To all: I've been trying to shorten my responses, but this is a LONG
e-mail. I left it that way intentionally. A lot of the reasoning in
this e-mail reminds me of the arguments that we've all heard from MLMs
and that I have specifically noticed in Quackstar IBDrones. I felt it
important, in this case, to deal with each point specifically and to
show all my reasoning so it was clear what was going on. While I'm not
trying to attack or "take down" Terra/Dawn, I do feel her reasoning
here is much like "MLM-speak" and hope that some reading this can see
the difference between emotional arguments that distract us or sway us
based on feelings and logical arguments that stick with facts. I hope
focusing on the fallacies here will help not only Terra/Dawn, but will
help others in spotting how MLM drones speak and why their statements
often have nothing to do with fact.
On Tuesday 22 May 2007, Dawn _ wrote:
...
> <<Hal, after reading your reply to my opinion, I can't help but
> feel that your response was more of an attempt to psychoanalyze
> (spelling?) my emotions. I never said that I didn't make it based
> solely on emotional reasons. There were a LOT of emotional reasons
> involved, such as the love that I have for my children and family,
> and wanting to help provide financially for them. So, yes, I agree,
> there are emotions involved. Your reply, however, came across to me
> sounding like a blanket statement, assuming that most MLM'ers have
> some kind of emotional "issue" beyond that of any normal human beings
> with normal human emotions like yourself or me.>>
Actually it was a blanket statement, but not just about MLMs. Most of
our decisions are emotionally based. We rarely buy a car based on pure
logic. We say safety, but a lot of that is related to fear. Or we may
buy based on a reaction to a midlife crisis. Take one of the most
important decisions in our lives: marriage. If this not done based on
emotions, then what is? How about buying a house? One can look at
many houses and find ones that, when all the facts are on paper, are
great, but if they don't "feel" right, we don't buy any of them. How
much of the campaigning for President is based on soundbytes that
attack on an emotional level rather than based on facts? When is the
last time you heard the terror alert level going up? It hasn't, except
once or twice, since the 2004 election, yet during that election,
whenever Kerry's ratings went up, the terror alert level went up. Was
it coincidence or was it because we're more likely to make a decision
out of fear?
We are emotional beings first and logical beings second, but only if
needed. Few people make their decisions on logic.
> > I never said or implied that. I learned, in the years I worked in
> > treatment, though, that when people make a strong or overreactive
> > inference from a statement like that and respond just as strongly,
> > there is something behind it they are not seeing in themselves. That
> > statement much have touched something quite deep in you or you would
> > not have reacted so strongly with loaded words and phrases
> > like "emotional freak", "stalks people", "sad sack", and "emotional
> > pile of dung."
>
> <<I don't think my reply was strong or overreactive. To me, that
> sound like most men that I have known in my life (not making a
> blanket statement; I'm only going on the men in my life like my
> father, husband, school teachers, friends, etc.): that when a woman
> has an opinion, they are "overreacting"
I don't know where this came from, but it sounds like I'm being branded
as making a judgement because I'm a man. I would have responded to you
the same way if you were a woman. Sex had nothing to do with it.
> Let's just agree that men
> and women think very differently, and communicate differently, and
> that you're seeing expressing myself as different from the way you'd
> do it, thereby appearing "overreactive"
Okay, that is partly true, but it has nothing to do with the situation.
I don't see why it even came up. Did you just assume that was why I
made the statements I made? What did I say, anywhere in my replies,
that gave you the least little reason to think I was making a statement
out of gender bias? Even more, what have I said in *any* post I've
ever made to this board that indicates a gender bias? Please, show me
one post that indicates that.
Actually, after having worked for a number of years in treatment
situations while teaching the emotionally disturbed, I have quite a bit
of experience in how people think. Actually, while this is not a
clinical judgement, I am often told I think more like a woman than a
man. A new woman friend of mine was recently commenting that talking
to me was more like talking to a girl friend than a boyfriend because I
actually talk about feelings and am aware of my feelings and thought
processes. On the other hand, a certain amount of that is necessary
for a writer who needs to understand people and their motivations.
> Words like
> "emotional freak", "stalks people", and "emotional pile of dung" are
> just the way I talk.
They are emotional words, used to create strong emotional reactions.
Are you saying you prefer to use loaded words instead of more neutral
ones?
> This is the way I communicate. Just because you
> do not use those words doesn't mean they are "loaded words and
> phrases".
They are. They invoke strong emotional images. Whether you make the
judgement or not, they are loaded words. Using any reference
of "stalking" is a reminder of a serious situation. Stalking is a
serious situation and using such terms invokes images and thoughts of
extreme situations and of fear. It takes a discussion off the grounds
of operating on logic and focuses on the emotional impact of the words
and the emotions they evoke.
> They are just my way of expressing myself. You and I both
> know that women use several thousand more words a day than men do.
> I'm just doing my part to keep up with my gender of the species. ;-)
That is just wrong. First, those words are all close to the normal
vocabulary of many people. Second, you're dealing with a writer who
will soon be running a production company to produce the movies he
writes. Yes, I'm a writer. I came *very* close to writing for TV in
Hollyweird and was told, by someone producing what is now one of TV's
current most highly acclaimed shows, that I could write a story better
than 85% of the writers in Hollyweird. Granted, I've had to spend
several years doing nothing but programming and that means most of my
thoughts and words are more limited and focused now, but I know words.
They are my passion.
Third, first you use your gender as a reason why I am judging you, then
you use it as a shield and say it's okay to use such words because
women have a larger vocabulary than men. (Oh, and I won't even get
into the point that the size of one's vocabulary does not, in any way,
indicate how well one can express their feelings.)
This is just wrong and it brings up other points that I'll mention
later.
>
> I'm not saying you're in need of therapy or that you are any of those
> terms that you've used, but such a strong response to a statement I
> kept in almost clinical neutrality does remind me of the
> statement, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
>
> <<Do you always analyze everything this much?>> :-)
Actually, after having worked in residential treatment, it's 2nd nature.
When a new kid came into my group, I had to be able to watch him and
pick up on his signals pretty quickly. Doing that was necessary for
survival. We (as in the staff) had to be able to pick up on any clues
immediately if the kid was "set off" by anything and we had to react
quickly if there was any indication that we'd have to restrain him.
(And before you start levelling sexist charges again, yes, I worked in
co-ed facilities, but for the moment I'm thinking of the last place I
worked before leaving treatment where I worked with an all male group.)
As staff, we had to be able to size up a situation immediately and pick
up on the undercurrents.
We also had to pick up on clues and understand what was going on. We
learned things like how to watch for an unusually strong reaction to a
simple and mostly neutral statement, since that (almost always) shows
deeper feelings about an issue than what the person claims. For
example, when I make a statement about emotional reactions and only one
person objects, and that person uses emotionally loaded phrases (which
I notice you don't use in this e-mail, or in other previous ones -- are
you sure it's your normal way of talking?), it does make me seriously
question whether that person is overreacting out of fear I might be
right. (Actually, it's a strong indicator that is exactly what's
happening.) When the same person comes back with gender based
arguments when I had said nothing about gender, it pretty much confirms
it.
>
> People don't overreact unless what they're responding to touches them
> more deeply than they want to realize.
>
> Oh, and keep the record straight. I never actually joined an MLM. I
> was in the group for about a week and a half. I was at one meeting
> and sold two plastic cans of metal polish. Why didn't I stay? I liked
> the idea I could make money but as I watched the group, I realized a
> certain type of behavior was expected out of the people involved and
> that I would not be able to keep up such a front for very long
> because it just wasn't me.
>
> <<So your personal experience with MLM's is limited to a week and a
> half? It appears to me that your need to be in this group goes beyond
> that of being an "MLM survivor", but moreso the need to analyze and
> point out people's emotions and behaviors. Just my perception.
> Although, I do enjoy your analyses.>>
Uh, do you pay attention? Do you read other posts or only ones that are
close to you? I had quite serious intentions about a woman I was with
a couple years ago and lost her to Quackstar. I was deeply hurt by
this. Anyone who was in this group about 2 years ago can vouch for
that. I saw a sweet woman go from one personality to another as she
was brainwashed by the AMO she was in.
I know the pain MLMs can cause to people that aren't even in them. I
consider many of them evil. I've said that a number of times and I've
also said I don't even use the word evil to describe Osama bin Laden.
He (bin Laden) is following what he thinks is right by his twisted
religious beliefs. The pins in Quackstar, though, intentionally twist
everything to their own whim. They know they are driving people into
debt, but they continue, yet they find ways to justify the debased and
twisted things they do.
Yes, evil is a loaded word, and notice I generally don't use loaded
words except to drive home a particular point. Still, I feel evil is
an appropriate term for an MLM that does such things.
As for a need to analyze, it's not so much a need, but the result of
needing to be able to do it quickly (almost instantly) as a survival
skill. I use it here because it fits with one of my goals, which is to
focus on logic and reasons for our actions so we can understand why
people get into MLMs and what groups like the AMOs do. If we
understand and can show others, that limits the effects of these
groups.
> That I was or wasn't in does not prove or disprove I was emotionally
> needy. There were emotional reasons to be involved, including
> security, the ability to impress my then fiancee with money, and so
> on. There were also emotional and logical reasons to quit.
>
> Hal
>
> <<What I find most interesting is that you never touched on my
> comment where I compared MLM's to franchises, with respect to
> business owners being able to make their own decisions, but that
> there were guidelines within the franchise agreements that need to be
> followed. Just wondering: what do you think about the thought that
> MLM'ers ARE business owners in the sense that some MLM's can be
> compared to a franchis set-up?>>
Actually, I barely remember reading it, but did and thought it was all
more programmed responses.
Can a franchise be taken from you by the higher ups without any
compensation? Does a franchised business have a separate business
license and operate as a distinct entity? Does your MLM business have
a business license? Does your MLM business exist as a separate entity
and can it be taken from you by the upline without compensation?
Overall, I've found this exchange quite interesting. I comment that
some decisions are based on emotions and you respond emotionally. I
back myself with experience, facts, and logic, and you again respond
emotionally, bringing in topics that have nothing to do with my
statements. I bring this up again because while I was reading your
comments about gender based thinking and why you were not reacting
emotionally, I could not help but to compare them to the lines I heard
from my ex-girlfriend and from others who are in MLMs and the types of
arguments they provide for why it's a good organization.
I make a point and you respond emotionally, with loaded words. In other
words, I bring up a logical point and you use loaded phrases to dismiss
it based on emotional grounds. I respond, using logic and making
points of what is wrong and why those arguments won't stand up and you
respond by bringing in a totally different topic as a reason I'm
wrong -- and you use that argument to try to prove me wrong and to
excuse emotionally loaded words. I can't help now but to notice how
close that is to the reasoning "skills" taught by many MLMs: Don't use
logic, use emotion. If you're losing, bring in a different argument
that is sure to punch buttons or, better yet, change the topic.
Do you see how the reasoning you have used in this exchange is so close
to the reasoning used by the MLMs that get people in to drain their
money?
Without trying to attack, though, such reaction does leave me wondering
if you've learned this type of reasoning from the MLM you're in and if
it really is based on each person making a profit, or if it's based on
emotional manipulation where you are making a profit at the expense of
others downline.
Hal
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment