On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 10:53:35 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 10:25:56 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 4:57:46 PM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> >> On 2022-11-28 3:41 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >> >> > On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:48:52 PM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> On 2022-11-28 12:43 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> You said that your poem was "largely" autobiographical, and that the
> >> >> >> boys in your household (one assumes you number yourselves among them)
> >> >> >> were subjected to "corporal punishment."
> >> >> >> No, you're trying to put words in my mouth yet again. I said that my
> >> >> >> poem was largely based on my own experiences. I did not say it was
> >> >> >> "autobiographical" at all. It isn't: it's a poem, not a biography.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > What's the difference between "largely autobiographical" and "largely
> >> >> based on my own experiences"?
> >> >> I'll t5y to explain the distinction and the difference, though I doubt
> >> >> that you're capable of understanding it. Still, other readers may be.
> >> >>
> >> >> An "autobiographical" account
> >>
> >> > BAZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
> >>
> >> > I did not ask for you to explain the difference between an "autobiographical" account and an account "largely based on my own experiences."
> >>
> >> > I asked for you to explain the difference between a "largely autobiographical" account and an account "largely based on my own experiences."
> >>
> >> > Those were the words we'd used. Those are the words I want you to explain.
> >>
> >>
> >> > < irrelevant "explanation" snipped >
> >>
> >> >> > Answer: There is no difference. You're nitpicking again, in an
> >> >> attempt to avoid the issue. IOW: Dance goes into his dance.
> >> >> As I said, I don't think you're capable of understanding the distinction
> >> >> between history or creative literature, or the difference.
> >>
> >> > BAZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
> >>
> >> > That was not my question, George. Please answer the questions I've asked -- not the made up "questions" you'd prefer.
> >>
> >> >> >>> If the boy lying in bed with his pajama pants pulled down wasn't you,
> >> >> >> just say so and be done with it.
> >> >> >> You're too much. For a week you've been backing up the Chimp's troll
> >> >> >> about my mental health (pure IKYABWAI) with this so-called true account
> >> >> >> of my childhood you found -- which turned out to be no such thing, but a
> >> >> >> stanza from one of my poems. Rather than just drop it, you're now trying
> >> >> >> to get me to give you that true accound you don't have.
> >>
> >> > Wrong. I'm asking you to confirm or deny the bare-assed incident(s).
> >>
> >> > If you poem is "largely based on (your) on my own experiences," the greater portion of if must be autobiographical.
> >>
> >> > If you say that the kid with his pajama pants down was based on some other kid you knew, I won't challenge it.
> >>
> >> > But you have to say it in order for me to think that it is not one of the autobiographical recollections in your poem.
> >>
> >> >> > AFAICS, the incident is based on your childhood experiences. Again,
> >> >> we have your admission that the poem was "was largely based on my own
> >> >> experiences," coupled with your claim that all of the boys in your
> >> >> household were subjected to "corporal punishment."
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unless you were a girl who underwent a sex-change in adulthood, you
> >> >> were subjected to corporal punishment as a boy.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Of course I can't know whether you've undergone a sex-change
> >> >> operation, and you can argue on the basis of your unknown childhood
> >> >> gender status till you're blue in the face -- but as the sex-change
> >> >> scenario seems extremely unlikely, I'm going to accept the
> >> >> bare-bottomed-boy stanza as "autobiographical."
> >> >> Michael, Michael, Miehael; who are you arguing with? I've already said
> >> >> that I was "subjected to corporal punishment as a boy."
> >>
> >> > I'm aware that you've said it. I'm also aware that you're now attempting to deny it (albeit via inane semantics-driven arguments).
> >>
> >> > Did you father deliver said punishment with a belt?
> >>
> >> > Did he whip you through your pants, or did he have you pull them down?
> >>
> >> > I realize that this is a painful subject for you, but since you've chosen to immortalize it in your poem, you have to face the inevitable questions that arise from it.
> >>
> >> >> That's hardly
> >> >> unique. If you now want to argue that everyone "subjected to corporal
> >> >> punishment as a boy" is paranoiac and has a persecution complex, you go
> >> >> right ahead, but that's not what you have been arguing up to now, and
> >> >> you (should) know it.
> >>
> >> > That is not what I want to argue, nor is it what I have argued.
> >>
> >> > The home situation depicted in your poem went far above the usual levels of punishment/repression/rules/etc.
> >>
> >> > Your "largely" autobiographical speaker was basically kept prisoner as a child laborer inside the house -- gazing longingly out the window watching other children enjoying the freedom to run and play that he would never know.
> >>
> >> >> >> Plus, you're
> >> >> >> pretending that if I give you that, you and the Chimp will never, ever
> >> >> >> try to use it -- we'll all be "done with it."
> >> >> >
> >> >> > If by "the Chimp," you're childishly referring to Jim, you've
> >> >> successfully driven off of AAPC. He'll soon be taking a permanent leave.
> >> >> Are you still feigning ignorance of who "the Chimp" is? No, you're
> >> >> admitting it, but just trying to pretend no one else knew. What a silly
> >> >> boy you are!
> >>
> >> > No, George. I'm refusing to refer to him by your childish names.
> >>
> >> >> > As per myself, when did I ever say or imply that I was never going to
> >> >> "use" it?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > A bare-assed boy dutifully awaiting punishment (a whipping) every
> >> >> night is a key factor in your psychological profile. No self-respecting
> >> >> armchair var. psychologist would dream of discounting it.
> >> >> But a psychiatrist of any kind, whose primary interest is his patient's
> >> >> history and not in writing creative literature, would use only what his
> >> >> patient told him of that, and would resist the temptation to indulge in
> >> >> creative literature by imaging and adding details to give his patient a
> >> >> more compelling story.
> >>
> >> > Not if his patient told him that his "creative literature" was "largely based on (his) own experiences."
> >>
> >> >> And you, most assuredly, are not doing that.
> >> >> Notice, for example, the one detail you just imagined in the above
> >> >> paragraph that was not in the poem you were trying to use as a true
> >> >> account (since you're incapable of imagining it as anything else).
> >>
> >> > And what "detail" that?
> >>
> >> > My assumption that it was a daily practice? Did you only get whipped on days with an "r" in their name?
> >>
> >> >> >> Not gonna happen, MMPJR.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IOW: My analysis has hit home and you're embarrassed by it.
> >> >> You wouldn't find it a compelling story if it didn't include that you'd
> >> >> embarrassed someone, now, would you?
> >>
> >> > You're the one who posted your childhood recollections here, George. I'm assuming that if you're willing to write about them in a poem, you aren't embarrassed over them.
> >>
> >> >> >>> For the past week or so, you've simply been trolling over my having
> >> >> >> called it "autobiographical" instead of "largely autobiographical" in a
> >> >> >> failed attempt to avoid the issue: whether the passage about the
> >> >> >> bare-bottomed boy was autobiographical.
> >> >> >> You're obviously the boy, and obviously a troll.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Why do you lie so much, MIchael? I've been "trolling" you over your
> >> >> >> having called my mental condition "Paranoia with a resultant persecution
> >> >> >> complex", and misusing a poem of mine for your only evidence. You tried;
> >> >> >> you failed: drop it and move on: try somewhere else when you can find
> >> >> >> something better.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > How am I lying when you admit that "I've been "trolling" you..."
> >> >> (immediately above).
> >> >> It's amazing how you'd interpret "Why do you lie such much, Michael?" as
> >> >> an admission that you've been telling the truth. It does make a better
> >> >> story for you, though, so I'd say that supports my hypothesis.
> >>
> >> > I've never made any such interpretation
> >> The archives show differently, you lying little monkey.
>
> > PP or STFU
> We can post when you were playing armchair psychiatrist earlier today, for starters, you shit spewing little monkey.

You've know idea what George and I are disagreeing over (above), have you, Donkey?