nope, no fear

just preference.

Bloke - But what were you *feeeeeeling* when you wrote that post? Obviously you're harmfully excluding your feelings about your feelings about feeling fear out of fear. Don't try to deny it, I can feel your fear that's how I know you're afraid ;-)

we're not in kindergarten, where everyone has to "win" and get the same exact serving of snack time pretzels and all lie down for naps together.
and we're not in a cult, where we all have to do every single thing together, at the same time, with no individuality. (at least most of us aren't)

wanting to share in a 1-to-1 experience with an individual doesn't mean you are fearful of others or a group. nor does it mean you're being exclusionary.
wanting to create a gathering of a small group of people with a specific shared interest doesn't mean you're afraid of anyone outside that group. again, nor does it mean you're willfully excluding everyone else.
wanting to spend time with a group (small or large) that we identify with can be a comfort. it's a natural inclination. that doesn't necessarily mean we're afraid to be with anyone else.

they're just varying types of experiences. varying interests. as human beings we need different kinds of connections. there's nothing wrong with that.

there's a huge difference between prejudice and individualism. I can want time by myself without being racist, sexist, classist, etc.

Bloke,
This is sort of strange cause I’m going to reference the other thread, but probably wouldn’t have commented if you hadn’t created a new thread. So it’s a conversation about a conversation….(Ali & Saddha I hope you are not offended by this.)

I did follow the other thread and thought, throughout, that you could easily replace ‘fear’ with ‘love’ (and other terms).

E.g.

OLD
""There is the fear of not being able to catch up without distractions and the fear of not being able to discuss certain things in private. These fears drive the desire to exclude."
"I understand that there could be a desire for a particular outcome without fear, but as soon as you try to manipulate the outcome (i.e. exclude) to be what you want, that *is* fear.""

NEW
""There is the LOVE of being able to catch up without distractions and the LOVE of being able to discuss certain things in private. These LOVEs drive the desire to exclude."

"I understand that there could be a desire for a particular outcome without LOVE, but as soon as you try to manipulate the outcome (i.e. exclude) to be what you want, that *is* LOVE.""
[reverse modification]

Seriously that’s the first time I used the replace button , but I suspected as much.

So I’m not trying to advocate some newer grand theory here, merely the dangers of reductionism. Let’s replace ‘fear’ with ‘logic’, for example:

""There is the LOGIC of not being able to catch up without distractions and the LOGIC of not being able to discuss certain things in private. These LOGICs drive the desire to exclude."

"I understand that there could be a desire for a particular outcome without LOGIC, but as soon as you try to manipulate the outcome (i.e. exclude) to be what you want, that *is* LOGIC.""

So I think there is some truth in all these positions, which is why no one wants to reduce it to one postion.

I wasn't part of the other thread but I'll jump in here and hijack it.

I think there's a subtext that all fear is bad. A few years ago I started qualifying my desire to conquer fears by saying that I conquer _irrational_ fears. Now that I'm really thinking about it, I think I'll change that to "exploring and fully understanding my fears."

I have always been uncomfortable with the idea that fears have a trait of being rational or irrational. All fear is irrational -- logical decision-making is rational. I had thought it ran on a spectrum, like from useful "I'm afraid of jumping off the top of this building" to non-useful "I'm afraid to talk to that girl". But the _fears_ themselves are all irrational; automatic, if you will.

I saw a documentary on Hunter S. Thompson ("Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson") and in it, they mention his rationale for riding his motorcycle fast in the night: that he was seeking to experience "the edge". I really understood that: that I have a built-in limiter that says when doing something is too much, and that "safety" limiter also prevents me from amazing experiences.

In most circumstances, we have first-line logical defenses: "I don't think I should jump off the roof because I'll probably hurt myself." Then there's the irrational fears -- a mechanism that will paralyze us if we make the attempt: "I tried but I just couldn't do it."

If you're skimming, please stop and think about that: fears are irrational and automatic. Fear itself is a feeling, not a thought.

And it can be bypassed.

Now what happens if I bypass my logical defenses and my fear and jump off my roof?: nobody knows!

I might break some bones in my body or I might die. Or I might walk away from it. I might get a rush out of it. It might not be fun. I might get paralyzed and have a completely different life. I might die.

There are lots of things that _might_ happen, but I do not _know_ what will happen.

So I think maybe fear is a reaction to trying to take an action that does not have a predictable outcome. You might have a fear of moving to another country because you don't know what will happen, but you don't fear staying in the same house your whole life because it's predictable. You might be miserable, but you're not afraid.

Bloke, you said "I don't think the only reason for exclusion is fear. I don't include my friends on my dates.. that's not fear." What you're doing is not approaching the fear phase by making a logical choice. So if you said, "you know, I might just try that", then you would probably face fear: your feelings would react and tell you that what you're about to do does not have a tidy outcome. You're already overcoming your fear of the date (if any) -- you don't know what will happen -- so you probably want to make the situation as likely for "success" as possible and use your past experiences as a basis. You can invite your friends on a first date if you wanted -- and I challenge you to logically disprove that you can't know what will happen, you can only consider what _might_ happen. Fear is reacting to the notion that the outcome of your action is not predictable.

Fuck you, I love you,
---Jason Olshefsky

Sometimes, exclusion is unintentional. I remember in HS when I had a group of friends and we all sat together in a circle during lunch and stood together the same way after school at the bus stop...we never meant to keep people out of the circle, but years later I ran into someone I knew then who was mad at me...it took a few moments, but she finally explained that she would sit outside our circle on a regular basis waiting to be noticed and invited in, but none of us "let" her in...she had the impression that we were blocking her out for some reason...I explained to her that this whole circle began with me and one other person and that everyone else who ended up becoming part of it invited themself in...we were not blocking people out, instead we were just minding out own business and whoever wanted to sit (or stand) with us just had to pull up a chair. She didn't seem to believe me, however, and seemed offended by my explanation to some degree. I still don't get it. All she had to do was introduce herself and say hi.