The other evening I went to an event held to give some visibility to the Glass Lake Studio (Expressive Arts Therapy Program) and to bid farewell to its founder and his wife, who are moving to Canada to join a community led by “guru” John de Ruiter.
According to de Ruiter’s site,
Canadian born John de Ruiter responds to invitations World-wide, addressing audiences from “core splitting honesty” and his unconditional way of absolute surrender and servitude to Truth.
Because I steer clear of anyone who spells Truth with a capital “T” (and run fast in the other direction from concepts like “surrender” and “servitude”), I am always a little taken aback when people who have been among my circle of friends go off to embrace such Truth so blissfully and assuredly. With the de Ruiter Truth, it’s not just the couple to whom I recently wished “safe journey.” Another couple I know — both well-trained psychologists with successful practices — have already moved, at least temporarily, north to de Ruiter’s Canadian enclave.
Without a doubt, truth is very important. Look at the mess the world is in because so many of our leaders have forgotten how to tell it. It’s interesting that de Ruiter’s wife recently left him because he is sleeping with two of his lovely blonde followers. I think that he has some sort of rationalization of the difference between his own “personal truth” (small “t”) and Ultimate Truth (capital “T”).
It all makes me stop to think about how many ways of defining “truth” there are out there. There’s scientific truth, historical truth, personal truth, mythic truth. And then there’s the capital “T” Truth, the idea of which always seems so compelling. It also tends to be the idea behind many of the most gruesome murdering sprees of mankind, from the Crusades to the war on terrorism.
Scientific truths change and evolve as new information is added to the mix. Historical truths often are a combination of actual facts colored by personal truths. It’s all so messy, so chaotic, so lacking in surety — kind of like life. To believe or not to believe. We make our choices and we take our chances.
Personally, my choice for truth usually is to try to match up my personal truths with the kinds of mythic ones that Joseph Campbell so eloquently and artfully described and analyzed in his too-soon-forgotten series of PBS programs and books. I guess it’s my way of integrating the big picture with the little picture, the personal with the planetary. Because, for me, it’s the only way for me to arrive at truths that I can count on, that provides the loom on which I can weave that chaos of science and history and personalities into the fabric of a life that I can wrap around myself for safety and sustenance.
All the rest is someone else’s truth. Someone else’s Truth.
That’s why the current American intrusion into the Middle East is so confusing to most people. (Makes you want to run way and hide in the bosom of de Ruiter Truth, doesn’t it?)
To help you get at some of the truths about Middle East Truths, you might want to link over to Bob Harris’ post on here , which begins:
It may be anything from a play for leverage in Iraq to the opening drumbeat for another war, but the White House, Rumsfeld, and Blair have all gotten on Iran’s case for allegedly harboring Al-Qaeda suspects, which supposedly even led to this week’s increased terror warning.
Iran denies the charge.
Who’s telling the truth? I don’t know. But keep reading.
It’s well-worth reading.
And to get a better fix on the continuing un-truths being thrown at us by the Bushies, check out Peter Beinart’s article in The New Republic Online that spells out “the record over the last eight months.”
Whose truth. Yes, indeed.
My question was an invitation for you to begin to be honest about your position in this discussion.
Have you met John?
What has led you to your position in this matter?
What I am asking is do you have any actual experience with this man or are you simply making judgements?
Because judgements without real understanding or experience are really just prejudice….
I am genuinely interested in your experience is you want to share what it was or is….
(I have paid off my debt to Oasis this year and bought some new discussions which are good)
Anyway, here are some quotes I looked up which I thought I would share…
We are each burdened with prejudice; against the poor or the rich, the smart or the slow, the gaunt or the obese. It is natural to develop prejudices. It is noble to rise above them.
What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other’s folly – that is the first law of nature. ~Voltaire
Prejudices are the chains forged by ignorance to keep men apart
Everyone is a prisoner of his own experiences. No one can eliminate prejudices – just recognize them. ~Edward Roscoe Murrow, 31 December 1955
I am an invisible man…. I am a man of substance, of flesh and bone, fiber and liquids – and I might even be said to possess a mind. I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me. ~Ralph Ellison, The Invisible Man, 1952
You have yet to reveal anything about yourself. Your personal opinion of another
end part was not supposed to be there…
“My question was an invitation for you to begin to be honest about your position in this discussion.” – Your opening statement is yet another lie Matt, and an evasion.Your question had nothing to do with any perceived honesty issue in me. Your question was specific, it was “What would a genuine prophet do in this world?”. It’s easy to see that you are testing out John’s teachings in neuro linguistic programming. The actual question you originally posited has many answers, but NOWHERE in it is an invitation for me to, as you pedantically put it, “begin to be honest about your position in this discussion.”. You simply couldn’t actually respond to my post and decided to jump tracks. Typical Johnite attempt at avoidance but predictably clumsy and ineffective. My position in this discussion has been clear from the beginning. I am not sure I understand what you have found to be “dishonest” about my position in this matter. Every single thing I have written is not only based on reported facts, and is stated right up front as my own personal opinion based on those reported facts. That’s generally the status quo on forums. You just don’t care for my opinions, and that’s your prerogative, but you are merely deceiving your own self if you think I haven’t been honest about my position. My position is that John de Ruiter is an unethical conman running the oldest scam in the book. I honestly feel that judgement against him, and have not hid the fact that this is my personal opinion/judgement in any way.
Secondly, you ask if I have met John, as if one needs to have met Jeffrey Dahmer to know that one should avoid him. It’s none of your business Matt – but yes, I have. He’s a spaced out self consumed arrogance child – playing with life and others lives like a child with plastic toys – a child without conscience. And his behaviour has the validation of greedy yesmen.Would you warn your child to stay away from the local pedophile who just moved in, simply based on reported facts? Yep. Unless you are an idiot. You might teach him politeness, however, I am quite sure a stern warning to steer clear is what every sane person here would do. You’d especially tell him to steer clear if said pedophile was surrounded by an encouraging bunch of worshippers.
Steer clear of John de Ruiter. That’s my opinion.
Besides Matt, judgements without experience is something we do every moment of every day, simply because one cannot afford to experience everything if one wants to survive. That’s elementary kindergarten first lesson of life Matt. Didn’t you listen to your mom at all when growing up and she told you stuff? She told you about those things to save you misery and permanent injury. Perhaps you are ungrateful, but I am not. I thank others for their warnings, and I warn others that danger may exist. That’s part of life Matt. Unless you are trying to pretend that de Ruiter DIDN’T do the things listed in this entire thread. If so, then by all means, refute them with vigor – you’ll look like a fool seeing as de Ruiter has admitted his actions.
When the cops put out an APB, the other cops don’t say, “well, have you actually mmmmmet and haaaad expeeeerience with this Mr. Al Capone??? No they wouldn’t. They would at the very least, treat Mr. Al Capone with a seriously reasonable amount of caution and suspicion. Especially when the guy himself has such an ego trip with bragging about his betrayal. He still contends that he never left nor betrayed Joyce. She says he did. I agree with her. Why? Because he admits that he did engage in sexual intercourse. He calls that being a faithful husband. Somehow that doesn’t jive with the promise he made to Joyce. Why else? Because I want others to be treated not only as I want to be treated, but also as they would like to be treated as well. Treated with dignity, honesty, loyalty – before it’s too late. Not just after the damage is done
Therein lies the biggest problem with de Ruiter. Here is a man who arrogantly claims that he is TRUTH itself, yet he cannot even take responsibility for his offenses, particularly his infidelity. He still claims that he had sex with the twins, but at the same time claims to have maintained fidelity. That is impossible, and it well illustrates his dangerous moral relativism. Since he has selfish morality, and is willing to make promises that he does not care to keep, one cannot trust him – dare not trust him.
That record is stained, and it wasn’t just stained with deceit towards a perfect stranger with no proven loyalties. No, it was with someone committed to him, who had put in major time – giving in to his outrageous power demands just for love. Someone who trusted him. Someone to whom he SOLD THE IDEA OF TRUST. I can understand his failing as a man. For that, I lump him into the same category as every other jackass cheater, which isn’t exactly gonna land him in jail, but it does invalidate him as a channel to the infinitely divine – in my personal opinion because he willfully hurt someone for a physical pleasure that could, arguably have been his anyways had he perhaps been patient and communicative. He didn’t and couldn’t discipline himself to do that and this too, shows his serious impairment as an ethics/moral leader. Unless you think gurus are above reproach and can rape babies, rob banks, pluck out your eyes, etc. etc. John doesn’t know the way. If he did, he wouldn’t have done what he did. Period. Next Jesus please…
Much of my experience with John and his group has been through and with countless friends. Friends known for years, and witnessed through their changes and their frustrations. Each of them getting sucked in by John and his corporation – selling them the false hope that they will find truth in his presence, duping them into believing that by paying for his material, that in it they can mine some strategy or method for attaining success and happiness. And yes, he DOES advertise that he has the answer of truth.
Over the years, de Ruiterites have brought me their stories, their anger and resentment towards John. I believe in their pain and I know from them and many others that you are dead wrong about John. Shall I dismiss their stories and embrace yours above theirs? Since participating in this thread, I have received hundreds of emails from current and former de Ruiterites, their exes, daughters, sons, husbands, wives. All people that have crossed paths with that moral dimwit and his for profit spritual scam. Will you invalidate and negate their personal testimonials to me? Just to satisfy
In regards to your bill to OASIS…if you had already paid it, then why mention it? More misleading by not telling the whole truth? Seems a de Ruiterite’s grasp of the truth is as common as a dirty penny. Sorry – EX de Ruiterite – no wait, you said you bought more discussions that were good. Are you sure that your entire presence here isn’t simply an overcompensation for a hidden buyer’s remorse? Are you sure you aren’t simply talking up John for the sole purpose of making yourself feel better about the money you’ve frittered away on buddy’s bullshit and just don’t want to admit it because it might make you feel stupid? Lots of people do that every day you know… I just find it a little odd that you claim one thing then another and always contradict yourself about John.
As for revealing something about myself? I love to cook, and have a wonderful singing voice. I enjoy hiking, music, travel, great parties, and engaging conversations. I would brake for Artesians, if I could recognize them, and have an exquisitely large member, over which I have developed a zen mastery which has made my vegan PETA hippy girlfriend absolutely unwilling to leave me despite my penchant for McDonald’s? Oh yeah, and for me, it’s button, THEN zip. Anything else about me that you would like to know Matt? It’s not as if it would be relevant to a discussion of whether or not de Ruiter is a scam or a danger…but if you really want to know… my favorite color is cobalt blue! YAYYY!
Fremenwarrior — It’s obvious that there’s nothing Matt can say that will satisfy you. He has pretty much explained (perhaps not with the language you prefer, but he has taken great pains to explain how he got to where he is) his perspective. Let him go.
And, actually, rather than the superficial details that you have offered about yourself, you could have provided some insight into why you feel the way you do about continuing to attack Matt. It just seems out of proportion to his mild defense of his attraction to that flawed man.
While I agree with your opinion of John DeRuiter, your verbal wrestling with Matt about the issue is way overkill.
Are you a good, compassionate man, Fremenwarrior? Do you war for just cause or just for sport? Some men just like to keep an argument going for the sake of argument. Are you not mature enough to know that it’s futile to argue politics, religion, and the validity of personal feelings? I’ll bet your and Matt’s enneagrams are totally opposite!! You don’t even speak the same language.
Matt’s a big boy who can attempt to defend his position on his own Kalilily. None of this has been “war” as you put it. Merely a thorough dissecting of Matt’s points. If you don’t think that is worthwhile, then shut your blog down. Discussion is often spirited and complex. You may find my style combative, others here have emailed me to thank me for not backing down from this discussion – to thank me for getting it right (as they put it…)
In addition Kalilily, personal details are NOT relevant to this discussion. A person’s arguments are supposed to be weighed on their OWN merit, not any merits perceived through identity. In university, we call that type of fallacy to be “argumentum ad homeneim”. I could be a priest, a politician, a freaky princess, a drug abuser, a stone cold sober mummy Theresa type, and it’s not supposed to matter. What is supposed to matter is a critical assessment of the actual points we each make. That’s how fair minded academics (and even just normal folk) do things… That’s why you got to know my favorite color as opposed to say my choice of religion. It’s irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant are the actual points of argument. Kalilily, admit it, you just don’t like to see two people “fighting”, as you perceive it. Well, too bad. You opened up this forum and now you want us all to not ACTIVELY participate with detailed responses? I guess this is a soap box for you, as opposed to a discussion thread. Welcome to Kalilily de Ruiter’s new franchise operation…
Finally, he hasn’t taken great pains to tell us “where he is”. He has taken great pains to try and convince us that there is something worthwhile in attending John de Ruiter’s meetings. My posts have been directly in opposition to that principle. I feel that JDR is extremely harmful to people so I have responded directly to each and every single selling point that Matt has offerred. If you can find fault with any of those points, please kindly illustrate that instead of just telling me that I like to go to “war” as you put it. Your invalidation of my well thought out arguments, simply because you cant stand to see Matt’s half baked blabber shown for what it really is should give you pause to consider your own role in this debate. Running into a house to yell fire and then leaving is irresponsible. Kalilily, you even took the opportunity to use this de Ruiter posting at the top to Bush-bash, which normally is a worthwhile endeavour, but hardly relevant to the JDR thread. Should we consider you to be an immature warlike crone simply because you appear to be picking fights? Or should we simply use our creative analytical minds to attempt to understand your point and recognize that discussions sometimes NEED to be heated and thorough? It’s not like we are discussing wallpaper.
My dear sir: This is a personal weblog, not a forum, and if you don’t know the difference, I suggest that you do a little googling. You have made your point, over and over again, about DeRuiter. If you feel you have a mission to mentor Matt and refine his blather, then please do so through emails to him directly and don’t clutter up my server space with your bickering. I reserve the right to delete comments to my weblog. As a blogger, I also can post whatever I please on my blog, including beginning with Bush-bashing and ending with DeRuiter routing. Go and get your own weblog and you can post whatever you please. They are free. Go to http://www.blogger.com and sign up for one and persue your issues there all you want.
It’s my party and I’ll delete if I want to.
And my original post was about the nature of “truth,” not specifically DeRuiter’s. You’re off topic as well as being a bully.
“What is truth?”
The old man turned off the radio
Said, “Where did all of the old songs go
Kids sure play funny music these days
They play it in the strangest ways”
Said, “it looks to me like they’ve all gone wild
It was peaceful back when I was a child”
Well, man, could it be that the girls and boys
Are trying to be heard above your noise?
And the lonely voice of youth cries “What is truth?”
A little boy of three sittin’ on the floor
Looks up and says, “Daddy, what is war?”
“son, that’s when people fight and die”
The little boy of three says “Daddy, why?”
A young man of seventeen in Sunday school
Being taught the golden rule
And by the time another year has gone around
It may be his turn to lay his life down
Can you blame the voice of youth for asking
“What is truth?”
A young man sittin’ on the witness stand
The man with the book says “Raise your hand”
“Repeat after me, I solemnly swear”
The man looked down at his long hair
And although the young man solemnly swore
Nobody seems to hear anymore
And it didn’t really matter if the truth was there
It was the cut of his clothes and the length of his hair
And the lonely voice of youth cries
“What is truth?”
The young girl dancing to the latest beat
Has found new ways to move her feet
The young man speaking in the city square
Is trying to tell somebody that he cares
Yeah, the ones that you’re calling wild
Are going to be the leaders in a little while
This old world’s wakin’ to a new born day
And I solemnly swear that it’ll be their way
You better help the voice of youth find
“What is truth”
The heart of the matter for me in this discussion
is to share. Sometimes when I reach a place where I cannot speak I find there to be those who have gone before me that have said it beautifully already. A so , this song.
I am prepared to stop speaking now…I have said what I needed to say. Yes, I am conflicted but not about what I know to be the goodness of human beings and there gentle, awesome potential to let go of their personal stances and opinions. When there is conflict between two people they must speak to one another. If each is prepared to acknowledge their limitations, growth is possible. At this juncture I say do what you think is best.
Matt, thank for your that song of Cash’s. It pretty much sums up the dilemma with which each individual is faced. Exploring music, art, and literature often opens our minds to help us find our own truths — moreso than being lectured and criticized. Dialogue also helps if it’s a true and honest sharing of personal “truths.”
There’s a book I read more than thirty years ago that was a great help to me, and it might be to you, Matt. It’s called “If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him” by Sheldon Kopp. I think you would appreciate it.
You seem to be a gentle soul, Matt, and I suspect that your biggest challenge is to NOT always look to others to tell you what you should be doing.
I spent many years, on and off, working with a therapist/shaman to uncover my own “truths” and use them to empower myself. I was one of the lucky ones who found a truly moral and gifted healer and teacher. DeRuiter is not such a man, and you seem to be acknowledging that. Sometimes we have to go down the wrong path to find the right one. I wish you well.
But Kalilily, how do you KNOW your Shaman healer is great, and then declare with certainty that John is not? You seem pretty certain. Nice that you feel liberated enough to make statements without backing them up.
Further you even state that Matt “seem to be acknowledging that” (John’s illegitimacy) where I can find zero evidence of that in his comments. In fact it is quite the opposite. Matt has been in here selling quite passionately for de Ruiter. He was, and is still a paying customer of John’s scams. You have absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that Matt doesn’t buy into John’s schtick, and further Kalilily, you have double standards. Your own quack Shaman therapist is seemingly above reproach, but John gets your certain disapproval sight unseen. That’s more than just a little pathetic.
I, personally, think you suffer from “buyer’s remorse” just as much as Matt. I’m not doubting that you truly believe your Shaman helped you, but you are projecting that personal success onto your appraisal of John – someone you likely haven’t even gone to see. You think I am a bully – well others here have written to tell me that I am the voice of reason, that I am ex-JDR’s only real voice here, that I am right and not to back down… I ain’t a bully, I’m an intellectual. Maybe you just don’t like my bluntness, but if you can find an actual insult in this thread, please post it. I can’t find a single nasty thing in this thread – just a lot of me keeping people like Matt (and now you) a little more honest, and a lot less airy-fairy.
So go ahead, hit that delete button if you are a coward – save us the controversy. Or start engaging both a critical mind and a thick skin and jump into the debate.
Again, instead of calling me a bully, can you actually point out anything that I have said that is actually wrong? Doubt you can.
Finally, Matt, you are posting lyrics trying to act as if the song somehow relates to you in this discussion. It doesn’t. In fact, it more relates to me and my position. When you demand to know personal details like my identity, you are the like the courtroom refusing to hear the longhaired person swear – merely because of your own inability to separate discussion of facts from dis-establishment of credibility by looking for something to trash in personality. Thanks for putting it up there though. It reminds us not to fall for it.
I came across that book recently on the internet…have not read it but thankyou for the recommendation.
They say that truth springs from argument amongst friends…
The sign of a great human being, for me, is one who can acknowledge the truth of another and kindly hold to that knowing despite the individuals seeming resistance to that in themselves.
Have you heard that Johnny Cash killed the Buddha?
I have a song for you! ( I think Sting wrote it but Cash sings it like he knows it)
Its called “I Hung My Head”
I agree with your opinion of deRuiter, Mr. Warrior. I admit it’s an opinion not formed from direct experience or evidence.
As far as you comments here, remember that how you say something is usually as important in getting your message across as WHAT you say. If you were a reader of my weblog, you would know that I have a pretty thick skin and I’m quite intelligent.
You wouldn’t happen to be a lawyer, would you? You’re certainly not a teacher!! Perhaps you should consider some therapy for your obvious prejudice against spiritual seekers. Johnny Cash certainly was one of those, and like many, he chose the wrong path for him before he found the right one.
Personally, I’m an agnostic, and, again, if you read through my weblog, you would understand where I’m coming from in relation to shamanism and therapy. My life is a public blogrecord, and that record attests to why I have the opinions that I do. Again, they are opinions as far as the rest of the world is concerned; some are “truths” for me personally. When you have a spare several weeks, read through my writings here at http://www.kalilily.net and read about me at http://www.kalilily.net/about.
I’m not projecting anything onto Matt or trying to convince him of anything. I’m simply establishing some common ground with him. Confrontation works in the court room but not in a classroom, and I consider these conversations a place to learn.
You ARE a lawyer, aren’t you!!!!
From myself, I am copper,
Through you, friend, I am gold;
From myself I am a stone,
But through you I am a gem.
Don’t treat me as a stranger
I am your neighbor.
My house is close to yours.
I may look different, by my heart is good.
My inside is shining even if my sayings are obscure.
There is a Soul inside your Soul.
Search that Soul.
There is a jewel in the mountain of body.
Look for the mine of that jewel.
Oh, Sufi, passing by,
Search inside if you can, not outside.
Oh reason, go away.
There is no wise one here.
Even if you become a small hair.
There is no place for you.
It is morning now.
Whatever candle you
burn Would be shamed in front of sunshine.
Love asked me last night, with pity,
“How could you live without Me?”
“I swear,” I said,
“I am like a fish out of water.”
“It is your fault,” he answered.
“You are the one fleeing from Me.
Last night I asked an old wise man
To tell me all the secrets of the universe.
He murmured slowly in my ear,
“This cannot be told, but only learned.”
I am a soul who has had
A hundred thousand bodies.
But I can’t talk about it.
What can I do?
I am tongue-tied.
I have seen thousands
Of people who were all me.
But from them I haven’t found
Any like me.
At the dawn of Eternal Love
Souls fly out of bodies
And man reaches the stage of perception
Where with every breath
He can see and touch
Without eyes and without hands.
How long am I going to tell
The color and smell of time?
It must be time to see that Beauty.
When I look at Him I see myself,
And when I look at myself, I see Him.
Come again, please, come again,
Whover you are.
Religious, infidel, heretic or pagan.
Even if you promised a hundred times
And a hundred times you broke your promise,
This door is not the door
Of hopelessness and frustration.
This door is open for everybody.
Come, come as you are
You are the water.
We are the plants.
You are the King.
We are the poor.
You are the one who talks.
We are the echoes.
You are the one searching.
Why don’t you come to all of us once?
I see an eye in every fortune,
And a fortune sits in every eye.
Oh, cross-eyed one,
If you see two in one,
I only see one in two.
Matt — I assume you wrote the above poem, since you didn’t indicate otherwise. It reminds me a little of Theodore Roethke’s poetry. Have you read any of his? I’ve already told my daughter I’d like her to read his “Fourth Meditation” from his Meditations of an Old Woman at my cremation party.
Also, I blogged here just now: http://www.kalilily.net/weblog/06/07/10/072557.html
I came across that poem on the internet today. I didnt write it. Its by Rumi. Heres a link with some writings of his… http://www.khamush.com/
I have never read Theodore Roethke until now…I just read some of his poems…thanks….I found these quotes of his…I too recognize the similarity between the two writers…simple…and warm
“A lively understandable spirit Once entertained you. It will come again. Be still. Wait.”
“Love is not love until love’s vulnerable”
I also read your blog post…and your /about…
“It is up to each of us to get to know our shadows and learn how to dance them into a positively channeled personal power. ”
“And everything comes to One, As we dance on, dance on, dance on” Theodore Roethke
Yes, I’ve read some of Rumi before, but I didn’t know the poem you posted. Interesting that you quoted from Roethke’s “The Lost Son.” The person who gave me Roethke’s book of poetry inscribed it with that quote.
Not everyone is comfortable with the metaphoric language of poetry, but I, for one, find it full of wisdom. Good poetry rarely gives you the answers to the questions in your heart; what it does, however, is move you to keep searching. It’s possible that that’s the effect deRuiter’s words have on some people, but I, personally, find, from what I have seen of what he has to say, that his statements are vapidly vague rather than motivatingly metaphoric. It’s like the difference between bad poetry and good poetry. The former, on the surface, sounds deep and meaningful, but when you really examine it, its meaning is either shallow or just plain misleading. Good poetry, as any good art, stands up to close scrutiny and sends you away with strong feelings that slowsly ignite a process of clearer thinking. Of course, all of this is only my opinion — the conclusions I’ve come to from my own experiences. I’ve participated in many Creative Arts Therapy sessions, both as a “student” and as a facilitator. I’ve seen it work with those who have a strong “right brain.”
And yes, I too think that Johnny Cash “killed” the Buddha.
I’m all for diverse forms of therapy, but de Ruiter is hardly an accredited accountable agency that can be held to scrutiny by a board of whatever. The OASIS structure allows him to essentially offer therapy without paperwork, professional conduct rules, ethics guidelines, academic certifications/degrees, etc. Yet people place the same faith and trust in his services – because the marketing portion of his company works hard directly for him, enticing people to place that trust in him as TRUTH ITSELF.
Yes! That’s exactly the point. Many individuals who gravitate toward him are looking for easy answers to tough questions — the kind of questions to which talented and legitimate therapists are trained to help them find answers.
Hence why people like Matt anger me in the extreme for their reckless endangerment of other humans through recommending JDR. Hence why Matt and anyone else like him gets zero quarter from me. We simply cannot allow people like him to keep selling the world on de Ruiter.
I understand that. But what Matt needs is encouragement and support to wean himself from his attachment to JDR and find to a base of support that will be more constructive and conducive to helping him find the self-stability he’s looking for. He’s so attuned to lyrics and poetry that I’ll bet he would both enjoy and profit from seeing a therapist who uses such arts in the therapeutic process. Some of us respond deeply to passion — even the semblance of such. Replacing personal creative passion with the passionate performance artistry of JDR would be a great way for Matt to go.
Freemenwarrior and Kalilily,
There is perhaps no phenomenon which contains so much destructive feeling as “moral indignation,” which permits envy or hate to be acted out under the guise of virtue. Eric Fromm
“There is nothing that simplicity cannot deal with. Simplicity knows its way through. Tender simplicity simply unravels it in a way that is the healing of your self.”
“You are not supposed to be something higher, you are invited to adore something higher. The lower is then not left behind, it is infused, awakened and transformed.”
“The most exquisite joy is when in absolute stillness, you are being to the core, true. Knowing the absolute and being what you know, without compromise… that is your true nature; it is your only home.”
“Nothing works without honesty and surrender. Honesty opens a true space, surrender secures that space… now true life actually begins.”
Here again we see the typical JDR mentality in Matt’s responses. It seems virtually impossible for Matt to respond in his own words. It seems that ninety percent of Matt’s postings are vague quotes cut and pasted from the net… I can see why de Ruiter holds so much power over Matt.
It’s easy to pick up a wee snippet of someone else’s words to try and buttress your own when you lack the necessary foundation to well defend your position. But since you want to quote Fromm, I’m game – personally I figure you aint got the slightest idea of what Fromm was really into because he was about as secular and scientific as it gets. He wouldn’t have given dildos like JDR the time of day (except maybe to do a thesis discrediting him perhaps!) I think, however, that you should have picked up on Fromm’s main principle, namely that “true love” contained the common elements of care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge. It is critical in understanding where Fromm came from. Well John certainly didn’t care for Joyce and his family, didn’t respect anyone concerned, didn’t stay honest to the truth of his committments, and certainly did not wait for Joyce’s understanding. I doubt Fromm would have respected de Ruiter. Period. But ok, if you want to use a dead man’s words to prop up the man you worship – go ahead.
Since you like quotes, I think this one is appropriate at this time: “Apes read philosophy Otto – they just don’t understand it!” – Jamie Lee Curtis in the movie, A Fish Called Wanda.
I think this may really apply in your situation Matt. Less poetry, more everyday real common sense. I don’t think you hang out with enough trucker/farmer types. They wouldn’t have much patience for the bullshit you sling and would likely be far more useful as life coaches than any poem you can misinterpret Matt – certainly they’d get you more value than JDR.
John’s quote about tender simplicity is simply a generalization because there are simple things in life, as well as things of great complexity and each should be given its due. John’s simple words appeal simply to simple people who ain’t got the balls nor strength to tackle the long hard road of complex thinking.
The next John quote you sling is even dumber. Basically it is a thinly veiled way of saying, “don’t bother trying to be great – worship someone you THINK is great when OASIS invites you to do it” Oh yeah, and 5 bux please.
The next quote regarding stillness, knowing God, and yet being yourself despite knowing the difference between right and wrong is John’s personal way of not having to take responsibility for his unethical actions. First off, none of us can know “the absolute”. We can think we know – arrogantly, but we don’t. Secondly, if we think we know, then we have a responsibility to act ethically, whether we like the ethic or not. And again, John has proven he likes to do things his OWN way, as opposed to the ethical way. Which brings me to his next loser quote: “Nothing works without honesty and surrender. Honesty opens a true space, surrender secures that space… now true life actually begins.”
Wow. I wish he’d thought of that before screwing around on his wife and family. Maybe if he’d stayed honest and surrendered his lust for power he might have had enough of what a spiritual leader is supposed to have to guide folks ethically. Obviously he knew the difference between right and wrong because he tried to convince Joyce to let him do it. He simply had no personal discipline, no care, no morality and went ahead with his betrayal for his own selfish wants. Good job on picking a great moral leader for yourself Matt. Way to go. Call me when that pedophile Mohammed comes back into town…
Kalilily, I understand that you want me to be all nice and such to Matt – well I am. It’s called tough love. He doesn’t need encouragement. He needs the instant wisdom of a proverbial kick in the ass to get him to wake up and stop being a shill for the man.
What you call “tough love” is intolerance. And it is cowardly. I will continue to post here and resist this cowardice.
Using a blindness to see…and knowing full well what you are doing. It is not whole, neither is it constructive or even remotely intelligent. It is an abuse of yourself, and its simply a waste of your true abilities as a human being. To hide behind your “right” to condemn and chastise another for the sake of your own personal safety, your own limited ideas of what is going on, and then to speak of it as “constructive” is simply shameful.
Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
This is not a debate…you cannot debate a person’s affections and loyalties. You can condemn them and chastise them, but that is not debating. That is much less than debating. True debating is a courageous act. It is not about exploiting your own contempt for a person’s percieved weakness in an effort to overpower them and crush them.
“Tough Love” is what has been used in residential schools, jails, in slavery and against what is real….namely Love itself. Love is not tough. It makes no demands. Love is invioable, though it can be hurt.
Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Like your name, your whole self is a carefully crafted disguise. Free Men Warrior…..you have much to learn about all three if you believe you are being anything but a bully to yourself first , and to those around you in this forum.
He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
And yes, like a Mcdonalds eater at a PETA convention, or a racist at a convention for the free right of a man to resist condemnation and speak out against one who practices violence, you will not find anything but disapproval in me for your way in these matters.
You are not to be excluded. You are welcome to address me at any time. I am waiting for something honest. And I can wait for that. The question is, can you?
You’re right. I don’t believe “tough love” really works long term. It tends to have too many psychologically buried side effect.
The problem I have with deRuiter’s words is a matter of “so what does all tham mean translated into every day life??” He gives no indication, and his own personal life is certainly no model. It all sounds good, but, again, how does it work in specific situations? That’s the issue that each individual has to work out for himself. It’s the practical applications of these platitudes that’s important, not the platitudes themselves. Many others have said the same thing in different sets of words. It all means nothing unless you explore how to apply them morally and practically. (And that’s what a good therapist helps one to do.) It’s like Transcendatal Meditation — there are all these vague words and rituals, but what you actually have to do is sit and be still and breathe steadily and learn how to quiet your mind. It’s called the “relaxation response.” I works to clear your mind and relax your muscles — not because of the platitudes but because of the practice. Matt seems to be lacking the personal practice, and he would be wise to find someone qualified to help him learn. What deRuiter preaches isn’t necessarily wrong; it’s simply useless at the level of just abstract concepts. “Truth” is a very abstract concept and open to as many interpretations as there are people. We each have to decide what it means to us. The Golden Rule is a good guide.
It’s like ballroom dancing. I can watch all the inspiring movies about it, listen to the experts explain how exhilarating it is, how you can achieve the much sports-lauded “zone,” how good it makes you feel. But until I go and learn how to do it and then actually do it, it’s been just inspiring words of no value to me except to get me jazzed about the concept. But learning how to dance well takes a lot of work and sweat.
Matt has to find his own way to take the platitudes and apply them to his life in real and physical ways.
— “The most exquisite joy is when in absolute stillness, you are being to the core, true. Knowing the absolute and being what you know, without compromise… that is your true nature; it is your only home.” — APPLICATION: LEARN TO MEDITATE USING ANY TECHNIQUE THAT WORKS FOR YOU.
— “There is nothing that simplicity cannot deal with. Simplicity knows its way through. Tender simplicity simply unravels it in a way that is the healing of your self.” APPLICATION: DON’T COMPLICATE SITUATIONS BY SECOND GUESSING THE OTHER PERSON. ACT WITH COMPASSION AND LEARN TO BE AWARE OF WHEN YOU’RE LETTING OTHERS MANIPULATE YOU. LIVE BY THE GOLDEN RULE.
— “You are not supposed to be something higher, you are invited to adore something higher. The lower is then not left behind, it is infused, awakened and transformed.” APPLICATION: TAKE YOUR FAITH IN SOME HIGHER POWER AND INCORPORATE YOURSELF AND EVERYTHING ON THIS PLANET INTO THAT FAITH, RESPECTING ALL LIVING CREATURES AS CONNECTED SOMEHOW TO YOURSELF. LIVE BY THE GOLDEN RULE.
As for “moral indignation,” that’s not the same as adhering to moral principles and recognizing when someone else is not. “Indignation” fuels tough love. Recognition can fuel action based on compassion. Again, the Golden Rule is a good guide.
OK. I think I’d make a much better cult leader than deRuiter!!! 🙂
Matt, I’ve been waiting for you to be honest since the start.
You are hurt. I understand that. I know that it’s easier for you to lash out and pretend I have some sort of disguise then it is for you to simply respond directly to each of my points regarding de Ruiter and his record. It’s human nature. In discussing this subject, I have rightly tried to keep you honest through all your contradictions, pedantic poetry, vague phrasings, and endless quotes that lead nowhere through yet again – more vagueness right on to outright not even having anything to do with the subject.
Yes I judge you, and what you are saying, and what it says about you. Just as you do me. You judge me (wrongfully) as a bully, as a coward, as intolerant, as blind. You even went so far as to use a MLK quote to imply that I am evil. I guess you just feel too guilty about it to admit you do it. And I do for reasons BOTH of personal safety, and for the good of the community that John and his shills endanger. Yes I judge John. Everybody does everybody whether they like to admit or not, vocalize or not, characterize it as such or not. We all do it in every moment. Even when we cut a guy some slack we are judging. As we mature, we become aware of this, and usually attempt better living, and more socially responsible living.
And yes, sometimes errant little boys need to hear a few sharp words from someone they don’t know.
Kalilily, every last one of your reinterpretations doesn’t even qualify as a stretch – more like a desperate leap trying any way you can to spin a silver lining into this. It’s crap Kalilily. The phrase “knowing the absolute” is a pretty loaded statement. It implies knowing God or knowing the absolutes of the universe. Why did your “many methods of meditation” sentence not even touch that? Reading too fast perhaps?
The “simplicity” quote is even more off base. He says NOTHING about 2nd guessing others in that quote, nor manipulating others. Interesting though that all the ex-JDR’s out there currently emailing me nods of approval are all echoing that John sure manipulates, and not to back down with the tough talk. They all wish someone like me had been around early enough to ridicule John and anyone that worships him just so that they might have been dissuaded from wasting their time on him in lieu of actual professional help. Your extremely broad reinterpretation of those quotes, though sweet in its gesture towards Matt, is both dishonest, and illustrative of just how vague and useless John’s so called teachings are – and a testament to how easy it is to psychobabble people into submission…
Tough love is useful in many moments. I’m sure Matt gets enough nookie at home that he can take it out in the big wide world. Free men know this.
Smugness is the satisfaction of one who has sucessfully beaten what is without defense. And to the one who is witnesses to such a display in another, there is righteous anger…
Smugness is the flow of one who takes pleasure in the subjugation of another…not realizing that one is also themself.
Smugness is not a real satisfaction. Because it is at the expense of the one who entertains it and the one who becomes the source of its pride it its ability to destroy.
Hah. Excellent response, Matt.
Mr. Warrior, Matt’s response is a direct example of deflection, which is what one has the option to use when one is having missiles (verbal or otherwise) hurled at oneself.
Matt will find his way in his own time. Making him continue to have to defend himself — or deflect from himself — gets everyone nowhere fast.
Do you know nothing about how growth and learning has to happen in order to be truly integrated into mental processes? Have you no children of your own? If you do, I feel sorry for them. I’m not saying Matt is a child; I’m saying that nurturing children into moral, life-loving adults teaches a parent how to deal with the tough stuff.
You’re a lawyer, aren’t you? If you’re not, you should be. I lived with one for a year. I’ve been confronted with all of the tactics. You’re very good at it.
I find a genuine rest in what you have said. I wish you all the best and thankyou very much for hosting me on your blog. Nuturance is always needed and it is the deepest and loveliest of all the things a human being can share.
I will continue to check in but have nothing left to say to Freemanwarrior and will not continue to make myself host to him. Its just not healthy!
What is healthy is to move forward with the knowing that kindness is the heart of all matters. Thanks again.
Go in peace, Matt.
I leave you with the reminder to live by the Golden Rule and be suspect of anyone who doesn’t. And the old saying that “actions speak louder than words” is about as close to “Truth” as you can get.
Hey would like to talk some more….
I would say that actions speak…but what they say is dependent on the motivation of the listener. In that, we use people’s actions to define them instead of directly experiencing who they are…
So, about John’s actions and what they say about his character I bring up an example of one who did the same.
Sitting Bull had at least 4 wives and 9 children?. An account of one who knew him (McLaughlin) reads “his accuracy of judgment, knowledge of men, a student-like disposition to observe natural phenomena, and a deep insight into affairs among Indians and such white people as he came into contact with, made his stock in trade, and he made “good medicine.” He stood well among his own people, and was respected for his generosity, quiet disposition, and steadfast adherence to Indian ideals. He had two wives at the time of his death (one of whom was known as Pretty Plume), and was the father of 9 children.
Anyways, I am tired…gotta retire.
I got no problem with polygamy. Do I have to spell out for you why Sitting Bull’s multiple partners were ok whereas John’s were not? It’s called a promise. Honoring one’s committments. John’s actions were contrary to his promises whereas Sitting Bull’s were not. Categorically HUGE difference. The way you view the world, semantics, and morality, if I were a woman or a business partner, I’d stay as far away from you Matt as possible if that is your concept of honest action.
Smugness…evidently you flatter yourself into thinking this is “fulfilling” somehow for me. Believe me, I don’t enjoy having to point out the obvious to an adult. I ain’t doing this for your benefit Matt. I do it so others can have a full view of the picture. You are a paying customer of John’s, and a shill. I am the voice of the other side.
Warrior Man, this last comment of yours is right on the money.
Matt, I don’t agree that what actions have to say is dependent on the motivation of the listener — although I guess that can explain why so many people still believe and follow Bush. They listen to what he spins with his words, and even though his actions belie his words, they still follow him. I guess that also explains why abused wives stay with their husbands. Those who are not yet strong enough to accept the harsh truth of actions — choosing, instead, to wrap themselves in the comforting illusion of words — are motivated to rationalize immoral acts.
Ohmygod I’m starting to sound like Matt.
I guess I’ll let you two keep at it, although I don’t see Matt changing his mind without some other more potent influence than mere words.
Meanwhile, some potent words via KANSAS
Carry On My Wayward Son
Carry on my wayward son
There’ll be peace when you are done
Lay your weary head to rest
Don’t you cry no more
Once I rose above the noise and confusion
Just to get a glimpse beyond this illusion
I was soaring ever higher
But I flew too high
Though my eyes could see I still was a blind man
Though my mind could think I still was a mad man
I hear the voices when I’m dreaming
I can hear them say
Masquerading as a man with a reason
My charade is the event of the season
And if I claim to be a wise man, well
It surely means that I don’t know
On a stormy sea of moving emotion
Tossed about I’m like a ship on the ocean
I set a course for winds of fortune
But I hear the voices say
Carry on, you will always remember
Carry on, nothing equals the splendor
The center lights around your vanity
But surely heaven waits for you
Carry on my wayward son
There’ll be peace when you are done
Lay your weary head to rest
Don’t you cry (don’t you cry no more)
We make it all up. Likes, dislikes…predjudices, judgements….knowing that it requires our life to support it…we do it anyways!
the timber in our own eye
Who am I seeing?
I will save Freemanwarrior the post:
83. freemenwarrior on 12 Jul 2006
Matt, I am still having major problems with the extreme contradictions in your statements. Unfortunately, virtually everything Matt has written above is seriously misguided gibberish.Are you sure that your entire presence here isn’t simply an overcompensation for a hidden buyer’s remorse? Typical Johnite attempt at avoidance but predictably clumsy and ineffective. My position in this discussion has been clear from the beginning.Perhaps you are ungrateful, but I am not. I thank others for their warnings, and I warn others that danger may exist.
Well Matt, you’ve just illustrated my point. Johnite’s simply don’t have enough spine for the truth, neither to hear it, nor speak it.That’s elementary kindergarten first lesson of life Matt.
Have you ever considered that you yourself may not be mentally/emotionally healthy enough to be recommending anybody to anyone? Matt, you would be foolish to take my words as a confrontation when I say that you follow an unkind man who is unfit to lead anyone spiritually.
For the rest of society, who are not poor brainwashed mentally ill people who should by rights be patients seeing phd psychologists instead of Jimmy Bakker, we DO both acknowledge his faults, and we certainly tend to think it neither CUTE nor DEAR. In fact most of us think he’s an idiot – so should you. And yes, I have never personally failed…EVER. I am a man, I am free and I am a warrior of tough love, one of the few left of my tribe. Love itself is a common failure amoungst mortals…it is my duty to crush the truth into them. We all have a calling except you and you know who.
Oh Matt, don’t be such a bitter puss.
I never claimed to be perfect. I never claimed to be TRUTH ITSELF. I never claimed to be a spiritual leader. I never claimed to only value tough love – I just note that in your case it seems appropriate, much like bringing an errant child to book with a healthy little swat on the backside. I have never called love a failing – don’t quite know where you get the audacity to state that bullshit. You are simply childishly bitter about being unable to actually tackly my posts head on point for point. I can understand and appreciate why you’d feel anger and frustration – nobody likes to be shown to be foolish, but if you are gonna say something, say something with foundation. Although I suspect you can’t. Probably has something to do with needing to use de Ruiter’s brain to think instead of your own.
The truth only feels like a crushing to those who are loathe to hear it. Under those circumstances, even the most gently delivered truth will garner nothing but bitterness, denial, and resentment amongst the willfully ignorant – especially amongst those who have interest in perpetuating a lie. People who are shills for John. If you think I am so very wrong, then try taking my arguments on head to head, point for point.
When you do actually step up to the plate, do us all a favour and put some actual work into it. Cut and paste artists are pathetic and a waste of our time. Got any original ideas of your own? Or are you going to continue to post other people’s words and twist them to your own sick cult member’s recruitment agenda? Hey, I think there must be some rock band out there with lyrics for this very moment – lemme just surrender my mind and your time to Spandau Ballet…
Authentic : conforming to fact and therefore worthy of belief; “an authentic account by an eyewitness”; “reliable information”
Insight comes when one allows that what they think and believe may in fact be foolish….
I rather find out I was a fool than to continue being one….
….to be foolish, and fight for that foolishness without reason or excuse is just not authentic….
even though it may be “original”.
Just saw a great movie called “Candy”….heres a poem by ee cummings that is quoted in it… (thanks to tanna)
i carry your heart with me
i carry your heart with me(i carry it in
my heart)i am never without it(anywhere
i go you go,my dear; and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)
no fate(for you are my fate,my sweet)i want
no world(for beautiful you are my world,my true)
and it’s you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you
here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;which grows
higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that’s keeping the stars apart
i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)
Matt, your “reliable information” post is more bullshit evasion. Are you trying to say that de Ruiter DIDN’T commit adultery? Please respond in iambic pentameter written by somebody else…
Ballad of Curtis Lowe
Well I used to wake the mornin, before the rooster crowed. Searchin for soda bottles to get myself some dough.
Brought em down to the corner, down to the country store. Cash em in and give my money to a man named Curtis Lowe.
Old Curt was a black man, with white, curly hair. When he had a fifth of wine he did not have a care.
He used to own an old dobro, used to play it ‘cross his knee. I’d give old Curt my money, he’d play all day for me.
Play me a song Curtis Lowe, Curtis Lowe. Well I got your drinkin money, tune up your dobro. People said he was useless, them people all were fools, cause Curtis Lowe was the finest picker to ever play the blues.
He looked to be sixty, and maybe I was ten. Mama used to warn me but I’d go see him again. I’d clap my hands, and stomp my feet, try to stay in time. He’d play me a song or two, then take another drink of wine.
Play me a song Curtis Lowe, Curtis Lowe. Well I got your drinkin money, tune up your dobro. People said he was useless, them people all were fools, cause Curtis Lowe was the finest picker to ever play the blues.
On the day Old Curtis died, nobody came to pray. Old preacher said some words, and they chucked him in the clay. Well he lived a lifetime, playin the black man’s blues. And on the day he lost his life, that’s all he had to do.
Play me a song Curtis Lowe, hey, Curtis Lowe. I wish that you was here so everyone would know. People said he was useless, them people all were fools, cause Curtis you’re the finest picker to ever play the blues.
So a second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give God the praise! We know that this man is a sinner.”
He replied, “If he is a sinner, I do not know. One thing I do know is that I was blind and now I see.”
So they said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”
He answered them, “I told you already and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his disciple, too?”
They ridiculed him and said, “You are that man’s disciple; we are disciples of Moses!
We know that God spoke to Moses, but we do not know where this one is from.”
The man answered and said to them, “This is what is so amazing, that you do not know where he is from, yet he opened my eyes.
We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if one is devout and does his will, he listens to him.
It is unheard of that anyone ever opened the eyes of a person born blind.
If this man were not from God, he would not be able to do anything.”
They answered and said to him, “You were born totally in sin, and are you trying to teach us?” Then they threw him out.
When Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, he found him and said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”
He answered and said, “Who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?”
Jesus said to him, “You have seen him and the one speaking with you is he.”
He said, “I do believe, Lord,” and he worshiped him.
Then Jesus said, “I came into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see might see, and those who do see might become blind.”
Some of the Pharisees who were with him heard this and said to him, “Surely we are not also blind, are we?”
Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you are saying, ‘We see,’ so your sin remains.
Matt, I can plainly see why you were drawn to de Ruiter…
And thank you for proving my point better than anything else…
Well, Matt and Mr. Warrior: Enough is enough. You guys are banned from leaving comments here. Try emailing each other and getting to know each other little better. Right now, you live on different planets, as far as I’m concerned.
I left a comment on Elaine’s site almost a year ago. I was concerned because a friend of mine had started attending John de Ruiter’s meetings. I’ve checked back onto this site from time to time, and have read all of the comments above. I was really trying to be open-minded and to not be overly dramatic about John de Ruiter’s teachings. It seems like every religion, spiritual belief system, etc. has been scrutinized at some point in history, so I didn’t want to rush to burn anyone at the stake.
I took some time to read some of John’s writings. After reading them, I felt considerably less worried – I didn’t find anything in his written words that was terribly original – most of it has been said before. For much of the past year, I assumed that any problems with John’s meetings had long since passed. I thought that maybe John had changed and that the drama that occurred circa 2000-2003 had subsided. I thought that maybe these meetings were just innocent discussions of philosophy.
But things have suddenly changed. My friend (who I will call Jo) called me the other day to let me know that we could no longer be friends. It turns out that Benita has counselled Jo to avoid my friendship. She had apparently told Jo that it wasn’t “true” for Jo to be my friend, and that to continue to be my friend would be to deny the truth.
John teaches that truth exists outside of us. I get the impression that this has made Jo powerless (I don’t know if powerless is the right word…) If truth exists outside of us then there’s no possibility for humans to change things. And if Benita or John says that it’s not true for us to remain friends, then I get the impression that Jo thinks that is a certainty. That there’s nothing that can be done other than to cut off ties to me.
I’m not writing this to open up the door to anti-John or anti-Benita rants in this weblog. I’m just trying to work through my shock and trying to figure out what I can do (if anything). I’m shocked because I thought for sure that my initial fears were overreactions or based on exagerrated internet stories. But then things started unfolding exactly as “Withheld” and “Anonymous” said they would…
Anyway, I just wanted to leave a comment thanking “Withheld” and “Anonymous” for being candid. It doesn’t help alleviate the pain I feel now, but it does help to know that I’m not alone. And thank you to Elaine for starting this conversation.