|
In Reply to: Jim-just read this posted by porceleindoll on October 06, 2005 at 19:38:24:
"...there's so much more below the surface of this whole situation than can't be gotten into on the boards, and some things can only be solved through time."
Just remember, it cuts both ways. There is more than meets the eye, whether the idyllic side of a family's whole San Diego world that the rest of us don't belong to (and we can't be charged with that background) or the reality of how the non-members of the SD LaMattery world were treated by one of its members.
I mean how would you react to being asked "how many children you abused in the Family"? This is the way many people were treated, from both generations.
That example is fitting because it contains two key elements that defined some people's feelings toward your uncle.
One: a tendency to be adversarial toward third parties and presume their guilt if they do or say something that would cause him the work of listening. Two: a tendency to do so in total ignorance of the facts of a situation. For example, in the case I refer to, the person was never in TF.
In his own interest, if he wants to accomplish his goals he might at least consider conducting himself in a way that is calculated to bring them about, principles aside.
I do want to say that the more I hear about your uncle here and there in this procees, the more intrigued I am by the things he went through with his kids and his story in general.
I think both "sides" are people and have their stories, and while I may sympathize more or less with any given person either because I have more in common with them or they didn't terrorize me, and nobody can force me to "work" with someone in the dark, I know that Jim is a person too. So are people who are not Jim, though.
I have decided to try to keep my mind open to his story even though I have not seen him do the same to anybody I know.
Cheers PD, I agree with Acheick that you rock.
