robinedgarsucks

Posts Tagged ‘denial’

Robin “Pot” Edgar Calls the Kettle Black

In Uncategorized on January 20, 2013 at 11:08 pm

Once again, Robin Edgar publishes another post with another long, bombastic headline about how he’s been victimised by Unitarian Universalists, and his endless crusade against ‘U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy’ (read: not doing what he demands).

His latest post is yet another screed about ‘verbally abusive’ UU ministers.  No specific examples mentioned, but then again, he’s gone on a tear about so many, we’re sure that even he is losing count.

At any rate, Mister Edgar had also sent a comment to this blog.  Considering the content, and his penchant for accusing Unitarian Universalists of ‘hypocrisy’ … well, we shall let our readers decide where he stands:

Oh, nanny nanny boo boo. Having a bad day? Feeling a little insecure about yourself? Talk to your therapist. “RobinEdgarSucks.wordpress.com?” Are you in sixth grade? I just hope to God you’re not Big Fat U*U Ministry. I hope you be annoying you U*Us a lot in the new year. Seems like you U*Us could use it. – TEA

Advertisements

‘I know Robin Edgar…’

In Uncategorized on February 13, 2012 at 2:13 am

We had received this comment a couple of months ago, but hesitated to post it until we made some effort to check it out as best as we can.  Even so, we would not be surprised if Robin Edgar goes off on another one of his tirades, accusing us of ‘more moronic Big Fat U*U BS.’

Well, he can make all the accusations he wants.  Read the comment for yourselves, and decide:

Came across your website and read thru it. I know Robin Edgar from years before, none of this surprises me or others I know who know about him. I’m not Unitarian, or any religion for that matter, but I lived with him in a boarding house here in Montreal. He can come across as nice enough, but as you say he is indeed obsessive. Cameras, for example. He can’t just tell you he took a picture, he has to describe in detail exactly what camera he is using, even his technical opinion, showing off what a great photographer he thinks he is.

I was around when he had his revelation, and like everything else he gets fixed on, he could not stop talking about it. Was convinced he could start his own religious movement around total eclipses, that the Unitarians would be a good place to start. Then things started falling apart, and the rest you know.

You also got right how he handles criticism or disagreement. If you ever cross him, he goes halfcocked about you being crazy or stupid or immoral. It’s hot and cold with him, you are either totally with him or you must be totally against him. He keeps losing friends, either driving them away or going all ballistic on him, then he’ll deny saying what he said or how he yells at people, then when he’s cornered and shown yes he said X Y Z or lost his cool, he goes on justifying it because nothing is ever his fault. Also takes a lot of things the wrong way, sometimes twists it around in really bizarre ways.

Robin has driven away more friends than anyone I know, and he is downright oblivious to his own problems.  People have suggested he see someone, get counseling or learn how to deal better with people. Like you said, that is the worst, he will explode like an atom bomb, how dare anyone say he has any kind of problem. Just like before, running hot and cold, he can only think crazy or sane, and if you are crazy he sees it as a moral failing.

The way Robin behaves gets him in so much trouble, he has a very hard time holding down a job or living in any one place long enough. The few people he can still manage to relate with try not to bring up the Unitarian thing, or just humour him. The alternative of going thru the same old routine – blow up, attack people, deny he did it, be shown he did, then hear him justify everything he just denied – is not worth it for some, but most can only handle that for so long. The only thing unusual is how long he has obsessed with the Unitarians, I think because he figures they are the most convenient target so he can keep denying and avoiding his own problems.

Robin Edgar, we know you read this blog.  Rest assured, we did take considerable steps to have some background checked before deciding to post this.  You can continue to deny and lash out at us, but this is not a ‘Big Fat U*U’ problem.  This is your problem, and it is more obvious to those around you than you realize.  We have said it before, we will say it again, as apparently so many have said to you before: You need professional help.  Stop avoiding, denying, blaming and attacking.

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black

In Uncategorized on January 9, 2012 at 4:55 am

It’s no surprise that Robin Edgar reads one UU minister’s blog entry, critical of some aspect of Unitarian Universalism, and makes it into a broad denunciation of anything and everything UUs believe and do.  But this time his accusation is the greatest of all hypocrisies.

Yes, Robin Edgar has decreed that Unitarian Universalists are narcissists.

This from the man who, for some two decades, has lashed out at an increasing number of UU ministers and leaders and congregations, indeed the entire UU movement, because they will not do what he demands.  Nothing else matters to Robin Edgar but what Robin Edgar wants.  Fail to do so, and he sees it as justification to insult, belittle, attack and harass those whom he once idealized and now devalues.

Forget that Unitarian Universalists have done so much work for the benefit of others, simply because it is the right thing to do.  Unitarians and Universalists worked for the abolition of slavery, equality for women, helping refugees from Nazi Germany, civil rights and racial equality, and now equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.  Not good enough for Robin Edgar, and not simply because Unitarian Universalists are no more perfect than anybody else.  No, it’s not good enough for Robin Edgar because Robin Edgar does not like how some UUs treated him.

Nor does it matter how outrageous his own behaviour has been.  If the Unitarian Church of Montreal will not authorise a second ‘Creation Day’ event, then he believes himself justified to throw a temper tantrum, accuse others in the church of intolerance, and demand that the minister meet him in his small apartment – and nowhere else – to ‘explain’ why total eclipses are such spiritual events.

It also does not matter that UUs have always been engaged in self-critical discussions about the evolution of our faith, and the needs of our members.  Once again, another example of his egoistic black-and-white thinking – only those who kowtow to him are good and right, and anybody who dares to question or criticise him are bad and wrong.

For Robin Edgar to accuse anybody else of narcissism is a classic example of ‘the pot calling the kettle black.’  Of course, when somebody becomes as self-centred and self-absorbed as he is, it’s expected that he fails to see this.  All we can hope is that UUs will remember all the good we have, and can continue, to do, and learn from that.

The Ultimate Hypocrisy of Robin Edgar

In Uncategorized on November 17, 2011 at 5:17 am

Having discovered Twitter, Robin Edgar has used it to pursue Unitarian Universalists with manic, obsessive abandon.  The response of many UUs has been to block him from further rants and harassment.

His response?  Indignation, if not outright rage.  How dare anybody ignore Robin Edgar, aka The Emerson Avenger!

So once again he spirals into another blast of manic posts, lashing out at UUs refusing to indulge his immature need for absolute attention.

But here is the most pathetic – and hypocritical – part of this never-ending cycle in the life of Robin Edgar.  While he decries UUs, especially UU ministers, of allegedly being insulting and rude to him, he goes out of his way to behave in even more rude and insulting behaviour, then acts as shocked as Claude Rains in ‘Casablanca’ that they would respond the way they do.

Yes, of course, he has repeatedly tried to distance himself from his actions, often by claiming that it’s not really him who is so obnoxious, but his supposed alter ego, ‘The Emerson Avenger’.  Read this excerpt from a comment on his blog, dated Sunday, July 12th, 2009:

‘The Emerson Avenger is something of a “persona” aka an “act” and is often quite deliberately rude and “in your face” offensive’

The cycle continues.  He doesn’t like what a Unitarian Universalist says, either about him or anything else.  He considers it a deliberate insult to him, so he now considers himself justified in insulting, attacking and harassing the UU in question.  When called on the carpet for his behaviour, he attempts to distance himself: ‘That wasn’t me, that was my persona!’  And the reason for this ‘act’?  The big bad UU was mean to him, so that justifies his even worse behaviour.  When the victim of his obsessive lashing out realizes that responding to his juvenile antics only leads to more of the same, and decides to break the cycle by both refusing to respond and denying him from hijacking thier Twitter account or blog, guess what? Robin Edgar decrees that this is another ‘reason’ for expressing his rage.  How dare UUs ignore him!

Respond to him, and he lashes out.  Ignore him, and he lashes out.  You can’t win, break even, or even leave the game.

This is Robin Edgar’s ultimate hypocrisy.  He demands that UUs be perfect, and when they are not, then he proclaims them evil, stupid, and every other insult he can throw at them – while he, conversely, is blameless and righteous in all things, and more importantly, deserving of attention if not outright adulation and submission to his will.

You can’t have it both ways, Mister Edgar.  You can’t demand of others a standard which you yourself refuse to live by.  And no matter how many times you try to rationalize your ‘deliberately rude and “in your face” offensive’ behaviour, there is simply no excuse for it.  Even your pathetic attempts at distancing yourself from what you do is meaningless.  After all, you created your so-called ‘Emerson Avenger persona’, and are thus ultimately responsible for everything you attribute to that ‘act’.

Robin Edgar’s “Certificate of Sanity”

In Uncategorized on May 8, 2011 at 2:11 pm

On more than one occasion, Robin Edgar has mentioned getting a “certificate of sanity” from a Montreal doctor, in response to concerns about his psychological state.  Of course, he never provides the actual content of this “certificate”, or even the name of the doctor who issued it.

Some months back, one of our readers mentioned reasons to doubt the veracity of his claim, based on their exchange with a trusted psychiatrist.  We have now received permission from this psychiatrist – who is also a Medical School professor who teaches on legal issues and mental health – to post the following commentary:

I have checked the blog posts of the individual in question, and it is clear to me why his vague references to a “certificate of sanity” are put in quotes and otherwise qualified.

For one thing, “sanity” can have diverse meanings, dependent upon context and the individual using it.  The narrowest definition is that used for establishing whether a person is to be committed to a psychiatric institution against their will, specifically that the individual is not an immediate threat to themselves or others due to some form of mental illness.  More broadly, however, an individual may mean simply that they are “free from mental illness;” such a sweeping negative definition is extremely difficult to ascertain.  The median definition is that the individual in question is able to function in normative social settings.

I think it most telling that Mr. Edgar cannot produce the text of the “certificate” he alleges to have obtained.  For one thing, I cannot see a responsible physician, and especially a general practitioner without specialized psychiatric expertise, providing any sort of affidavit attesting that a patient is free from mental illness.  At best, a medical professional could assert that a patient is either not an immediate danger to himself or others, or is able to function in normative social settings.  This does not, however, dismiss the possibility that the patient is mentally ill in some fashion.  Individuals with obsessionial ideation, mood disorders, personality disorders and even certain delusions are capable of considerable functionality – yet they are still mentally ill.

No attestation of a given patient’s mental health status is of any meaning without a thorough evaluation by a qualified psychiatrist or psychotherapist.  Unless your Mr. Edgar can produce the detailed contents of his alleged “certificate,” and the means by which his status was evaluated, my professional opinion is that his assertions have little to no merit.

So if Robin Edgar truly wants to assure us that he is not mentally ill, then we suggest once again that he follow this advice.  If he feels that his “certificate” is enough, then publish its contents.  Until then, considering his prior history of distorting and even manufacturing evidence, we have no reason to trust his claims.

Unhealthy Obsession Indeed

In Uncategorized on April 3, 2011 at 10:22 am

One of our readers has reported that he has tracked the origin of Robin Edgar’s Internet activity:

the IP listed is Bibliotheque Nationale Du Quebec.

Indeed, this is the provincial library for Quebec, and their website shows that, like other public libraries, they offer free Internet service.  As our reader speculates:

if he’s accessing the internet through the library these days, that might mean he’s now unemployed- which would explain how he has time for all this. And why he’s been extra bitter lately, too.

Now, when most people lose a job, they devote their time to finding a new one.  Instead, Robin Edgar appears to be increasing his lashing out at Unitarian Universalist.  Does he actually believe this will get him gainful employment?

An alternative explanation is that he actually works at the library … and is doing his anti-UU blogging, commenting and web-surfing while on the job.  Not likely, however, as most large employers tend to monitor their personnel’s computer activity these days.

Either way, we have a question for Mister Edgar.   How can you continue to insist that you are not obsessed?  Only an obsessed individual would spend more time online lashing out in anger at so many individuals instead of finding gainful employment and moving on with your life.  Only an obsessed individual would engage in such behaviour while on the clock, placing their employment status in jeopary.

This is not the behaviour of a healthy individual.  You need to move on with your life, sir.  Rather than dwell on the ‘wrongs’ which you constantly allege have been done against you, or claiming to be some righteous crusader while behaving like a rage-filled stalker, the time is long overdue for you to let go.  You say that you are a spiritual man, Mister Edgar.  The great spiritual traditions of the world call for forgiveness of wrongs, whether perceived or real.  Why are you so unable to embrace this virtue?

Get help, Mister Edgar.  We implore you once again.  Putting this campaign of rancor and bitterness above earning a decent wage makes no sense, and cannot lead to anything good for you.

The Latest Accusation from Robin Edgar

In Uncategorized on March 31, 2011 at 8:02 am

Robin Edgar has hurled a variety of accusations and epithets at his numerous targets.  His most recent, borrowed from another UU blogger, is passive-aggressive.

As usual, he makes no bones about diagnosing Unitarian Universalists he disapproves of, but easily launches into a tirade when anybody even dares to ask if he might have psychological problems.  Not to mention the fallacious reasoning behind his use of the label.

Passive-aggressive people refuse to do what they are asked to do.  UU leaders are refusing to do what Robin Edgar asks of them.  Therefore, in Robin Edgar’s eyes, UU leaders are passive-agressive.

Setting aside the fact that there are other, perfectly legitimate reasons why different people refuse to do things, he’s missing the point that passive-aggressive individuals specifically resist authority.  So Robin Edgar has it backwards … or is incredibly arrogant in assuming that he should have authority over Peter Morales, Gini Courtier, William Sinkford, John Buhrens and anybody else whom he accuses of ‘mistreating’ him.

Even more interesting is when we look at other specific symptoms of passive-aggressive personalities, and see how many actually match of the behaviour of Robin Edgar himself.

The passive-aggressive create chaotic situations, and make excuses for their behaviour.  They constantly complain about being misunderstood and unappreciated, and exaggerate their sense of personal misfortune.  They have few intimates, often pushing them away with continual anger and mistrust.  Most important of all, the passive-aggressive always blame others, and never take responsibility for their own actions.

Still, just as UU leaders are not passive-aggressive because Robin Edgar projects one major trait on them, Robin Edgar is not necessarily passive-aggressive just because he seems to share some passive-aggressive traits.  But his negativity, hostility, rage and narcissistic need for attention are definitely cause for concern.  He is right when he says that others do not understand when he behaves the way he does … not only because of how counter-productive his behaviour is, but because he has utterly failed to learn how unproductive that behaviour is after so many, many years of repetitive lashing out.

Mister Edgar, whatever reasons you give for rationalizing your behaviour, it has not worked, and it will not work.  You need to learn how to do things differently.  You need to learn to let go of your rage, and to put yourself in the position of those many individuals whom you have been attacking and hurting over the years.  But your recalcitrance has convinced us that you cannot learn this yourself.  You need help.  Please get that help, before it’s too late.

Robin Edgar and the Seven Principles

In Uncategorized on March 25, 2011 at 10:56 pm

Robin Edgar has repeatedly put himself up as the judge of all Unitarian Universalist conduct, following such an extreme ‘counsel of perfection’ that nobody could possible live up to it.  Any deviation from his interpretation, and he goes on the warpath to denounce and denigrate them, and in the process declares that UUs are hypocritical.

What about Robin Edgar himself?  How well does he live up to these principles which he demands that everybody else live up to in such an absolute degree?

The inherent worth and dignity of every person.  Robin Edgar routinely insults people.  He does not merely say he disagrees with them, but calls them ‘stupid’, ‘morons’, ‘asshats’ and other derogatory terms.  He even brags that he’s deliberately rude and offensive, and uses outlandish excuses to rationalize such behaviour.

Justice, equity and compassion in human relations.  Robin Edgar has probably set a record for the number of misconduct complaints filed against UU ministers, insisting that the fact that he has declared their actions wrong is sufficient grounds for chastising and punishing them.  They include his claim that a minister has ‘demonized and marginalized ALL Republicans’ because she expressed dismay at the language used by some GOP leaders. And if the UUA will not follow through on his complaints?  Well, then they are guilty of complicity and must be similarly punished!  Apparently Mister Edgar believes he is to be the sole arbiter of justice, at least in UU matters.

Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations.   We wonder how picketing churches and meetings, and harassing those who enter them, encourages spiritual growth.  Not to mention questioning the Unitarian Church of Montreal’s right to provide free or reduced admission to university students at their events.

A free and responsible search for meaning and truth.  Robin Edgar has been playing fast and loose with the truth for years now, often using distortion and hyperbole to make his case.  We have already cited how he accuses UUs of a coverup which never happened.  Considering how he takes such an extreme approach (his views are beyond question, but woe unto anybody who dares to question him or offer contrary views) just how ‘free and responsible’ is that?

The right of conscience and the use of democratic process within our congregations and in society at large.  Robin Edgar does not believe that UU ministers have the right to express opinions which he finds objectionable (see above under second Principle).  Nor does he respect the right of a congregation’s membership to remove a disruptive individual from their ranks – at least when that individual is him.  So, at best, he believes in a selective application of this principle, where he selects when and how it will be applied.

We’ll leave it there for now, the point being clear.  Robin Edgar demands perfection from others, then plays fast and loose when it comes to how he lives by them.  If he wants to deal with ‘injustices, abuses and hypocrisy,’ then he clearly needs to start with himself.

Montreal Unitarian Beware…

In Uncategorized on March 23, 2011 at 11:03 pm

It is typical of malignant narcissists to play a warped game of tit-for-tat.  When those around him talk about something else, he cries, ‘What about me?’ When they try to point out his own antisocial behaviour, he points an accusing finger and snarls, ‘What about her?’

Such is the course of Robin Edgar.  When asked if he would pleadge not to use physical violence against Unitarian Universalists, he not only refuses to give a straightforward answer, but once again picks on somebody else.  In this case, it is Reverend Victoria Weinstein.

Again, he harps on a post she made, and later deleted.  Mister Edgar, you are the one obsessed with anal impalements, not to mention connecting so many other things with the human rectum.  Reverend Weinstein has moved on, and you are still unable to.

He also repeats his diatribe about an incident remarked about in 2005.  We also commented on this ten months ago, and we made it clear that we did not condone such behaviour.  Not enough for Robin Edgar, because when confronted with his own irrational and spiteful antics, he needs somebody else to point to as a distraction. ‘What about her?’

If that were not enough, he accuses unnamed members of the Montreal church of physically assaulting him.  Really, sir?  Then why no mention of any criminal complaints filed by you against these individuals?  Where is your evidence?  Where are your witnesses?

But let us return to the point, Mister Edgar – your behaviour.  You have been harassing, attacking, stalking, insulting, offending and generally acting like that part of the human anatomy you so love to point out, for almost two decades now.  You have widened your circle of targets, spewing venom and bile at any and all UUs who refuse to join your endless crusade.  Like other obsessed stalkers before you who have done likewise, either at the lady who spurned them, or the employer who fired or refused to hire them, yours is a clear pattern of escalation.

First you expect to trust that you will not be violent because you have not yet been violent.  Again, let’s point out the danger of escalation, where the offending behaviour only gets worse and worse as the obsessed stalker decides he has to ‘take it up a notch’ to get what he wants (and, in his warped view of things, somehow deserves).  During the time you were a member of the Montreal church, you were asked to abide by certain covenants, and then violated those covenants.  So how can you be trusted now?

Worse yet, Robin Edgar claims the right to what he calls ‘legitimate self-defense.’  Well, we have seen what he considers to be ‘legitmate’ in terms of grievances and complaints – simply another excuse for him to pick a fight, denigrate somebody else, and draw attention to himself.  We would hate to see what somebody so self-centered would regard as ‘self-defense.’

We would hate to see the Montreal church needing to become a fortress.  But it is clear that Robin Edgar cannot be trusted to remain nonviolent, considering the violence of the words and imagery he chooses to use, and the examples he cites (exaggerated and distorted as they are) to rationalize and justify his already outrageous behaviour.

Members and friends of the Unitarian Church of Montreal – please be careful!  The potential danger of this man should not be underestimated.  Do whatever you can within the bounds of law and reason to keep Robin Edgar at bay.

How Robin Edgar Defamed the UUA

In Uncategorized on March 7, 2011 at 5:32 am

In our previous post, we mentioned (among other things) that Robin Edgar has resorted to defamation as part of his continual harassment of Unitarian Universalists.

We would anticipate that he would, once again, angrily insist on knowing how exactly he has defamed the UUA.  So we feel compelled to explain in advance.

Robin Edgar has repeatedly alleged that the UUA and its Ministerial Fellowship Committee engaged in a ‘cover-up’ regarding sexual assault charges against Reverend Mack Mitchell in 1991.

Not only was Mitchell reported to police in 1991 by members of his own Northborough church, and not only was the matter covered in news media, but the MFC promptly investigated the matter and voted to remove Mitchell from ministerial fellowship, as reported by the UUA’s Information Officer at the time.

So, Mister Edgar, where is this ‘cover-up’ of which you are alleging?  Did the UUA attempt to silence the press, or refuse to comment on the matter?  No, on both counts.  The press covered as they should, and the UUA reported that they followed their procedures for reviewing the evidence and removed Mitchell from their roster of ministers.

And yet, you have continued to accuse the UUA of a ‘cover-up’ in the matter.  The facts have been brought to your attention which contradict your accusation, and what do you do?  You persist in making the accusation.

That, sir, is defamation!

You can use whatever rationalizations you wish to justify such irresponsible statements, but the fact remains that you made a baseless allegation calculated to discredit a group, and when once made aware of the facts to the contrary, refuse to retract your statement and indeed keep repeating it.

Robin Edgar tries to position himself as the moral judge for Unitarian Universalist ministers and leaders.  His hypocritical actions demonstrate that he has no business doing so.