Royal Way/Jacumba/Ranch/Michael - Need Info
Date: October 04, 2006 04:10PM
At the risk of appearing to use this message-board as a personal communication tool, I am nonetheless compelled to respond to the post by Sharon Nader dated 17Sept2006. My reason for this post is simply to reply to a few items that Ms. Nader’s post contained, apparently in rebuttal to my post dated 06Sept2006. I will review those items, and only those items, specifically.
To begin with, Ms. Nader, please accept my apologies if I have misinterpreted the specific statements in your post. There is no need to be defensive for I am not attacking Jacumba, Royal Way or Michael Gottlieb. As I stated in my post, I am a former member of Jacumba and, generally, I had a very good experience during my association with it (however brief that may have been) and met some truly wonderful individuals. I am only articulating what I have observed.
In the interest of disclosure, I do not have specific training in any of the many psychological or sociological sciences that other posters appear to have and nor am I an attorney – I am an independent consultant for biotechnology companies and manufacturers / developers of medical devices.
As to Ms. Nader’s specific points and to the extent that they were in response to my post dated 06Sept2006:
“That someone would intentionally mischaracterize as “worship” the love and gratitude many feel for all he has given to help them solve their problems and enrich their lives is mean spirited and pathetic. It sounds like envy to me.”[/color:1f8940baac]
You seem to have misinterpreted my statements. I harbor no ill-will or hostility towards anyone associated with or otherwise connected to Jacumba or Royal Way, and certainly not to Michael Gottlieb. Let me be clear: I have not “intentionally mischaracterized” anything – as you are entitled to your own opinion based on what you see, hear and read, so am I. Your reference to “pathetic” is subjective and, again, you are entitled to your own opinion.
I have never in the past felt envy for the benefits enjoyed by Jacumba / Royal Way members, and I do not today. If you would re-read my post you’ll note that I describe my first (and only) “weekend retreat as a truly extraordinary and wonderful experience.” Further, I do not begrudge anyone’s feeling of love and gratitude for benefits they receive from anyone or anything, so long as no one is hurt in the process.
“Regarding people leaving Royal Way, just like any friendships in life that evolve from common interests, be it a job or membership in a book club or health spa, when someone leaves, they no longer share the same interests, so friendships often change and people move on.”[/color:1f8940baac]
When I met my friend I was unaware of their involvement in Jacumba and, as far as I know, their involvement in it had absolutely nothing to do with either the commencement or maintenance of our friendship. At least as far our particular situation was concerned your assertion that we no longer shared the same interests – due to my departure from Jacumba – is irrational.
“3. No one “worships” Michael nor would Michael ever tolerate someone attempting to do so.”[/color:1f8940baac]
To this day, I do not know how else to describe the totality of what was taking place at the Patron’s Party. However, and in spite of that, this is a subjective description on my part and, once again, I am not a trained psychologist or sociologist.
“7. Someone who has only attended the first retreat is not eligible to attend a Patrons Party for the simple reason that they would not understand what it is. So the person claiming to have attended a Patrons Party after only one retreat and reporting on what supposedly went on there is deliberately lying.”[/color:1f8940baac]
In spite of what you claim, I did in fact attend a Patrons Party. And, yes, I had only attended the first weekend retreat. As I am not "deliberately [or otherwise] lying," please do not misquote me – I did not “report” anything specific, per se, in my post that “went on there” (at the Patron’s Party); I only expressed my personal opinion as to what I encountered.
As far as I was made aware the Patron’s Party is a birthday celebration party, of sorts, for Michael Gottlieb. I do not know you, Ms. Nader, or at least do not recall your name, so I cannot say if you were there or not (there were a good many people in attendance that I had never seen before, anyway). While I have no knowledge of your stated requirement regarding one’s eligibility in order to attend a Patron’s Party what I can say is that I did attend one. Perhaps there are rules in effect now that were not in effect when I was a member.
“8. At no Royal Way retreat has any participant ever disrobed, been asked to disrobe or anything of that nature.”[/color:1f8940baac]
My post does require some clarification on this point and I apologize if it was misleading: I have never personally witnessed any person, or persons, naked or in any way disrobing as a part of an Jacumba / Royal Way weekend retreat. However, I was told by an individual who had attended a weekend retreat, one that was subsequent to the first one, that they participated in a session during that particular weekend retreat where the participants were naked. While I did offer my opinion as to why those individuals might have been naked, I have no reason to make-up things regarding Jacumba / Royal way. This (the lack of attire) was just a point that was relayed to me by another member and I have no way of knowing the validity of their statement.
Again, my intention in this post was to address a few statements made by Ms. Nader and to offer a bit of clarification.