I have decided that, if you have any updates for me, to send them via Messenger on Facebook. Do not put another gaslighting header into my feed. My understanding is that the only reason I keep getting nailed by sadistic clowns at the end of the day is that you mean well, and then add gaslighting to my feed in order to update me in the morning. There have been times when the gaslighting has stopped, and I thought everything was over.
You have permission now to both hack my account and stop with the gaslighting attacks, no matter how well meaning they are. I am not making an accusation, as you may have been told otherwise, but I prefer talking online, at a distance.
You are permitted to view any post I post, regardless of anti-CR orders, regardless of anti-CR orders, regardless of anti-CR orders. I edited the subheading of my blog for a reason, didn't I? Someone is keeping you from seeing the big picture, and I think you are on your way to knowing who it is. ANTI-children's rights. Note the part I capitalized. They aren't the "next newest" pedophile experts. They hate children while claiming to be better advocates than us, saying "we need criminals to advocate". I do not work for them, apart from a "pinnie" role, which I do not identify with, in defiance of anti-CR rulings.
I know you are in Reading, Robbyn, and I also kindly request that everyone pack up set and go back to their home states, their hometowns, etc. Why listen to Blake, Robbyn? Listen to yourself, which you are not doing because you have been told somehow that you are un-trustworthy. You are trustworthy, but only trust yourself and not those anti-CR gooks. Every time I get angry at you, I'm really angry at them, and I wish for you to point that out otherwise.
Do read over, and you can worry about my risk enough to read my pages and count words, as I trust you with that. I don't trust you with little yet obscure things such as condiments because you're not close to me. It's like me somehow learning how to hack, then hacking someone else's computer to rid them of viruses. Some people would thank you, namely touchy feely people who like close relationships. I see my life in circles in terms of who has right to step in, with me being the bulls eye. All parties have the right to be worried about me hurting a child, so warn the child's parents. As far as hotcake syrup? You can't save them all, Robbyn. My own personal mental health information is MY property, regardless of how you make sense of that fact. Please do not share anything without my permission as a means to rearrange aspects in my life. You can do so to warn of impending danger to a child, and I don't care, because I'd just answer to the court later, and if I am defensive and beg, there must be abuse. I am morally opposed to suicide, to the point where once they say "killing yourself is your only way out", I sort of laugh beneath all the physical pain - that's what it is, and that's really all it is. Just take it easy, and there is a light on the other end of the tunnel. I always will. I always have. EEGs don't kill, but you skeptical of that until the end. It is a form of abuse, and I may be hurt more than I say, but I hate the intent of the curators of this - misusing proper trauma technology, which can help out many who have the matched trauma. That one was matched to a children's rights trauma, hence the flag of false psychiatry.
Anti-children's rights is telling you to do too much to "honor his narcissist" which is non-existent. Those accommodations would be valid, if they got my profile right. All you have to do is be there to listen, and watch as mom gets put in that position, and you read the blog post afterwards when you can be interested. The rest I must figure out for myself. A pedophile is like any antisocial parent - when it wants to change, it will find any way to do so.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Any comment that
1. Endorses child abuse (including pornography of such)
2. Imposes want to the point of imposition, meaning entitlement.
3. Contains self-entitled parent rhetoric, to the point of self-victimization
will not be published. Flexible application. Debate is allowed, but only civil arguments that presume the best of intentions in their opponent, on both sides.