fuzzy post-it

oh phew i’m glad someone replied with this sooner rather than later, so i can crush this bullshit where it stands

dewdropdaze:

(wikipedia definition elided)

This whole fucking post is literally a prime example of gaslighting and I am not okay with this, at all. [Examples: “consider that five times, the author says he has problems with paranoia,” “his memory may not be completely reliable,” “i don’t doubt that he believes everything in his post”]  

let’s assume, however briefly, that i am correct and that the author is gravely misremembering events.

how exactly do you suggest i convey this state of affairs, in a way that is not gaslighting? i would be glad to edit my post to take your suggestions into account.

also, as long as we’re running with this assumption: how is the author not gaslighting mel?

And excusing someone else’s abusive behaviour with “well they were abused” is weak and, quite honestly, disgusting. [“it is left unmentioned that mel’s mom gaslighted her constantly as a kid, leaving her particularly sensitive to it.”]

was that an excuse? i asked merely that it be considered while reading the post, as i believe it to be important context. perhaps you disagree.

You are also pretty blatantly ableist in a lot of this post. [“ but they are called “problems” for a reason,” “i hope he finds help someday,” repeating “he believes” statements followed by “but i know he is chasing phantoms.”] 

the author’s issues had a demonstrable and profound negative impact on him and the people around him, by his own admission.

what do you advise i do, in order to not be “ableist”? pretend his paranoia made everyone have a great time? express hope that he can’t solve his problems?

Also cherry picking, active dismissal, and making sure everyone knows how much this hurt PK [which is also an abuse tactic]. You honestly look like you didn’t read the post, and don’t really care one way or the other about what ——— actually had to say, or how this affected him and anyone else.

is the author not cherry picking, by choosing which chat logs to post? are you not cherry picking which parts of my post to reply to?

i am not mel, so i can hardly sit here refuting one paragraph at a time. i doubt anyone would want to read such a diatribe, either. i made my point as succinctly as i could manage — partly because the author expressed anxiety over my posting a lot of words in response.

for the same reason, i avoided using his name, and have edited it out of your quoted post here. of course, you would have known about both of these things, had you actually read his post. i would appreciate if you would be more considerate towards him in the future.