OK, returning to topic that plagues me... Collussion

[lighter]

I spend a good deal of of time pondering the fallout caused by Sociopaths (and N's) in society... particularly that in my own life. 

It's ongoing and pervasive.

Finding our voices, and gaining understanding from peers/family/co-workers/friends and/or the justice system, with regard to a sociopath's behavior toward us is maddening.  I'd like to find some answers, and learn how to deal more effectively, with this insane puzzle.

Here's an article I came across while doing some research.  It's referencing spiritual abuse, but I'm sure we can all see parallels when we spoke out about our own experiences.  It's termendously helpful for me to see these dynamics written out in black and white.  The COMMON GAMES OF COLLUSSION, referenced at the end of this article are of particular interest.





Basic Facts about Collusion
by Dee Ann Miller

 

Collusion with evil can and does occur in every culture and organization. It occurs in families, as well, especially when there is a serious problem that brings a sense of shame to those who engage in whatever behavior needs to be addressed.

By this author's definition, collusion is the conscious or unconscious collaboration of two or more individuals to protect those engaged in unethical practices.

The degree of collusion seems to correlate with the amount of power or respect, whether warranted or not, that is held by the perpetrator. The more sacred the institution is deemed to be in it's idealized form, the greater the collusion. This is why clergy perpetrators bring the greatest amount of shock to so many congregates.

While people are often surprised and horrified when a father or mother abuses their child, the shock is multiplied and the degree of collusion is therefore magnified in most cases. This starts a vicious cycle--the more collusion we find, the more shocked we are. The more shocked people are, the greater the fear of speaking up. The greater the shock, the less likely people are to believe. The less they believe, the more persecution there is for the messenger and the messenger's family. Shooting sometimes seems merciful! The greater the collusion, the less likely one is to find justice--sometimes even in the courts.

So, anyone wanting to study collusion, even in general society, will do well to go where it can be studied “under a microscope.” For the faith community seems to be the most shocked of all when they find a perpetrator in a place where that person is least expected to be (ie. in leadership in the church itself) This is true whether the violation is abuse of children or vulnerable adults, whether it involves sexual, physical, or domestic abuse, whether it is an incestuous relationship with one's own child or a congregate).

Most shocking to many: people often collude to protect other colluders!

Persons who collude may do so actively (the fighting mode) or passively (the flight mode).

Collusion is usually far more devastating to victims than the primary abuse.

Please note: The DEMONS are NOT the perpetrators. They aren't the colluders, and certainly not the survivors. I've named the collective demons in an acronym--DIM thinking--DENIAL, IGNORANCE, and MINIMIZATION. We are all prone to participate in any or all of those elements. In fact, survivors generally do for a long time before facing reality. Sadly, few realize that those to whom they report maybe stuck in DIM thinking, either from previous cases or because of what they believe is the novelty of the current one. For every person who hears of such horrific trauma will be forced to go through the same process that the survivor did. Like survivors, most take a long time to face reality, if they ever do.

Behind collusion one will always find some form of DIM Thinking* (Denial, Ignorance, and Minimization). Ignorance here may refer to one or all of the following: misinformation about the dynamics of abuse, Resistance to attempts to provide education, or a choice to ignore what one knows. Colluders may be guilty of DIM Thinking about the abuse, about collusion itself, or both.

Examples of passive collusion:

1. A member of the congregation decides that it is "none of my business" to get involved when she overhears the girls in her youth group discussing how uncomfortable they have felt in the past when alone in a counseling session with the minister or youth leader. Rev. Smith is approached by a member of his friend's church about concerns that the member's pastor, one of Smith's close friends, has been seen several times recently in restaurants at a table-for-two with a recently-widowed member of the congregation. Rev. Smith chides the member, telling him: "I know your pastor well. We fish together at least once a month. Why he was even president of our Ministerial Alliance last year! I'm going to pray that your spirit will be cleansed of this suspicious nature." Rev. Smith refuses to speak to anyone else about the problem. He does not even confront his friend. Biblically speaking he "walks by on the other side." (See the story of the Good Samaritan for further insights.)

2. A pastor ignores the recommendations of his denomination, refusing to encourage his congregation to adopt policies which would help insure safety and adequate supervision of the children and youth during church-sponsored programs and events. Bishop Johnson puts a letter from a victim in his "low priority" stack. In it, the young woman is voicing her weariness that she continues to be left hanging as the adjudicatory committee of their denomination holds meeting after meeting without taking any decisive action. She asks that the bishop call her at his earliest convenience. Later, when confronted by the victim's husband, he defends his passivity, saying: "I didn't see anything in the letter that needed a response."

3. Colleagues of the perpetrator, along with their wives, either shun the wife who is a victim of domestic violence and/or whose children are victims of incest by their father. The shunning gets worse once the woman files for divorce. Old friends quit calling. If they meet her on the street, they may strike up a conversation about the weather or politics, but never about the greatest trauma she has ever known!

Examples of active collusion:

1. Upon hearing of the allegations being investigated against his pastor, a church leader manages to find out the alleged victim's name, then calls other church leaders and key people in the community to make certain they know that the accuser is "crazy" and "has a history of immoral and untrustworthy behaviors.

2. Mrs. Anderson, a wealthy congregate, certain that her denomination did nothing wrong by ignoring the reports of "trouble-making" victims for almost two years, contributes $500,000 to help denominational leaders find the best attorney to defend itself against a civil suit. Several members of a congregation tell their minister's wife that she is no longer welcome in their services, but that her husband will continue to occupy the pulpit, even though she has recently been forced to go to a shelter for safety. They tell her that they are very disappointed that she is not willing to forgive, move back in the parsonage, and “start making things right again.“

3. When a young woman who is a recovering alcoholic reveals to people in the church that she is an incest victim, she is told that her story is not something that is appropriate for discussion in the women's group or anywhere else in the church. They insist she is blaming her father and not taking responsibility for “her part” in the abuse.

Later, she courageously approaches the pastor after she has maintained sobriety for several years. She wants help in starting a survivors' group in the church. She wants to give her testimony in worship service. The pastor tells her there would not be enough interest in her group. He is happy for her to give her testimony, as long as she avoids using disturbing references to her history of incest in any way.

4. Denominational leaders tell victims of abusive clergy that there is no money to help with their therapy. Yet these same leaders take in millions of dollars every year for missions or other causes to help oppressed people around the world. In addition, they have no difficulty announcing that they have a fund set up to help ministers who have been terminated for a variety of causes, including sexual abuse of congregates.


COMMON GAMES OF COLLUSION

ROLE REVERSAL--thoughts or behaviors which treat victims as perpetrators and perpetrators as victims.
SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, SPEAK NO EVIL--shaming of self or others for even daring to think or speak or be in conversation with anyone who is speaking about the abuse.
PASS THE BUCK--an endless game which allows persons at every level and in every capacity of an organization to rationalize that the work of investigating and then holding a perpetrator accountable belongs somewhere else. (Almost invariably the buck repeatedly gets passed back to the victim, who must either ignore the evidences of DIM thinking or search for the energy to once again speak out.)
LET'S PRETEND--going about all of the usual activities of the church while refusing to acknowledge the "elephant" issue of which most members are already aware on some level--an issue which is managing to impact the church in virtually everything it does. (might also be called "OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND") This game assumes that it is the responsibility of victims and advocates to initiate every conversation about the "elephant." If they do, then the problem is obviously theirs. If they do not, then there is no problem.
LET'S MAKE A DEAL--offering a victim or advocate something, either tangible or intangible, to keep quiet. (Examples: "If you will just go quietly to another congregation, we won't tell anyone that you had an affair with the minister." OR actually paying "hush money" in exchange for the victim's agreement not to take the perpetrator of denomination to court.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This article, like all at www.takecourage.org is copyrighted by the author. Other writers, by copyright law, may use up to 300 words in other published works without asking permission, provided the author is given full credit. This also applies to the acronym "DIM Thinking," a term coined by Miller. You may download and/or distribute copies of any of these articles, for educational purposes, PROVIDED the pages are distributed without alteration, including this copyright statement.

www.takecourage.org by Dee Ann Miller, author of How Little We Knew: Collusion and Confusion with Sexual Misconduct and The Truth about Malarkey.
 

[lighter]

Interesting article Lighter.

You say you'd like to learn how to deal more effectively with the puzzle - can you say to what end? More personal understanding, less being maddened by injustice?

What
I
would
like,
Guest,
is
for Quentin Tarantino to make an absurd off beat easily identifiable cult film about the irrational insanity of dealing with domestic sociopaths, so that society can make more informed knee jerk assumptions when viewing situations that involve what appears to be irrational victims of seemingly very rational N/sociopaths.

People could refer to ignorant harmful characters in the film.... as in "Hey, Judge Joe Brown, don't Judge Seeliger up this case."  like they said  "don't get Munsoned out in the middle of nowhere" in the movie KINGPIN.

People would be quoting lines from this film like they quoted lines from AIRPLANE and VACATION.

It would be BIG.

Perhaps then there could be a collective understanding about what domestic sociopaths are, and fewer stupid questions asked of the victims regarding what they did to MAKE the sociopath
act
like
a
SOCIOPATH.

More information =  Less Collusion.

Maybe.

That.....

is what I'd like.

[sKePTiKal]

OK Lighter...

maybe Tarantino could pull this off. But I have a question for ya!

Since the psychos and socios of society are so good at appearing to be normal, rational people - and using seemingly logical rationalizations to explain themselves.... masters of this, really, since they aren't bothered by any distracting emotions that would jar their eloquence, their persuasiveness...

what's the never-fail, telltale sign? That's common to all these varieties of monster? Isn't it weird, that all the real "Hannibal Lector"s are all described as nice normal neighbors, co-workers, etc?????

One very important aspect of "collusion" - or even gossip - is secrecy. The duality of "privileged information" vs public information... and the difference between "appearances" and "reality". And the ability to define and control the definition of "truth".

It's an interesting topic, Light. Lots of different angles into it, lots of ways to dissect it. And it gets at a certain aspect of human nature, too... of a desire to be one of the "initiated", top-secret clearance, acceptance in a group... and then there are the socio-political issues: how to preserve individual family's freedom and privacy... while at the same time lowering - or eradicating - the potential for abuse. 'Coz I think we'd all agree it wouldn't be a good thing to have official weekly "inspections" into family matters or private, personal relationships. (nor would it be effective)

I mean, one thing my mom - even now - uses to abuse, is her exhortation to kids to "tell the truth" about what goes on in families. She used this on me and now, on my niece and nephew. But it had better be HER truth, you know? You dare not have your own opinion, or vary from her version of the "facts".

[lighter]

I don't know, Amber.... I suppose the biggest telltale sign is a victim running around like their head's cut off, spouting incoherent things about "THEIR RIGHTS!" and the like.

It wouldn't be a guide to "spotting" N's and S's. 

It would be a powerful cultural myth,  largely replacing current erroneous views on N/Sociopaths.

120 Quentin T moments.....
the audience exchanging places with victims, abusers and colluders, alike.  

An improbable, stranger than fiction, up hill, down dell plot of twisting, turning, on the edge of your seat, experiences.

Perhaps providing more than perspective for some audience members.... perhaps epiphany?

I can cast it now......  

Dean Winters (Mayhem from Allstate commercials) as the main antagonist/N/sociopath.

The doddering good ol'boy family court Judge, completely ignorant on all matters PD, bandaided forehead from tussle with glass door...  who who who?  

Uma Thurman, as protagonist, of course.  QT likes his leading lady.

Yup yup yup.  

An enlightening message delivered with a (difficult to stop watching) QT flourish.  

Everyone could purchase the sound track at Starbucks, and play it over dinner parties, while quoting the most memorable lines.

Something dark and dreadful, showing N's and S's for what they really other.

Something other than serial killers, and selfish celebrity brats.

::shrug::

It could happen.

[sKePTiKal]

So, Lighter.... when does the screenplay hit the streets for bids??? LOL!

I think you SHOULD write it, you know. I think it would do you a world o' good. Post it, serial fashion, over in the members story section (the most private space of all the board). I believe Dr G has said you have to be a member to read over there... and atm, there aren't a lot of new members being added - so it would be safe. Change the names, if you want an even greater layer of safety. Write similar events - ones that don't provide so much identifying detail. Even if you don't finish it - or have to take long breaks to keep from retraumatizing yourself - it will be cathartic. And no one else could write it like you can.

Here's what happened to me, when I started writing it out, story-fashion - my perspective changed... instead of being so damned autobiographical (and therefore painful, etc)... the story began to exist outside of me... i.e., "not me". Course, this was years after I'd gone through each agonizing detail multiple times and claimed each nuance... and it didn't take long either. It was a project that didn't really "get off the drawing board", for me.... which means, personally - it just wasn't that important anymore. (But that was me, not you - whole different situation for you, I think; understandably!!)

The way I'm trying to think about this same problem - that of "outing" the warped, evil ones - is to work from the opposite starting point: how to teach people not to be victims... without walking around under seige in their skin, armored away from all connection & contact with other people, at the same time. Trying to identify what it is, that makes some folk more vulnerable - and others not. If we can make more folk less vulnerable to these zombies... they'll be deprived of their "supply" of victims...

... and then I wonder what will happen to them? Will they resort to picking each other off, one by one?

By the way, Light - maybe instead of Tarantino, the Coen Bros should have a shot... and for me, I've already found the "teaching stories" in Grimm's Fairy Tales - no huggable Disney characters there!

[river]

Thanks for this, really helpful, and such a good subject.  I also am most disturbed by the dynamic of denial and collustion. 

I have my own put together theory.   That is most of people in society are disordered, in the sense that there has been a failure of separation/ individuation, which means that they dont think for themselves, nor insist on pursuing the truth, nor empathise intelligently, instead they settle for a feeling of 'belonging', and avoiding the experience of standing alone because it brings on feelings of being bad and abandoned.  Surely this is how a whole society can fail to oppose extremists coming to power, and the like.   

If the 'Real Self', according to one theory has amongst its abilities, the ability to empathise, to take responsibility, to stand for principles, then all this is to do with the development of the Real Self.   The real self emerges thro the process of separation/ individuation, as the person grows to autonomy and creativity and being self-motivated.  When peopl comply and collude, and hide from truth, then that is a failure of separation individuation, and a failur of the real self. 

  I used to take a pride in being the 'non-colluder', in any group I'd be the one to speak out, and drop a bombshell into the leader-loving herd hiders, yet, I'd be once again hurt that I was going home alone.   
For my recovery I've been trying to maintain links with others whils finding a way to be truthful, tho realising that sometime diplomacy has to rule.  ~ at least for the time being. 

Great subject, and good inormation. 

[Hopalong]

Clear, remarkable post, River.

thank you very much.

Hops

[lighter]

Amber, River, Guest:

It would be nice if there was some common and UNIVERSAL word that meant "heads up, this might be a sociopath we're looking at."

We could singsong the word.... "hopscotch."

Or......

even cough the word "psycho!"  

::nodding head::

I like the second one.

[river]

Clear, remarkable post, River.

thank you very much.

Hops

thanks for what you said here, theres a book: 'The Real Self', he goes into the dynamics of Narcissist as well as Borderline disorders, and also what he calls the 'closet narcissist', the one who likes to 'shine in the reflected glow of the powerful other', and by their nature, I guess, are tailor made to be colluders. 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Self-Developmental-Relations-Approach/dp/0876304005/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294488318&sr=1-4

[river]

Amber, River, Guest:
It would be nice if there was some common and UNIVERSAL word that meant "heads up, this might be a sociopath we're looking at."
We could singsong the word.... "hopscotch."
even cough the word "psycho!"  

lighter, what I've found is its been so difficult that others dont notice or even feel anything wrong a lot of the time.  It seems to be a work of art to wake people up without alienating myself.   But Im working on that too.....  and then I question myself, like... 'am I over reacting?  exaggerating?'   

[sKePTiKal]

Well, Lighter - yes we need a word... something that "says it all" without out & out making a public accusation... just for our "own kind"...

jerk
dipwad
egomaniac
power-tripping
toad (personal fav)
diva

???

[river]

It seems that you have to be prepared to walk home alone. That is really not a problem. It's being the target of a lynch mob that would worry me. Or being stitched up by international authorities, having my bank accouts frozen, being held in jail without charge. You have to know who your friends are. Am I over reacting, or exaggerating? - sincerely, who cares. It's fine to make mistakes. It's not fine to let things be in case you might be wrong about that psycho. Better to be embarrassed by a mistake than have someone be hurt. But not easy to do!
Maybe we could have whistleblower t shirts, which carry a warning?

What you say is true. 
 But I'd say that the lynch mob and the 'group culture' even when its only some daft group-think stuff going on, all comes from the same principle, its only one is much more extreme than the other.  Thats why I think I feel so triggered and discontent, because these people are acting out on a deadly principle, and not knowing, or caring.  ie it has echoes and psychic connections to far worse things than just walking home alone.  And I think thats why I can feel disturbed by it. 

[river]

Hi Guest,
I think so.  ( liked how you asked)
But the reason I talked about my attempt at increasing 'diplomacy and tact' is in order to be more effective, for one, and the other is its frankly just too painful for me to remain isolated and disconnected from others, as I have been the vast majority of my life.   
I dont think this is the same as giving up and giving in, Im not about to do that because Im less confused than I used to be, albeit the vision I have is more bleak, in a way. 
I think some people can be big characters and put their finger on whats true that no-one else wanted to say, and everyone loves them for it.   It never was that way for me.  I tend to go lonesome implode, ~ lonesome balistic I like.  If thats what you do, Im gonna follow you around : ) 

Perhaps soon it'd be good to share a real incident here about what we're talking about and to discuss strategy. 

[lighter]

I am consistently puzzled by the shaming responses of outsiders who focus on the response of the victim to abusive behavior.

Over and over again, the emphasis is on the response to abuse, not the abuse.

WTH?

[sKePTiKal]

Lighter:
People just want to try to frame the situation in some logical way... and force logic into a situation that defies logic... therefore, they're going to push some blame to the response to abuse - even if it's only a Monday Morning Quarterback attempt to tell the victim "you should've seen this coming and avoided it like the plague".

Another aspect to it, is that people who do have healthy boundaries don't comprehend how in the world someone in an abusive situation got "hooked" into it... don't comprehend - does not compute - how someone would accept abusive treatment in exchange for an illusion of the benefits of a relationship; they have no concept of "enmeshment", Stockholm Syndrome, or even notice the subtleties of manipulation... because they are not vulnerable or susceptible to it. They miss the part about how desperately a person can crave approval, acceptance and how desperately a person can fear even the appearance of "abandonment" - much less the emotional reality of that kind of isolation.

Is it fair? an accurate understanding? compassionate? NO, probably not. But even people with healthy boundaries have fears... and they fear the "tar baby" of the drama, of 'getting involved", of being responsible in a situation that really isn't about them. Even people who do try to "help" draw lines in the sand about how much they'll do... they are afraid of doing something wrong; making a situation worse; or simply don't have the resources - mental, emotional, time, etc - to do more.

I've come to the conclusion after working to the point where I can see my story from the outside - as if it were happening to someone else - that I can't be angry at the people who could've done more... could've intervened... could've protected me. They really didn't have the whole set of facts; had been fed the public version spin of the delusion; and they really didn't have any responsibility to help, you know? The bits they did do - were useful and helpful and represent the fact that these people DID CARE.

There's no superhero who's devoted to righting these kinds of wrongs; no moral court of justice, either. I'm not sure it wouldn't have some pretty negative unintended consequences, if there were. Spanish Inquisition, anyone? Witch trials?

I've also come to the conclusion that my vulnerability to being enmeshed; opening myself wide up to the abuse... the projections and lack of boundaries... despite being "trained" to be this way and not this way naturally... is still my responsibility to fix. I played a very definite role in my own abuse, in other words. I was the patsy, the fall guy, was setup... sure enough. I walked right into the propeller. And it wasn't stupidity that enabled me to do this - it was that sense of loyalty, sacrificing all for those one loves - unconditionally - the damned dependence on approval, acceptance, and the dangling carrot of reciprocal "love" - that made me vulnerable.

Yes, that's right. It was the fact that I understood what the ideal of unconditional love is that made me the "sucker". That got me hooked into the cycle of abuse. And I was volunteering... because I thought it was the right thing to do. The fact that it got used against me, wasn't returned, and eventually turned into a situation where I became "collateral damage"and had to fight for my own life... really doesn't diminish the value of that ideal for me nor does it somehow cancel out the fact that only I am responsible for making sure that I don't get into one of those situations, again.

No one can do this for me; no one else has any obligation or responsibility to "protect" me from those situations. That's my job.

Am I absolutely safe from falling into that "trap" again? NO, probably not. But I've learned a lot and learned how to listen better to my own inner "radar"; I've learned how to protect myself - as difficult as enforcing a boundary can be at times - without going nuclear at every N-counter I have. (Coz I'm the one who suffers the most from those implosions.)

So the Ns of the world are walking free amongst us... unidentified... unmarked. So are psychos with guns. Only a fool wouldn't be afraid, knowing this. But I can't dwell on that or let it stop me from living my life or shrink my life to the point that I never engage with others.

I would miss all the real fun, the real loving relationships, the challenges & opportunities that cosmically offset the negatives of those kinds of people in life.

So... while I agree with you that people often turn a blind eye to reality, and are reluctant to really help - and yes, even blame the victim unfairly - it is what it is. I can't change that. But I can change myself.

The return on investment for that work is quite a bit "richer" than trying to make reality or the world different than it is.