In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I thought you said professionals were dupes and we should just be
> >> >> locking
> >> >> them up and throwing away the key. There's that famous Ron
> >> >> inconsistency
> >> >> again. Maybe you should attempt to remember what you say on a subject
> >> >> as
> >> >> a
> >> >> reference for next time.
> >> >
> >> > A misdirection of attention. We were discussing your views Dutch.
> >>
> >> I explained my views. I do not feel compelled to intervene in a
> >> discussion
> >> engaged in voluntarily between two adults. I find it very odd indeed that
> >> you would imply that I should when you advocate letting anorexics who
> >> plead
> >> for help starve to death. I see Rudy's assault on SN's views as a
> >> possible
> >> ray of hope for her. You are free to allow her to wallow, but don't
> >> presume
> >> that the rest of us must do so.
> >
> > Please don't confuse our views. I was addressing your reactions as
> > compared to your stated position. Based on your response here, I should
> > be verbally abusive to any anorexic that I meet as means to "help" them.
>
> Why not? It might help. If it's true that they are simply putting a game on
> then perhaps a little nasty attitude might shame them out of it. If they are
> starving to death it's not going to hurt them any more than they're hurting
> themself already.

Which game are you referring to here? Is the suggestion that an eating
disorder is the game, or that their interactions are a game, or Rudy's
involvement with his posts direct at SN are part of a game?

This however doesn't remove responsibility for you position, or more
correctly to be considered an honest and intellectually honest
individual. If the claim is that vegans are eating disordered, my
question was quite clear: is this how you view those who you have deemed
medically ill should be treated in the community?

> > You seem to suggest above that this is what Rudy is doing for SN.
>
> I find it a reasonable interpretation. Of course she must *take* it that way
> at some point or it won't work.

I think then we now have a solution to eating "disorders". We can now
establish treatment programs where people come in for regular doses of
verbal abuse. I think we should then petition the medical community to
incorporate expressions such as "****hair" and "****wit" into their
bedside manner.

> > My view remains as stated, where some expresses behaviour consistent
> > with a desire to die, I believe that all people should be supported in
> > what they want.
>
> What if they want YOUR money, your life?

That's the beauty of being morally bankrupt, amoral and morally
relativistic. I can support whatever other wants so long as it doesn't
interfere in what I want.

> > If you want me to accept your viewpoint that the anorexic has no ability
> > to control their thoughts, emotions or behaivours then,
> > institutionalized life until they can demonstrate a cure is certainly a
> > reasonable response for a society.
>
> Yes, some sort of facility would be helpful. We could play them tapes of
> Rudy calling them filthy skanks and you calling them self-indulgent whiners.
> That should work up an appetite.

You used these terms. I used the term passive-aggressive which refers to
an inability to manage one's anger. One can coddle the passive
aggressive, or the passive aggressive can choose to learn ways to become
assertive as one possible solution. The passive aggressive (anorexic)
could also be honest. The anorexic does what they do because they want
to and because they like or derive some happiness from their choices.
I've mentioned previously the paradoxical theory of change. Until the
anorexic can be honest with who they are and what they do they seal
their own fate. A consistent and persistent desire to be dishonest about
the fact that they are starving themselves and to die means that are
just dragging the rest of down with them.