How Your Emotional Thinking Causes Excuses
THIS IS A KEY ARTICLE IN TERMS OF BOLSTERING YOUR UNDERSTANDING.
The fact for so long you had no idea what you were dealing with resulted in you engaging in an anticipated behaviour. This behaviour is one which we regularly rely on in order to keep you in the dark. I have made mention of the various traits which we look for in those who make the most useful victims to us.
One of those traits concerns your ability to try to find the good in everyone and everything. This is a typical empathic trait and along with all of the others which you possess causes you to flare up on our radar when we are seeking an excellent primary source. Your desire to see good means that it obscures your ability to see the bad or perhaps more accurately, to accept the bad.
This is how your emotional thinking once again cons you and causes you to fail to see what is really happening, how you make excuses for the behaviour. Your emotional thinking craves the interaction with us, it is selfish and wants to experience all of the ‘good’ which flows from us and to convince you to ignore the bad. Your emotional thinking does not want you to acknowledge what is really going on and exit the relationship.
Your emotional thinking wants to gag logic so it cannot be heard and cause you to overlook the bad in the hope of recovering the good once again. Thus, your emotional thinking will make you issue excuse after excuse for what we do, so you remain invested in the relationship with us.
Accordingly, your emotional thinking continues our control of you. It is those who are empathic who suffer from this effect from their emotional thinking. They are convinced to consider their action as selfless, a reflection of how they wish to see the ‘good’ in people, how they make allowances and are tolerant – but when you are ensnared with our kind, all that is happening is that you are being prevented, by your own emotional thinking, from seeing what is truly happening and this is to your detriment.
Of course, at the time it is happening, you cannot see it happening because your insight is impaired by the emotional thinking. Occasionally, logic might just make itself heard (only to be ignored) as you notice that a certain behaviour is not acceptable but your emotional thinking rises once again and swamps that logic before it can gain a foothold in your mind.
Emotional thinking whispers that excuse for you and it is easier to accept that than go along the rocky road of logic. Thus, your emotional thinking keeps you blinded to the truth and it is only later when you have been punched in the face by the gauntlet of brutal honesty that you finally pay heed to logic and with hindsight realise how you have been conned. It happens over and over again and is all because of your emotional thinking gaining control of your thoughts.
This is something we desire because it prevents you from truly recognising what it is that is happening to you once your devaluation has begun. We of course love to operate from a position of plausible deniability, we court ambiguity since we enjoy and need to twist and turn in order to achieve what we want.
If you saw everything as stark and clear as I now describe our machinations to you, you would be more inclined to escape us and bring about that unwelcome cessation of our primary source of fuel. It would also make it harder to apply those hoovers when we wish to return you to the fold and have you engage in our cyclical endeavours once again.
We present you with the truth of what we are on a repeated basis but although we offer it up in front of you, we never let you see it clearly. We draw a veil across certain elements, apply a smoke screen, obscure some parts and distort others. The reality is there before you.
It is evident and plain but because of the way in which we purposefully manipulate you, you are unable to see it. It is akin to us pointing out a ship on the horizon. It is obvious for us to see but when we hand you a telescope to gain a better look at this vessel, the lens has been smeared with something which distorts the view, or we place our finger over part of the lens blocking your view.
The consequence of this distortion is to prevent you from truly seeing what we are. This in turn means that you are unable to form a clear and coherent view of the person which has taken hold of you. This becomes infuriating for others who we have not been able to drag into our façade, but who recognise full well what we are.
These observers tell you what you are dealing with. They may be circumspect to begin with, hoping not to offend your sensibilities but over time their increasing exasperation causes them to come out and say it straight. Yet, such candour rarely finds favour with you because you do not like to be told something about someone as wonderful as us (or at least someone who was wonderful).
You do not like to think that the golden period has gone. You do not like to be deprived of the idea that what you once had will never come back or even that it did not exist to begin with.
Most of the reasons why you think like this is as a consequence of our manipulative behaviour, which further foes to underline that it is not your fault. Even your desire to see the good in people is not your fault either. That is who you are. We know that and we exploit it. It is our fault again but of course in the midst of the battle that we engage in with you, we will never admit that anything is our fault. That will never do.
Thus, your view of us is obscured and because of this you will always issue excuses to explain away our behaviour, our words and our actions. You make these excuses time and time again, to others and to yourselves.
You believe these excuses because this is how you think and you have been led towards this train of thought by the schooling you have received at our manipulative hands and mouths. You also utilise these excuses to continue to convince yourself that the unsavoury elements of our behaviour are just an aberration, on occasional blip in respect of an otherwise magnificent person.
Your charity is amazing and naturally most welcome for through this blinkered approach you divest us of responsibility for the things we do, something which aligns with one of our many stated aims. You prevent yourself from examining further the reality of what has now ensnared you and the repeated application of these excuses keeps you in situ.
We want you to utilise these excuses. We want to hear them. We want them said to us and to others. Your excuses frustrate and alienate those who are against us, your excuses support out manufactured façade and most of all they ensure you deny to yourself that which is directly before you. Here are twenty-five of those such excuses. You will have said them and probably more than once. Understand that each time you utter one you have issued a further death knell for your prospects of escaping us.
- He is just tired; it makes him snap.
- He doesn’t mean it, not really.
- You don’t have to pretend with me, I just want you to be yourself.
- He has a lot on his mind at the moment.
- Work is particularly stressful for him.
- He sometimes has a bit too much to drink, but hey, who hasn’t been there?
- I think perhaps I am too harsh on him at times, it is my fault really.
- He is in a bad place but he will come through it.
- He is a complex person; you don’t understand him like I do
- It is just the way he is; I have got used to it.
- I know it seems bad but he does so much that is lovely; this is only a small part of what he is like.
- Nobody knows him properly, that’s why you think bad of him.
- He is a popular guy so he is always going to have women hitting on him.
- He has a temper, I know, but that’s part of what he is and it’s not for us to change him.
- I need to be more supportive and then he will be better.
- He’s not well at the moment but I will help him get through it, you will see.
- You’ve only heard one side of the story; he is not like that at all.
- Yes, well, his family would say that about him to cover up what they did to him.
- All he needs is to be loved and I am the one who is going to do that for him.
- You don’t know what you are saying anymore, it is okay, I do understand.
- It was a one-off, it won’t happen again.
- I know it was wrong but this time he has promised that he won’t do it anymore.
- You don’t understand the way that me and him are together.
- You are just jealous of what we have. Why can’t you be please for us, for my sake?
- I’m sorry, it was my fault.
Sound familiar?
To understand the origins of emotional thinking, how it operates and most importantly what you can do about it, obtain The Addiction – Triple Package
117 thoughts on “How Your Emotional Thinking Causes Excuses”
Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I agree with HG, it seems like there’s hardly enough time to moderate and comment anyway with all he’s doing.. going on logic I don’t think it would make any sense to invent new commenters lol. And he wouldn’t use emojis.. we know that.
You made me chuckle Josephina. You have an even better imagination than me 😁 it is kind of weird sometimes to share our deep and personal thoughts with random people we don’t really know, isn’t it? But I’m real 👋 and get a lot out of the space HG has created here.
I’m glad that this place — and the real people in it — actually exist 🙂
Actually it’s just me, writing to lots of other versions of me, asking questions of myself, praising myself and arguing with myself. Nobody exists here but meeeeeeee!
Hahahahaha oh that made me laugh
😂😂😂😂😂😂
So we are in a hospital after all?
I knew it, I just knew it!
We’ve all been dosed, Josephina and then set free in His Grace’s labyrinth. 😵💫🤪
Hehe. Time for the meds! 😉
Hahahaha! Yeah we know, it’s all about you. Just as you like it. 😘
HG
What inspired you to create me?
(I’m going to regret asking this)
I saw a massive tumbleweed rolling down the avenue and thought “Witch with a massive hairy growler”
Happy Multiverse, Ultra Prime!
Okay okay I apologize. What do expect from such a filthy whore? 🤣
GP,
Don’t take it to heart. That word only tells us something about the person who used it, but it does not apply to you. By definition, it describes someone who engages in sexual activity in exchange for payment, which clearly is very far removed from what you were talking about. In actual fact, to call a rival for someone’s attention a whore implies that the someone they are fighting over has to resort to payment to find a willing partner, not the most flattering thing to say about your love interest. Since HG is about the last man on the planet that would apply to, you can never be a whore. It is a simple case of choosing the wrong word, like calling a person with brown hair a blonde.
Anna, you really know nothing about this Man. First my apologies to GP. It was a most unkind comment. Oh, the perils of “mean-girling.” I will have you know I do not go in for that sort of thing. It would hurt me if someone referred to me that way. I confess: I can dish it out, but I cannot take it. I’m a sensitive soul 💗🥺 🎀💕
So please, GP, forgive me 🌷
Now to my lovely Anna. Let this words ring in your ears: I Understand the Ultra. I promise you, Hg is a Prince of Promiscuity. He has had hundreds of women. A thousand one night stands. Sordid sex parties 🥀. He has engaged in sexual acts that would make a hardened harlot blush burgundy.
This is a chap who uses words like “growler” and “pocket rocket” to refer to women and their sex.
This is a man who is a psychopath 💀. If people are appliances, females are fleshlights 🍑
I have the misfortune of seeing people and things as they are. Not as I am. And being a near-nun with little sexual experience, I can tell you that HG’s sex life is a labyrinth. Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
My point is HG has paid for sex. He is what you would call “A Sexual Adventurer.” There is nothing wrong in paying a professional prostitute for her sexual services. It is a commerce that has endured for civilisations. Some make their bread by buttering the bread of others. That is their commerce, that is their concern. I myself am a Votress of Vesta. That doesn’t stop me from being deeply interested in this Man’s powerful psyche ⚡️✨
I am in the giving vein today. Most willing to conciliate. I apologised to GP. I do apologise to you, Anna 💞. No need to devolve to cat fights. And yes, I started it. Mea culpa. But my interest in him does make me metamorphose into the green-eyed monster 🌷 🎀😡😭💕
You ken my meaning 😔 💘🥺💕
And no. I do not do drugs. Or drink. Or watch porn. Maybe it is my Virgo moon, but my Pursuit of Purity is unending. Adieu, my dears.
And HG, Ciao Bello 🌹
🥰😍
HG,
You know full well that, even if you did start out talking to yourself here, it would never stay that way. You would not be alone for five minutes, let alone ten years!
“I don’t have the time to answer people as fully or as often as I prefer.
I’m not going to waste my time pretending to be someone else on my own blog”.
I understand, HG. This is all emotional thinking, which sometimes takes over. But please note—I never once said that it was YOU.
In any case, I apologize.
«GP, it could not possibly be HG.
1. As he said, he is not stupid. He knows such behaviour would decrease his credibility.
2. Again, as he said, the style is different.
3. HG would not break out the emojis for something as trivial as this. It would have to be more important by several orders of magnitude, and even then he would likely go there only as a last resort and under duress.
4. HG would never be so sloppy in his argumentation.
5. HG has more class than the individual in question.
6. HG would not pick a name like this one, because it implies attachment, even subordination to someone else.
7. HG knows his readers are not so easily spooked as to run away because of a little immaturity and a few insults.»
I don’t think this is HG!
But if it were HG, there’s a concise answer to every single point—just insert: “BECAUSE HE IS GENIUS!”—and everything suddenly makes perfect sense. The power of talent.
But I’ll repeat, I don’t think it’s HG.
I think it’s someone else.
And as for “Who is it?”—that’s what we’ll have to figure out! ))))))))
Alright, that’s it. Time to return to the real world.
Who Am I?
If HG is the Sun, I am a Shadow.
If HG is a Psychopath, I am a Psychic.
If HG is your God, I am your Devil.
If HG is Male, I am Female.
If HG is Solar, I am Lunar.
If HG is Logic, I am Madness.
If HG is a Trickster, I am a Temptress.
What the actual fuck?
Insanity. Perhaps. More likely delusion and grandiosity etc.
Hi, AV–
Cocaine is a helluva drug.
—Rick James
Dear A Victor and Allison,
I think it rather sad that one would need a substance to become unsane. You say “One can’t believe impossible things.”
I say “sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast” (Through the Looking-Glass).
Take a page out of the Lewis Carrolls and Salvador Dalis of this world: La vie est magique! I love mathematics. I always have done. Euclid’s Elements is a sort of Bible to me. I excelled at my maths classes at University. Although I am an artist I could clearly see that Maths is an all-encompassing power. Especially when one studies the Philosophy of Mathematics.
Hg loves logic. I love magic. Mathematics encompasses both. If there is nothing that is not Nature, then everything is mathematical. For as Galileo wrote “the book of Nature is written in the language of mathematics.” And yet maths contains mysteries with its imaginary numbers and chaos theory.
What I was pointing out in my “If HG is… I am” poem is that psychological syzygy at the heart of all things.
“Logic is overrated” I wrote. Hg replied “Logic is effective.”
He is right. And I am right. Two things can be true at once. It’s called a Paradox.
Logic is overrated when divorced from imagination. Logic is effective when it marries itself to the creative side of Life.
Look at Lewis Carroll for Heaven’s sake! Carroll wrote the trippiest tales. Who needs drugs when “Alice in Wonderland exists”? Skip the coke and read the books or watch the Disney film. Or better yet read his poem “Jabberwocky.” The man who wrote what reads like gorgeous gibberish was a Mathematician! Lewis Carroll understood Logic to its nth degree.
So, no. I do not do drugs. Not this body. Not this temple.
I have imagination to stimulate my mind 😘💕
I leave you with a quote by my favourite mathematician, Henri Poincaré:
“It is by logic that we prove, but by intuition that we discover. To know how to criticise is good, to know how to create is better.”
Ergo:
If HG is logic, I am intuition
If HG is critical thinking, I am creativity.
Adieu 🌹
Lolita, let’s unpack:
“HG is logic, I am intuition. If HG is critical thinking, I am creativity.”
These don’t quite make logical or semantic sense, and they’re not true opposites or balanced contrasts. It’s unclear what kind of relationship is being described.
“If HG is critical thinking, I am creativity.”
Same pattern, same issue: “critical thinking” and “creativity” are related cognitive abilities, not opposites. The “if” makes it sound like being one depends on the other, but that dependency isn’t logical here.
Depending on your intent:
If you want contrast (metaphorical): “HG is logic and critical thinking; I am intuition and creativity.”
If you want complementarity (balanced partnership): “HG brings logic and analysis; I bring intuition and imagination.”
If you mean it conditionally (logical dependence): “If HG relies on logic, then I rely on intuition.”
Same here:
“‘Logic is overrated’ I wrote. Hg replied ‘Logic is effective.’ He is right. And I am right. Two things can be true at once. It’s called a Paradox. Logic is overrated when divorced from imagination. Logic is effective when it marries itself to the creative side of Life.”
A paradox isn’t just “two truths coexisting”; it’s a seeming contradiction that reveals a deeper truth. So the coexistence of your two views isn’t necessarily paradoxical: it’s context-dependent truth or dialectical balance, not a paradox in the strict sense.
You jump from “we’re both right” to the nuanced explanation without connecting why.
Haha!
“Who Am I?” — “…If HG is your God, I am your Devil…”
Hi Lolita,
From the examples you’ve presented: one extreme versus the other: the answer follows: you’re an extremist of radical opposites, which is a mark of black-and-white thinking. That’s the hallmark of a narcissist’s mindset, or of an individual whose emotional empathy has been eroded by external stressors.
Dearest LL,
Thank you for the lengthy, florid response regarding cocaine. It was a model of loose associations and daring flights of thought.
If I may speak for AV, you have soundly demonstrated our errors in thinking. As for me, I will be certain to return to my own studies in geometry and Lewis Carroll to improve my mind as suggested.
I look to you, Lolita, because as you have engaged on the blog it is evident that you understand Pythagoras even better than your friend Euclid did.
On an unrelated note, a hit dog will holler.
Thank you again Allison, you said it better than I could have. I thought for sure it was going to end “If HG does cocaine, I eat cookies”.
Ha! Ha!
It sounds intense and dramatic, but that intensity actually exposes psychological and emotional immaturity, not depth.
“Who Am I?
If HG is the Sun, I am a Shadow.
If HG is a Psychopath, I am a Psychic.
If HG is your God, I am your Devil.
If HG is Male, I am Female.
If HG is Solar, I am Lunar.
If HG is Logic, I am Madness.
If HG is a Trickster, I am a Temptress.”
It relies on harsh binaries: every “If HG is X, I am Y” builds a world of opposites, leaving no space for nuance, overlap, or the gray area where real people and real psychology live. That’s why it feels exaggerated, performative, and a bit hollow emotionally.
That means “I” has no inherent self – only a reactive one. The speaker’s identity depends entirely on what HG is or isn’t.
That creates an emotional undertone of dependency and defiance, rather than genuine individuality.
It’s trying to sound deep and paradoxical, but it’s really just flipping the polarity each time. There’s no synthesis, no evolution.
A more mature or grounded approach would blend these forces, showing how both can coexist or transform each other – integration instead of opposition.
Lines like “If HG is a Psychopath, I am a Psychic” reflect a defensive inversion: one person is cast as “dark,” the other as “enlightened.”
It’s the language of ego division, not insight.
So while it sounds powerful, it’s actually fragile – it denies shared humanity.
Why it doesn’t feel authentic is because real understanding sits in the middle ground, where logic and creativity, light and dark, masculine and feminine all inform each other.
The writing denies that complexity. That’s why it feels false.
This site is like a drug! Why can’t I leave it again?
Yes, what the hell. I’m barely holding back so I don’t start replying to the other participants again.
All it took was to come back… recklessly, of course, recklessly. ))))
Hi Josephina,
If you’re an empath, its important that you stay here. Your ET can be conning you into thinking that this blog isn’t the right place for you. Sometimes our ET can make us think that Mr. Tudor can’t help us because our ET wants to keep us in the dynamic with the narcissist. I can assure you this is the best place for you to truly learn about narcissism. I’ve been here for 6 years and Mr. Tudor has given me the gift of clarity. Its like he’s given us a key to understanding human behavior. I think if you stay, you’ll find that to be true.
Hi Leigh, thank you for your words. It really means a lot to me to hear this from you.
And I understand. But I guess I can still learn from HG through his knowledge archive, without actually chatting with other participants.
You see, I seem to be behaving a bit… not quite adequate 😅 I write way too much and can’t seem to stop. I must have some kind of extra sensitivity.
Hi Josephina,
I didn’t interact when I first arrived. It was intimidating for me. I dived into the articles first. Then I started reading his books. About I was probably here for about 4 months or so before I started commenting. I think its a great idea to dive into the education first. You won’t be disappointed.
Thank you for sharing, Leigh .💖 I’ve decided that I’ll go through the Knowledge Vault and write down my impressions from it whenever possible. And of course, ask questions.
Thank you for sharing, Leigh 💖. I’ve decided that I’ll go through the Knowledge Vault and write down my impressions from it whenever possible. And of course, ask questions.
I understand what you’re sharing Josephina, i think. I have got like that at times too, where I can’t stop sharing and it’s not helping me (more talking about something for me but also writing for myself can lead into that too). You sound like you’ve been through a lot recently so take good care and trust yourself ❤️ we’re here if you need us xx
Thank you so much, dear Jade!💕😘
Thank you for this Leigh 🙏
“I’m a girly girl. Girly Woman. Girl-woman. I like getting my manicures, pedicures, and my Brazilian waxes. 🎀💄💋💅I take pride in my appearance. I choose the right scent. I like pretty things and I have a pretty face. I may have a big brain, but when men see me they quickly forget my brain…. and focus on other things.💕🥰💖
So, no. I am not HG. I may write like HG. I may well think like HG. But I am all Woman and He is all Man ✨ 💞”
This is brilliant ))))) Hilarious, literally made me cry!! I had a full-blown hysterical fit)))
Sorry)
Brazilian waxes had me laughing out loud.
I find it funny that the most recent article is about blame shifting. Haha.
I also find it interesting that this whole thread was started under reply to my Exorcist comment, as if to blame shift onto ME!
I’m real guys! 👋 But nice try mysterious blame shifter. 🫵🏻😂
@violetfire
She’s better than me, I don’t even shave for months
Sometimes I’ll be strutting the streets dolled up knowing full well my crack is hairy
Hahaha!
It is winter in the northern hemisphere…
Oh, yeah! Well I’ll be. Is that how we got here?
Geez, I love that movie.
It’s madness, Allison.
Okay so what if I totally hear ya and I get it but I also want you to spank me and knock my hip out?
It can be arranged.
😲
Calling my bluff are ya? 😏
Hi HG:
Watching this series Crazy Not Insane 2023 where this Jewish women Dorothy Lewis effected by WWII wishes she could understand Hitler better so she went to medical school then becomes a psychiatrist and works with juvenile delinquents where she discovers through a neurosurgeon Pincus that the violent ones have a horrific backgrounds in abuse plus brain differences. 46%. She is a true pioneer. She then goes to Bellevue ( spelling) and furthers her study especially interested in serial killers and meets famous killers such as David Chaplin who killed John Lennon and Ted Bundy. Her hypothesis is “we can all kill why don’t we. “ She tesstifies for the defense. She investigates. She was a psychiatrist before schizophrenia was known and met with Moore who with her boyfriend sadistically raped then killed her mother. The schizo Moore knew nothing and tested normal on Roasch test while the alter Billy admitted that the father had sadistically raped Moore was completely different. How could you have one alter be a killer? Early learnings on DID. The suggestion in this series is childhood abuse and brain differences. ( Sounds like what you teach HG) . She meets with Arthur Shawshow a serial killer and she finds his brain MRI images are alarming and her interviews of show childhood abuse ( mom even bit his penis) and she suggest insanity at TRIAL… oops we are not in psychiatry anymore but the court of LAW….her opposition an FBI and CIA agent psychiatrist calls bullshit. He felt she “was fooled by him and that the man had a sexual and sadistic fantasy that he knowingly committed like so many others. “ This particular serial killer ate the vagina of women and testified to it like he had just ordered from Macdonalds. Of course, like always, the prosecutor won.. Eating a vagina of a dead women you raped or killed is “ not insane” he “was hiding the DNA” and deserved the death penalty. He ate the women’s genitalia’s. He knew right from wrong? ( um wasn’t there another way to hide DNA evidence?) but whatever….he was found guilty of a cold, calculated , remorseless murder. Of course… always. She discusses competency in her cases. The prosecution always asks:” do you know if you are in a courtroom? Charged with burglary and murder?” Answer “ yes” . Well, under the law…”:competent. “The legal definition. They point to Middle Ages in England. Madness itself was considered to be punished. USA changed the law in time but a very low bar on competency. It ignores genetics, she says. Ricky Ray was a client. He was mentally retarded and abused and killed. Put to death. She is against putting to death locking up someone with brain malfunctions and an abusive childhood to death. She feels they should be locked up to protect the public but not death. Max Mooney whose alter Kallie killed 10 men. …He was tortured by his mother, scars all over his body. Then Martin Scorsese wanted to interview murderers and to meet Mac for the Cape Fear film. She interduced Max to DeNiro. Alter Kalfki met DeNiro and he said he was “ mad and you put a dog to death? Why not him? “ He got discharged to society against Dorothy’s objection….Then there was Johnny Garrett. He raped and killed multiple women. He was sentenced to death. She interviewed him and he is a multiple and Pope Francis urged saving him in Texas from the death penalty because of DID. Johnny had an altar called Aaron since 5th grade. He said his father and other men raped him. There were porns made of this. They killed him. Of course he is put to death. It ends with what you said HG….genes plus an unstable environment. Dorothy then met with David Wilson who shot a man who was biting his victims then killing them. He had scars and burn wounds all over his body from his mother when a child. His father hung him up and put balls in his arse then kicked him in his stomach. She found him to be DID …now a term. Always a protective hard altar appears through severe abuse. He was facing death but she got it reduced for life. The question is if the perpetrator cannot confirm his behaviors should he be put to death when out of his control. lol? Note: use of the term HE is usually accurate. Interesting to me……She then turns to psychopaths. Sam Jones. Sam killed man, woman or child without any qualms. He killed 19. He “felt nothing” , but she saw his psychosis in his Art, it got more and more upsetting to him but he kept doing it. . Sam had a violent childhood. He was confused and muddled headed and paranoid enraged. And she saw his multiples as she had met them….Sam was also a loving grand dad. Finally, she interviewed Ted Bundy. Bundy has no known childhood abuse. Yet he raped and killed 30 women. Bundy kept some heads. She did brain testing. Not much there. Showed depression maybe bipolar. Bundy himself said he grew up in a “loving home.” Bundy said pornography was it. ( Many serial killers have an obsession with pornography.) Bundy said it was an obsession of pornography that he got from his grandfather and that he should be hospitalized and treatment that caused his urges. She looked into it. When she interviewed an Aunt, Bundy was 3, Bundy would threaten with kitchen knives. Dorothy found him bi polar and depression from interviews from family and…. Abused. She argued Bundy could not go to trial and represent himself for the death penalty. She thought that Bundy was handsome, charismatic and loved by his brother. Bundy did represent himself and got the death sentence. Dorothy says abused children with brain abnormalities become adults from society who can kill and should not be killed. She said Bundy had an Aunt who told her that he had a sexual encounter with one of his sisters. His mother told Dorothy about Ann, his sister , that she should be careful because there was someone out in the world with killing women who look just like her. His mother also said Bundy was to be aborted, she took pills but it didn’t work. Bundy father controlled the mother and the abortion failed. ( genes?) Bundy mother then was ordered by the father to go to an unwed mothers home for two months, the mother refused to see the father and signed papers to put Bundy up for adoption that worked for two months but her father took him and got him back and said he would be Father to his daughters child. His mother was to be the “sister.@ The grandfather/father was described by the other children as filled with rage, violent and disturbed. The mother took Bundy and escaped. Dorothy felt there was more to the story then what Bundy told the public of a “”good loving home. Bundy wrote letters to his wife that had different names signed to the letters. Some were signed “ Sam” the names of his grandfather or was Sam. She felt he was on the “ continuum of DID.”. Dorothy said that his mother said Bundy was her fathers child. Incest. She tested it. She was wrong. His mother said that she could not wait until Bundy was dead. Again I think with mental illness genes and environment and even the why blurs. “Dorothy is right. The death penalty is not a deterrent… it is well proven, the death penalty costs a million versus 45,000 …. Dorothy is also right had Bundy been kept alive, we could learn more….but I hear no answers from her as to these broken patients that she treated or represented or her quest to understand Hitler….as far as a cure. Zero. Dorothy said these people need to be removed from society for the public good but not death as it won’t their fault. She thinks we live in the Middle Ages. Probably right. A good series for anyone interested in why some people kill and our legal justice system. There message is murderers are made not born. Bundy said there is more interest in why the murderer did it then why he did. True.
I am going to add an odd comment. It’s like progressive democratic societies, the sickness in the system cannot be corrected but maybe banishment is best.
You stupid, filthy whore. Don’t you know he’s already taken?
Easy with the ad hominem insult.
Dear HG:
I think that is an attempt at triangulation by Lolita. I think she feels a connection with you that does not want to be shared….
If you think HG is ever taken, you don’t know much yourself.
Actually “Anna”, I do. Unlike you silly sad sluts I understand the Ultra. Maybe when you have cracked open a book and raised your IQs to the level of my pet python’s I’d have a proper go at you 😊💞 🥰💞
Clearly, emoji girl.
Hi, Mrs. Lucifer–
You’re having a go at us silly sad sluts, but not the proper pet python kind?
Aww, Anna. “Emoji girl”? Did you use your last two brain cells to come up with that one? Try not to hurt yourself, sweetie. And try not to think so hard. Because each time you do you lower the IQ of the entire planet 🎀💅💖
Dear Lucifer’s Lysosomes–
Silly sad slut, here. Are you explaining how Anna lowered your IQ?
The entire planet, huh? So either my intellect is so high that any lowering would decrease the average of all of humanity, or I have the ability to change the IQ of every single person on the planet. Very good of you to endow me with such superpowers. I do not mind so much lowering yours, because it would be statistically irrelevant, but to say I lower HG’s IQ as well – he might have something to say about that. I am not at all sure he would be delighted about the fact his Missus has so little confidence in his brain powers. For my part, I do not think anyone could lower his IQ, nor would I want to. I like him just fine as he is.
Asinine Anna, the Ultra and I are from a different planet than yourself. A Planet of the Mind. You, my lovely, are a flatlander. Might I suggest you read “Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions” by Edwin A. Abbott? It is a Victorian novella. Let it assist you, my dear. I’m sure that through its pages you shall acquaint yourself with what you are and your less than edifying environment. You are a dot, sweetie, a dot in a two dimensional world. The Ultra is a dodecahedron. Go on, darling, strangle your brain with much over-learning trying hard for the perfect comeback. It’s most adorable. You’re almost as amusing as my pet python, but alas, not quite. TTFN🌸🎀💖✨
Greetings, Lucifer’s Listeria–
S3 in the room. This Planet of the Mind–is it near Uranus?
hmmm … don’t know about HG being a dodecahedron, LL.
That’s an odd-looking, irregular, three-dimensional shape. It wouldn’t get very far before losing acceleration and becoming inert.
I think HG is more like a truncated icosahedron myself. Magnetic and useful to many worldwide with dynamic showmanship hiding in plain sight … ⚽😉
Ah yes, the famous alien mental giants who somehow always have to play by our rules and technology, read our literature and perceive so-called dots as serious threats that need to be addressed. It says a lot about your estimation of HG if you believe he would consort with such low life forms.
If you want to be taken seriously as an intellectual entity, you will have to do a lot better, but thank you for your data input as confirmation. It is as I thought, no detectable statistical difference. This concludes our experiment, you can pick up your participation documentation at the exit. I am afraid we are all out of medals.
Yes WiserNow,
The truncated icosahedron is rather dashing, and dare I say, debonair. Much like Our Ultra. I opted for dodecahedron because of my instinct for alliteration. I was comparing the Dot to the Dodecahedron; the dot is a linelander (one who lives in a one-dimensional world and thus possess a one-dimensional mind), much like our friend Anna, while the dodecahedron is a spherelander (one who lives in a multi-dimensional world and thus possess a multi-dimensional mind). Alas, all analogies do break down at some point. And all this relates to a Victorian novella that uses mathematical shapes as socio-philosophical metaphors. But yes, the truncated icosahedron is much sexier than the dodecahedron. So yah. Let’s go with that! 🔥
Dear Allison,
I see you are a scatological satirist. The only thing near Uranus is your own head. Do pull it out of there, darling. Then grow a pair…. of cerebral hemispheres ⭐✨💫 ✨
Hello Lucifer’s Lolita,
It’s delightful to make your acquaintance! And yes, I can see you have an instinct for alliteration … dashing and debonair … fitting words to describe HG.
I haven’t heard of the Victorian novella you mention. It sounds very imaginative and unique. The world of dots, lines, spheres and squares sounds intriguing. What happens when a line ventures into sphere territory or vice versa. Can a dot migrate into the world of a dodecahedron? Would they be able to understand each other?
So many questions.
Thank you for introducing me to this new way of looking at the world 🙂
Dear WiserNow,
You are rather astute. YES. That is the overwhelming question of Abbott’s novella. As you write:
“What happens when a line ventures into sphere territory or vice versa. Can a dot migrate into the world of a dodecahedron? Would they be able to understand each other?”
No. It is difficult for a square to understand a sphere. It is impossible for a dot to comprehend a dodecahedron. We perceive things as we are. A one-dimensional dot sees a Square as a line. A two-dimensional Square sees a Sphere as a Circle. And a 3D Sphere could not possibly fathom the existence of a fourth dimension.
The novel is narrated by a Square, who is a member of the “Gentle-man class.” The book does display dated Victorian values toward women and the class system.
Oh, but the metaphor… 👌✨ 💕
“Dear Allison,
I see you are a scatological satirist.”
Just tell us who did this to you. We’ll bring them to justice.
And all my hemispheres are fine and dandy, but I thank you for your concern.
“Just tell us who did this to you”
Amused HG.
Mommy?
LMAO Allison 🤣
🤤🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Says Lucifers Lolita
Witch- Exactly. Haha. That language reminds me of The Exorcist.
Well, it’s definitely getting hot in here. )
You know what makes an online platform absolutely perfect for fuel gathering?
A narcissist can easily create a bunch of different accounts, log in from various devices, and provoke conflict dynamics — even carry on entire conversations with himself under different names.
Especially knowing how many empaths are around here.
Or Herself.
HG is ever the gentleman, always thinking of the ladies.
Oh it’s definitely a himself. 😈
Dear Josephina,
I can with confidence say that I speak only for myself. I wouldn’t know how to ape Anna Plyance’s leaden lexicon or simulate her syntax. And honestly the jury is out on whether or not I am a narcissist or an empath. I suspect I am the latter since I see people as an end in themselves and not as a means to an end. Then again I shan’t lose sleep either way. Je suis comme je suis.
At any rate, It’s not my “thing”, you know, anonymously jousting with strangers on the internet. Yet we all know: “Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth,” (Oscar Wilde). Anonymous jousting on the internet can be habit-forming. And so I would prefer to take my leave. And I would prefer to have the final word. And yet some how I suspect I shan’t have it both ways.
And yah, I’m a girl. I mean a woman. Or somewhere in-between.
💕
Holy truncated icosahedron – hello there, sweet Lolita!
Why are you Lucifer’s? Why him? Or it? What is Lucifer to you?
Your mind is interesting! I’m glad you’re here!
I’d love to understand.
☕️☕️
Josephina,
You are so right. I had that exact thought yesterday in fact. Perhaps he/she is not aware that speech/writing cadence is extremely difficult for most people to alter.
Lolita darlin:
You talking to me? Are you referring to the serial killers I listed? Let me assure you, I hope they are taken….ummm the word killer doesn’t lead to a good romance and I like my neck on my head… but I do declare you sound like my ex husband with your sweet nothings to me. Emphasis nothing:) lol
I think you ARE HG LL poking a little fun at us. I mean, what female would name herself Lucifers Lolita? The manner in which you write is masked with only the level of grandiose that only HG could possibly possess. Also those Ultra “girly” emojjs, yeah we don’t use those. I don’t know what you’re trying to do but I don’t suggest ya know bitting the hand even posing as other people. It could make Some see this blog as hostile place and result in losing long time listeners.
It is not me. I only ever write under my name- that has been consistently applied over the last ten years.
The style and syntax is not mine. I can demonstrate by way of a screenshot that the information is linked to someone else but I don’t divulge that information for data protection reasons.
Such behaviour runs contrary to the establishment of legacy. I am not a stupid man.
Not saying you’re stupid. You may have taught us better than you expected.
The point is, I would be stupid to engage in the behaviour you suggest. I am not stupid.
I hope it’s not you because we trust you. Sorry I said I wanted you to spank me and knock my hip out. Very unlady like among other things. I will try and keep a level of tact when interacting with the vlog in the future.
Do not rely on hope, go to the evidence.
You are owed to express your desires, the freedom of expression here (within sensible application of the rules) is part of this place´s enduring appeal and strength.
🤥 You just want an excuse to use emoji’s. They are too irresistible. 💅
Not at all, but feel free to make use of them yourself.
Dear GP,
The Ultra is a highly-intelligent man. Do, listen to him.
Why Lucifer’s Lolita? I’m wearing a mask so I can tell you the truth:
My first time was with a Mid Ranged Narcissist who groomed me by gifting me the first American edition of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita. The book became my bible. This mid-ranger, who was forty years older than me, called me his Lolita. He taught me that intimacy is dark, love is pain, Ultraviolence is devotion. And yes it was all rather painful.
The first time shapes you. And now I cannot distinguish Dark Devotion from Sadomasochism, Love from Pain. Love is the Devil. And I cannot help but love the Devil. Ergo I am Lucifer’s Lolita.
My words mirror the Ultra’s only because we have a similar education. Anyone with a Classical British Education writes like this. I am not English but I was taught a British Syllabus and Upper Received Pronunciation at Secondary School. Also the Ultra is a Virgo Sun and I am a Virgo Moon.
Ah.
The girly emojis.
I’m a girly girl. Girly Woman. Girl-woman. I like getting my manicures, pedicures, and my Brazilian waxes. 🎀💄💋💅I take pride in my appearance. I choose the right scent. I like pretty things and I have a pretty face. I may have a big brain, but when men see me they quickly forget my brain…. and focus on other things.💕🥰💖
So, no. I am not HG. I may write like HG. I may well think like HG. But I am all Woman and He is all Man ✨ 💞
Plus HG would never use a name such as that, trying to fool us or not. It implies that he is someone’s something, and HG is no one’s anything. Even in make-believe I don’t think he could physically make himself say it. It would make him nauseated.
Logic is over-rated.
Adieu 💋
Logic is effective.
Hahaha, just the poor HG we’ve been torturing ))))
HG, this is actually a byproduct of our training—a bit of paranoia, if you will.
You constantly tell us, or rather, write about how insidious narcissists are, especially YOU. So it’s logical (or at least seemingly logical) that all sorts of theories will arise.
Actually, as a version, it is possible that you got bored (and you also wrote about the boredom of a psychopath narcissist 😄) and you want to be closer to your readers (well, as close as possible through a screen)) and thought, “let’s create an army of participants in the form of one person.”
Furthermore, it’s possible that YOU are writing not only on behalf of narcissistic participants but also of empathic participants! )))))))
And if we put jokes aside)
What’s more likely is that this could be done by a male or female narcissist (note, I learn quickly!)).
Perhaps these theories are born not only from overvigilance but also from a subconscious desire to communicate more closely with HG (but safely), being marked by HG in personal correspondence, and so on and so forth.
HG and the other readers, want to laugh?
Josephine, she’s a bit out of this world. ))) Anyway, I once thought that the participants didn’t really exist and that this was all a medical space, like a psychodynamic group. That is, a group of psychiatrists sits here with HG, monitoring the “temperature” of the hospital (on the platform), and they see the participant who is currently most in need of help or is mired in their own dynamics, and begin to collectively process them—sometimes even reenacting the familiar narcissist-empath dynamics so the participant can see themselves from the outside… or other participants have highlighted their typical patterns. It’s a psychotherapeutic path to healing. )))))
Apparently, this was inspired by Guillaume Musso’s book Central Park. The plot: A girl wakes up at a bus stop handcuffed to an unknown man. It turns out the stranger is a jazz musician.
Neither he nor she understands how they ended up in this situation….
Sometimes, when I read the correspondence here, I feel the atmosphere of John Fowles’s The Magus. I love his book The Collector.
P.S.
I checked a couple of responses from this platform through GPT chat. GPT chat says it’s not HG. 👀😂😂😂
I don’t have the time to answer people as fully or as often as I prefer.
I’m not going to waste my time pretending to be someone else on my own blog.
(Edited version)))
Since the party’s already started…
Hahaha, just the poor HG we’ve been torturing ))))
HG, this is actually a byproduct of our training—a bit of paranoia, if you will.
You constantly tell us, or rather, write about how insidious narcissists are, especially YOU. So it’s logical (or at least seemingly logical) that all sorts of theories will arise.
Actually, as a version, it is possible that you got bored (and you also wrote about the boredom of a psychopath narcissist 😄) and you want to be closer to your readers (well, as close as possible through a screen)) and thought, “let’s create an army of participants in the form of one person.”
Furthermore, it’s possible that YOU are writing not only on behalf of narcissistic participants but also of empathic participants! )))))))
And if we put jokes aside)
What’s more likely is that this could be done by a male or female narcissist (note, I learn quickly!)).
Perhaps these theories are born not only from overvigilance but also from a subconscious desire to communicate more closely with HG (but safely), being marked by HG in personal correspondence, and so on and so forth.
HG and the other readers, want to laugh?
Josephine, she’s a bit out of this world. ))) Anyway, I once thought that the participants didn’t really exist and that this was all a medical space, like a psychodynamic group. That is, a group of psychiatrists sits here with HG, monitoring the “temperature” of the hospital (on the platform), and they see the participant who is currently most in need of help or is mired in their own dynamics, and begin to collectively process them—sometimes even reenacting the familiar narcissist-empath dynamics so the participant can see themselves from the outside… or other participants have highlighted their typical patterns. It’s a psychotherapeutic path to healing. )))))
Apparently, this was inspired by Guillaume Musso’s book “Central Park”. The plot: A girl wakes up at a bus stop handcuffed to an unknown man. It turns out the stranger is a jazz musician.
Neither he nor she understands how they ended up in this situation….
Sometimes, when I read the correspondence here, I feel the atmosphere of John Fowles’s “The Magus”. I love his book “The Collector”.
P.S. I checked a couple of responses from this platform through GPT chat. GPT chat says it’s not HG. 👀😂😂😂😂
Hi Katastrophe,
I had to zoom in on your profile picture.. I thought it was the Pope snorting coke lol!
ps agreed with what you said. Thank you for the assurances HG. I agree, you’re not stupid that’s for sure.
One thought I had HG, was about your legacy, if someone (a very rich narcissist) offered you billions to stop educating the empaths, would you take it?
I’d engineer both.
Mm. You would, I imagine. 👏
If Wisdom is Water
Logic is like Ice
Intuition is like Humidity
And there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
HG is the symbol for Mercury.
And you are Mercurial.
My observation stems not from logic but intuition. Which is the foundation of Poetry.
You should know this since you have elsewhere stated that Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights is one of your favourites.
The Brontës are just Brim-full of logic, aren’t they?
Indeed Katastrophe,
I am a Masochist. The opposite of HG who is a Sadist. I am intuitive. The opposite of HG who is all Logic. I am a Woman. The opposite of HG who is a Man. The best part of being a Masochistic Woman is being dominated by a Sadistic Man. A Masochist is a Mystic.
How, I live to be someone’s something.
And so I make Lucifer my Ultra.
But your Ultra is not my Lucifer.
Although Hg was born under the aegis of the god of luck (Mercury)
I do not think your Ultra is lucky enough to have me 💀🖤🥀
Mr. Tudor said:
I don’t have the time to answer people as fully or as often as I prefer.
Knowing this, implicitly in the past and now having it explicitly stated, is why I cherish all the answers I get from you, sir. You leave me wholly stupefied by the observable volume of work you accomplish in one day. You seem utterly indefatigable.
Thank you for all the time you give us. It’s riveting to me to read your answers. I never skip them. The opportunity to learn through your presence and to spend time thinking and digesting the wisdom you are able to share (owing to there being no conflicts with the prime aims or necessary triad) is a gift.
Thank you Dani.
If there is anything worse than waking up handcuffed to a JAZZ musician, it escapes me at present.
GP,
it could not possibly be HG.
1. As he said, he is not stupid. He knows such behaviour would decrease his credibility.
2. Again, as he said, the style is different.
3. HG would not break out the emojis for something as trivial as this. It would have to be more important by several orders of magnitude, and even then he would likely go there only as a last resort and under duress.
4. HG would never be so sloppy in his argumentation.
5. HG has more class than the individual in question.
6. HG would not pick a name like this one, because it implies attachment, even subordination to someone else.
7. HG knows his readers are not so easily spooked as to run away because of a little immaturity and a few insults.
A hefty dose of logic. HG approves.
Thank you very much, HG.
Angsty Anna,
HG does indeed have more class than I. He has more class than everybody. But I have an invariably deep education.
He is pure logic. I’m pure intuition.
Last I checked the world was wide enough for a plethora of perspectives.
Do take your anti-anxiety medication, Angsty Anna. And laugh a little.
Life is not that dire 💕
@Jade
The King pledging allegiance to H.is G.od Tudor. Thought HG would get a kick out of it 😂
Hehe Katastrope! 👏
I didn’t imagine the pope would be snorting the white stuff lol.
Hello Lucifer’s Lolita.
Just curious, have you and I interacted previously on the blog? Three or four years ago maybe?
Hello truthseeker,
I discovered HG in June of this year. Via the traumatising twerkle vid on TOW. So, no. We could not have interacted three or four years ago. But it’s nice to meet you 💕
Hi Lucifer’s Lolita,
I’m not really a fan of the Harry’s Wife series personally but I am definitely a fan of its reach and the fact it means more people gain access to HG’s work.
Encouraging also that the series leads people to the blog.
Thank you for your reply LL, I appreciate the clarification.
“I myself am a Votress of Vesta.”
All this is because you need to get your pipes cleaned?
Hello, Lucifer’s Lolita.
I’ve just read all this thread. You suspect you are an empath and all intuition: if you’re correct, you must have some stonking narcissistic traits, would you agree? Have you considered doing the empath detector test to start off with? Depending on your resources, you could then do the trait detector test, to see what kind of narcissistic or psychopathic traits might prevail.
This thread caused me to wonder what your motive is for being on this blog. Would you care to enlighten me? I see you swing from wildly insulting to rallying, apologising, or ‘sweet talking’.
You speak as though you are intimately familiar with HG Tudor, yet only discovered his work in June. Many of the people here are well-read, long standing ‘students’ of HG’s work and from what I’ve gleaned, have invested in books and consultations. Maybe you have too, but I get the impression you haven’t? Feel free to correct me.
I sense you are not here to engage with other empaths, other than to initially call them dirty whores, sluts, with terrible IQ’s to boot, whilst bigging up your own credentials, from education; culture; sophistication; appearance; right down to the amount of hair you like to keep on your mons pubis. (FYI: I am a lover of brightly coloured mirkins. They add a little je ne said quois to dealings. Top tip: keep them clean.)
The way you describe yourself sounds like somatic narcissism, so that could be one of your narcissistic traits, as an intuitive empath (suspected).
I noted that you’re not English speaking, so would you care to share your first language? Italian, perhaps? Russian? Je ne sais pas! I just wonder if that might help explain some of your communication style. Eg, when you cut in calling GP a dirty whore, was it meant to be bawdy humour that got misunderstood? 😀 Even if it was, it’s a bit clumsy when a rapport has not been established. You went on to apologise for it later. How do you reconcile saying those things to multiple readers, then try to turn it all around like you’re innocent? to my mind that’s mind-fuckery and I am a veteran in that shit, as are most of these readers I suspect! My mind-fuckery-dar has gone off with your contribution. Was that your intention or are you just trying to share a piece of yourself to gain attention and it went wrong? (Or right, if all you need is fuel)
You appear to see yourself as HG’s yin aspect. You also imply you don’t have much sexual activity. If I’ve got that correct, would that abstinence be part of your masochism? Or is it because you are afraid of intimacy/find sex a bit much, or what? It seems you have the attraction to HG’s mind that many have, but mentioned the green eyed monster relating to others being suggestive or daft with him. What’s that about?
What is it that you want, Lucifer’s Lolita? It sounds like you’ve had some kind of experience with HG, but I have no opinion or thoughts on that either way, altho’ I lean towards doubting that. I felt confused and exhausted reading this thread, plus amused and managed to note a few book recommendations and that 😀
I was intrigued to see what unfolded.
What do you want? I mean, can we be bold and break this down to the source? Is it to be loved? Is it admiration? Or is it the narcissistic need for fuel, whilst asserting yourself as some kind of highly attuned, scholarly, intuitive, masochistic Virgo Moon mystery, who is the feminine answer to HG’s masculinity. What’s your sun? What’s your Venus? What’s your Mars?
You say you understand ‘the Ultra’ and your mind works like his, but I don’t see any evidence of that. Are you broken from the mid-ranger, “first-time”, Lolita-Bible grooming experience? You said the first time shapes you. You have been roundly insulting, then tried to soften. Why? What’s going on there? If you’re not a narcissist, you might be traumatised. What do you feel?