Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

You folks ought to be ashamed of how you acted. You ought to be wallowing in the shame for your utter lack of support for someone that was physically and vocally being attacked in your midst. Instead, you folks just got real quiet and watched the drama unfold and let it expand until I was forced to push my way out of the house entirely. I found it even harder to deal with that nobody at all even walked outside to see if I was ok. Instead, you all encircled the attacker and instigator and gave her your support. Nobody except my cousin came out after I came back for my jacket and shoes.

I found it apalling that my girlfriend felt she could do me more good by staying inside and defending me against the very fucking people that ought to have been supporting me in my right to say "I don't want to disucuss that at this party." Sure, one or two of you said that you thought she was projecting her own problems onto me, and they didn't think I had done anything wrong. Ok, great. NOW GO TELL HER THAT. Maybe if enough people tell her that what she did was not only illegal assault, but that it was --wrong--, then maybe she will realize that she did something that she shouldn't have, and might consider not inflicting the same treatment on the next poor hapless soul who happens to decide to stay openminded and respectful of the people that they call 'friends'.

So for my part of things, I stand like so: At least I had the human decency to -TALK- to William and hear his side of the story before condemning him to social death. I immediately regretted doing so, because it turned out that I was the one breaking the news of all of it to him. I completely ruined his night.

Now I ask you a question. You, those of you who have labelled William as a 'rapist', 'asshole', etc. You call yourselves adults? You condemn a man for something that the police don't even believe he did. If they did, there would have been charges. Stop and think about this for a minute. It's not as if he's a hard man to track down. Heck, I'll give you his phone number if you actually want to stop being a close-minded child and talk to him. I'm not saying that she is lying. I'm not saying that he didn't do it. I'm saying that I'm not going to take a side between two people I know, both of whom I considered friends before this. I'm pointing out the fact that none of you even gave him the benefit of a doubt. You just jumped on what she said, and ran with it. Every. single. last. one. of. you.

You should be ashamed.


( 35 comments — Leave a comment )
Mar. 14th, 2005 02:16 pm (UTC)
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:37 am (UTC)

Thank you. It's always odd to see comfort coming from some corners where I really wouldn't have expected it. Thank you.

Mar. 14th, 2005 03:05 pm (UTC)

Not running out after you was a combined decision of damage control and thinking that you could use a moment alone first. When I saw Ben go out after you when you stopped in for your coat, I opted for damage control for a bit, then going out to see you. Would have gone out if he hadn't. Wouldn't let you sit with that alone for any longer than that. Was glad to see that someone else was looking out for you.
Mar. 14th, 2005 03:14 pm (UTC)
I miss talking to you! IM me when you get a chance.
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:37 am (UTC)
Re: *hug*
*hugs* Okee!

Mar. 14th, 2005 03:36 pm (UTC)
although i'm not letting your friendship with william color my opinion of you, and i never would, my immediate reaction for being told i ought to be ashamed of myself for believing my friend is a big "fuck you."
you don't get to tell me to be ashamed of myself for that. and if you ever try to my face, our friendship will be over. that's not a threat so much as a protection of who i am, my own experiences in this life with abusive men, and the fact that i care about jill and where she is coming from.
it is true, i was not and am not and will never be friends with william and so i can honestly say i don't give a damn about him. so i'm not going to call him and ask. if you think that gives you some kind of moral high ground, so be it. we don't ever have to talk about it again, and in fact i would prefer not to, because i do value your friendship.
i just have to tell you how this post made me feel.
Mar. 14th, 2005 06:23 pm (UTC)
I think he was mostly talking about the people at the party last night where a minor a-bomb went off. I don't think you were on that list, honey. I can understand the reaction though.
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:24 am (UTC)
I actually wasn't saying that you should be ashamed for believing your friend. You should be proud of that.

I was saying that the people at the party ought to be ashamed for their abyssmal reaction to the sudden influx of hostility that got slapped on me.

Mar. 14th, 2005 03:51 pm (UTC)
woah. O_o woah. i have NO idea what is going on-but i hope everyone is ok....i've never even heard of these accusations toward william. sounds like everyone needs to back off everyone. gah. drama.....argh. sorry. if you need to talk, just let me know.
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:35 am (UTC)
*hugs* Thank you. I might take you up on that. Glad to see that you're feeling better too.

Mar. 14th, 2005 04:06 pm (UTC)
Nobody except my cousin came out after I came back for my jacket and shoes.

Am I nobody? I came out after trying to calm her down, but didn't get very far with you and felt pretty helpless. I'm sorry that this shit has hit the fan in such a public and traumatizing manner. This whole thing is really really triggering for me and difficult for me to deal with so I'm sorry if I haven't been as supportive as I could, but I feel like I'm in a very awkward position. I wish *none* of "this" (going back six months) had ever happened, but I now have to deal with the problems as they are and it's tricky, to put it mildly.

I have not spoken with William to get his point of view because I believe her. I was with her on the phone a lot while she was dealing with this and being an abuse survivor myself, although nothing as life threatening as her experience, I believe her. Ultimately it is her word against his, but there's also police reports which back up her story. I saw the marks on her body. You are a friend of William's and I get it that you wanted his point of view before you made up your mind. I respect that, but I don't agree with your conclusions.

You condemn a man for something that the police don't even believe he did. If they did, there would have been charges.

IIRC, with rape cases, the police won't press charges unless the victim presses charges. If the victim doesn't press, they drop it. They figure they have bigger and better things to do. IMO, if the victim knows the offender, frankly they'd rather not get involved. She hasn't pressed charges yet, but it looks like she's building up the courage to do so.

I understand you're angry, hurt and pissed off. You have every right to be. But, I don't like being preached to. You're no better, nor worse than I. We are all just human.

::hugs:: all around

This whole situation is awful, just awful.
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:26 am (UTC)
*hugs* No, you are not nobody. Far from it.

Mar. 14th, 2005 05:07 pm (UTC)
On all sides, perceptions of other people's actions are not truth. They are perceptions. The core of the original incident should stay between the two people involved and should have been discussed between those two people. That never happened. The reactions displayed are normal in times of trauma.


1. When you left, ppl who didn't come talk to you were not defending you.
2. Either side is right or wrong in their actions.
3. Everyone encircled the girl who was trying to talk to you.
4. I should feel ashamed for my actions.


1. I did tell her that you were trying to be fair to both sides and that this must also be incredibly hard for you.
2. I do call myself an adult even if I stayed in the apartment.
3. I also consider you my friend even though I didn't go outside with you.
4. Your wonderful, amazing, beautiful girlfriend is correct: damage control is paramount over choosing sides in diffusing situations to avoid further escalation.
5. I do not feel ashamed for my actions.
6. I did not 100% support any side. Mostly, it's not my issue but I don't like to see all of my friends feeling any kind of pain to this degree.
7. I hope we can all move forward as friends into better directions and support that we're all human and we all have issues to deal with at times.
8. I hugged you before you left because I also know this is hard for you and unfair to you since it's not your issue. And it's hard for her.
9. I don't have a friendship with William not because of the events that I'm hearing about but because I didn't really have one with him before or during or after. I am also not judging him as well.
10. I did not talk to William about his side because I don't see it as my issue. I do know that I have a friend who is deeply hurt, and I want to help her regardless of what happened.
11. If you remap everyone's coordinates, you'll find that's not true. And it also doesn't mean that people automatically were against you. I personally think you did the right thing by walking out if you couldn't talk to her.
12. I talked with your girlfriend when things were going down. I could tell that this was not only hard for her to try to handle but also that she didn't want to further escalate it. And that she cares a lot about you. She probably wanted to give you space and to try to defend/support you in the way that made sense for her at the time. I don't disagree with her actions either. I'm not sure what I would have done if I were in her shoes. It all happened very fast.


Mar. 14th, 2005 06:28 pm (UTC)
well said. You rock. :) No worries about him with me- I think that's okay. I didn't get the imprsseion that he was mad at me for staying, so much as that the situation was such with everyone that I thought I should stay for damage control.
Mar. 14th, 2005 06:34 pm (UTC)

I think it's hard b/c no matter what anyone would have done that night, someone would have both interpreted and misinterpreted those actions. And I think when it's good friends involved, the deer stuck in headlights and frozen feet seemed (to me) to be the immediate response.

I don't remember everything I said, but I was thinking about both people involved and how I like both and to me both have good qualities. And I think the situation is hard. Lots of rambly thoughts...
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:34 am (UTC)
:) *hugs* Thank you.

Mar. 15th, 2005 04:33 am (UTC)
Nope. Not mad at you at all.

For that matter, not really mad at anyone except Jill. Just very disappointed and hurt by the 'group think' that happened.

Mar. 14th, 2005 05:25 pm (UTC)
to stay w/your boyfriend or not to stay...hmm...that's sometimes hard. i dont know what all she did, but dont be tooooo hard on her for that, sometimes its hard to know if someone wants you to go w/them to comfort them or if theyll push you away & just want to be alone. i still dont always know which my bf wants.

and as a woman, who's been an "abuse surviver" of various sorts, i still think its good of you to be open minded toward two ppl you know. if someone is enlisting your aid & support & youre friends w/both, well, youd have to know both sides in order to just say you wont be the other's friend anymore. or stay out of it. i dont see how you could take one person's side & still remain the friend of the other in something that serious.

now, i know that girls sometimes lie, & so do men, & it's hard to know who's telling the truth, who wants attn, what really happened, so on & so forth...the same things you know that make you want to not take sides. & youre right. unless someone confesses to doing wrong, you are right. so just remember that in groups of ppl, there will always be those that want to create or be a part of drama bc their normal everyday lives arent exciting & cool enough for them...& you already know what to expect from those kindsa ppl, so dont be surprised at the stupidity of "group think" when you go to your next party.
Mar. 14th, 2005 08:00 pm (UTC)
Heheh, that's a good one, "group think." I may have to borrow that, considering I'm having to deal with so many sheep now-a-days.
Mar. 15th, 2005 10:21 am (UTC)
yea, that's the psychological term for what happens to ppl when they get into a group--like nazi's, rioters, & ppl that just go along w/the group. it's very strong & everyone is succeptible at one time or another.

remember that girl who got stabbed to death in the courtyard of her appartment complex a few decades ago [i dont remember her name or the location exactly, but it was in new york, i think in the 80s]? all of her neighbors were watching her, but nobody called the police or tried to help her. everyone just assumed that since there were so many ppl there that somebody else would take responsibility & do something about it. since everyone assumed that, nobody did anything. turns out, when in groups, ppl do bizarre things....
Mar. 15th, 2005 04:32 am (UTC)
What caused this particular conflict was not me taking sides, it was her not letting me stay out of it. It was her saying that I 'had to deal with this' and take a side, and only hers. I can't, and won't do that. I simply want her to leave me out of this for now and stop trying to make me say that she's right and perfect and that William is the devil, because I won't.

I don't particularly care which one of them is lying at this point, I just want her to understand that I am not, and will not, get into the middle of a conflict that is not my own. He understands that and hasn't asked me to take sides. As such, I respect him quite a bit more than her right now, and am still inclined to call him my friend... She crossed a line at the party that is not going to be easily forgiven.

Mar. 15th, 2005 10:18 am (UTC)
well, you know i dont know any of these ppl, so i'm not sure if "she" is [i think it was jill who was having the problem?] or your gf. but either way, i can understand why this would cause problems for you.

of course, again since i dont know any of these ppl, i wont take sides either & i dont really care what happens for them since it doesnt affect me, except by way of you.

i can understand the predicament. friends usually want you to support them & tell them everything's ok & that theyre right, etc etc. in a case where both friends might want the same thing out of you, & there's no way to find the truth except to sit them down together & listen to them both at the same time [and maybe not even then], which is not something that you'll want to do since it's...not likely to help anyone to do that--unless youre a lawyer or a psychologist, which youre not, then all its gonna do is make things worse for all three of you concerning your friendship.

anyway, so i totally get where youre coming from, & i dont think you did anything wrong. you recognized that there's no way you could ethically take sides & still keep both of your friends. if she's worth being your friend still, i'd only recommend explaining that to her that you can only remain friends w/both of them, or neither of them in light of this situation, & let her decide. if she decides that's not good enough for her to remain your friend, then you might not need to do anything else.
Mar. 15th, 2005 11:32 am (UTC)
Yes it is jill's prob not threadwalker.

friends usually want you to support them & tell them everything's ok & that theyre right, etc etc.

Definition: Those aren't friends, those are sheep and emotional drains. A friend is someone who won't just kiss your ass to make you feel better about yourself, that's just pathetic. A friend is someone who will tell you what they really think about you, and your choices, not just what you want to hear. People who only tell you what you want to hear, just want something from you and you can't count on them when the shit hits the fan or you fall. But then, my concept of loyalty is more like taking a bat to some jackasses head for attacking a friend. Rather black or white. The "grey" only exists for those friends who kiss your ass.

Disclaimer: Of course, I maintain a multilevel definition of the word friend and I only maintain such loyalty to those who are in the lower levels (lower because of the deeper connection). So, this doesn't apply to all my friends, only those of a certain rank, which I would normally help clarify by using a descriptor, ie new, old or close.
Mar. 15th, 2005 11:46 am (UTC)
i can understand that. i mostly agree w/you. i think a friend *is* someone who doesnt always tell you just what you want to hear, but will tell you the truth, even if it sometimes hurts. but a friend is going to tell you this in a loving & caring way to help you...not in a way to hurt you. & a friend will know the difference. a friend also has to recognize that when they tell you something that you dont want to hear, they dont always know whats best for you, & they need to let you do your own thing also.

but when i say that a friend usually wants you to support them & tell them that theyre right & everything's ok, that is true. your friends do want your support. youre their friend, you usually do support your friends, & agree w/them, otherwise the friendship probably isnt that deep. that doesnt mean that you always will agree w/them & tell them theyre right, but even if you have to say theyre wrong, they still need comforting in any tramatic event. it causes conflict when you arent able to for some reason.

i dont mean this just in x & j's cases, i mean this w/other friendship scenarios as well.
Mar. 15th, 2005 12:34 pm (UTC)
i dont mean this just in x & j's cases, i mean this w/other friendship scenarios as well.

Agreement: I figured that was a given.

Clarification: I didn't bother to mention the method of delivering the truth to the friend, ie diplomatically, with love, or brutal honesty, ect. I probably should have, included that aspect. However, that can get into a long list of possible methods, each applicable in different situations, ranks of friends and personalities of friends. For me the results would justify the method.

Understanding: Yes, I agree that sometimes friends just need your physical, mental/emotional or spiritual support. However, such signs of weakness generally churn my stomach and I am used to weeding out the weak with regard to friends. There are of course times when I believe it is acceptable, however, I still view it as weakness. Weakness not because you are willing to express/share your feelings, rather weakness in that you allow them to control you and completely cloud your judgment. For kids I consider it acceptable, however, after a certain age such behavior is not. Of course, I believe in supporting my friends, and have infinite patience when they need to rant, I just don't support placating them.

Basically to me, it revolves around the idea that some people like to surround themselves with themselves. But then you never learn anything about yourself if you surround yourself with yourself.
Mar. 16th, 2005 07:06 am (UTC)
i'm not sure i follow you. do you mean that you find someone needing emotional support as weak? or do you mean that someone allows their emotions to control them to the point where they seek emotional support?

to feel emotion & to sometimes become irrational bc of it is to be human. to be human, we are all subject to human weakness. this is why we are human & not vulcan. those of us who are unaccepting of human weakness will always have disdain for the human race, which is to have disdain for ourselves, as we are also human. we cant be all rational all the time.

i like to surround myself w/myself. but that's mostly bc i dont like the group, & what comes w/it. i cmptly ignore group think & only stay w/the closest of friends in small groups. that way nobody is ever afraid to be brutally honest w/me. ...?
Mar. 16th, 2005 09:41 am (UTC)
do you mean that you find someone needing emotional support as weak? or do you mean that someone allows their emotions to control them to the point where they seek emotional support?

Clarification: Basically, I believe it is weak to allow their emotions to control them to the point where they need to seek emotional support. As humans feel it makes sense they would be emotional at times. Further clarifying my point is that to allow the emotion to cloud your judgment so that you can no longer function, resulting in your need to seek support, is weakness.

Question: Is your close group of friends a group of individuals all with their separate interests, philosophical ideas, life paths, ect or are you a group of like minded people who are basically the same, just with superficial differences?

Possible Response: If you are group of individuals, then your statement saying you surround yourself with yourself was inaccurate. Because, you surround yourself with people who will no fall subject to the group think as they make their own decisions instead of following the group think mentality.

Conclusion: As your friends are not afraid to be brutally honest with you, in my opinion they are good friends. However, if you all agree on everything, then you are not growing and they are in fact bad friends by helping you fall to the group think. This latter possibility doesn't seem likely given your stance on the issue. Further clarification from you would likely show this to be true.

Appreciative Statement: It's good to meet someone new who likes to discuss such matters, as I rarely have had friends since high school with inclination or time to do so.
Mar. 16th, 2005 09:52 am (UTC)
Possible Response: If you are group of individuals, then your statement saying you surround yourself with yourself was inaccurate. Because, you surround yourself with people who will no fall subject to the group think as they make their own decisions instead of following the group think mentality.

Late Clarification: Thus, it would preclude the fact that as you do not all agree on things as y'all don't follow group think, that y'all are not like yourself, unless you constantly disagree with yourself and have multiple personalities.
Mar. 16th, 2005 08:42 pm (UTC)
i disagree w/you. i dont believe seeking emotional support is weak. i believe not being able to express your emotions is weak...w/the addition that of course there's a balance. those who never show emotion & those who show too much emotion [who can't get a grip & are always whiney bitches] have some issues to deal w/. of course, some ppl are subdued in how they express emotion, but none at all signals a problem.

to add to this, fair weather friends, those that are only around for you when youre in a good mood, or are only around when theyre in a good mood, are not friends at all. those who can show you all sides of them, including the emotional, i'm upset & i need some help, are those who actually trust you [again, aside from the melodramatic type thats always this way in front of even aquaintances].

you might even think about some of your closest friends & see if any of them have ever come to you for your opinion or to discuss a problem they have. maybe they werent crying & freaking out, but they wouldve been concerned enough about something & valued your input for the situation. ...if none of your friends come to you for advice...then that's something else.

as far as my friends, we are both. we have our own interests & dont always agree on everything. but we're friends, so of course we have a lot of similar interests & things we do agree about. usually, ppl dont just hang out w/someone that they have nothing in common w/, there's usually some kinda initial thing in common that brings them together. but we thrive on our similarities that allow us to respect ea other for our diffs. so we can violently argue about the president &...well, mostly that these days...but not be upset at ea other.

my main requirement for a friend is that they be of the utmost quality of a person. i will not hang around those that are not genuine, are concerned w/an image, or who do things that i find fundamentally wrong & would never do myself [like drive drunk] bc i figure of all the things to be hypocritical about, the things you find ethically wrong for yourself are things you should never accept for someone that you hold to just as high a caliber of as yourself.

so as far as you saying i dont surround myself w/myself, i understand what you mean, but i present it in a diff way. one, i dont spend much time w/anyone but myself & my bf, so yes technically i do only surround myself w/myself. but my friends are all similar to me in their core of being upstanding respectable ppl, & I will only bother to surround myself w/ppl that i find as good as me in that respect.
Mar. 17th, 2005 05:46 am (UTC)
Agreement: I also believe a person who cannot express their emotions is weak, as they lack self knowledge.

Clarification: What I was saying is that, those people who let their emotions cloud their ability to function, ie they're no longer able to think or act coherently, are weak. These people lack self knowledge and self control.

Agreement: Those friends who bring you into their world are good friends.

Amusement: Heheh, yes friends have come to me with problems on many occasions. However, as most of my friends disagree with my methods for resolution they usually only ask me about financial issues now, except a couple who are melodramatic types. The thing is that, when I was in high school we weeded out the weak and we continually tested each other, and taught each other how to be independent and deal with our issues by ourselves.

Understanding: Of course there must be some similar interests and basis for friendship. However, I meant surrounding yourself with cookie cut people that are basically a group of followers, ie sheep, with no real will of their own. Seeing how you describe your friends it seems like you are not surrounding yourself with yourself, which is what I expected. But you also say that at your core you all are similar, which is typical. You are taking what I was saying and applying it to a deeper level than I had stated, namely superficial. Thus, it doesn't apply. However, having friends, who at their core differ from you, teaches you even more.

Agreement: Of course, I also have sets of standards for the different ranks of friends, however, I don't believe in judging them for their choices. I do believe their choices have consequences and sometimes I help them see what those will be if they don't, but generally I prefer to not interfere with their choices. So, if someone does something that I wouldn't do, I do not automatically no longer consider them a friend. Accepting them for who they are is a part of friendship. In my eyes, once you have achieved a certain rank of friendship, you will never slip back to a lower rank no matter what you do. The only time you can loose you rank is if you betray me, but then I no longer consider you a friend and in my eyes you no longer exist.

Amusement: I thought that may have meant you were alone more often now, but I wasn't certain.

Curious: So are you and your bf one and the same? :D
Mar. 17th, 2005 07:13 am (UTC)
i believe it was plato who once hypothesized that there once were super humans w/two heads, four arms & legs, & god thought that they were too powerful, so he split them up. since, everyone has been searching for their "soul mate." although we are two very diff ppl, in this respect, my bf & i are one & the same.

i think, in these respects, we will simply have to agree to disagree. i believe my friendships are static mostly bc i'd never spend time w/someone who doesnt hold the same ethical core values i do, bc i'd never have a friend who'd do something like risk others' lives in a drunk driving accident. if someone drives drunk, they may harm someone. that someone could potentially be me or someone i care about. if a friend of mine drove drunk & injured someone i care about as a result, their negligence & irresponsibility would force me to no longer be their friend. however, if a friend of mine drives drunk, it is more likely that if they injure someone, it'd be someone i dont even know. but to empathize, that person i dont know is still a loved one to someone else. as such, i cannot allow anyone who could be that irresponsible in my life. similar aspects go for those who break the law in negligent uncaring manners, or who would perform other unethical acts.

i'll also have to diagree w/you on what you consider weak & how ppl deal w/their problems. in a relationship, ppl should act as partners, & thus share good & bad situations w/ea other, as their lives are entangled w/ea other. my friendships are also relationships, in a diff respect, but i treat them thusly. i've seen weak & i've seen strong, i know the diff, & i'll never agree w/you on this respect. but we are allowed our diffs.

i also dont believe that someone has to be drastically diff from you to teach you more & help you grow. this is all subjective.
Mar. 17th, 2005 08:50 am (UTC)
*Grin*: I am glad you found your soul mate.

Clarification: I believe that conflict and resolution are one of the best means for growth. Hence, befriending those who differ from you, knowing that you will differ on several levels, will help you both lead to growth as you expose each other to various aspects of life that you would have never sought out before. Thus you test each other, revealing your strengths and weaknesses, learning from them and enhancing your strengths, while removing or overcoming your weaknesses. If you never test yourself and your friends never test yourself, then you will never really be certain of who you are, because you will never really be certain of what you are capable of understanding and achieving.

Desired Understanding: I understand you core ethical values, however, what I was curious about is: are drunk drivers and hypocrites the only people you would exclude? What about those who endanger only themselves, like people who sky dive or swim with sharks? Or what about those with different codes of ethics, like some that are stricter than yours? Basically, what are the limits to your acceptance and how would you determine it if you do not test it?

Agreement: We have different values, as such it makes sense we have different definitions of what makes a friend and what does not, what is strong and what is weak.

Assessment: It appears like you and your friends are share the group spirit, which is much better than the group think, as it is based on a deeper level instead of the physical or mental which are more temporary. Thus, on certain levels you will disagree but on some core principles you will always agree. Like our brief comments on the English language, you have multiple dialects (friends) but all share the same basic principles thus allowing for all to communicate and agree on some level.
Mar. 17th, 2005 09:32 am (UTC)
drunk drivers are the easiest example. everyone knows its wrong & knows why, but some ppl still do it anyway. the lines are sometimes fuzzy bet what is & isnt accaptible levels of intoxication to drive at, which makes this all the more important. hypocricy isnt always bad, like parents' 'do as i say not as i do' to children. i just mean that i cant allow others around me to do unethical things that i wouldnt do, i'm not hypocritical in the sense that i hold everyone to the same values.

as far as those who engage in risk/thrill seeking behavs like sky diving: it's not as big of a deal. you cant say that someone can only harm themselves, bc if anyone cares for them, then when that person is hurt, it hurts also those who care about them. if someone dies skydiving, their family is upset. but it's not the same as engaging in unethical behaviours that dont have a purpose [one cannot argue that unethical drunk driving for thrill seeking purposes is the same as skydiving bc of the ethics/values involved in the possibility of senselessly hurting someone else who didn't ask to be in that situation, but was rather forced into it].

as far as diff codes of ethics--no prob, we all sometimes have diff standards. but my cores are pretty simple & involve not harming others for no reason or by irresponsibility.
Mar. 15th, 2005 12:03 pm (UTC)
It was messy. I posted on it as well, with response from Jill. Hmmm. Crazy people. Damn humans! :) The whole thing is a big tangle.

Mar. 15th, 2005 12:35 pm (UTC)
What fools these mortals be.
( 35 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

November 2008