Choosing Movements
Why do we do some of the things we do, instead of doing other things that would be better on many or all levels?
Betrayal or stealing often does as much lasting damage to the person who does it than the person it's done to, it is an injury we do to ourselves as well as to another. These injuries can be healed when we are able to see ourselves as human beings who don't know everything, and who want forgiveness, and who want to feel the strength and inner peace that comes with straightforwardness and genuine care for the souls of others and ourselves.
Betrayal or stealing often does as much lasting damage to the person who does it than the person it's done to, it is an injury we do to ourselves as well as to another. These injuries can be healed when we are able to see ourselves as human beings who don't know everything, and who want forgiveness, and who want to feel the strength and inner peace that comes with straightforwardness and genuine care for the souls of others and ourselves.
Succeed And Fail, Or Be And Do
"Go beyond the idea of succeeding and failing -- these are
judgments. Stay in the process and allow the universe to handle the
details."
- Wayne Dyer
- Wayne Dyer
Narcissism, BPD, and Stigma
We
might need to revisit straightforward Narcissism vs. BPD. There is so
much stigma attached to both, which is of course one of the traits of
Narcissism, ironically~ labeling people as "loser", "crazy", or "bad".
These diagnostic labels are supposed to be tools used for analysis and
understanding purposes, not for stamping people with scarlet letters and
shunning them. Throughout human history though,
as we all are aware, there are always those who find ways to group
people as "good ones" (that would be the 'Us' crowd) and "bad ones"
(that would be the 'Them' crowd). Mental illness is no different, and
most of us who have been abuse targets know exactly what it feels like
to be treated like a "Them", so we know it's not helpful at all, and
only serves one purpose, someone's agenda.
>>>We might want to do that, even feel we need to, when we are in the middle of dealing with an abuser, and it's understandable, but that's a completely different thing from those who are not dealing with a specific situation attaching stigma, and is especially true for those who are mental health care workers and professionals. A psychiatrist, psychologist, clinician or therapist MUST learn how to view other humans as objectively as possible, without giving themselves "permission" to be judgmental with the excuse that they're "only human". Of course it's hard, it's hard for anyone to be objective about their fellow humans, but it's essential nonetheless.
That being said; some differences between classic Narcissism and basic BPD:
The person with BPD is worried about you liking him or her. The person with NPD is not, they are only worried about whether you'll be a supply or not.
The person with BPD may become very anxious or angry if they feel abandoned, it's one of the common symptoms. The person with NPD doesn't feel "abandoned", they feel like they're being 'disrespected' if someone isn't paying enough attention to them.
The person with BPD may feel angry, humiliated, and defensive when he or she feels like someone is treating them like they're someone who's "loopy" or "dumb" (not so abnormal, is it? it's just that their emotions about it can be much more intense, and can cause serious anxiety, which then makes them appear "loopy", which then invites even more negative judgment, etc~) The person with NPD is the one DOING the judging.
The person with BPD may self-harm and develop addictions due to anxiety, fear, stress relief, belonging, and feeling unwanted and shunned. The person with NPD develops addictions because they were looking for something to make them more powerful than they already think they are in some way (like amphetamines so they can get an "edge" on someone they're competing with, or anabolic steroids.)
The person with BPD may be very upset about something someone did or didn't do on a regular basis, and may have interpreted the other person's actions, words, and motive completely wrong but stay upset anyway; the person with NPD pretty much only displays annoyance and anger (and rage) as genuine emotions, and it's usually because something didn't go their way; if they could HIDE those emotional displays they would, absolutely (hurts their image and agenda, the display itself humiliates them, and they may become even angrier and blame someone else for it.They may do things to distract others or 'escape' when they feel exposed, or an emotional reaction coming on. They may 'turn the tables' as an escape tactic.)
A person who has BPD traits can ALSO have 'Narcissism', but they're not one and the same. There are all kinds of "versions" of BPD, especially since it's only a label for a pattern or cluster of behaviors that was noticed some years ago. The actual CAUSE of an individual's BPD symptoms frequently goes unexplored and ignored, and untreated, by many in the mental health professions. It's common for a person who has been diagnosed with BPD to get prescribed heavy medications but not receive therapy such as DBT, which has shown very postive results. It is common for a person who has been diagnosed with BPD to be singled out as the "cause of the family problems" by mental health care workers, (scapegoated), instead of the other way around, or even as a piece of a larger puzzle. It's common for a family scapegoat to develop BPD symptoms, and also for any children growing up in a Narcissistic environment (caregiver, family, or larger community).
There are a lot of people with BPD symptoms, from mild to severe; it centers around weak, severely weak, and injured boundaries, and a lack of awareness and understanding about boundaries in general. With that, an unclear, wobbly, or skewed sense of self and identity. All of which is frequently caused by abuse, bad behavior modeling, skewed feedback, and/or neglect.
"The disorder, characterized by intense emotions, self-harming acts and stormy interpersonal relationships, was officially recognized in 1980 and given the name Borderline Personality Disorder. It was thought to occur on the border between psychotic and neurotic behavior. This is no longer considered a relevant analysis and the term itself, with its stigmatizing negative associations, has made diagnosing BPD problematic. The complex symptoms of the disorder often make patients difficult to treat and therefore may evoke feelings of anger and frustration in professionals trying to help, with the result that many professionals are often unwilling to make the diagnosis or treat persons with these symptoms. These problems have been aggravated by the lack of appropriate insurance coverage for the extended psychosocial treatments that BPD usually requires. Nevertheless, there has been much progress and success in the past 25 years in the understanding of and specialized treatment for BPD. It is, in fact, a diagnosis that has a lot of hope for recovery."
~NAMI
(Click for page:What is Borderline Personality Disorder)
>>>We might want to do that, even feel we need to, when we are in the middle of dealing with an abuser, and it's understandable, but that's a completely different thing from those who are not dealing with a specific situation attaching stigma, and is especially true for those who are mental health care workers and professionals. A psychiatrist, psychologist, clinician or therapist MUST learn how to view other humans as objectively as possible, without giving themselves "permission" to be judgmental with the excuse that they're "only human". Of course it's hard, it's hard for anyone to be objective about their fellow humans, but it's essential nonetheless.
That being said; some differences between classic Narcissism and basic BPD:
The person with BPD is worried about you liking him or her. The person with NPD is not, they are only worried about whether you'll be a supply or not.
The person with BPD may become very anxious or angry if they feel abandoned, it's one of the common symptoms. The person with NPD doesn't feel "abandoned", they feel like they're being 'disrespected' if someone isn't paying enough attention to them.
The person with BPD may feel angry, humiliated, and defensive when he or she feels like someone is treating them like they're someone who's "loopy" or "dumb" (not so abnormal, is it? it's just that their emotions about it can be much more intense, and can cause serious anxiety, which then makes them appear "loopy", which then invites even more negative judgment, etc~) The person with NPD is the one DOING the judging.
The person with BPD may self-harm and develop addictions due to anxiety, fear, stress relief, belonging, and feeling unwanted and shunned. The person with NPD develops addictions because they were looking for something to make them more powerful than they already think they are in some way (like amphetamines so they can get an "edge" on someone they're competing with, or anabolic steroids.)
The person with BPD may be very upset about something someone did or didn't do on a regular basis, and may have interpreted the other person's actions, words, and motive completely wrong but stay upset anyway; the person with NPD pretty much only displays annoyance and anger (and rage) as genuine emotions, and it's usually because something didn't go their way; if they could HIDE those emotional displays they would, absolutely (hurts their image and agenda, the display itself humiliates them, and they may become even angrier and blame someone else for it.They may do things to distract others or 'escape' when they feel exposed, or an emotional reaction coming on. They may 'turn the tables' as an escape tactic.)
A person who has BPD traits can ALSO have 'Narcissism', but they're not one and the same. There are all kinds of "versions" of BPD, especially since it's only a label for a pattern or cluster of behaviors that was noticed some years ago. The actual CAUSE of an individual's BPD symptoms frequently goes unexplored and ignored, and untreated, by many in the mental health professions. It's common for a person who has been diagnosed with BPD to get prescribed heavy medications but not receive therapy such as DBT, which has shown very postive results. It is common for a person who has been diagnosed with BPD to be singled out as the "cause of the family problems" by mental health care workers, (scapegoated), instead of the other way around, or even as a piece of a larger puzzle. It's common for a family scapegoat to develop BPD symptoms, and also for any children growing up in a Narcissistic environment (caregiver, family, or larger community).
There are a lot of people with BPD symptoms, from mild to severe; it centers around weak, severely weak, and injured boundaries, and a lack of awareness and understanding about boundaries in general. With that, an unclear, wobbly, or skewed sense of self and identity. All of which is frequently caused by abuse, bad behavior modeling, skewed feedback, and/or neglect.
"The disorder, characterized by intense emotions, self-harming acts and stormy interpersonal relationships, was officially recognized in 1980 and given the name Borderline Personality Disorder. It was thought to occur on the border between psychotic and neurotic behavior. This is no longer considered a relevant analysis and the term itself, with its stigmatizing negative associations, has made diagnosing BPD problematic. The complex symptoms of the disorder often make patients difficult to treat and therefore may evoke feelings of anger and frustration in professionals trying to help, with the result that many professionals are often unwilling to make the diagnosis or treat persons with these symptoms. These problems have been aggravated by the lack of appropriate insurance coverage for the extended psychosocial treatments that BPD usually requires. Nevertheless, there has been much progress and success in the past 25 years in the understanding of and specialized treatment for BPD. It is, in fact, a diagnosis that has a lot of hope for recovery."
~NAMI
(Click for page:What is Borderline Personality Disorder)
Tell What You See! Listen To What Others See~
Share
your point of view with the world. Remember that only you can see
things from where you're standing. You can't see things from where I'm
standing, only I can. I can see something you CAN'T, and you can see
something I CAN'T, and that person standing on the corner can see
something NEITHER of us can see (or feel, hear, or understand), nor
anyone else. Each one of us is holding our very own le...ns
through which we each experience the world. The only way we can learn
what another sees is to listen to what they report from their unique
perspective. And the only way for anyone to hear our report from our
unique point of view is to tell it. You can't stand in my shoes, it's
not possible. You can try, but you can't really. What you can do,
however, is stop arguing and judging, trying to tel me what you think I
see, or what I "should" see, and just listen. Anyone else who
understands will listen to YOU report YOUR unique perspective as well,
because they want to know what you see through your own eyes.
The story of the Elephant and the Blind Men, below, is well known to many, but few seem to remember the meaning of the story and practice it in every day life. What a wonderful, much more peaceful and prosperous world we would have if everyone understood and practiced this. It's not a religious concept so much as logic. ~I can't see what I can't see, and you can't see what you can't see, so if we argue about what we're seeing it's pretty ridiculous, isn't it? If each of us are standing on opposite sides of a house, we can only tell each other what we're each looking at, we can't actually SEE the other side of the house from where we're each standing. Even if we've stood there before, we still can't see what the other person is seeing, and they can't see what we're seeing, or how we're seeing it. To some this is an obvious concept, to others it is difficult to comprehend, possibly because they were not taught that other human beings are real people like themselves, or they may have been taught that "reality" is the same for everyone, and therefore if someone else sees something else, they must be mistaken.
(However, if one examines this further, one will see that those who accuse others of being mistaken or delusional also submit to whomever they have identified as a "Leader", so when this "Leader" says that they see something different, they will listen, and say "ah, he/she is wise", even if the "Leader" says the same thing as another who was called "mistaken" or "crazy". This is still related to the Elephant and the Blind Men; dismissing one person as value-less and then therefore dismissing whatever they say, but exaggerating the value of another and hearing whatever they say as Divine Wisdom. If the Blind Men did this in the story, then everyone would believe that the entire Elephant was ONLY a trunk, or ONLY a tail, etc., depending on which men they dismissed as "lesser", and which men they chose as "Leader".)
The story of the Elephant and the Blind Men, below, is well known to many, but few seem to remember the meaning of the story and practice it in every day life. What a wonderful, much more peaceful and prosperous world we would have if everyone understood and practiced this. It's not a religious concept so much as logic. ~I can't see what I can't see, and you can't see what you can't see, so if we argue about what we're seeing it's pretty ridiculous, isn't it? If each of us are standing on opposite sides of a house, we can only tell each other what we're each looking at, we can't actually SEE the other side of the house from where we're each standing. Even if we've stood there before, we still can't see what the other person is seeing, and they can't see what we're seeing, or how we're seeing it. To some this is an obvious concept, to others it is difficult to comprehend, possibly because they were not taught that other human beings are real people like themselves, or they may have been taught that "reality" is the same for everyone, and therefore if someone else sees something else, they must be mistaken.
(However, if one examines this further, one will see that those who accuse others of being mistaken or delusional also submit to whomever they have identified as a "Leader", so when this "Leader" says that they see something different, they will listen, and say "ah, he/she is wise", even if the "Leader" says the same thing as another who was called "mistaken" or "crazy". This is still related to the Elephant and the Blind Men; dismissing one person as value-less and then therefore dismissing whatever they say, but exaggerating the value of another and hearing whatever they say as Divine Wisdom. If the Blind Men did this in the story, then everyone would believe that the entire Elephant was ONLY a trunk, or ONLY a tail, etc., depending on which men they dismissed as "lesser", and which men they chose as "Leader".)
Story(25)
ELEPHANT
AND THE BLIND MEN
Once upon a time, there lived six blind men in a village. One
day the villagers told them, "Hey, there is an elephant in
the village today."
They had no idea what an elephant is. They decided, "Even
though we would not be able to see it, let us go and feel it
anyway." All of them went where the elephant was. Everyone
of them touched the elephant.
"Hey, the elephant is a pillar," said the first man
who touched his leg.
"Oh, no! it is like a rope," said the second man who
touched the tail.
"Oh, no! it is like a thick branch of a tree," said
the third man who touched the trunk of the elephant.
"It is like a big hand fan" said the fourth man who
touched the ear of the elephant.
"It is like a huge wall," said the fifth man who
touched the belly of the elephant.
"It is like a solid pipe," Said the sixth man who
touched the tusk of the elephant.
They began to argue about the elephant and everyone of them
insisted that he was right. It looked like they were getting
agitated. A wise man was passing by and he saw this. He stopped
and asked them, "What is the matter?" They said,
"We cannot agree to what the elephant is like." Each
one of them told what he thought the elephant was like. The wise
man calmly explained to them, "All of you are right. The
reason every one of you is telling it differently because each
one of you touched the different part of the elephant. So,
actually the elephant has all those features what you all
said."
"Oh!" everyone said. There was no more fight. They
felt happy that they were all right.
In Jainism:
The moral of the story is that there may be some truth to what
someone says. Sometimes we can see that truth and sometimes not
because they may have different perspective which we may not
agree too. So, rather than arguing like the blind men, we should
say, "Maybe you have your reasons." This way we
don’t get in arguments. In Jainism, it is explained that
truth can be stated in seven different ways. So, you can see how
broad our religion is. It teaches us to be tolerant towards
others for their viewpoints. This allows us to live in harmony
with the people of different thinking. This is known as the
Syadvada, Anekantvad, or the theory of Manifold Predictions.
Superiority Scanning
Remember
that most of those who have Narcissism traits, severe and blatantly
abusive or not, are looking to find ways to feel superior to others at
all times. Feeling above another is the only way they know how to feel
real, and good about themselves. They do this all the time, they're on
"scan"; if someone shows anything that they can interpret as a chink, as
a flaw, as a weakness, as inexperience
or lower "status", they are all over it. That person is now officially
lowered in their imagination. They now feel comfortable countering them,
condescending to them, shunning them, and questioning and doubting
openly everything they do and say.
Showing inner turmoil, showing sadness, anger, frustration or indignation are all "reasons" that a Narcissist may judge a person as "lower'. (They are completely unaware. apparently, of their own emotional displays and complaints, which are often dramatic and tedious.)
Other "reasons" that a Narcissist may find as signs of "lower status", however only when applied to OTHER people, not to themselves:
Not working in a 9 to 5 job (literally, daytime hours)
Not working in a job they judge as "high status"
Not having a regular job, regardless of income (if you are independently wealthy, or if you have income from a non-obvious source, or inheritance, they will STILL judge you for not having a job.)
For GETTING a job if they think you don't "need the money" (same people who judge you for not getting a job.)
For talking about things that bother you.
For talking about being treated unfairly.
For talking about abuse you've experienced.
For standing up for others.
For sharing observations that they don't agree with.
For displaying any kind of emotion whatsoever that does not MATCH THEIRS at the moment.
For sharing any observation or opinion that does not MATCH THEIR point of view.
For being physically larger than them, or smaller.
For getting counseling (even if they've gotten counseling also; actually you would be hard-pressed to meet a human who has not sought counseling from others; a Narcissist will categorize counseling from a friend, relative, coach, clergy, or boss as "different" from counseling from a licensed therapist. It is different, because counseling from personal connections can be hidden and kept secret more easily...)
For being heavy set, overweight, thin, "well endowed", or in "good shape" (regardless of their own body type.)
For being "unattractive" IN THEIR OPINION, or for being "attractive" IN THEIR OPINION. (They believe their opinion is objective fact.)
For asking a question about anything.
For asking for advice about anything.
For sharing personal frustrations.
For sharing personal accomplishments.
For sharing personal experiences, "positive" or "negative".
FOR ASKING THEM FOR ASSISTANCE, HELP, OR PARTICIPATION IN ANYTHING, FOR ANY REASON. (Don't ask a Narcissist to help you get work done, don't ask them to help you move, don't ask them for a loan, don't ask them to pet-sit, don't ask them to participate in a project of yours~ they MIGHT say yes, but they will probably use it as a way to say "NO", so they can feel power. If they say yes, then you are probably in for a power struggle. Either way, you asked them for something, therefore they have something you "need", that you don't have, and are therefore superior to you.)
ANYTHING PERSONAL, basically, at all. As soon as the Narcissist starts thinking of another person as having any kind of "flaw" (flaw defined by their own imagination), they immediately start trying to knock the person down and treat them like they're NOT worthy of respect, or as "valuable" or as smart of a human being as they are. They begin to counter everything the person says, condescend, stop reciprocating communication and respectful behavior, start to judge everything the person does and says as negative, lazy, wrong, crazy, and stupid. Everything the person says and does, no matter what it is, will be seen by them as negative, and that's even if they held the person on a pedestal for the exact same things before.
Non-narcissists don't look for reasons to judge others as lower than themselves because they don't need to compare themselves to others to gain confidence, they aren't looking for a fight in order to get a rush of neurochemicals, they aren't looking to feel self-righteous and above anyone, and they are solution and progress oriented, not self-interest-only oriented. They are also big-picture oriented, so they can see why mutual respect and polite treatment between humans is so important. They can see the problems and drama that Narcissism causes for everyone on so many levels, and don't want to be a part of those problems in the world, in their community, and in their families.
Showing inner turmoil, showing sadness, anger, frustration or indignation are all "reasons" that a Narcissist may judge a person as "lower'. (They are completely unaware. apparently, of their own emotional displays and complaints, which are often dramatic and tedious.)
Other "reasons" that a Narcissist may find as signs of "lower status", however only when applied to OTHER people, not to themselves:
Not working in a 9 to 5 job (literally, daytime hours)
Not working in a job they judge as "high status"
Not having a regular job, regardless of income (if you are independently wealthy, or if you have income from a non-obvious source, or inheritance, they will STILL judge you for not having a job.)
For GETTING a job if they think you don't "need the money" (same people who judge you for not getting a job.)
For talking about things that bother you.
For talking about being treated unfairly.
For talking about abuse you've experienced.
For standing up for others.
For sharing observations that they don't agree with.
For displaying any kind of emotion whatsoever that does not MATCH THEIRS at the moment.
For sharing any observation or opinion that does not MATCH THEIR point of view.
For being physically larger than them, or smaller.
For getting counseling (even if they've gotten counseling also; actually you would be hard-pressed to meet a human who has not sought counseling from others; a Narcissist will categorize counseling from a friend, relative, coach, clergy, or boss as "different" from counseling from a licensed therapist. It is different, because counseling from personal connections can be hidden and kept secret more easily...)
For being heavy set, overweight, thin, "well endowed", or in "good shape" (regardless of their own body type.)
For being "unattractive" IN THEIR OPINION, or for being "attractive" IN THEIR OPINION. (They believe their opinion is objective fact.)
For asking a question about anything.
For asking for advice about anything.
For sharing personal frustrations.
For sharing personal accomplishments.
For sharing personal experiences, "positive" or "negative".
FOR ASKING THEM FOR ASSISTANCE, HELP, OR PARTICIPATION IN ANYTHING, FOR ANY REASON. (Don't ask a Narcissist to help you get work done, don't ask them to help you move, don't ask them for a loan, don't ask them to pet-sit, don't ask them to participate in a project of yours~ they MIGHT say yes, but they will probably use it as a way to say "NO", so they can feel power. If they say yes, then you are probably in for a power struggle. Either way, you asked them for something, therefore they have something you "need", that you don't have, and are therefore superior to you.)
ANYTHING PERSONAL, basically, at all. As soon as the Narcissist starts thinking of another person as having any kind of "flaw" (flaw defined by their own imagination), they immediately start trying to knock the person down and treat them like they're NOT worthy of respect, or as "valuable" or as smart of a human being as they are. They begin to counter everything the person says, condescend, stop reciprocating communication and respectful behavior, start to judge everything the person does and says as negative, lazy, wrong, crazy, and stupid. Everything the person says and does, no matter what it is, will be seen by them as negative, and that's even if they held the person on a pedestal for the exact same things before.
Non-narcissists don't look for reasons to judge others as lower than themselves because they don't need to compare themselves to others to gain confidence, they aren't looking for a fight in order to get a rush of neurochemicals, they aren't looking to feel self-righteous and above anyone, and they are solution and progress oriented, not self-interest-only oriented. They are also big-picture oriented, so they can see why mutual respect and polite treatment between humans is so important. They can see the problems and drama that Narcissism causes for everyone on so many levels, and don't want to be a part of those problems in the world, in their community, and in their families.
Dwelling On Our Problems... Or Not... Human Behavior
Learning
about the behavior and psychology of our own species is a funny thing.
Those who are aware of the reality of the human animal's tendency to
control and manipulate other members of their group are more likely to
see analysis for what it is, but those who are not aware, or who are
invested in such control behavior in their daily lives, often react
emotionally to discussions about human behavior,
and misinterpret it as lamentation, "dwelling in the past", wallowing,
and whining. Fascinating, since most humans do not react to discussions
about the behavior of OTHER species in this way. Since it's removed from
them personally, they can understand that it's observation. So when we
talk about the social dynamics of Grey wolves, for example, most people
can simply talk about it without reacting with defensiveness or
condescension, or projecting "motivation" onto the observer/researcher.
They can read and hear about how both Alpha males and females lead
packs, how both genders often oversee the behavior of both sexes in the
rest of the pack, how they discipline and teach their pups, and how
occasionally a wolf will get ostracized, driven out of the pack. They
can hear about the general behaviors of Polar bears, or of Elephants,
Cheetahs, and simply learn and discuss without assigning some kind of
emotional "motivation" to those who study, observe, and write about
their observations. They seem to know the difference when it comes to
the study of other species.
But when it comes to reading about the behaviors of their own species, many tend to jump to conclusions about anyone who observes and writes about human behavior. This is another form of PROJECTION. They are placing their OWN motivations upon those who observe Human behavior. This projection is somewhat understandable, since many humans take any kind of observation of the species personally, especially when they feel they recognize themselves in the observations. If they don't see themselves in the observations, they may not have a defensive reaction at all, or feel compelled to assign and project an emotional or ulterior motive.
But when it comes to reading about the behaviors of their own species, many tend to jump to conclusions about anyone who observes and writes about human behavior. This is another form of PROJECTION. They are placing their OWN motivations upon those who observe Human behavior. This projection is somewhat understandable, since many humans take any kind of observation of the species personally, especially when they feel they recognize themselves in the observations. If they don't see themselves in the observations, they may not have a defensive reaction at all, or feel compelled to assign and project an emotional or ulterior motive.
Gossip And E Coli
Gossip and slander are the verbal equivalents of defecating in one's own drinking water, and pretending it's Kool Aid.
Misinterpreting Other People
Misinterpreting
the intention, meaning, words, motives and emotions of others is common
in those with certain disorders. It doesn't mean they can't heal from
it, but until they do, this can wreak havoc in personal relationships.
This is a form of projection, and also often a kind of transference.
(It's important to note; it's also a natural human trait to assume that someone means what we would mean if we said the same thing. Why so many intelligent people get conned and scammed.)
So when Jim says "Nice job taking out the garbage!" to his nephew Chris, what exactly does he mean? His nephew is going to take it the way he hears it, which might not be the way his Uncle Jim meant it.
Chris hears it as sarcasm, but Jim actually meant it as a genuine, drama-free acknowledgment. So since Chris assumes it was sarcasm, he reacts to Jim according to his incorrect interpretation, and huffs and puffs, and rolls his eyes. Jim, in turn, is frustrated and a little hurt. This kind of thing happens all the time. Chris' father is very sarcastic, controlling and demeaning, but his Uncle Jim is not at all. So Chris, understandably, "hears" the same thing when his uncle speaks. This ongoing dynamic based on Chris' incorrect interpretations, and Jim not knowing what's happening (tough one to figure out), creates more and more tension and leads to an eventual breakdown of the relationship. Which is very unfortunate for both of them.
On a wider level, Chris interprets most people this way. His father's attitude has become a filter through which he views all adults, and is beginning to view others his age through it as well. So Chris hears sarcasm and put-downs directed at him everywhere he goes, and can't discern when a person is not talking down to him anymore.
The implications of this are pretty far-reaching; if one hears disrespect, sarcasm, control and insult whenever others speak, how will Chris be able to make any healthy connections, or learn anything new from others, or get any kind of help for anything he's been through or issues he's dealing with, including this one? He could heal, and then he would be much more clear about the real motivations and emotions of others, but he has to first recognize that he has this issue.
(It's important to note; it's also a natural human trait to assume that someone means what we would mean if we said the same thing. Why so many intelligent people get conned and scammed.)
So when Jim says "Nice job taking out the garbage!" to his nephew Chris, what exactly does he mean? His nephew is going to take it the way he hears it, which might not be the way his Uncle Jim meant it.
Chris hears it as sarcasm, but Jim actually meant it as a genuine, drama-free acknowledgment. So since Chris assumes it was sarcasm, he reacts to Jim according to his incorrect interpretation, and huffs and puffs, and rolls his eyes. Jim, in turn, is frustrated and a little hurt. This kind of thing happens all the time. Chris' father is very sarcastic, controlling and demeaning, but his Uncle Jim is not at all. So Chris, understandably, "hears" the same thing when his uncle speaks. This ongoing dynamic based on Chris' incorrect interpretations, and Jim not knowing what's happening (tough one to figure out), creates more and more tension and leads to an eventual breakdown of the relationship. Which is very unfortunate for both of them.
On a wider level, Chris interprets most people this way. His father's attitude has become a filter through which he views all adults, and is beginning to view others his age through it as well. So Chris hears sarcasm and put-downs directed at him everywhere he goes, and can't discern when a person is not talking down to him anymore.
The implications of this are pretty far-reaching; if one hears disrespect, sarcasm, control and insult whenever others speak, how will Chris be able to make any healthy connections, or learn anything new from others, or get any kind of help for anything he's been through or issues he's dealing with, including this one? He could heal, and then he would be much more clear about the real motivations and emotions of others, but he has to first recognize that he has this issue.
Successful And Happy?
Wonder
which kind of community or family flourishes~ (more people are more
successful and happy)~ the ones where all the people in it are
supportive of each other, or the kind where people in it are always
looking for ways to condemn each other in order to make themselves feel
better? The ones where people see all the other people in it as valuable
as themselves, or the ones where people look for reasons to devalue
others? Hmmm... support - condemn...support , condemn... gosh I can't
figure it out, the two are so similar... Which kind of community or
family would I want to live in... gosh that's a tough one too...
Anti-Male Bashing... Is That One Of Those Moronic Ox Things?
Amazing
how many people twist support forums for abuse and trauma survivors
into some kind of anti-male thing... HOW do they manage to rationalize
that?! And a better question... WHY?! Why is "anti-male" even in their
minds at all, attached to the subject?! Do they NOT want trauma
survivors to recover?! Do they think only males are abusive? Do they
think ALL males are abusive? Do they think males are never targets? I
don't think "Hey that's anti-Pit-Bull!" when someone brings a cat to the
vet because it got hit by a car... one has nothing to do with the
other. How in the heck do they fabricate the connection?
Not Wearing Pants
Thanks to Ann Althouse for pointing to this video, haven't laughed that hard in several story times~
I AM YOUR FATHER... OR MOTHER... Whichever the case may be...
Hit "Play" first, and then read the article below ~you'll understand.
(Darth Vader)
Nearly every person on the planet has been metaphorically implanted with a little switch in the back of the head that, when flicked or pushed, causes us to feel less like a confident adult who is quite worthy and mentally sound and more like a child, and an inept, socially awkward child to boot.
Nearly all of us have it because most of us were pretty normal kids for most of our youths.That switch was installed by the bigger people around us who had the authority to tell us what to do, and punish us when we did something out of line.
Some humans learn about that switch from a Big Person's perspective, and learn how to flick it at will, or at least try to, so they can use it against us. They use it for all kinds of things.
If I want to create the image of authority around myself, but don't necessarily have the brain power, discipline, or knowledge it takes, I can instead use that switch. Instead of actually being experienced or well-studied, I can just ACT like I am, and treat others like they're NOT.
By cranking up the contrast between myself and others, and pressing on their subconscious, I can create this image pretty quickly. This created image will be MUCH more effective at making people see me as highly intelligent and experienced than the impression I would make from actually being intelligent and experienced, because it plays on people emotions and memories, not on the reality of myself.
All I have to do is throw out a few social signals, subtle ones work best, and walk away.
These social signals can be in person, or from a distance, in direct interaction or seen from afar in media. They can be in the form of appearance, like the way I comb my hair, the jewelry I wear, and the clothing I choose. They can be a facial expression, a vocal tone, the words I use, and body language, Behaviors such as refusing to make eye contact and refusing to acknowledge another person's presence, words, or meaning are very effective. Silent treatments, cold shoulders. puffing up, and condescension; all ways of hitting that switch and building the facade. Another currently popular practice that seems to work is personally insulting other people and/or things, continually making criticisms and complaints about everything and anything (look at that stupid car... look at that ugly dress... look at that hair...what a dumb song...), but since it's been taken way too far so many times it has become generally less effective.
Many who are in the "public eye" use this as a way of convincing the public that they do indeed know MORE than the rest of the population, and therefore should keep their very lucrative jobs because no one else can fill their shoes. From politicians to journalists to radio DJ's, this is a common practice; giving YOU signals that you are (or someone else is) an ignorant idiot, and THEY are the authority on everything; their opinion is as close to "fact" as possible... ("Yes, that's right ~ the ocean is 3.5 % saline, dogs are descendants of wolves, the tax rate in Brooklyn is 18.569% if you're Class 1, and Superman CAN, indeed, beat up Batman. And Jimi Hendrix is the best guitar player, not Jimmy Page... I was right about the other stuff, therefore I'm right about everything I say...")
Simply the act of having a "stern face" or a "stern demeanor" can flick the switch in most humans, it looks a lot like the way Mom or Dad, or the teacher, or the coach looked when they were about to deliver some discipline. Doesn't it...?
What is an actor, a comedian, a blogger, a lawyer, or a radio show host doing with a permanently stern demeanor? What is it that they're so serious about, all the time? Why are they standing, acting, and talking to people like a Mom or Dad, or Officer Flynn, or the elementary school Principal, or an evil Emperor or Queen?
Why? Because, it works.
They behave that way, giving signals to our subconscious, and we humans just believe that they know more than someone else does. If Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall, and one of these "Image Maker" people were in a room together, talking to us, we would most likely assume that the "Image Maker" person is the "Leader", and the most intelligent person in the group. We would most likely ignore Mr. Hawking and Ms. Goodall, and LISTEN to the "Image Maker", just because they are giving "I AM AN AUTHORITY" signals and the others are not. We don't do fact checking, we don't get to know people first, we just assume that they are an "authority", or intelligent, or NOT, based on the signals they give us.
So that means the most intelligent person on the planet will not be seen as an authority on anything, unless they have some kind of documentation to prove it or someone else in authority saying so, and may even be treated as if they are quite stupid, just because they are not giving "I Am An Authority" signals. And walking right next to them, one of the most obnoxious, self-centered, non-thinking, arrogant wankers on the planet is getting all kinds of attention and followers because he or she knows how to do ONE THING: give "I Am An Authority" signals. And because nearly all of us have that little metaphorical switch, we say "yes yes that person knows what they're talking about... you should listen to them, like we do..."
Of course that is NOT to say that all humans who have been credited with having a clue about something, or being good at something, doesn't deserve it. It's simply that we humans will and do, quite often, FOLLOW one person who does NOT have a clue, and IGNORE another person who DOES, just because of the signals they give or don't give.
Some other people find the humor in this phenomenon too~:)
Nearly every person on the planet has been metaphorically implanted with a little switch in the back of the head that, when flicked or pushed, causes us to feel less like a confident adult who is quite worthy and mentally sound and more like a child, and an inept, socially awkward child to boot.
Nearly all of us have it because most of us were pretty normal kids for most of our youths.That switch was installed by the bigger people around us who had the authority to tell us what to do, and punish us when we did something out of line.
Some humans learn about that switch from a Big Person's perspective, and learn how to flick it at will, or at least try to, so they can use it against us. They use it for all kinds of things.
If I want to create the image of authority around myself, but don't necessarily have the brain power, discipline, or knowledge it takes, I can instead use that switch. Instead of actually being experienced or well-studied, I can just ACT like I am, and treat others like they're NOT.
By cranking up the contrast between myself and others, and pressing on their subconscious, I can create this image pretty quickly. This created image will be MUCH more effective at making people see me as highly intelligent and experienced than the impression I would make from actually being intelligent and experienced, because it plays on people emotions and memories, not on the reality of myself.
All I have to do is throw out a few social signals, subtle ones work best, and walk away.
These social signals can be in person, or from a distance, in direct interaction or seen from afar in media. They can be in the form of appearance, like the way I comb my hair, the jewelry I wear, and the clothing I choose. They can be a facial expression, a vocal tone, the words I use, and body language, Behaviors such as refusing to make eye contact and refusing to acknowledge another person's presence, words, or meaning are very effective. Silent treatments, cold shoulders. puffing up, and condescension; all ways of hitting that switch and building the facade. Another currently popular practice that seems to work is personally insulting other people and/or things, continually making criticisms and complaints about everything and anything (look at that stupid car... look at that ugly dress... look at that hair...what a dumb song...), but since it's been taken way too far so many times it has become generally less effective.
Many who are in the "public eye" use this as a way of convincing the public that they do indeed know MORE than the rest of the population, and therefore should keep their very lucrative jobs because no one else can fill their shoes. From politicians to journalists to radio DJ's, this is a common practice; giving YOU signals that you are (or someone else is) an ignorant idiot, and THEY are the authority on everything; their opinion is as close to "fact" as possible... ("Yes, that's right ~ the ocean is 3.5 % saline, dogs are descendants of wolves, the tax rate in Brooklyn is 18.569% if you're Class 1, and Superman CAN, indeed, beat up Batman. And Jimi Hendrix is the best guitar player, not Jimmy Page... I was right about the other stuff, therefore I'm right about everything I say...")
Simply the act of having a "stern face" or a "stern demeanor" can flick the switch in most humans, it looks a lot like the way Mom or Dad, or the teacher, or the coach looked when they were about to deliver some discipline. Doesn't it...?
What is an actor, a comedian, a blogger, a lawyer, or a radio show host doing with a permanently stern demeanor? What is it that they're so serious about, all the time? Why are they standing, acting, and talking to people like a Mom or Dad, or Officer Flynn, or the elementary school Principal, or an evil Emperor or Queen?
Why? Because, it works.
They behave that way, giving signals to our subconscious, and we humans just believe that they know more than someone else does. If Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall, and one of these "Image Maker" people were in a room together, talking to us, we would most likely assume that the "Image Maker" person is the "Leader", and the most intelligent person in the group. We would most likely ignore Mr. Hawking and Ms. Goodall, and LISTEN to the "Image Maker", just because they are giving "I AM AN AUTHORITY" signals and the others are not. We don't do fact checking, we don't get to know people first, we just assume that they are an "authority", or intelligent, or NOT, based on the signals they give us.
So that means the most intelligent person on the planet will not be seen as an authority on anything, unless they have some kind of documentation to prove it or someone else in authority saying so, and may even be treated as if they are quite stupid, just because they are not giving "I Am An Authority" signals. And walking right next to them, one of the most obnoxious, self-centered, non-thinking, arrogant wankers on the planet is getting all kinds of attention and followers because he or she knows how to do ONE THING: give "I Am An Authority" signals. And because nearly all of us have that little metaphorical switch, we say "yes yes that person knows what they're talking about... you should listen to them, like we do..."
Of course that is NOT to say that all humans who have been credited with having a clue about something, or being good at something, doesn't deserve it. It's simply that we humans will and do, quite often, FOLLOW one person who does NOT have a clue, and IGNORE another person who DOES, just because of the signals they give or don't give.
Some other people find the humor in this phenomenon too~:)
Which Point Of View
In any society and region, it is common for one race or sex to be seen as "more powerful", or literally to have more power, due to the usual human control desires in the species. Whichever race or sex has acquired more power in a given region is who's in control, and that's what seems NORMAL to the entire society.
(OBVIOUSLY, the race or sex that holds more power changes from region to region. In many regions, controllers oppress their OWN race or sex. This article uses skin color as a demonstration only, not to represent any specific people, region, or era.)
It's "normal", for example, in a region where the race who has more power is dark-skinned, for dark-skinned people to hold most of the government positions, and for dark-skinned people to dominate the business and educational environment, and make most of the budgeting decisions.
They will CONTINUE to hold these positions because of one simple fact: when one human group acquires power, anyone who can identify themselves as a member of that group will usually claim entitlement to that power.
(If light-skinned people had acquired the power in that region, the roles would be reversed. If polka-dotted people acquired the power in that region, then they would be in the "power" position over everyone else. Physical traits including race and sex are the most common identity factors in human power entitlement belief.)
This means that nearly all of the dark-skinned people in that region will feel completely normal and fine with this feeling of entitlement, and won't think twice about the light-skinned people NOT having the same power. Most of the dark-skinned people will feel like getting any job is NORMAL, and if a person is not getting hired they will say that it's because they're not trying hard enough, they're not smart enough, or they don't have what it takes. They don't seem to be able to grasp that they are being given favoritism by the other dark-skinned people who are in the positions of doing the hiring.
Further, and strangely, the light-skinned people will also be "normalized" to dark-skin people having more power, and tend to have BIAS TOWARD dark-skinned people. Because they grew up in this environment, they subconsciously believe the bias to reflect the NATURAL world. So, hiring a dark-skinned person feels like "common sense" to them, especially since everyone else seems to agree. Their doctor is probably dark-skinned, their lawyer, their government representative. They probably would rather hire a dark-skinned person to fix their home and their car. They were raised to see dark-skinned people as having a natural ability to get things done, and light-skinned people to only be able to do certain things. So, they will not believe that another light-skinned person is really that intelligent or that capable, and they will commonly DEFER to a dark-skinned person for just about anything.
In this region, those who are actually more emotionally reactive are the dark-skinned people, because they are more used to getting what they want, and to people listening when they speak. When they don't get what they want easily, or when they feel ignored or insulted, dark-skinned individuals are much more likely to react emotionally and with anger or rage than light-skinned individuals, who are acclimated to more obstacles, or being blocked from getting what they want or need by others, and not being listened to when they speak.
Both dark and light-skinned people in a dark-skinned-biased region will raise their children with the same bias, more or less, and will usually "shush" them if they ask any questions about the disparity, or explain it away. When a light-skinned person has a dark-skinned child, they will commonly invest much more of everything into that child than the other children. When the local school system has obvious bias for the dark-skinned children than the light-skinned children, with more budgeting, more classroom interaction, and more encouragement and attention being given, it is not questioned by either dark or light-skinned parents. The dark-skinned parents of course WANT the bias, and the light-skinned parents are either extremely "normalized" or afraid to speak up about it for fear of rejection or retaliation.
No one thinks much at all about how their children are being taught the same bias, whether they're dark or light-skinned. The negative impact this makes on all of the children is not studied but ignored, because those who have the power want to keep it, and those who don't are either so acclimated that they believe the power imbalance to be natural, or they don't want to draw negative attention from retaliators for themselves and their children.
In the newspaper and on TV in this region, much more coverage is given to dark-skinned people than light-skinned people, and that includes children and groups. Much more positive language is used when referencing dark-skinned people than light-skinned by most journalists. It is more common for journalists and others to use an excited and enthusiastic TONE when referencing dark-skinned people; both because of their own bias, and because they want to be LIKED and remembered by dark-skinned people.
When someone points out this disparity, they are shouted down. When a dark-skinned person points it out, they are called names in an attempt to humiliate them into silence. When a light-skinned person points it out, they are attacked by both dark and light-skinned people, and called names that reflect blatant contempt and hatred.
In this region, dark-skinned people seem to constantly make demeaning jokes and cruel references about light-skinned people, not only with one another, but in public as well. If anyone points out this practice they are immediately dismissed as "oversensitive" and "hyper reactive"... by BOTH dark and light-skinned people. However! When light-skinned people make any kind of similar demeaning reference about dark-skinned people, they receive huge backlash about how "cruel", "crazy", and "controlling" they are... and that's from both dark and light-skinned people.
The ONLY reason this entire disparity and power imbalance has taken place is because a group of dark-skinned people amassed wealth and weapons a long time ago, and appointed themselves the ones in control of the region. Not ALL dark-skinned people actually have "power" in this area, but they don't fight against the disparity because they MIGHT get power some day, since they ARE dark-skinned, they feel it to be their "birth right". They don't defend their light-skinned coworkers, relatives, or neighbors when they are not treated with fairness or respect, because they kind of WANT things to stay the way they are.
Many want things to stay the way they are because they're afraid of the light-skinned people gaining power; will they retaliate if they gain power? Will they oppress the dark-skinned people? Will they take over?
Many light-skinned people want things to stay the way they are because one of their children is dark-skinned, and they feel that this child brings them power as a parent. They may also not actually want the responsibility that power brings, or they may not want the negative consequences. Some may not want other light-skinned people to achieve much, because it will injure their own ego; they like to think of light-skinned people as a "WE", and "WE can't do this thing or that thing, WE'RE not naturally good at it, WE aren't as clever or as strong as dark-skinned people." So they disparage and help oppress other light-skinned people, even their own family members.
Apply this to any region at all by just changing the groups to what they actually are in that area, it could be race, it could be ancestry within a race, it could be religion or anti-religion, it could be wealth or lack of wealth; it could be sex/gender. It may be more than one of these.
Whichever group believes they are most entitled to power over others in a given region is the group that fights to get and to keep power. And then, whatever group has acquired power is what everyone in the region gets conditioned and acclimated to. No human group has more "natural intelligence" than any other human group, no race and neither sex, and yet the vast majority of societies are controlled by only one group. The only common denominator in all of these regions is the desire for power over others.
A region where there is no power imbalance between groups SHOWS IT, and individuals have no qualms in talking about the subject, there is very little conflict about it, it's a conceptual topic that can be discussed any time without dramatic reactions, defensiveness, or refusal to talk about it, on anyone's part. Regions where there is great power imbalance show it as well, and many or most individuals show a dramatic aversion to talking about it.
M.M.Black
(OBVIOUSLY, the race or sex that holds more power changes from region to region. In many regions, controllers oppress their OWN race or sex. This article uses skin color as a demonstration only, not to represent any specific people, region, or era.)
It's "normal", for example, in a region where the race who has more power is dark-skinned, for dark-skinned people to hold most of the government positions, and for dark-skinned people to dominate the business and educational environment, and make most of the budgeting decisions.
They will CONTINUE to hold these positions because of one simple fact: when one human group acquires power, anyone who can identify themselves as a member of that group will usually claim entitlement to that power.
(If light-skinned people had acquired the power in that region, the roles would be reversed. If polka-dotted people acquired the power in that region, then they would be in the "power" position over everyone else. Physical traits including race and sex are the most common identity factors in human power entitlement belief.)
This means that nearly all of the dark-skinned people in that region will feel completely normal and fine with this feeling of entitlement, and won't think twice about the light-skinned people NOT having the same power. Most of the dark-skinned people will feel like getting any job is NORMAL, and if a person is not getting hired they will say that it's because they're not trying hard enough, they're not smart enough, or they don't have what it takes. They don't seem to be able to grasp that they are being given favoritism by the other dark-skinned people who are in the positions of doing the hiring.
Further, and strangely, the light-skinned people will also be "normalized" to dark-skin people having more power, and tend to have BIAS TOWARD dark-skinned people. Because they grew up in this environment, they subconsciously believe the bias to reflect the NATURAL world. So, hiring a dark-skinned person feels like "common sense" to them, especially since everyone else seems to agree. Their doctor is probably dark-skinned, their lawyer, their government representative. They probably would rather hire a dark-skinned person to fix their home and their car. They were raised to see dark-skinned people as having a natural ability to get things done, and light-skinned people to only be able to do certain things. So, they will not believe that another light-skinned person is really that intelligent or that capable, and they will commonly DEFER to a dark-skinned person for just about anything.
In this region, those who are actually more emotionally reactive are the dark-skinned people, because they are more used to getting what they want, and to people listening when they speak. When they don't get what they want easily, or when they feel ignored or insulted, dark-skinned individuals are much more likely to react emotionally and with anger or rage than light-skinned individuals, who are acclimated to more obstacles, or being blocked from getting what they want or need by others, and not being listened to when they speak.
Both dark and light-skinned people in a dark-skinned-biased region will raise their children with the same bias, more or less, and will usually "shush" them if they ask any questions about the disparity, or explain it away. When a light-skinned person has a dark-skinned child, they will commonly invest much more of everything into that child than the other children. When the local school system has obvious bias for the dark-skinned children than the light-skinned children, with more budgeting, more classroom interaction, and more encouragement and attention being given, it is not questioned by either dark or light-skinned parents. The dark-skinned parents of course WANT the bias, and the light-skinned parents are either extremely "normalized" or afraid to speak up about it for fear of rejection or retaliation.
No one thinks much at all about how their children are being taught the same bias, whether they're dark or light-skinned. The negative impact this makes on all of the children is not studied but ignored, because those who have the power want to keep it, and those who don't are either so acclimated that they believe the power imbalance to be natural, or they don't want to draw negative attention from retaliators for themselves and their children.
In the newspaper and on TV in this region, much more coverage is given to dark-skinned people than light-skinned people, and that includes children and groups. Much more positive language is used when referencing dark-skinned people than light-skinned by most journalists. It is more common for journalists and others to use an excited and enthusiastic TONE when referencing dark-skinned people; both because of their own bias, and because they want to be LIKED and remembered by dark-skinned people.
When someone points out this disparity, they are shouted down. When a dark-skinned person points it out, they are called names in an attempt to humiliate them into silence. When a light-skinned person points it out, they are attacked by both dark and light-skinned people, and called names that reflect blatant contempt and hatred.
In this region, dark-skinned people seem to constantly make demeaning jokes and cruel references about light-skinned people, not only with one another, but in public as well. If anyone points out this practice they are immediately dismissed as "oversensitive" and "hyper reactive"... by BOTH dark and light-skinned people. However! When light-skinned people make any kind of similar demeaning reference about dark-skinned people, they receive huge backlash about how "cruel", "crazy", and "controlling" they are... and that's from both dark and light-skinned people.
The ONLY reason this entire disparity and power imbalance has taken place is because a group of dark-skinned people amassed wealth and weapons a long time ago, and appointed themselves the ones in control of the region. Not ALL dark-skinned people actually have "power" in this area, but they don't fight against the disparity because they MIGHT get power some day, since they ARE dark-skinned, they feel it to be their "birth right". They don't defend their light-skinned coworkers, relatives, or neighbors when they are not treated with fairness or respect, because they kind of WANT things to stay the way they are.
Many want things to stay the way they are because they're afraid of the light-skinned people gaining power; will they retaliate if they gain power? Will they oppress the dark-skinned people? Will they take over?
Many light-skinned people want things to stay the way they are because one of their children is dark-skinned, and they feel that this child brings them power as a parent. They may also not actually want the responsibility that power brings, or they may not want the negative consequences. Some may not want other light-skinned people to achieve much, because it will injure their own ego; they like to think of light-skinned people as a "WE", and "WE can't do this thing or that thing, WE'RE not naturally good at it, WE aren't as clever or as strong as dark-skinned people." So they disparage and help oppress other light-skinned people, even their own family members.
Apply this to any region at all by just changing the groups to what they actually are in that area, it could be race, it could be ancestry within a race, it could be religion or anti-religion, it could be wealth or lack of wealth; it could be sex/gender. It may be more than one of these.
Whichever group believes they are most entitled to power over others in a given region is the group that fights to get and to keep power. And then, whatever group has acquired power is what everyone in the region gets conditioned and acclimated to. No human group has more "natural intelligence" than any other human group, no race and neither sex, and yet the vast majority of societies are controlled by only one group. The only common denominator in all of these regions is the desire for power over others.
A region where there is no power imbalance between groups SHOWS IT, and individuals have no qualms in talking about the subject, there is very little conflict about it, it's a conceptual topic that can be discussed any time without dramatic reactions, defensiveness, or refusal to talk about it, on anyone's part. Regions where there is great power imbalance show it as well, and many or most individuals show a dramatic aversion to talking about it.
M.M.Black
Love
Love is 'inclusive'. Love protects, defends, shelters and cares. Love believes the best, love prefers you. Love never gives up on you, doesn't interrupt you, love listens to you and hears you.
Abuse is 'exclusive'. It fails to protect and defend you. Abuse pretends to care, but doesn't. Abuse does not believe the best in you, but rather, brings out the worst in you. Abuse talks over the top of ...you and doesn't ever really 'hear' you.
Abuse will make sure you are excluded and left out if you don't behave how it wants you to. Abuse is fearful and insecure, threatened by your presence. Abuse maintains a sense of perceived power, by deciding who is worthy to be inside the 'inner circle' and who will be kept out. Abuse withholds information and keeps secrets.
Love is inclusive, and doesn't leave others out, everybody's welcome. Love is secure and firm, love is not afraid. Love celebrates others, (not seeing one as better than another), but enjoying diversity and uniqueness in all people. Love will maintain a sense of privacy as a boundary, but doesn't use secrecy as a weapon.
Abuse will keep you stunted, but Love will cause you to flourish.
CHOOSE LOVE !
~S.E. Castelli
http://simonecastelli.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/around-and-around-and-around-we-go-punishment-and-reward/
Expectations In Relationships; Good Woman, Good Man
Many
people grow up expecting any romantic relationship they have to look a
certain way, and when the person they choose to be with ends up not
filling that expectation, they treat them like they're doing something
bad and wrong. So a woman who has preconceived expectations of what her
boyfriend or husband is "supposed" to be like may fight with, belittle,
and try to shame him for not fulfilling t...he character role in her head.
Classic examples of this in Western culture include a man who does not fix things around the house, or only knows how to fix certain things, a man who's not into the Sports culture, a man who likes to clean or cook, a man who does not make a lot of money, a man who is kind to others outside of the relationship, a man who doesn't try to act "tough" or "run with" other males, or a man who is not obsessed with sex, violence, alcohol, or random rebellion behavior.
A man who has preconceived expectations of what his girlfriend or wife is "supposed" to be like will do the same thing, treating a person as if they're "bad" or "wrong" when they don't fill the character role they hold in their head. Classic examples of this in Western culture are often a woman who doesn't make cooking and cleaning her first priority, a woman who repairs and builds things, a woman who enjoys activities outside the home, a woman who does not defer to other's opinions but treats others as equal persons, a woman who speaks, laughs, and behaves with the same confidence as the men around them. Both men and women who create these roles for others in their minds also often have the way the other person is supposed to look in there as well; their character role they have pictured in their minds is usually pretty fleshed out. Their clothes and their hair is "supposed" to look a certain way, if it doesn't, they're not being a "good person".
Even if there is more than one "version" of the appearance, there will still be obvious similarities between the versions. (For instance a thin Irish woman or a very thin Nigerian woman; the requirement is still "thin". A tall Polish man or a tall Indian man, the requirement is still "tall".)
Those who have preconceived expectations for other people will judge them by how close they match to this character role. They won't be interested in getting to know the person and therefore can not have a genuine relationship with the person. When the person fulfills the role, they are approved of; when they don't because of perfectly normal or even GOOD things, they will be rejected and discarded.
This same character role issue can be seen in other relationships as well, including parents and children (both ways), other family members, friendships, employees, communities, pretty much anything that involves humans. It can be seen on a global scale with citizens of governments (political leaders, presidents and dictators who have this character role issue), religions, and other organizations.
Those with "character role expectations" of others don't care much about another's personhood, their real talents, strengths, or experiences, they have already created their "profile" FOR them. No matter how "good" the other person actually is, no matter what they actually do, they will be judged only on how close they come to filling the role of the character they have been cast in by the other person.
Classic examples of this in Western culture include a man who does not fix things around the house, or only knows how to fix certain things, a man who's not into the Sports culture, a man who likes to clean or cook, a man who does not make a lot of money, a man who is kind to others outside of the relationship, a man who doesn't try to act "tough" or "run with" other males, or a man who is not obsessed with sex, violence, alcohol, or random rebellion behavior.
A man who has preconceived expectations of what his girlfriend or wife is "supposed" to be like will do the same thing, treating a person as if they're "bad" or "wrong" when they don't fill the character role they hold in their head. Classic examples of this in Western culture are often a woman who doesn't make cooking and cleaning her first priority, a woman who repairs and builds things, a woman who enjoys activities outside the home, a woman who does not defer to other's opinions but treats others as equal persons, a woman who speaks, laughs, and behaves with the same confidence as the men around them. Both men and women who create these roles for others in their minds also often have the way the other person is supposed to look in there as well; their character role they have pictured in their minds is usually pretty fleshed out. Their clothes and their hair is "supposed" to look a certain way, if it doesn't, they're not being a "good person".
Even if there is more than one "version" of the appearance, there will still be obvious similarities between the versions. (For instance a thin Irish woman or a very thin Nigerian woman; the requirement is still "thin". A tall Polish man or a tall Indian man, the requirement is still "tall".)
Those who have preconceived expectations for other people will judge them by how close they match to this character role. They won't be interested in getting to know the person and therefore can not have a genuine relationship with the person. When the person fulfills the role, they are approved of; when they don't because of perfectly normal or even GOOD things, they will be rejected and discarded.
This same character role issue can be seen in other relationships as well, including parents and children (both ways), other family members, friendships, employees, communities, pretty much anything that involves humans. It can be seen on a global scale with citizens of governments (political leaders, presidents and dictators who have this character role issue), religions, and other organizations.
Those with "character role expectations" of others don't care much about another's personhood, their real talents, strengths, or experiences, they have already created their "profile" FOR them. No matter how "good" the other person actually is, no matter what they actually do, they will be judged only on how close they come to filling the role of the character they have been cast in by the other person.
Camaraderie With The Opposite Sex
People
who think of the opposite sex as "other", and only think of members of
their own sex as "camarades" can have a harder time with romantic
relationships, and human relations in general. Some who don't have much
experience with real friendship with the opposite sex due to however
they happened to grow up may not realize that they have more
similarities than differences, and that they're human ...beings
with the same vast array of emotions, perspectives, experiences,
aspirations, strengths and weaknesses, fears and intelligences as their
own sex. One may have this perspective from just an absence of peer
friendship and regularly shared activities with the opposite sex. They
may have had a sister or brother, but were raised to think of one
another as very different "species" due to their parents' cultural
issues. They may have not had an opposite sex sibling, and the adults in
the area inside or outside of the home may have separated girls and boys purposely, creating groups,
teams, and clubs that excluded the other sex. (And taught that this is required and try to justify it with all kinds of rationalizing, but have never actually tried anything different.) Many adults even actively
"teach" children skewed perceptions about the opposite sex, and convey
that ethics and integrity don't apply in the same way to "them" as it
does to "our kind".
One is not going to have a healthy, respectful, reliable, supportive and fun relationship with a person who thinks of them as "Other", as "not my kind".
One is not going to have a healthy, respectful, reliable, supportive and fun relationship with a person who thinks of them as "Other", as "not my kind".
Can Straight Men Identify WIth Female Protagonists?
Found this fascinating, I'm sure you will too, click here:
Straight men: Can you think of a female protagonist you identified with?
Straight men: Can you think of a female protagonist you identified with?
Do Break
Let us grow out of our desire to be
the one who knows more,
the one who feels more,
the one who has experienced the most.
Let us grow past our craving to be
the one who is cared for more than the other,
the one who is elevated more than the other.
the one who is given more understanding
and compassion than the other.
Let us grow beyond our need
to be seen as long suffering
to be known as persecuted
to be thought of as more deserving.
Let us grow stronger than our fervor
for status
for wealth
for comfort
for notoriety
Let us break out of our own heavy, coarse shells
so that we may see from above ourselves,
and all of our earthly counterparts,
and take in the unfettered, wild glory
that is the human spirit.
M.M.Black
the one who knows more,
the one who feels more,
the one who has experienced the most.
Let us grow past our craving to be
the one who is cared for more than the other,
the one who is elevated more than the other.
the one who is given more understanding
and compassion than the other.
Let us grow beyond our need
to be seen as long suffering
to be known as persecuted
to be thought of as more deserving.
Let us grow stronger than our fervor
for status
for wealth
for comfort
for notoriety
Let us break out of our own heavy, coarse shells
so that we may see from above ourselves,
and all of our earthly counterparts,
and take in the unfettered, wild glory
that is the human spirit.
M.M.Black
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)