An interesting encounter with some sisters today. (page 2)

quellycatface

I just WANTED them to know that I DIDN'T have any hard feelings. Why should'nt I say hello? I'm not under a court order or restraining order!!!

We are ALL God's children.

No malice intended.

Phizzy

I say well done again Quelly, you did the same as Jesus would have if he had been in your position.

Making people squirm and look uncomfortable in public places is a form of unkind 'getting back' at people. Their reactions prove absolutely nothing about whether they think shunning is or is not wrong. Do you want them to demonstrate total ease with shunning? You would undoubtedly criticise them for that as well.

At some level, if people do not want to acknowledge you, you need to accept it and move on. Otherwise, despite your unseen (and likely honorable "Christian" intentions) your nice overtures are perceived as a type of upstaging and goading behaviour. Tell me when has approaching people against their will ever been an effective practice of persuasion for getting people to act more kindly towards you? If anything, it gets people's backs up and hardens their resolve.

Besides, what self-respecting individual keeps approaching people who have made it clear they do not want to be approached? Your world will not fall apart if you respect their wishes - and you might learn something very basic about granting people the right to shun you - as hugely painful as it is. I would never suggest it is always possible to preserve self-respect above the need to prove you're a nice Christian person. But taking a look within about why the need to talk to people who shun you is so strong may be helpful for your own growth and personal development.

cofty

I could not disagree more Steve2

JWs go against all their normal instincts when they ignore former friends.

Those of us who have the courage and confidence to make them feel very uncomfortable are doing them a big favour.

Being "nice" isn't always a virtue.

you might learn something very basic about granting people the right to shun you

Not an effing chance! Make them squirm.

steve2

With or without the sanction of religion, people shun. It was not invented by religious organizations, although it is undoubtedly used to further the ends of religious control. Personally, how you treat people is totally your business. If you want them to squirm, you will have many creative ways to achieve that result. Or you could make up your mind to put your energy into other pursuits besides cornering people in public.

I spent decades trying to reach family and friends so I am a fine one to advocate moving on - I acknowledge my own struggle in this regard. But, in looking back, I allowed myself to be controlled by the urge to use seemingly nice social behaviours to make the Witnesses look silly. No more - it reflected my own then need to be liked and not be shunned. Talk about fighting reality. But I also acknolwedge, to each their own in terms of their need to approach witnesses in public places.

cofty

Or you could make up your mind to put your energy into other pursuits besides cornering people in public.

What a pathetically dishonest statement Steve. I don't spend my days looking for JWs to talk to FFS - but you knew that already.

If I come across one I refuse to play by their silly rules. Anybody who goes along with shunning is still allowing the Watchtower to dictate to them.

it reflected my own then need to be liked and not be shunned.

I don't want them to like me, I want them to squirm. The more public the better.

steve2

Cofty, we clearly disagree with each other on this point of approaching JWs. My responses have notbeen directed at or about you. While my choice of words could have been better, I did not say you spent your days looking for JWs to talk to.

I acknowledge from your subsequent words that your explicit intent is to make JWs squirm. By contrast, I deduced from the OP that was not their intent by their reference to their Christian beliefs.

My comments were in response to what they wrote - not what you wrote.

Phizzy

I don't know which bit of the O.P you objected to Steve 2 , perhaps the last sentence.

But an apparent attack on Quelly is uncalled for. Just look at the situation, the JW's there are intent upon shunning, feeling they have the right to do this vile unchristian act, and that they are taking the moral High Ground.

To let them get away with that is cowardice, to confront it, as I said above, as Jesus himself would have done, took courage and moral strength on Quelly's part, and did no harm to the JW's, and may, possibly, if their heart is good, have moved them on.

They may become aware, perhaps deep down at first, that their stance is simply wrong .

I am actually pleased when I am shown I am wrong, I then know how to act in the future.

I can see where you are coming from with this, and I too agree that simply making JW's uncomfortable for the sake of making them uncomfortable would be wrong.

But, to make them confront their own despicable behaviour is not wrong. I, and no doubt Quelly, would do the same were the issue paedophilia for example, should we, on that issue, pussy-foot around so as not to upset the sensibilities of JW's ?

No.

And the same with shunning, which has ruined more lives, and brought some lives to an end by suicide, than Paedophilia has.

steve2

Phizzy, I wasn't aware that my response was "an attack". If it came across as an attack, of course I apologize. I guess you could make a case for confronting and naming an overt act of shunning.

However, where differences of opinion emerge is around the question of when do you accept that other people, for better or worse, choose to shun you? Does the passing of time make a difference? Does the fact that you've confronted them x number of times in recent months or years?? Do you confront them each and every timethey shun you? At what stage would it look like you're goading or harrasing them?

Lots of incredibly unfair and cruel things happen in life and these can end up having a controlling influence over the present.

My view - and I stress it is one of likely many different views on the topic - is it is an act of kindness to yourself to (eventually) move on.

I know from others comments that the thought of leaving the JWs alone in their shunning behaviour is unimaginable. And as cofty had the honesty to frankly state, the point of his approaching the witnesses would be to precisely make them squirm. Which brings into view what each individual's main goals are. If the goals differ then so too do the corresponding actions. Again, not wishing to offend anyone - and as I said earlier, I could have worded my view far better - that is just my own strongly held view - it is not a fact, or an expectation that others should follow suit.

jgnat

This is coordinated shunning, supported and promulgated by an organization. Shunning and taboos are very effective deterrents as we are social beings. We can pretend it doesn't hurt, but it does; both for the shunner and the shunnee. Why should I leave such people in the privacy of their behavior, when they are following an organization's dictates, lock-step, with hardly a thought? It deserves to be challenged.

Now, if they want to spend their warm, sunny Saturday afternoons going door-to-door peddling magazines, I won't bother following them down the sidewalk challenging the error of their ways. I might as well head down to the local bar at happy hour and tell the residents to get a life.

An interesting encounter with some sisters today.

Share this