|
|
" rosie readandpost" <readandpost@yahooORhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vfqjd.34378$ye4.33701@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
>
> "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
> news:cmla4t$g2m$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> :
> : 1. If someone reacts to something I say or do with anger or by
> : laughing for example, how they react is not a matter that's within
> my
> : control. I may have provoked that reaction but that's where my
> : responsibility for their reaction ends.
> :
>
> i think you might be a little confused here.
> you ARE responsible, imo, if you lash out "to hurt" for example, and
> it does indeed hurt someone!
These comments make me think you have not understood what I meant by
"I may have provoked that reaction but that's where my responsibility
for their reaction ends."
> it is not a matter of how the other person reacts.
> INTENTION has a lot to do with "blame placing".
> don't you agree?
It is possible for someone who feels hurt by another's words or
actions to misinterpret the motives of the person who did whatever it
was that resulted in the hurt being felt and for such a person to
feel they have justification for laying the blame for their hurt on
someone else. I believe that AA literature does not encourage such
behaviour.
When someone deliberately sets out to hurt another and achieves their
objective, if the only person who's been hurt is their victim, maybe
it's only the victim who ought to be worried by how their staying hurt
could
adversely affect their peace of mind/serenity/ability to move on/get
on with life.
JB
|
|