HelenM

I agree, freemonkey.

I think it might also go this way (my changes at the end are in bold)

person M: You're angry
person A: No, I'm not
person M: I know angry when I see it
person A: Whatever
person M: Why are you so angry?
person A: I'm not really angry
person M: I'll tell you why you're so angry: you're (insult), and you're (insult). In addition, you (grain of truth, sore spot to dig at) and you don't (talking out of ass).
person A: Please stop that
person M: I don't even care about you
person A: fine, go away
person M: You wouldn't be so angry if you faced the "truth"
person A: Now you've made me angry
person M: See, I told you you were angry!
person A: leave me alone
person M: Why are you so angry?

love
Helen

Eudaimonist

I reread your post, and I see your point. Yes, the title you chose seems justified to me. We agree after all. My mistake.

[ August 03, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>

Eudaimonist

It sure does. It takes some twisted reasoning to turn the giving of torment into a good thing, but abusers may need to justify their own cruelty, at least to themselves.

[ August 03, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>