I'm sorry that you construed my comments as 'chastising' Sky. What I did
say was what I would have liked to have done:
> > I really feel that I would have at least liked to ask the follow up
> > question.
Perhaps I can see where there might be an implied, "...and you ought to have
done." That was not my intention, but I was trying to point out a tactful
way of investigating the situation which might have felt less awkward for
In fact I did acknowledge Sky's feelings "> > I'm sure it was." What
followed after that was a series of questions which I hoped might make
everyone aware of the consequences of our actions as role models in the eyes
of those who look to us for guidance.
> when stuff like this happens to me i am usually so shocked i
> can't think of _anything_ to say for a little while.
And this is exactly where the IGE's training is useful. The program itself
is entitled "Ethical Fitness." Like Physical Fitness, one's strength and
endurance need to be practiced and exercised so that we're not caught by
surprised or frozen by shock. The moment when you need the strength is not
the time to start practicing or working out; you have to prepare and be
prepared for that.
> i have also often been
> accused of having unrealistic expectations in the area of human
> behavior/morality. although my beliefs remain strong, these accusations
> probably make me even more hesitant to quickly and loudly speak up. i can
> say the appreciation i have for others who act with respect, kindness,
> consideration, and honesty is enormous and i always try to let them know
This is, on the whole, very commendable; people do and will object to others
who have strong ethical and moral convictions. A component of the training
includes preparing yourself to be able to counter these "objections", which
include everything from dogmatism to relativism.
> my 2 cents,
And very much appreciated, wendy. Thank you.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 20 2000 - 12:17:54 PDT