Jan. 6 committee sends DOJ historic criminal referral of Trump over Capitol riot

[Dutch Uncle]

It was a response to a post I had already responded to. Fuck, man, get a life.

Your anger is interesting because it fits with what you and I have been discussing about your personality.

Do you really think your online personality and real life personality are so different? Sure, you're less inhibited online. You can be more yourself online. In public, especially at work, you have to mind your P's and Q's.

On JPP your true face emerges: the angry one with a chip on your shoulder.

Why don't you have a problem with my analysis of the common JPP Trumper? Elderly, angry Euro-American males, many of whom are in chronic pain?

 

[Diesel]

Your brand of sarcasm is also an effeminate quality since it's passive-aggressive but you are most welcome.

Yawn. More of the same. You can keep calling me effeminate and passive aggressive for the rest of your life. You apparently get off on it, but it doesn't bother me. It is disturbing, though, to see how your mind works. You are truly messed up, but that's pretty typical of American men your age.

 

[Diesel]

You may want to look that up again.

Disagreed. Mostly I've ignored you because you clearly have a chip on your shoulder about your sexuality. That's for you to work out, not me. If you are under 40, that's still in the "normal" category albeit on the high end. Most people start to become comfortable in their own skin by their mid-30s.

Correct. A single post or even a dozen isn't sufficient, but a few hundred at various times of days and in different mental states is a good indicator of a person's base personality. Dumbass, you assess your personality as effeminate based upon your personality, not what your other others call me. If you are as smart as you believe yourself to be, you'll notice that your RW friends also label me all sorts of things that aren't true. I don't call them effeminate. I call them as I see them.

Do you realize that of the two of us, you are the only one who incessantly refers to my sexuality? All you're doing is displaying and reinforcing your own irrational prejudices. You call me effeminate because you think it offends me and because your caveman brain associates non-heterosexuality with effeminate. We're used to people like you. Do whatever you need to do.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Yawn. More of the same....

If you are truly bored, why not simply ignore me like I ignored most of your 10,000+ posts?

 

[Diesel]

Your anger is interesting because it fits with what you and I have been discussing about your personality.

Do you really think your online personality and real life personality are so different? Sure, you're less inhibited online. You can be more yourself online. In public, especially at work, you have to mind your P's and Q's.

On JPP your true face emerges: the angry one with a chip on your shoulder.

Why don't you have a problem with my analysis of the common JPP Trumper? Elderly, angry Euro-American males, many of whom are in chronic pain?

Yeah, this is exactly what I mean. You're the type of man who tells women that they're crazy and that they need to calm down. The type of man who tells a stranger on the internet that he's angry. You're just a douche bag. Plain and simple. I pity old, fat men like you strutting around sports bars like peacocks. Trapped in a teenage mentality. Mansplaining the world through your tiny, inadequate lens.

I have seen you describe Trumpists that way many, many times. You are incredibly repetitive, as we all know. I think it's an overly simplistic view of those people, but it's not entirely wrong. I haven't cared enough to jump into any of those conversations.

 

[Diesel]

If you are truly bored, why not simply ignore me like I ignored most of your 10,000+ posts?

I've ignored you like it was my job. I spent a few months trying to be civil with you, but you're an internet troll, and you can't help but alienate yourself. I've spent a lot of time scrolling past you. I don't even remember what sparked this particular spat, but I clearly felt like putting you in your place. You'll think I was ineffective, but I'm pleased with myself.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Do you realize that of the two of us, you are the only one who incessantly refers to my sexuality? All you're doing is displaying and reinforcing your own irrational prejudices.

You call me effeminate because you think it offends me and because your caveman brain associates non-heterosexuality with effeminate. We're used to people like you. Do whatever you need to do.

That's because I'm curious about the psychology of pansexuals. It's not like you're a dime a dozen. I've met many gays and a few lesbians professionally. Like religion, it was known, but unprofessional to discuss. Every once in a while, outside of work at a bar or restaurant the subject would come up.

I don't know any pansexuals, so you're a new area for me.

Dude, I pointed out your femininity because that's what I saw. Why are you offended by it? Why not embrace it as part of who you are? Why do you persist in playing both the rough, tough John Wayne ideal of a man, then flip-flop and brag about being a pansexual who attacks other men for not being gay? Embrace your individuality instead of constantly defending it with your chip attitude.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ss/202109/the-yin-and-yang-sexual-mindfulness
The Yin and Yang of Sexual Mindfulness
How being gentle and fierce in a relationship can benefit intimacy.

Common sense and research tell us it’s time to throw out rigid roles and embrace what we can become. Our culture often encourages certain gender roles. For example, women should be gentle, caring, and accommodating, and men should be bold, fierce, and decisive. However, these strict roles don’t help us meet our relational or sexual needs or reach our individual potential. Perhaps both men and women need to embrace masculine and feminine traits.

Yin and Yang
Much like the balance between male and female traits, the idea of yin and yang refers to duality or that opposites can exist in harmony. In fact, opposites can bolster one another. Dr. Kristin Neff, a researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, talks about the yin and yang of self-compassion. At times, we feel the need to be loving, connected, and tender with ourselves and our partner, which is the yin in us.

However, there are also times when the yang in us will demand that we speak hard truth, stand up for growth, or tap into a feeling of empowerment to address a difficult reality. When we are stuck in viewing ourselves one-dimensionally, either as all yin or all yang, we miss opportunities to show both gentle and fierce compassion.

 

[Diesel]

That's because I'm curious about the psychology of pansexuals. It's not like you're a dime a dozen. I've met many gays and a few lesbians professionally. Like religion, it was known, but unprofessional to discuss. Every once in a while, outside of work at a bar or restaurant the subject would come up.

I don't know any pansexuals, so you're a new area for me.

Dude, I pointed out your femininity because that's what I saw. Why are you offended by it? Why not embrace it as part of who you are? Why do you persist in playing both the rough, tough John Wayne ideal of a man, then flip-flop and brag about being a pansexual who attacks other men for not being gay? Embrace your individuality instead of constantly defending it with your chip attitude.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ss/202109/the-yin-and-yang-sexual-mindfulness
The Yin and Yang of Sexual Mindfulness
How being gentle and fierce in a relationship can benefit intimacy.

Welp, I think that's about enough armchair psychology from the untrained quack on the other side of a computer screen. You're a lost cause. I'm not offended by you calling me effeminate. YOU WANT ME to be offended, and you're frustrated that it didn't work. Believe me: I have been called much worse by far better people than you are. I know exactly who I am, and it's not my problem that you can't wrap your brain around an individual like me. I tried to have reasonable and productive conversations with you. It's literally impossible. So, since it's not going to work out between us, I'll go back to the political discussions in the forum and leave this personal one aside.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I've ignored you like it was my job.

I spent a few months trying to be civil with you, but

you're an internet troll, and you can't help but alienate yourself. I've spent a lot of time scrolling past you. I don't even remember what sparked this particular spat, but

I clearly felt like putting you in your place. You'll think I was ineffective, but I'm pleased with myself.

Really? Interesting.

Disagreed. Your chip on your shoulder makes it impossible for you to be civil to anyone for long. You are constantly on the attack against anyone disagreeing with you. Most just leave. I'm guessing that gives you the false impression of winning something.

I can see why some people believe that. Especially the ones who have their heads up their own asses and I'm impolite enough to point it out publicly. What you call "alienate" I call "being myself". If people can't be themselves on an anonymous, largely unmoderated political forum, then where can they be themselves? Have you ever taken the Myers-Briggs test? What was the result? https://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?173937-How-your-personality-relates-to-others

More like the chip on your shoulder compelled you to attempt to put me in my "place". You're free to do so just like everyone else is free to call you on it.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Welp, I think that's about enough armchair psychology from the untrained quack on the other side of a computer screen. You're a lost cause. I'm not offended by you calling me effeminate. YOU WANT ME to be offended, and you're frustrated that it didn't work.

Believe me: I have been called much worse by far better people than you are.

I know exactly who I am, and it's not my problem that you can't wrap your brain around an individual like me.

I tried to have reasonable and productive conversations with you. It's literally impossible.

So, since it's not going to work out between us, I'll go back to the political discussions in the forum and leave this personal one aside.

Thanks for an example of your armchair psychology.

No doubt. Hence, the chip on your shoulder and your eagerness to put down others from the anonymity of your keyboard.

A slight disagreement; if you were truly comfortable in your own skin, i.e. knowing exactly who you are, then you wouldn't be so angry all the time.

Disagreed on your reasonableness to me and anyone else who disagrees with you. Saying reasonable conversation with me is "literally impossible" is the type of hyperbole an effeminate personality would use. It's obviously both illogical and a lie.

We're not dating, son. You're free to ignore or interact with whomever you choose.

 

[Diesel]

Really? Interesting.

Disagreed. Your chip on your shoulder makes it impossible for you to be civil to anyone for long. You are constantly on the attack against anyone disagreeing with you. Most just leave. I'm guessing that gives you the false impression of winning something.

I can see why some people believe that. Especially the ones who have their heads up their own asses and I'm impolite enough to point it out publicly. What you call "alienate" I call "being myself". If people can't be themselves on an anonymous, largely unmoderated political forum, then where can they be themselves? Have you ever taken the Myers-Briggs test? What was the result? https://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?173937-How-your-personality-relates-to-others

More like the chip on your shoulder compelled you to attempt to put me in my "place". You're free to do so just like everyone else is free to call you on it.

Hahaha, that's not even remotely true. There are a handful of issues that are non-negotiable to me. Everything else is fair game for a disagreement.

Stick to your lane. You are not a spokesperson for "everyone else".

I know my Myers-Briggs, my Predictive Index, my tendency, and my love language.

 

[Diesel]

Thanks for an example of your armchair psychology.

No doubt. Hence, the chip on your shoulder and your eagerness to put down others from the anonymity of your keyboard.

A slight disagreement; if you were truly comfortable in your own skin, i.e. knowing exactly who you are, then you wouldn't be so angry all the time.

Disagreed on your reasonableness to me and anyone else who disagrees with you. Saying reasonable conversation with me is "literally impossible" is the type of hyperbole an effeminate personality would use. It's obviously both illogical and a lie.

We're not dating, son. You're free to ignore or interact with whomever you choose.

Uh huh. Well, Massa Dutch, you just keep pontificating from your 66-year-old tower. I can tell you it has enormous influence over younger generations. We love when you tell us who and what we are. In fact, we knew that old, white men were going to continue to try to define and control us long after we took that control from you. I guess your little attempt at resistance on this obscure website is the best you could do. I won't hold it against you anymore than is necessary.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Yeah, this is exactly what I mean. You're the type of man who tells women that they're crazy and that they need to calm down. The type of man who tells a stranger on the internet that he's angry. You're just a douche bag. Plain and simple. I pity old, fat men like you strutting around sports bars like peacocks. Trapped in a teenage mentality. Mansplaining the world through your tiny, inadequate lens.

I have seen you describe Trumpists that way many, many times. You are incredibly repetitive, as we all know. I think it's an overly simplistic view of those people, but it's not entirely wrong. I haven't cared enough to jump into any of those conversations.

Not only does your armchair psychology need work, but you are doing to me exactly what you claimed I did to you. The difference being that I can quote posts of yours where you go off on people for disagreeing with you yet you won't find a single post of mine being abusive to women simply for being a woman.

That said, thank you for the insights into how your mind works. As you grow older and mature, I'm sure you are smart enough to realize that people are at their most natural when they are very angry. It's a baseline for all their behavior.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So, since it's not going to work out between us, I'll go back to the political discussions in the forum and leave this personal one aside.

Wow. That only lasted 41 minutes.

This was what I was referencing when I posted about how your "chip" compels you to react. Your emotions control your reason, not the other way around.

Hahaha, that's not even remotely true. There are a handful of issues that are non-negotiable to me. Everything else is fair game for a disagreement.

Stick to your lane. You are not a spokesperson for "everyone else".

I know my Myers-Briggs, my Predictive Index, my tendency, and my love language.

Uh huh. Well, Massa Dutch, you just keep pontificating from your 66-year-old tower. I can tell you it has enormous influence over younger generations. We love when you tell us who and what we are. In fact, we knew that old, white men were going to continue to try to define and control us long after we took that control from you. I guess your little attempt at resistance on this obscure website is the best you could do. I won't hold it against you anymore than is necessary.

FWIW, I love it when people use "we" and "us" in their arguments about why I'm wrong about something. You're smarter and better educated than the RW dumbasses who do it so I expect you are better able to guess why you think I find it so interesting.

 

[Diesel]

Not only does your armchair psychology need work, but you are doing to me exactly what you claimed I did to you. The difference being that I can quote posts of yours where you go off on people for disagreeing with you yet you won't find a single post of mine being abusive to women simply for being a woman.

That said, thank you for the insights into how your mind works. As you grow older and mature, I'm sure you are smart enough to realize that people are at their most natural when they are very angry. It's a baseline for all their behavior.

I mean, you can repeat yourself until you're dead. You are attributing "anger" to a situation where none exists. There are plenty of reasons while people like you tell other people how they feel, but none of them are accurate.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I mean, you can repeat yourself until you're dead.

You are attributing "anger" to a situation where none exists.

There are plenty of reasons while people like you tell other people how they feel, but none of them are accurate.

Exactly. Freedom of Speech. God bless America!!!

You and I can agree to disagree on that point.

Please give me a few reasons so you and I can discuss them. I'm truly curious.

 

[Diesel]

Wow. That only lasted 41 minutes.

This was what I was referencing when I posted about how your "chip" compels you to react. Your emotions control your reason, not the other way around.





FWIW, I love it when people use "we" and "us" in their arguments about why I'm wrong about something. You're smarter and better educated than the RW dumbasses who do it so I expect you are better able to guess why you think I find it so interesting.

I'm making a very conscious effort to separate "you" from "us". That's why I used those particular pronouns as I did. For someone who sits in a 10-story high chair and talks down to strangers for a living, you sure have a way of both stating and missing the obvious.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I'm making a very conscious effort to separate "you" from "us".

That's why I used those particular pronouns as I did.

For someone who sits in a 10-story high chair and talks down to strangers for a living, you sure have a way of both stating and missing the obvious.

Good.

Sorry, I do apologize for not keeping up with this year's pronouns. However, "us" and "we" are collective as opposed to personal like "you" or "I". Are you saying pronouns have changed their meaning?

What you consider "talking down" is you responding as a "Child" to a perceived "Parent" in the Transactional Analysis model of people and relationships. I'm talking as an "Adult" and expect others to respond in kind...unless they have "issues", then it becomes a matter of both miscommunication (~90% of all human conflict) and curiosity.

http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/ta.htm

Parent
There are two forms of Parent we can play.

The Nurturing Parent is caring and concerned and often may appear as a mother-figure (though men can play it too). They seek to keep the Child contented, offering a safe haven and unconditional love to calm the Child's troubles.

The Controlling (or Critical) Parent, on the other hand, tries to make the Child do as the parent wants them to do, perhaps transferring values or beliefs or helping the Child to understand and live in society. They may also have negative intent, using the Child as a whipping-boy or worse.

Adult
the Adult in us is the 'grown up' rational person who talks reasonably and assertively, neither trying to control nor reacting aggressively towards others. The Adult is comfortable with themself and is, for many of us, our 'ideal self'.

Child
There are three types of Child we can play.

The Natural Child is largely un-self-aware and is characterized by the non-speech noises they make (yahoo, whee, etc.). They like playing and are open and vulnerable.

The cutely-named Little Professor is the curious and exploring Child who is always trying out new stuff (often much to their Controlling Parent's annoyance). Together with the Natural Child they make up the Free Child.

The Adaptive Child reacts to the world around them, either changing themselves to fit in or rebelling against the forces they feel.

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

No. Terrorists belong in Guantanamo.

Put Trump in Guantanamo! Good idea

 

[Diesel]

Exactly. Freedom of Speech. God bless America!!!

You and I can agree to disagree on that point.

Please give me a few reasons so you and I can discuss them. I'm truly curious.

For example, people who attribute an emotion that isn't in play in order to summarily reject it are not having a good faith discussion.