute we make it conditional we are being less than our OWN best selves.

Of course I know that people do, unconsciously, set standards. We're outnumbered-- we have to choose to whom we allocate time. But when we do it awarely, coldly, deliberately-- that is BS, usually from unhealed hurts we have chosen NOT to heal. At least that is what I always find if I get a chance to look a little deeper.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:50 PM

Is this a read-between-the-lines comment on some stuff that is happening in a thread I haven't read?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 01:57 PM

Nope. It's an observation on something from ten years at Mudcat (as stated, because What You See Is What You Get).

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 02:00 PM

And as I am stepping out, I'll add now that it's not a sideways slant on the old Mudcat Clique threads, either, but a different phenomenon about caretaking and enabling of various sorts (not "just" alcoholic enabling).

It's a NEW TOPIC.

But I am sure people have old sore toes on which they stand as they view it. That's part of the nature of human beans, too.

McGrath, try looking at the OP again and comment from the questions it poses?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Amos
Date: 10 May 10 - 02:28 PM

I came here as a curious newby more than ten years ago, although I find that hard to believe. I found friendship, intelligence, a kind of dialogue that was nourishing and humorous, and felt right at home after a while. My observation is that, as in all groups, there is a core cluster of communication styles which characterizes the strongest voices in the group--the flippancy of Spaw, the infinite tolerance and helpfulness of Rick Fielding, Kendall's wit, Mick's breadth, the humor of BSeed and Swanno, the endless whacky intelligence of the MOAB crowd. Humor, intelligence, a little humility for flavor... Back then, too there were terrifically fun Song Challenges and fiction threads which I found I could fit into pretty well.

I have never felt like I was a member of "the Core", but I think that is a moving target based on the individual's before-and-after perceptions. ANyone who builds a lot of friendships through the communication of posts, messages and visits among Catters takes on the color of "old-timer" or whatever the notion is. That's the way reality is built, after all.

I dunno about treating anyone as dependent children. Even Barky has taken on her own standing as an young adult in my mind. One aspect of this that might have some bearing is the way-out crowd, people who are far removed from the core cluster of communication styles, either excessively narcissistic, aggressive, paranoid, or loudly dominant, folks who take themselves very seriously and say so stridently. Although I have little patience for this kind of extreme I try to be patient with them. And if they are willing to hold their position and keep on communicating they even take on the color (in my view) of "loyal opposition" voices, welcomed as outer-edge peers, more or less, after some sort of baptism by fire. I don't think of them in anyway as dependent, though. A little juvenile, maybe. I think they know who they are.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 May 10 - 02:43 PM

What a load of navel gazing shite!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 10 May 10 - 02:48 PM

ahh whiskers...

The little "i" is not me being precious. It is me being half lazy and half protective of arthritic hands. The little fingers don't like reaching for the shift keys.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 10 - 03:02 PM

there has always been at least one favored darling (usually for good reason) for whom people cut lots and lots and LOTS of slack

Can't say I've ever noticed that happening. Sometimes we seem to get someone who seems to get widely identified as being a bit of a pain.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 May 10 - 04:02 PM

Looks like some code talking here, to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 May 10 - 04:15 PM

Not a problem Maggie, just set your Inner Circle Mudcat Decoder Ring to B-12 and then you'll see that...................hmmmm....................................just a sec here...................maybe C-7.........................no.....try E-31..............................................hmmmmmmm.......................nope.......................Okay Maggie forget what I said. This does seem to be code but its not an Official Mudcat Inner Circle Code.........Beats the shit outta' me what she's on about.........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 10 May 10 - 04:21 PM

...didja ever think you might be off base....hhhmmm now there's a thought for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 May 10 - 04:22 PM

Heh! ;-) I've been thinking about this very issue for at least the last 10 years, Susan. And sometimes I've commented on it too. But I've long since passed the point where I think much of anything can be done about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: gnu
Date: 10 May 10 - 04:49 PM

I think the "cycle" will cycle and the cyclists will peddle their wares and ways to few.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:04 PM

the cyclists will peddle their wares -

like this...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Sorcha
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:07 PM

I will NOT speak the name of the most recent 'protected Catter' but I can garundamntee it wasn't ME!

I got in trouble for even saying the Name and so did a LOT of other people.

That person isn't currently posting here, but I'm not at all sure that is what Whiz means....

I'm with SRS...I think it's code speak. In Navaho/Dineh maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Emma B
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:10 PM

I think we might need one of these :)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:19 PM

Whether it's code-speak of thinly-veiled import or just an idle exploration I know not. I must say it doesn't ring true to my mind. "Protected"? I don't even know what it means.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Sorcha
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:21 PM

Ebbie, to MY mind it means a person can post anything they please including calling people names, foul language, lies, insinutions, just whatever.

Several do come to mind, but I'm really wondering what Susan actually meant here.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:26 PM

Let the mystery be? :)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:29 PM

It's probably about religion or something

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:30 PM

What's all this about? Seems to me the Mudcat is a pretty level playing field.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Sorcha
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:31 PM

LOL, Richard may be right.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: gnu
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:33 PM

The thought plickens.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: gnu
Date: 10 May 10 - 05:49 PM

It is level, McGrath, until someone tries to tilt it.

There have only been a few peeps banned from this forum. For good cause, and it was after repeated attempts by management and sundry to try to get them to be civil.

There have been others that were not banned after they ceased transgressions.

Sorcha... "... a person can post anything they please including calling people names, foul language, lies, insinutions, just whatever."

Seems that it can happen, as I have seen it done over the years. But, for the most part, when such transgressions were fought against by "sundry", the transgressions subsided.

Fortunately, Max is tolerant and allows Mudcatters to clean up their own litter box... unless it gets silly, abusive or underhanded.

I hope that doesn't happen again.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 May 10 - 06:06 PM

I 'kinda' get it. Some folks seems to live their personal lives 'online', whether Mudcat, Facebook or Twitter...whatever.. and it's not always easy to tell how much attention from others is really needed, or whether becoming an 'icon' gets them extra coddling...even when there's "good reason" (as noted in the OP) for the original concern.

And....face it..some folks are more empathetic than others, and really LIKE following travails and offering support and doing various vicarious interacting...and here, even folks we have never met seem like old friends after 5-8-10-14 years.

This is a really hard thing to discuss, as so much of it is subjective impressions of what is 'excessive'.

I'd guess that WYSI wishes there were a better way to say it, or wishes she hadn't bothered, 'cause there's no way to explain easily without naming names, and then you get ruffled feathers and upsets.

   ...*slinking back into a corner, hoping I didn't make the confusion worse*

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Rowan
Date: 10 May 10 - 06:27 PM

Perhaps I've lived a sheltered life in a place far away from civil strife and the corridors of power but I've always tried to take people as I see them and try to ascribe positive intent to their efforts until it's clear (to me) the what's going wrong is not nonfeasance nor misfeasance but is clearly malfeasance.

It's hard enough to distinguish these in my own culture, in which I think I have broad understanding, but it becomes a real adventure when dipping the toes into others' cultures, especially when they appear to speak (or, in Mudcat's case, write) the same language.

There are some I'm a bit wary of, but that might be because I don't really understand; they're not going to put me off though. Some of what I saw a few years ago had me scratching my head for a while and I came to the conclusion that judicious moderation could lower the temperature to a more comfortable level for almost all concerned. Civilisation; what a wonderful concept!

Vive la difference!

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:07 PM

Certainly not me!!!!
Not because I'm incorrect, but mostly because of, "Beauty..as well as ugly, is in the eye of the beholder"!!

I'm the person everyone loves to hate..because they have no sense of humor...or because they've been stuck in folk songs for too long!

Besides, I make too much sense, to those who are indoctrinated!..and as the old saying goes, "Neither the sun, nor reality can be looked at for too long."

Wink!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Gurney
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:30 PM

Strong, silent type, eh Dave.

It may be 'Not Mocking the Afflicted.' If someone has asked for help, or prayers, or has an obvious difficulty with dyslexia or something like that, then reasonable and sober people wouldn't attack them, online or in person.
coming the raw prawn, as they say in Oz, is different.

Subject: a non-post slanted any way anyone wishes
From: wysiwyg
Date: 10 May 10 - 07:34 PM

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Nick E
Date: 10 May 10 - 08:03 PM

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 May 10 - 12:45 AM

HEY!!! WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!! Whaddya think this is? Hansard?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Tangledwood
Date: 11 May 10 - 05:01 AM

So think about it-- on what basis do you allow people to "earn" your "respect," and didja ever think ya might be off base?

Everybody has my respect initially. Some loose it or, if you like, "earn" my lack of respect. The criteria for loosing respect is their continuing display of lack of respect for others.
Off base? I don't think so as it's not based on a single occurence.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 May 10 - 05:27 AM

I 'kinda' get it. Some folks seems to live their personal lives 'online', whether Mudcat, Facebook or Twitter...whatever.. and it's not always easy to tell how much attention from others is really needed, or whether becoming an 'icon' gets them extra coddling...even when there's "good reason" (as noted in the OP) for the original concern.

Now there you have it Bill. I just don't understand this propensity to bare one's soul on a public forum.
I would no more dream of telling people I don't know, my medical problems, for instance. Yet it happens on here. Likewise any aspect of my personal life, is just that 'PERSONAL'
When it comes to things like, my dog is ill, please pray for him, I start to feel hypoglycemic, and I'm not diabetic.
It appears to me, and I am happy to be contradicted on this, that you folks in the US indulge in this phenomenon, more than we do, in the UK.
Could this be a manifestation of the noted British reserve, or phlegm?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 May 10 - 06:14 AM

I'm not sure if the Enigma machine is the right choce, Emma. Maybe an enima...

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 May 10 - 03:37 AM

You know where you can stick that, Dave :)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 12 May 10 - 10:10 AM

Yes, Bill, some folks ARE more empathetic, but sometimes what is called empathy is really excessive caretaking, and the sequelae show it.

===

I think Tangledwood (sp?) captured much of what I think, BTW, in one of the questions I asked. S/he (sorry) is a nice example of someone I do not know at all simply answering a question that has been posed.

===

Been enjoying some PMs that speak to these thoughts, as well. As often is true at Mudcat-- the threads are only one view of the Mudcat.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: michaelr
Date: 12 May 10 - 11:57 AM

Huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 12 May 10 - 12:03 PM

I don't come 'round here as much as I used to, but even when I was a more constant participant, I never was able to understand many of the personality conflicts that mean so much to some of us.

In other words, I have no idea who might be the member(s) of this "protected class," and normally couldn't care less. However, when a discussion like this appears, I can't help but become curious.

******************

In regard to the proclivity of some folks to "live their life online" and to bare their souls: I have always persued the oppostive strategy. I burrow into the computer and participate in discussion groups & networking sites largely in order to escape the trials and tribulations of my real life. I have my personal problems, but within the context of this group, no one knows about 'em and therefore they don't exist in this virtual reality. That's the way, uh huh, I like it!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Amos
Date: 12 May 10 - 12:39 PM

I too have been enjoying a simply huge number of private PMs which have placed me in the enviable position of being party to all kinds of views and opinions. Aren't I lucky? If you knew what was in them, by George, you'd be lucky too!

On a more serious note: empathy and compulsive sympathy are different critturs, although they are sorta like harmonics.

THat aside, I think the concept of a protected class hereabouts is a granfalloon, beyond just being more interested in people who communicate rather than those who dramatize every wee thought...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:16 PM

Perhaps as McGrath notes, us Yookers have a tendency to be culturally more reserved than Americans and the high degree of pastoral care exhibited in Mudcat, is certainly something that feels thoroughly alien to me for one. I observe it without really knowing what it's all about, and I must confess at times, what I suspect is a kind of culturally ingrained 'emotional prudery'. As someone who would never post anything requesting 'good vibes' for my health or personal life or whatever, I can still however see the value in them for others.

In response to the OP's apparent comment on excessive neediness in some posters? I'd also add that it's often an entirely a reciprocal relationship between the "needy" and the "needed". Some people emotionally need to be needed by the "emotionally needy". But there's a secondary gain embedded in their need to be needed, it gives them self-esteem or a sense of superiority or even power over others. Some even get a weird self-pitying kick out of being a martyr!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:35 PM

Mostly, I earn my own self-respect by staying out of discussions like this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: jacqui.c
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:36 PM

Your second paragraph is so true CS.

I think the fact that quite a number of us know each other in the real world, even though we are normally separated by a lot of miles, makes the 'Cat a great place to keep up with any real problems being experienced in our lives. When Kendall was so ill I found it easier to cut and paste one statement for Mudcat, Facebook and email to let those who were interested know what was happening.

I do believe in the power of positive thought and I know that the various posts on Kendall's threads have helped both of us through some hard times and the same is true for a number of 'Catters who have gone through difficult times over the years. There are the occasional posts in which it is clear that the thought is not for the subject of the thread, but more about the poster but one will find these self absorbed people in all walks of life so we just skip over those posts and go on to those who are genuinely concerned about what is happening.

As always, and unlike what happens in real life, it is quite easy NOT to go into a thread/read a post if the subject matter or the poster gets up your nose.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:48 PM

So think about it-- on what basis do you allow people to "earn" your "respect," and didja ever think ya might be off base?

--

Abuse or non-abuse ..it is that simple. One person here, and I think only one, is so abusive that I will not read his posts. Another is probably not abusive, but unhealthy for me to interact with, and I will not read his either. Almost everyone else I probably more or less respect..they don't have to earn it..I think respect is sort of a default that people can make you change your mind about by their behavior. But really, 2 out of hundreds is not bad. And I of course presume that those two or others will not want to read what I have to say, etc. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 May 10 - 02:01 PM

I wonder where Chongo falls in this particular hierarchy?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: gnu
Date: 12 May 10 - 02:08 PM

I am of two minds on the "health" threads. Any thread that can help, such as was obvious in Kendall's case (among many Mudcatters), I am all for. I viewed Kendall's threads mainly as a way of letting peeps know the latest news but they devleoped into support for Kendall that was clearly evident and appreciated by Kendall and many others. I started mine because I had what I thought were humourous stories (nah, they WERE funny or at least made me feel better to think they were) or when I wanted to glean advice and experience from others or impart same.

However, I recall a few health threads from some years ago that developed into an ongoing blog of long posts about nothing. I might like to know how things are going but I really don't care to sift through posts about what is for supper.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat's Current *Protected Class*?
From: SINSULL
Date: 12 May 10 - 02:10 PM

That is an interesting observation, Crow Sister.

In Maine, it is the norm to offer help and stand back. If it is wanted or needed, you know soon enough. If not, the offer is appreciated but refused. Keep pushing and you will be pushed back. That "martyrdom" you mention is neither appreciated nor accepted. My aunt used to call it Mary Martyr Syndrome - you can actually see the flames licking around their feet.

As you said "there's a secondary gain embedded in their need to be needed, it gives them self-esteem or a sense of superiority or even power over others."

As to the appropriateness of a given "help" thread, I have two observations. First is the obvious - stay out of a thread that you are not interested in. Second (and a read of Kendall's, Tom's, Maeve's, katlaughing's, LilyFestre's, even Brett's Guam thread proves this out) the threads provide communication when there is no other venue.

I relied on posts in both Tom (Curmudgeon's) and Kendall's threads when Linn and Jacqui were too overwhelmed to call or email. We used phone chains and email chains to share info. Some of it was simply to know what was going on but often it was to plan logistics for mail and prescription pick-ups, pet care, meeting places in Boston, etc. The hospitals banned the use of cell phones as did the damn busses and I don't have a Facebook account. Mudcat was it.

Updates provided friends from Alaska to London and in-between with information in a timely convenient fashion.

Maeve's thread was often the only way we could keep in touch when her phone service was out. It still is. Her computer is in the local library; her phone is still not connected.

PMs don't always work if one can log in only as a guest.

I follow Miss Tam's thread for her support and my own. Lily's ongoing cancer saga is the basis for a book - honest, brutal and inspirational.

I don't see any of these people as needing or getting my protection. They are adults perfectly capable of handling their own affairs but asking for emotional support. And there are UKers who ask for support, sympathy, a good vent, sometimes within a thread sometimes in a personalized thread. They can "out" themselves if they choose. LOL

The Power of Positive Thought? I can see BillD cringing. But I know a family in Florida who believe that it was our prayers and good wishes that got their daughter through an impossible brain surgery to walk, talk and improve daily. I am not going to tell them it is BS.

So I guess in summary I would say if you find yourself "protecting" a person who has asked only for emotional support. Back off and re-think why you are doing what you are doing. Is it about them or about you?

Sorry for the ramble.
SINS