Did anybody else received this email from Fisheaters?  I never have
signed up nor registered for this forum.

  How weird, I got an email from Fisheater's last night--could not imagine why--

so I deleted without reading, figuring it was a virus.

 

I've wrestled with composing this posting for quite a few days.  Rather than use the words of CathInfo posters as hooks for my comments, I've decided that it's more prudent for me to use direct quotations from Vox Clamatis herself.

I just need a gig. I need to find work or win the lottery so I can dig myself out of the hole I'm in, keep this website going, get that kitchen set up, not worry about eating, go to a dentist, keep going to my doctors about my heart stuff, and make sure I have Social Security when the time comes.

I assume that Vox knows the local bakery industry inside & out--assuming that there still is one in Indy--and which kinds of its work might fit her nowadays.  It seems unlikely that she could've worked for 20 years in that industry, and be left without any marketable or transferable skills to show for it.  But I know that I don't know nothin' 'bout bakeries.

Be that as it may, I do guard my own privacy as best I can against invasions by computer technology.  So I wouldn't be surprised if Vox's prospects for "a gig"--one distinct from FE--have been poisoned by the bad fruit of what's been her arguably bad judgment: Publicizing so much information about herself that would be customarily be kept private.  She hasn't merely shot herself in the foot, but aimed at it with a firearm set on 'automatic', and held in the trigger.

Considering the conventional wisdom that human-resources staffs nowadays routinely search the Internet for dirt on otherwise appealing prospective employees, Vox's extreme openness in "abouttracy.html" might've disqualified herself from multiple jobs that might otherwise have seemed entirely plausible.  And she'd be left without even a shred of evidence (except entries in server logs) to alert her that any such thing had happened.  A potential employer might not need to be especially cold-blooded to regard Vox less as a talented individual, but more as a set of 'pre-existing (medical) conditions'.

Encouraging news on U.S. employment is in short supply, and that might be the optimistic way to word the situation.  An on-line article I read a few months ago, probably by an h.r. or recruiting professional, could easily ruin the day for many job-seekers in the U.S.A.'s alleged "economic recovery": It claimed that statistically the most significant predictor of success in job searches nowadays, was whether or not the seeker had been employed full-time within the past 6 months.  Explaining how moderating FE would satisfy that requirement might be a really tall order.

The biggest [challenge] for me is manic depression, with those really fun and entertaining "mixed episodes." I can get sorta nuts. [....] I usually hole-up and disappear when I'm crazy and try not to afflict my friends.

Would she have been able to hide her diagnosis of mental illness, e.g.: using prescribed medication, if she hadn't confessed it on her Web page?  That's mostly a rhetorical question, especially now: The reportedly widespread sharing of personal-health data under Obamacare will practically scuttle medical privacy.

I have a messed up heart (left ventricular hypertrophic cardiomyopathy) that makes exertion difficult and can make me dizzy, want to faint, and out of breath sometimes.

Would this cause her physician to insist that her "gig" be limited to one that's completely sedentary?

Ironically for this topic, I see that "Catholic" Answers currently has a posted almost-certainly-sedentary "Employment Opportunit[y]": A 'non-exempt' "Customer Service Representative" who has "a basic knowledge of the Magisterium".  But that can't provide new entertaining episodes in the continuing tales of Vox Clamatis.  CA's posting plainly states that it will not pay for relocation.

Some sort of "customer service" position in a call-center might fit well enough, if all of those that were once unavoidably located locally in Indiana haven't now been all off-shored.  And if an employer with paying customers were willing to risk incoming complaints resulting from a customer-service agent "get<ting> sorta nuts" over the phone, especially one known to've been diagnosed with "manic depression".  And if the pace & stress of the job didn't increase her episodes of "get<ting> sorta nuts". And if she could find an alternative to her "hole-up and disappear" approach that met the demands of a time-clock.  And if she could restrict her tobacco habit to infrequent preapproved breaks during her work day.

One of the work-at-home Internet-based "customer service" jobs might be ideal, but extreme caution would be called for, to find one among the superficially appealing ones that's neither a scam nor multilevel marketing.

------
Note *: I've applied simple logical reasoning to what Vox has already confessed in "abouttracy.html", which is viewable by anyone having Internet access and a browser.

•   As I tried to edit my draft for clarity, other ideas occurred to me that made my text longer & longer.  The possibilities or plausible conclusions I present above do not incorporate any privileged information about her life, except for what she has already written on that page.  I've never met her, nor had any other personal contact with her.  Altho' I assume that she would be formally considered a 'public person', I've taken care to express uncertainty in my logical conclusions as it seems appropriate.
  
  Note #: Anywhere on Planet Earth except perhaps Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Red China, and other countries that censor the Internet.

..and now I'm starting to get private messages here from Jayne.  Never met her, no interaction with her, no reason to have anything to do with her, and she wants to talk.  Talk about Vox.  With me, a complete and total stranger.  Amazing.

We poor humans are most blinded to those things right in front of us that are destroying us.  

Whether a person thinks that FE is great or terrible, that CI is great or terrible, or that Catholic Answers is great or terrible, any website can become an obsession for certain people and they'd be so much better off without it.  I have no idea who this Jayne person actually is, what her stake in all of this is, and don't care...but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that FE and Vox are a fatal obsession for her.  

Jayne, come out of it.  I don't mean FE, I mean the internet.  You're a poor little sheep, like me, and like me you have your fatal attractions.  For some it's alcohol, or drugs, or sex, but for you I think anyone can see it's the intrigue of the internet.  

Me, I don't figure into this at all.  I'm a passerby.  I stopped by to gawk at a train wreck and talk with some other bystanders about it.  Eventually I'll wander off to some other corner of the web and read about something else. I don't have this as my great temptation, Deo gratias.  I have others.  

Come out of it, Jayne.  It's bad for you.  Maybe some people can't be Catholic on the internet.  I've seen a few that seemed to fit that description, and you are one.  Be Catholic in the real world.  Just disappear, tonite, and never log in again.  Cold turkey.  Don't let yourself be fascinated with whether anyone misses you or not.  Don't let yourself be obsessed with what imaginary avatars are doing on message boards.  Let people with sɛҳuąƖ problems deal with it themselves, they don't need you.  Or me.  Or anyone except their priest.  

Unplug from it.  Not worth your soul.  Not worth anyone's soul.  All true Catholics love your soul.  Take good care of it.          

Quote from: icterus

come out of it...I mean the internet.  


... it's the intrigue of the internet.  

...Be Catholic in the real world....  

Unplug from it.  Not worth your soul.  Not worth anyone's soul.  All true Catholics love your soul.  Take good care of it.          

No kidding.  Doesn't anyone do real life anymore?  I haven't read most of this thread.  

Bah.  I'm bored already.  Gotta go do something.

-LH

For some people, the internet is real life.

I'd like to point out that all of the people in this situation claim to be under the care of good, traditional priests who are well-informed of all of their activities and are being obeyed.  This, of course, cannot be true.  

Exactly. And though we cannot know with certainty that there are no good, traditional priests involved in the lives and activities of those concerned, there's good evidence that this is indeed true. Which means that there's intentional deception going on. But for what purpose?

On the internet, we need to wary and not just accept that a person is who he or she says that he or she is. If there are glaring contradictions, there's good chance that there's a problem with honesty.

Jayne started a new thread where she was forced to defend church teachings against Impy and his best buddy Vox. Of course Gimpy kept his mouth shut and Vox stuck up for him and tried to kill Jayne off with niceness.
 
JayneK:
I have some objections to a post in another thread. http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3461348.0/topicseen.html  Rather than express my objections there and derail that thread, I am starting a new thread.

Quote from: Clare Brigid
I just have to say something.  If I'm banned, so be it.

Vox, how low are you going to sink?  Shirley and Jenny?  Now you're celebrating LESBIAN ELEPHANTS?  This is supposed to make us emotional?  Well, I am.  I am DARNED emotional, but not in the way you and others apparently are.  I am extremely upset and I want this FILTH to end.  And I'm not the only one.

What are other forums going to think when they see this celebration of dyke elephants?  What kind of message are you trying to send?  Please, enough.  This is a new level of SCANDAL.  Pachyderm porn.  Bestial ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.  Elephant Elephant  Wonderful.  Traditional Catholicism?  I don't think so.

This was not funny.  It was mockery and it was cruel.  It was completely out of place in this tender, lighthearted thread.

The Church teaching presented in the Catechism was difficult enough at the time it was written.  We have to recognize the serious sinfulness of acting on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies while, at the same time, having compassion and sensitivity for the people struggling with these disordered tendencies.  Since the Catechism was written, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ activists have gained power until they are now at the forefront of enemies of the Church.  We have seen the beginnings of a persecution that is likely to become worse.  It has become a crime to merely state the truth that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ behaviour is gravely sinful.  Believing this truth is being portrayed as grounds for denial of public office.  More and more cases are reported of businesses sued for refusal to render services for same sex weddings.  It becomes more and more entrenched in law and culture that we may not speak out against ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ sins and that we are forced to make a show of support and acceptance of them.  Accusations of homophobia bring more and more social ostracism and legal persecution.  

So yes, some Catholics are over-sensitive and overly polemical on the subject of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.  Some Catholics have trouble getting their heads around the important distinctions needed to understand Church teaching on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity. Sometimes their completely justified opposition to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ sins and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ activism interferes with their ability to have compassion for people with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ tendencies.  Our Lord's call to love our enemies has never been easy.  It is not going to become easier if we mock Catholics with a less than ideal attitude towards or understanding of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.  How about having some compassion and sensitivity for scared people who are expecting persecution in the near future?  How about doing something that will help them to do better rather than mocking them for their weakness?  Have you never been weak or imperfectly followed Church teaching?  How did you want people to treat you then?

I think it's interesting that guac/impy/Brigid Clare, was concerned she might get banned.

I highly doubt that will ever happen.

I think it's interesting that guac/impy/Brigid Clare, was concerned she might get banned.

I highly doubt that will ever happen.

I think that guac/impy/clare wasn't really concerned about being banned - that was just part of the joke. I'm not surprised that Impy wrote something like that. What causes concern is that Vox said that she begged him to post it on the forum, after he sent it to Vox in a private email.

What also is cause for concern is an article on FE, posted by Vox yesterday, titled, "Men, women, love, respect, and romance." It contains sɛҳuąƖly explicit language, and I can't see that there's any good reason for posting something like that. It's disgusting.

That's why prayers for her are much-needed. When someone's mind is in the gutter, they need help to get out of it.