Doc's SECRET Installations of Values! OLD AGE can BREED Pigs!!!

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/27/05 8:07:20 PM, sam58fagone writes:

 

 

 

And notice who did respond to the post. Paulina responded to the

post. So I wonder if Doc was actually reframing the negative

energies that were aroused in Paulina because of Aaron's original

post?

 

 

 

Hi Sam: That was a very good post. You were able to clarify for me Doc's reframe as to my original response to MIKE.... not Aaron. Hence:

 

> > Pandora51@a... wrote:

> > > I can't help but wonder why You Mike, seem to be bashing

> > >women, rather than merely agree or support Doc's view on one

> > >particular woman who has apparently bashed him personally.  I

> > >have seen Doc respond to  males just as vigorously. It

> > >certainly is not because she was a woman.

 

I guess I didn't understand why an incident that was made by one woman to Doc....got a reply from MIKE, that seemingly got generalized to most women.

 

Doc reframed it into terms, that frankly got lost on me, when he used himself and his weight and being in/out of shape. I guess I took it at face value and that it was Doc's good natured way to lead us away from a heated conversation, that frankly was not very useful. When he said that he was out of shape, I took that to mean that he really thought that, and I personally did not see it and so I responded that way. I guess when you put it the way that you did, I can see that it was more than about weight or fitness and more as a means to teach the group meta modeling, and reframing, and I am sure a host of other things that I didn't get. I sometimes (most times), think that a cigar is just a cigar, and that there is no deeper meaning and that what people say is what they mean, and mean what they say.

 

Your post certainly clarified it for me. I tend to respond from a gut instinct (being the kinesthetic that I am), and frankly get frustrated to try to read between the lines, so to speak. So that a lot of really good quality posts get lost on me, if they don't grab my interest right away, or when I can't see how I can learn from it directly.

 

So thank you for that clarification.

 

Paulina

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/27/05 11:20:00 PM, darthon4 writes:

 

 

What I liked about the whole "OLD Age can BREED Pigs" thread is that 

it did make me stand back and think and do my own self assessment

about where I could use some improvement myself. Ironically, as a

result I'm working on getting into top physical condition.

 

 

 

Hi Lori:

 

I don't know if that threat of Doc's sparked some subliminal domino effect, but that is precisely my goal as well. I have joined Curves and also got a Pilates DVD and a small bit of aparatus that goes along with it, that I find is very interesting to me. I have some range of motion difficulties with my hips so am taking it easy and doing what feels good for my body. You don't think that Doc did anything to plant those seeds in some of us.. do you? LOL

 

Paulina

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/27/05 11:35:54 PM, Pandora51 writes:

 

 

I don't know if that threat of Doc's sparked

 

 

Wow I just noticed the Freudian Slip here, LOL...

 

I meant, of course, "thread".....

 

Paulina

[Guest guest]

> --- , Aaron Kulkis <akulkis@H...> wrote:

> > Pandora51@a... wrote:

> > > I can't help but wonder why You Mike, seem to be bashing

> > >women, rather than merely agree or support Doc's view on one

> > >particular woman who has apparently bashed him personally. I

> > >have seen Doc respond to males just as vigorously. It

> > >certainly is not because she was a woman.

 

I sincerely think that Doc's post is not about weight issues at all.

 

It's not about Wood Elements, nor Metal Elements.

 

I think that it is about a certain covert installing of positive

values while using an erasure technique to blow out certain negative

energies before they grew to a point of escalation.

 

Let me explain why I say that.

 

What I got from his post was a reframe and a connecting rapport

building post between Aaron and Paulina, who were just about ready

to go tooth and nail at each other.

 

Paulina thought Aaron was bashing women.

 

Aaron was talking about a certain type of woman that did attack Doc

privately, and not about women in general.

 

More interspersed between they different posts.

 

> > Paulina, it's not that various Prince Charmings never arrived in

> > their lives...it's that they TURNED UP THEIR NOSE AT THEM and

> >snubbed them in favor of DangerAsshole....

 

> > And after they're done spawning DangerAsshole's demon sprog,

> >fucking up their own lives, and in other ways, making themselves

> >COMPLETELY undesirable (including the weight gain) to all but the

> >most desperate men...then, and ONLY then, do they take an

> >interest in a guy who actually has something going for him, and

> >and education, and manners.

 

Notice that the person Aaron in talking about is a specific type of

woman, and not a general type of woman?

 

Aaron then explains himself more clearly with the following.

 

> > I don't hate women, but I utterly abhor the sort of " I want

> > an asshole man to create my kids, but I want YOU to raise

> > them for me " sort of pigs as I described above.

> >Aaron

 

So, two really smart people are butting heads over a concept that

they both identify with and take personal.

 

And they are both good people.

 

So Doc comes on the scene and switches the topic from 'those

asshole' women, and those 'asshole' men to something seemingly

totally different.

 

But if you look closely, it is not different.

 

Doc just switched referencial index from 'those nasty evil women'

who turn into pigs, onto himself!

 

First Doc praises his wife.

 

How she is in so good physical shape.

 

Then he points his own finger at himself, just like Aaron pointed

him finger at 'that type of woman'.

 

And how he is now a pig because of, and he gives us a reason or two

to verify that premise.

 

1. he had a previous injury 9 years ago.

 

2. he is 100% self-motivated.

 

3. he needs to recognize first that where he is is not where he

wants to be.

 

4. so Doc actually gives us a framework of steps to go from where

you are and don't want to be, to where you want to be.

 

5. then he fills in the goal orientation with times of achievement,

ie, when his next seminar in Feb 2006.

 

6. there is much more that I won't go into now.

 

All of a sudden we have all forgotten about the argument that Aaron

and Paulina were having, and now we are focused on Dr La Tourette

and his own admittingly poor physical shape.

 

Then he gives us clues and ways that he is going to better that

condition.

 

So now the post is about bettering the condition and the previously

argument is totally lost in the wasteland of memory.

 

> Hi Aaron,

> I was totally mesmerized by your post to Paulina.

 

Notice that Doc was not angry at Aaron, but was mesmerized by his

post to Paulina. Doc took the attack and reframed it into something

much more postive, a learning tool for awareness.

 

> Not because it is a " truth " , but because it is isomorphic WITH ME.

 

Doc switched referencial index so he was not talking about them, but

about something he has total control over, himself.

 

> And I'm not talking about my wife turning into a pig...

 

Notice the neat installation of pig, done several times.

 

> ...I'm talking about ME turning into a pig!

> And there is/was NO EXCUSE FOR IT, ever!

 

Notice Doc does not whine, nor procrastinate, nor excuse what he's

noticed about himself (regardless of whether it is true or not).

 

Notice that you can now relate easily to being a few pounds

overweight without feeling bad about it, but knowing that you can

deal with it and you have the tools to deal with it.

 

> My wife is 59 years old, 5' 5 " tall and weighs 127 pounds.

> She exercises 3-4 times a week a curves, so she can look good,

>move good, and have pride in herself.

 

Notice that Doc has reframed age being an excuse for over weight.

 

Notice that Doc has covertly given a workable plan of action for

getting in shape, for moving good, and for having pride in yourself.

 

Notice that Doc has not used the words that refer to the negative

sides of the fat, pig issue when talking about the positive results.

 

Gees, I wonder if he did that on purpose?

 

> Me, I'm over the hill. In my early 60's. About 35 pounds

overweight.

 

Notice that Doc is pacing what Aaron said about that one group of

women. He is going for the unconscious agreement frame.

 

> I've been that way since an injury 9 years ago, and I've just NOT

> yet taken the time, effort to use the NEAT SKILLS I OWN to apply

> them to the weight issue.

 

Doc gives a reason why he is a bit overweight. Again a covert pace

of the reasons and believes of why and how people become a bit heavy.

 

> You see Aaron, I just didn't think that it mattered. At least it

> didn't matter to me. I'm pretty sure it matters to my wife, to my

> students and to my clients.

 

Notice that the post is aimed directly at Aaron, a person that never

once admitted that he read it.

 

And notice who did respond to the post. Paulina responded to the

post. So I wonder if Doc was actually reframing the negative

energies that were aroused in Paulina because of Aaron's original

post?

 

And, it doesn't matter. Why not? Because no one can even remember

where the thread started, but only the point that Doc thinks he's

out of shape and has made a decision to rectify that into something

that is more positive.

 

> But I'm self-motivated 100%!

 

Doc is now leading us in a certain direction that all people need to

go in mentally before they can get anything done.

 

He is leading them towards being proactive.

 

He is leading them to the decision that they have the abilities and

the control to change what they don't like about themselves into

what they do want instead.

 

Again, his post is not about weight issues, but about anything that

you notice about yourself that you don't like, that you would like

to change for the better, and a structure to follow to get that

change.

 

Notice what he says next. It does validate the point.

 

> The first thing is I NEEDED TO RECOGINIZE THAT THERE " IS " A WEIGHT

> ISSUE.

 

So he tells us the first thing we need to do to change. Notice that

it is stage two of the 5 stages of competancy. The stage where one

goes from being a sheeple to noticing that he is a sheeple.

 

> And, THANK YOU Aaron and Paulina, because of BOTH your posts, I

> FINALLY REALIZED IT!

 

This was do DAMN IMPORTANT.

 

When someone notices that they are a sheeple (or fat, or weak, or

ignorant, fill in the blanks with whatever) they normally do two

things.

 

The first thing is, they ignore the evidence that they are fat.

 

They give reasons to validate that fat. ie, " I'm old. I've been

injured. I've bad knees. I'm diabetic. I've a back back, etc.

 

And because they've validated the reasons for being fat, now they

forget the fact that they are fat!

 

Doc did reframe all of the above reasons for being fat.

 

Now Doc 'thanks' both Aaron and Paulina for their mesmerizing posts,

the posts that allowed the awareness of something that needed to be

fixed, to seep into his brain.

 

It's like Doc conversationally used the Inner Demon Destroyer set-up

phrase so that we could unconsciously accept the fact that we need

to change something, and we would be able to give 'thanks' to the

fact that we need to change.

 

> Damn!

>

> Now " IT'S GET TO WORK TIME! "

> Again, my thanks to both of you!

 

This was a cute use of the Milton Model. When Doc conversationally

uses a simple, " IT'S GET TO WORK TIME " , so that we could easily fill

in the blanks in our own mind with the necessary details and

sequences that can be done to get to where we want to go.

 

A real covert installation of Doc's Precision Model of Thinking.

 

Thank you Doc, Aaron, Paulina, Beth and Walter for such an inspiring

intellectual NLP drill.

 

Sam Fagone

 

> Nice point Aaron. It smacked me right between the eyes.

>

> Dr. John (flabby) La Tourrette

> (soon to be back where it is best to be!)

> Creeping Up Old age CAN breeds pigs!

> Doc's SECRET Installations of Values! OLD AGE can BREED Pigs!!!

[Guest guest]

Hi Paulina,

 

What's fascinating to me is how different people have interpreted the

posts of Doc and Barbara Ann. I knew it wasn't about Doc being out

of shape because I had seen him. You even noticed that so don't under

estimate your observation ability. Then again, I tend to be really

analytical about things and red flags start going off when things

don't match up for me...sometimes that gets me in trouble...LOL. I

also know that Doc has a great and unique sense of humor so I took

that into consideration too.

 

What I liked about the whole " OLD Age can BREED Pigs " thread is that

it did make me stand back and think and do my own self assessment

about where I could use some improvement myself. Ironically, as a

result I'm working on getting into top physical condition.

 

Lori

 

 

,

Pandora51@a... wrote:

>

>

> In a message dated 12/27/05 8:07:20 PM, sam58fagone writes:

>

>

> >

> > And notice who did respond to the post. Paulina responded to the

> > post. So I wonder if Doc was actually reframing the negative

> > energies that were aroused in Paulina because of Aaron's original

> > post?

> >

> >

>

> Hi Sam: That was a very good post. You were able to clarify for

me Doc's

> reframe as to my original response to MIKE.... not Aaron. Hence:

>

> > > Pandora51@a... wrote:

> > > > I can't help but wonder why You Mike, seem to be bashing

> > > >women, rather than merely agree or support Doc's view on one

> > > >particular woman who has apparently bashed him personally.  I

> > > >have seen Doc respond to  males just as vigorously. It

> > > >certainly is not because she was a woman.

>

> I guess I didn't understand why an incident that was made by one

woman to

> Doc....got a reply from MIKE, that seemingly got generalized to

most women.

>

> Doc reframed it into terms, that frankly got lost on me, when he

used himself

> and his weight and being in/out of shape. I guess I took it at

face value

> and that it was Doc's good natured way to lead us away from a

heated

> conversation, that frankly was not very useful. When he said that

he was out of shape,

> I took that to mean that he really thought that, and I personally

did not see

> it and so I responded that way. I guess when you put it the way

that you

> did, I can see that it was more than about weight or fitness and

more as a means

> to teach the group meta modeling, and reframing, and I am sure a

host of

> other things that I didn't get. I sometimes (most times), think

that a cigar is

> just a cigar, and that there is no deeper meaning and that what

people say

> is what they mean, and mean what they say.

>

> Your post certainly clarified it for me. I tend to respond from a

gut

> instinct (being the kinesthetic that I am), and frankly get

frustrated to try to

> read between the lines, so to speak. So that a lot of really good

quality

> posts get lost on me, if they don't grab my interest right away, or

when I can't

> see how I can learn from it directly.

>

> So thank you for that clarification.

>

> Paulina

>

[Guest guest]

Yep, we'd better get our butts in gear and start working out now...LOL

 

 

, Pandora51@a...

wrote:

>

>

> In a message dated 12/27/05 11:35:54 PM, Pandora51@a... writes:

>

>

> > I don't know if that threat of Doc's sparked

> >

>

> Wow I just noticed the Freudian Slip here, LOL...

>

> I meant, of course, " thread " .....

>

> Paulina

>