For somebody who wants nothing to do with me, Riin sure talks about me enough...
On October 18, 2007 1:03:19 AM ADT, Anonymous wrote:
Aw, you got mentioned in the paper -- er, I mean, a blog -- aren't you proud...No; shocked.
If you think that having been in, and then extracted oneself from, an emotionally abusive relationship isn't . . . a big part of someone's life at that time, then you're obviously unclear on the concept. Of COURSE it gets mentioned when one is describing . . . "why I now avoid stuff I used to love."I am perfectly clear on the concept. If you think that Riin was the only one who was "emotionally abused," think again; this sword is double-edged.
A reference indicates the level of trauma she experienced, yet you seem to think it's a sign that she's pining away for you.No. Talking to her friends about it privately would indicate the level of trauma she's experienced; talking about it publicly is a whole other ball o' yarn. Sue, a past commenter here, actually took me to task for discussing things about Riin publicly that I shouldn't have; I've since taken those down when I realized she was right.
"But you mention Riin all the time on your blog," some might say. Quite true but, then again, I have been forthright from the outset that I am trying to get Riin's attention. If I didn't want her attention, I wouldn't be broadcasting my pain across the globe; I'd be talking about it only with my close friends in private.
In my opinion, there are only four possible motivations Riin could possibly have for mentioning her trauma publicly:
- She's playing for sympathy.
- She's trying to get back at me.
- She's trying to get my attention.
- She's "pining away for [me]."
I think it's a combination of options 1-3 in descending order.
First and foremost, I think she's playing for sympathy. Even when we were together, she had a strong tendency to play the victim, even with me. She used to tell me all the ways people had wronged her and how angry and powerless she was to prevent it all. Hell, until recently that was pretty much all she ever did on her blog, for that matter (now pretty much all she talks about is knitting which, I think, is a distinct improvement).
Second, she definitely wants to get back at me; no question of that. She was forced to take down the libelous comment about me (of course, she did it under the guise of "starting over" so she wouldn't have to admit she was wrong) so, the first opportunity she had she put up something she knew would annoy me but that I can't say anything about because, unfortunately, I can't deny the truth in it.
The third ties into the second; she can't get back at me without getting my attention, and I know she knows I'm reading her blog. So I have no doubt that she is playing for my attention, not to get me back, but to twist the proverbial knife.
In fact, not mentioning the relationship at all would be rather unhealthy of her; it would seem to indicate some ongoing state of denial or not having come to grips with the situation.I agree, but none of that changes the fact that she could choose to talk about it privately as opposed to in a public forum; she chooses to speak publicly. There is absolutely no reason to do so outside of the aforementioned four motivations.
I for one am very glad to see that she seems to be moving on in a healthy manner."Healthy?" Hardly. All she ever talks about is how I was "emotionally abusive." Not once has she ever admitted to being at fault herself. "Healthy" would be a balanced admission that we were both at fault. She's always had trouble facing her own faults; this has destroyed every emotionally significant relationship Riin has ever been in:
Bicycling Advocacy and CarFree and do a Wayback Machine search on her former blog; she talks about them all.
The only one of these relationships that didn't technically self destruct is Ken Kifer, and then only because he didn't live long enough to be subjected to Riin's abuses; in that sense, he was the lucky one of the six of us. Still, Riin's abusive side is a fairly creative one; eventually, she found a way to betray even him.
Following his death, she took over care of his Yahoo! Group, the aforementioned Bicycling Advocacy. She told me on countless occasions how important that group was to Ken. So what does she ultimately do with it? She abandons it to me, a man she considers so reprehensible that she can't even bring herself to face me and talk through our issues like adults. She could have turned the group over to the other co-moderator, but she didn't; she just turned her back.
She didn't even have the decency to say goodbye to the members when she left. I mean, if you're just a member of a group, OK you don't owe anyone anything, but when it's your group, you owe it to the members to at least let them know you're leaving and let them know who will be in charge when you're gone; you don't just leave.
On her old blog, Riin once said that she felt like a traitor; she just didn't know to who or what. I think a part of her, deep down, knows the answer to that: Ken Kifer. If Ken's memory meant anything to her at all, she would never have turned her back on a piece of him so callously.
Riin is just as abusive as I am; she just won't admit it to herself. If she doesn't admit it soon so she can do something about it, she probably always will be abusive and her relationships will continue to fail, one by one, leaving a string of shattered hearts.
Right now, what she's doing is avoiding. She wants to pretend she hasn't done anything wrong so she doesn't have to feel guilty. Now, I don't advocate living a life of guilt, as I've seen so many people do, but there are times when one should feel guilty. I do. I feel guilty for everything I've done to hurt Riin. She, on the other hand, apparently feels no remorse whatsoever for the pain she's caused me, or any of the other five she's turned her back on.
I guess she's not ready to face her darker half; until she is, she is not "healthy."
Of course, in my experience, no one truly is...
On October 19, 2007 1:32:12 AM ADT, Anonymous wrote:
Well, I totally agree that it's inappropriate for you to give her personal details without her explicit permission -- such as, oh, for example, a list of people you claim she's hurt (whether you're right or wrong about that is not the issue, but I don't accept it as fact, I accept it as something you claim). Including naming names in some cases! You should be ashamed!Then so should she. I haven't revealed any names she hasn't already; see the above links.
You will note that she did not mention you by name.The trick all libelers use to avoid legal issues; morally, it's still the same.
My whole point in my comment was that she was giving an overview of her life of late and of some major changes and the reasons behind them.All of which she had no reason, aside from the ones I gave earlier, to do in public.
Take note, please, that I never said that you weren't also emotionally abused.Not directly, but you claimed I "wasn't clear on" what it is to be in or get out of an abusive relationship. That implies I haven't had any experience with it; that further implies that I've not been abused.
In fact, I never said that she was.Again, by telling me the "trauma" of the abuse was probably the motivation behind her actions, you implied it very clearly; if she wasn't abused, your argument means nothing.
She is probably NEVER going to be able to leave out that part when describing big changes in her life.Sure she can. Just as she did in her personal info page: "For a long time I rode a bike everywhere, but that really wasn't making me happy anymore." That's all that really needs to be said, unless somebody actually asks why it "doesn't make [her] happy."
[S]he is doing well . . .Too well. She's suffered no consequences for the people she's crushed in her wake; not just me.
My opinion? Sure, but I'm entitled to it.